Datasets:

BEE-spoke-data
/

govdocs1-by-extension

Dataset card Viewer Files Files and versions Community

Subset (11)

all · 168k rows

Split (3)

train · 159k rows

section stringclasses 4 values	filename stringlengths 6 32	text stringlengths 104 10.3M	lang stringclasses 44 values
converted_docs	755020	##### 2006-2007 No Child Left Behind - Blue Ribbon Schools Program U.S. Department of Education Cover Sheet Type of School: (Check all that apply) \[ X \] Elementary \[ \] Middle \[ \] High \[ \] K-12 \[ \] Charter Name of Principal [Mr. Thomas D. Parker]{.underline} (Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other) (As it should appear in the official records) Official School Name [Holston View Elementary School]{.underline} (As it should appear in the official records) School Mailing Address\_\_[1840 King College Rd]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Bristol TN 37620-2833 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total) County \_\_\_\_\_[Sullivan]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_State School Code Number\\_\_\_\_\_\_[0030]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Telephone [( 423 ) 652-9470]{.underline} Fax [( 423 ) 652-9472]{.underline} Web site/URL [http/www.btcs.org/HV]{.underline} E-mail [[email protected]]{.underline} I have reviewed the information in this application, including the eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my knowledge all information is accurate. Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ (Principal's Signature) Name of Superintendent\ [Dr. Steve Dixon]{.underline} (Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other) District Name [Bristol City]{.underline} Tel. [( 423 ) 652-9451]{.underline} I have reviewed the information in this application, including the eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my knowledge it is accurate. Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ (Superintendent's Signature) Name of School Board Dr. Steve Morgan President/Chairperson (Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other) I have reviewed the information in this application, including the eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my knowledge it is accurate. Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ (School Board President's/Chairperson's Signature) PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION The signatures on the first page of this application certify that each of the statements below concerning the school's eligibility and compliance with U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) requirements is true and correct. 1. The school has some configuration that includes grades K-12. (Schools on the same campus with one principal, even K-12 schools, must apply as an entire school.) 2. The school has made adequate yearly progress each year for the past two years and has not been identified by the state as "persistently dangerous" within the last two years. To meet final eligibility, the school must meet the state's adequate yearly progress requirement in the 2006-2007 school year. 3. If the school includes grades 7 or higher, it has foreign language as a part of its core curriculum. 4. The school has been in existence for five full years, that is, from at least September 2001 and has not received the No Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon Schools award in the past five years. 5. The nominated school or district is not refusing OCR access to information necessary to investigate a civil rights complaint or to conduct a district‑wide compliance review. 6. OCR has not issued a violation letter of findings to the school district concluding that the nominated school or the district as a whole has violated one or more of the civil rights statutes. A violation letter of findings will not be considered outstanding if OCR has accepted a corrective action plan from the district to remedy the violation. 7. The U.S. Department of Justice does not have a pending suit alleging that the nominated school or the school district as a whole has violated one or more of the civil rights statutes or the Constitution's equal protection clause. 8. There are no findings of violations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in a U.S. Department of Education monitoring report that apply to the school or school district in question; or if there are such findings, the state or district has corrected, or agreed to correct, the findings. PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA All data are the most recent year available. DISTRICT 1\. Number of schools in the district: [6]{.underline} Elementary schools [1]{.underline} Middle schools [0]{.underline} Junior high schools [1]{.underline} High schools [0]{.underline} Other [8]{.underline} TOTAL 2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\_\_\_8476\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\_\_\_7469\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} SCHOOL 3\. Category that best describes the area where the school is located: > \[ x\] Urban or large central city > > \[ \] Suburban school with characteristics typical of an urban area > > \[ \] Suburban > > \[ \] Small city or town in a rural area > > \[ \] Rural 4\. [10]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his position at this school. If fewer than three years, how long was the previous principal at this school? 5\. Number of students as of October 1 enrolled at each grade level or its equivalent in applying school only: ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- --------- Grade \# of \# of Grade Grade \# of \# of Grade Males Females Total Males Females Total PreK 7 10 17 7 K 32 29 61 8 1 23 25 48 9 2 23 25 48 10 3 27 19 46 11 4 19 23 42 12 5 22 21 43 Other 19 9 28 \* 6 28 16 44 TOTAL 377 STUDENTS IN THE APPLYING SCHOOL ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- --------- > \Holston View Elementary houses three system-wide, self-contained > Comprehensive > > Development Classes. The classes are for students classified as > mentally retarded. 6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [96]{.underline} % White the school: [3]{.underline} % Black or African American [0.6]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino [0.3]{.underline} % Asian/Pacific Islander [0.1]{.underline} % American Indian/Alaskan Native 100% Total* 7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year: [\_\_\_18\_\_\_]{.underline}% > \[This rate should be calculated using the grid below. The answer to > (6) is the mobility rate.\] ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------ (1) Number of students who 26 transferred *to* the school after October 1 until the end of the year (2) Number of students who 31 transferred *from* the school after October 1 until the end of the year (3) Total of all transferred 57 students \[sum of rows (1) and (2)\] (4) Total number of students in 329 the school as of October 1 (5) Total transferred students .18 in row (3) divided by total students in row (4) (6) Amount in row (5) 18.0 multiplied by 100 ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------ 8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: \_[. 01]{.underline}\_\_% [\_\_3\_\_]{.underline}Total Number Limited English Proficient Number of languages represented: \_\_[3]{.underline}\_\_\_\_ Specify languages: Spanish, Chinese, and Gujarati 9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [40]{.underline}% Total number students who qualify: [\_140\_\_\_]{.underline} > If this method does not produce an accurate estimate of the percentage > of students from low‑income families, or the school does not > participate in the federally supported lunch program, specify a more > accurate estimate, tell why the school chose it, and explain how it > arrived at this estimate. 10\. Students receiving special education services: [12%]{.underline} [48]{.underline} Total Number of Students Served > Indicate below the number of students with disabilities according to > conditions designated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education > Act. Do not add additional categories. [\_5 \_]{.underline}Autism [\_0\_\_]{.underline}Orthopedic Impairment [\_0\_\_]{.underline}Deafness [\_4\_\_]{.underline}Other Health Impaired [\_0\_\_]{.underline}Deaf-Blindness [\_22\_]{.underline}Specific Learning Disability [\_3\_\_]{.underline}Emotional Disturbance [\_1\_\_]{.underline}Speech or Language Impairment [\_0\_\_]{.underline}Hearing Impairment [\_0\_\_]{.underline}Traumatic Brain Injury > [\_11\_]{.underline}Mental Retardation [\_0\_\_]{.underline}Visual > Impairment Including Blindness > > [\_2\_\_]{.underline}Multiple Disabilities 11. Indicate number of full‑time and part‑time staff members in each of the categories below: Number of Staff [Full-time]{.underline} [Part-Time]{.underline} Administrator(s) [1]{.underline} Classroom teachers [18]{.underline} Special resource teachers/specialists [6]{.underline} \_\_8\_\_\_ Paraprofessionals [1]{.underline} [\_\_15\_\_\_]{.underline} > Support staff \_\_\_[3]{.underline}\_\_\_ [\_\_\_2\_\_\_]{.underline} > > Total number [\_\_29\_\_\_]{.underline} [\_\_25\_\_\_]{.underline} 12. Average school student-classroom teacher ratio, that is, the number of students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers, e.g., 22:1 [19:1]{.underline} 13\. Show the attendance patterns of teachers and students as a percentage. The student dropout rate is defined by the state. The student drop-off rate is the difference between the number of entering students and the number of exiting students from the same cohort. (From the same cohort, subtract the number of exiting students from the number of entering students; divide that number by the number of entering students; multiply by 100 to get the percentage drop-off rate.) Briefly explain in 100 words or fewer any major discrepancy between the dropout rate and the drop-off rate. Only middle and high schools need to supply dropout rates, and only high schools need to supply drop-off rates. Also explain a high teacher turnover rate. ---------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ------------ 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 Daily student attendance 96% 95% 95% Daily teacher attendance 97% 98% 98% Teacher turnover rate 0.5% 0% 1% ---------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ------------ PART III ‑ SUMMARY Holston View Elementary School, a five-pod complex located on a 34-acre site on King College Road, opened in 1972. It encompasses 55.904 square feet. The school is composed of Grades Pre-K through Sixth. The present student enrollment is 377. The length of our school year is 200 days, and the length of the day is 420 minutes. All teachers are teaching in their area of certification. Advanced degrees are held by 68 percent of our teaching staff. We have seven teachers with over thirty years of experience; six teachers with over twenty years of experience; six teachers with over ten years of experience; and eight teachers with fewer than ten years of experience. Holston View is fully accredited by the State of Tennessee and the Southern Association of Schools and Colleges. Curriculum alignment has been completed in all subject areas. Family Life is also part of the curriculum. There are many unique programs at Holston View. System-wide Comprehensive Development Classes are housed at Holston View. We also have a system-wide Behavior Specialist and English as a Second Language Teacher. Band is offered for Sixth Grade students. Pre-school is offered for selected Holston View students. Students from King College and Tennessee High School provide peer tutoring. East Tennessee State University, King College, and Virginia Intermont College place student teachers at Holston View. At Holston View, we provide students with a variety of resources to help them succeed. The technology available to students continues to improve with additional computers being added to the computer lab and a Smart Board for large group presentations. Computers have Internet access and are networked to have software for remediation and enrichment. Science and Mathematics laser disc programs are used for instruction. Teachers have access to a video camera, digital camera, and scanner. Patrons contribute greatly through activities coordinated by the Parent-Teacher Association. There is a program in place where parents or community members read to the students. We have school-business partnerships with Coca-Cola, Twin City Federal Bank, and Keen Pro. PTA membership has been 100 percent for the last three years. Holston View's PTA supports the school with projects such as landscaping, stocking a student clothes closet, and providing snacks for needy children. Teachers greatly appreciate parent help in staffing centers, planning holiday parties and field trips, and donating items and managing star shopping, which is a classroom reward system. Parents operate an annual Book Fair and fundraisers to raise money for the purchase of computers, sports equipment, and other learning programs. "Apples for the Students", a Food City sponsored program, and the Pillsbury Box-top program are managed through the PTA. The PTA publishes a school yearbook. Numbering of interior and exterior doors has been completed for safety reasons, with emergency phones placed in classrooms. The front door has been protected by a doorbell system with all exterior doors locked. One fire drill is held monthly. The Sullivan County Health Department inspects the kitchen and provides documentation. Playgrounds are inspected monthly. The building has been approved and meets standards for special education students. The staff has had Crisis Management and Violent Intruder in-service training. There have been no drugs, alcohol, or tobacco arrests at Holston View. Security cameras cover the interior and exterior of the building. The mission of Holston View Elementary School is to provide, through a combined effort of staff, parents, and members of our community, a learning environment that ensures experiences that promote the intellectual, social, emotional, and physical development of each individual child. Holston View's vision is for our students to realize the value of being lifelong learners as they develop social and cooperative skills that are essential for success in our fast-changing world. PART IV -- INDICATORS OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS 1. Assessment Results: Students in Grades One through Six are administered the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP) each Spring. The achievement test is a timed, multiple-choice assessment that measures skills in Reading, Language Arts, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies. Grade Five students are given a Writing Assessment each February. Test results are reported to parents, teachers, and administrators. Information on the state assessment system can be found at http://state.tn.us/education/. Grades One and Two student assessment scores are norm-referenced tests, which show how well students do in comparison to a national group of students who took the same test items. Grades Three through Six student assessment scores are criterion-referenced tests that are required by the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation. Criterion-referenced student scores measure how well a student has learned Tennessee's state curriculum rather than how the student compares with a national group. The scores are also used to identify student areas of need or strength. The Tennessee Department of Education produces an individual school report card for the public to access each year online at http://state.tn.us/education/. Schools must meet required federal benchmarks. Holston View received all A's on the 2006 report card which places the school in the exemplary category. The letter grades are based on Criterion-Referenced Academic Achievement. The grades are in Mathematics, Reading/Language Arts, Social Studies, and Science. Grade Five Writing Assessment scores are 4.4 out of 6.0, which is an "A" on the state report card. Subgroup scores for Economically Disadvantaged students are as follows: Grade 3 Reading/Language Arts 90% advanced and proficient Grade 3 Mathematics 73% advanced and proficient Grade 4 Reading/Language Arts 67% advanced and proficient Grade 4 Mathematics 75% advanced and proficient Grade 5 Reading/Language Arts 87% advanced and proficient Grade 5 Mathematics 80% advanced and proficient Grade 6 Reading/Language Arts 100% advanced and proficient Grade 6 Mathematics 100% advanced and proficient Grades Two through Six students are assessed in August, December, and February of each school year using the Predictive Assessment Series (PAS). The assessment is matched with the State of Tennessee TCAP Test. The results assist teachers in revising instruction, enhancing learning, and preparing students for the state testing program. 2. Using Assessment Results: As a part of the improvement process, ongoing assessment is vital. Using data gathered and reported by the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP) and the Predictive Assessment System (PAS), the staff determines which areas will be emphasized for improvement. Goals are established and written in a School Improvement Plan. Based on assessment results, we selected Reading Vocabulary and Mathematics Problem Solving and Reasoning as our focus. Goals have been set for desired growth and gain, and strategies for improvement have been developed and implemented. Timelines for periodic and annual review, evaluations, and reassessment have been set. Additional assessment includes chapter tests, individual assessments using adopted texts, daily class work, and interim reports. Student progress is monitored daily by the staff. Remediation and enrichment activities are provided as needed. After formal evaluation each spring, it is determined if specific goals have been met, if new strategies need to be implemented, and if the bar needs to be raised. 3. Communicating Assessment Results: Grades One and Two parents receive a TCAP Achievement Home Report that uses shaded bars to represent a student National Percentile score in each of the content areas measured on the TCAP Achievement Test. The National Percentile score is the percentage of students in the national group that a student scored higher than on the test items. A student's score determines the height of each bar. The higher the bar, the better the student scored on that content area. The right side of the Home Report indicates whether scores are considered to be below average, average, or above average. Grades Three through Six parents receive a Criterion-referenced Individual Profile Report. The report shows the student's performance on test items that measured the knowledge and skills in the Tennessee Curriculum. The report lists a student's scale score and overall proficiency for a particular content area and identifies where the student is proficient and/or needs improvement. The report gives a graphic representation of a student's performance in each reporting category. Below proficient, proficient, and advanced are indicated by a bar. (An estimate of the number of items a student would be expected to answer correctly if there had been 100 similar items on the test.) The minimum for proficient and advanced is listed. Holston View employs a number of strategies to keep stakeholders informed of student performance. On a weekly basis, teachers use the Holston View website as well as individual teacher websites to communicate student achievement. They also correspond by use of weekly newsletters, take-home folders, e-mail, and phone calls. Interim reports and report cards are other communication tools employed to keep students and parents informed of students' academic performances. 4. Sharing Success: Student progress, growth, and improvement are communicated to staff, students, parents, and community. We utilize school newsletters, the Holston View website, media, PTA meetings, student recognition assemblies, and our annual formal recognition and awards assembly. Students are recognized for academic and personal improvement success. Our PTA shares our success with special student projects, staff recognition on Teacher Day and American Education Week, and by sponsoring fundraisers to improve technology. The school system web page publicizes our school academic success and special activities. Reports to the School Board are made at monthly meetings. PTA scheduled a parent reception to celebrate our school's selection as a Blue Ribbon School by Tennessee Education Commissioner Lana Seivers. We continue to look for positive information to share within our school, school district, and our community. The faculty and staff at Holston View Elementary are committed to sharing the school's successes with teachers throughout the school district. Our doors are open to educators who are seeking ideas for practice in their educational settings. Teachers share new teaching ideas and classroom experiences. Classroom observation is one manner in which teachers share our school's best practices. Through collaboration with local colleges and universities, student teachers observe classes on a continuous basis throughout the school year. We also interact with colleagues in our work environment. Regular interaction with colleagues creates and maintains a support structure for our teachers. Faculty members participate as facilitators during summer staff development workshops. PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION 1. Curriculum: Curriculum and instruction are the priority at Holston View Elementary. Every instructional lesson is aligned with stated and essential goals. Through differentiated instruction we are consistently providing curricular instruction as a means to meet the needs of every student. The Reading/Language Arts curriculum includes the content standards, learning expectations, and accomplishments necessary for students to develop the language skills necessary to succeed in school. The foundation includes the three content standards: writing, reading, and language. The three standards are taught in an integrated manner, not in isolation. Students are exposed to elements of effective speaking, critical listening, and viewing. Reading/Language Arts skills are the supporting skills for all other content areas. The foundation of the Mathematics curriculum includes the five content standards: number and operations, algebra, geometry, measurement, and data analysis and probability. The five content standards are taught in an integrated manner, not in isolation. Within the content standards are problem solving, reasoning and proof, communication, connections, and representation. The intent is to communicate a vision of mathematical literacy, which goes beyond traditional mathematics skills. The foundation of the Social Studies curriculum standards includes communication, data analysis, historical awareness, and acquiring information. Students are exposed to culture, economics, geography, government and civics, history, individuals, groups, and interactions. Social Studies is taught across the curriculum in an integrated manner. The foundation of the Science curriculum includes knowing about and understanding the natural world, using scientific processes in making personal decisions, engaging in matters of scientific and technological concern, and becoming a scientifically literate person in their careers. Science is taught in an integrated manner across the curriculum. The foundation of the Computer Technology curriculum includes exhibiting responsible behavior when using technology, acquiring knowledge in the use of technological resources, processes, and software, accessing and organizing information, and enhancing a broad range of communication skills. Students have scheduled computer lab classes in which they utilize the Scholastic Reading Counts program, sites provided by adopted textbook companies, the Internet, and other educational links. Teachers incorporate technology across the curriculum. Specialists in each area offer Music, Art, Library, and Physical Education curriculum. Regular classroom teachers follow up by teaching the areas across the curriculum. General Music and Art are taught in a yearlong course for Pre-K through Grade Six. Students receive exposure to exploratory opportunities to develop an interest in the arts and to develop their creative abilities. Students also perform for students and parents at PTA meetings and special events. Instrumental Music is offered to interested Grade Six students. Physical Education teaches students to display competency in movement concepts and principles, personal and social responsibility, fitness, and understanding physical activity. The students will understand that physical activity produces enjoyment, challenge, self-expression, and social interaction. Library/Media teaches students a love of books and reading. Skills are taught in use of the library, electronic card catalog, Scholastic Reading Counts, and an appreciation for all literature. The Library/Media Center is the hub of learning at Holston View Elementary. 2. Reading/Language Arts: The Reading/Language Arts curriculum standards include the content standards, learning expectations and accomplishments necessary to ensure that students develop language skills needed to succeed in school, in the workplace, and in their daily lives. The foundation of the curriculum standards includes the three content standards: writing, reading, and elements of language. The three standards are taught in an integrated manner, not in isolation. Pre-K through Grade Three students use the adopted SRA Open Court Reading series. Comprehension strategies and writing are emphasized from the very beginning of Pre-K. At levels Kindergarten and First Grade, decoding skills are developed and combined with pre-decodable and decodable books and authentic literacy experiences. Once decoding skills are in place, emphasis gradually shifts to developing reading fluency and comprehension. Grades Two and Three emphasize reading to learn, write, and develop high order thinking skills. Grades Four through Six students use the adopted McGraw-Hill reading series. The series engages students in a wealth of high quality literature. Explicit instruction and ample practice ensure students' growth in reading proficiency. Grammar, writing, and spelling are integrated for a total language arts approach. 3. Additional Curriculum Area -- Mathematics: The foundation of the curriculum includes five content standards: number and operations, algebra, geometry, measurement, and data analysis and probability. The five content standards are taught in an integrated manner, not in isolation. Included with the content standards are problem solving, reasoning and proof, communication, connections, and representation. Pre-K through Grade Five uses the adopted Harcourt Math program. The program provides thorough coverage of state and national standards and provides the flexibility to customize the program for local courses of study. The program is designed to help build conceptual understanding, skill proficiency, problem solving, and logical reasoning while carefully developing concepts within and across the mathematics strands. Grade Six uses the adopted McDougal Littell Middle School Math program. The program provides students with essential math concepts with integrated print and technology support that provides a vital link to real-life problem solving. Special emphasis is given to the development of note taking and vocabulary skills along with Brain Games to challenge thinking skills. 4. Instructional Methods: Research-based strategies currently utilized include: Six Traits Writing, Compass Learning software, Thinking Maps, Scholastic Reading Counts, PAS test, and cooperative groups. Technology components are utilized with the adopted Reading, Math, Science, and Social Studies series. Students have scheduled times in our twenty-five-station computer lab, which also has a projector and Smart Board. Our building is networked, and our students have access to many educational sites on the Internet. Extended contracts allow for individual teacher tutoring after school hours at each grade level. Educational assistants and high school peer tutors are available to work with students for remediation and enrichment. A needs assessment is developed for each student using PAS and TCAP Achievement Tests. Students receive instruction and remediation in areas of diagnosed weakness. Teachers establish a plan for each student to foster skill improvement. At Holston View, teachers employ a number of instructional methods to improve and maintain an environment for student learning. Low-level cognitive questions evaluate student preparation and comprehension through reviewed summarization techniques. High-level cognitive questions encourage critical thinking, problem solving, and stimulate students to assume greater responsibility for seeking information on their own. Teachers incorporate multiple hands-on learning activities and use various manipulatives in their lessons. 5. Professional Development: Teachers have a variety of opportunities available during the summer months. The school system publishes a list of in-service opportunities in May of each year. All professional staff are required to complete eighteen hours of staff development each school year. Teachers are allowed professional leave time during the school year to attend state and national conferences. In-service is provided for Reading, Math, Science, Social Studies, Writing, and Technology at the local system level. Grade level meetings are scheduled on a regular basis during the school year. Teachers are encouraged to collaborate with their colleagues to share teaching methods and techniques. Staff Development days are scheduled in the school calendar to be conducted at the building level. Principals are responsible for scheduling the days. We schedule staff development activities based upon our School Improvement Plan. The Staff Development team reviews the latest findings in educational research and future trends related to defining expectations for student learning. Survey and achievement data are compared to state and local standards in order to analyze teacher needs for training and initiate the annual redesign of our School Improvement Plan. This redesign provides a clear indication of our priorities for improvement. Staff development workshops are attended to provide teachers instructional strategies to promote students' achievement of our targeted goal PART VI - ASSESSMENT RESULTS STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS Subject [Reading/Language Arts]{.underline} Grade [3]{.underline} Test [TCAP Achievement]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year [06]{.underline} Publisher [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 Testing month April SCHOOL SCORES\* \% Advanced 67 75 57 \% Proficient 31 25 41 \% Below Proficient 3 0 2 Number of students tested 39 40 49 Percent of total students tested 100 100 100 Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 SUBGROUP SCORES [Economically disadvantaged]{.underline} \% Advanced 45 62 64 \% Proficient 45 38 36 \% Below Proficient 10 0 0 Number of students tested 11 13 12 --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS Subject [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade [3]{.underline} Test [TCAP Achievement]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year [06]{.underline} Publisher [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 Testing month April SCHOOL SCORES\* \% Advanced 77 83 67 \% Proficient 15 17 27 \% Below Proficient 8 0 6 Number of students tested 39 40 49 Percent of total students tested 100 100 100 Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 SUBGROUP SCORES [Economically disadvantaged]{.underline} \% Advanced 45 77 70 \% Proficient 27 15 23 \% Below Proficient 27 8 7 Number of students tested 11 13 12 --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS Subject [Reading/Language Arts]{.underline} Grade [4]{.underline} Test [TCAP Achievement]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year [06]{.underline} Publisher [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 Testing month April SCHOOL SCORES\* \% Advanced 59 62 47 \% Proficient 29 29 47 \% Below Proficient 12 5 5 Number of students tested 49 45 38 Percent of total students tested 100 100 100 Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 SUBGROUP SCORES [Economically disadvantaged]{.underline} \% Advanced 33 30 35 \% Proficient 33 40 45 \% Below Proficient 33 30 20 Number of students tested 12 10 11 --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS Subject [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade [4]{.underline} Test [TCAP Achievement]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year [06]{.underline} Publisher [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 Testing month April SCHOOL SCORES\* \% Advanced 53 66 39 \% Proficient 35 29 47 \% Below Proficient 12 5 13 Number of students tested 49 45 38 Percent of total students tested 100 100 100 Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 SUBGROUP SCORES [Economically disadvantaged]{.underline} \% Advanced 17 40 35 \% Proficient 58 20 30 \% Below Proficient 25 40 35 Number of students tested 12 10 11 --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS Subject [Reading/Language Arts]{.underline} Grade [5]{.underline} Test [TCAP Achievement]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year [06]{.underline} Publisher [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 Testing month April SCHOOL SCORES\* \% Advanced 62 49 50 \% Proficient 33 49 39 \% Below Proficient 5 2 11 Number of students tested 55 39 36 Percent of total students tested 100 100 100 Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 SUBGROUP SCORES [Economically disadvantaged]{.underline} \% Advanced 27 6 15 \% Proficient 60 88 78 \% Below Proficient 13 6 7 Number of students tested 15 16 15 --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS Subject [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade [5]{.underline} Test [TCAP Achievement]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year [06]{.underline} Publisher [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 Testing month April SCHOOL SCORES\* \% Advanced 69 74 75 \% Proficient 20 24 17 \% Below Proficient 11 2 8 Number of students tested 55 39 36 Percent of total students tested 100 100 100 Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 SUBGROUP SCORES [Economically disadvantaged]{.underline} \% Advanced 47 50 45 \% Proficient 33 38 45 \% Below Proficient 20 13 10 Number of students tested 15 16 15 --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS Subject [Reading/Language Arts]{.underline} Grade [6]{.underline} Test [TCAP Achievement]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year [06]{.underline} Publisher [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 Testing month April SCHOOL SCORES\* \% Advanced 87 58 51 \% Proficient 13 40 39 \% Below Proficient 0 2 11 Number of students tested 39 40 57 Percent of total students tested 100 100 100 Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 SUBGROUP SCORES [Economically disadvantaged]{.underline} \% Advanced 69 19 20 \% Proficient 31 63 65 \% Below Proficient 0 19 15 Number of students tested 13 16 15 --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS Subject [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade [6]{.underline} Test [TCAP Achievement]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year [06]{.underline} Publisher [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 Testing month April SCHOOL SCORES\* \% Advanced 82 63 66 \% Proficient 18 34 29 \% Below Proficient 0 3 5 Number of students tested 39 40 57 Percent of total students tested 100 100 100 Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 SUBGROUP SCORES [Economically disadvantaged]{.underline} \% Advanced 62 31 35 \% Proficient 38 44 45 \% Below Proficient 0 25 20 Number of students tested 13 16 15 --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- -----------	en
all-txt-docs	460491	-CITE- 40 USC CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL -HEAD- CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL -MISC1- SUBCHAPTER I - OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS Sec. 3101. Public buildings under control of Administrator of General Services. 3102. Naming or designating buildings. 3103. Admission of guide dogs or other service animals accompanying individuals with disabilities. 3104. Furniture for new buildings. 3105. Buildings not to be draped in mourning. SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND 3111. Approval of sufficiency of title prior to acquisition. 3112. Federal jurisdiction. 3113. Acquisition by condemnation. 3114. Declaration of taking. 3115. Irrevocable commitment of Federal Government to pay ultimate award when fixed. 3116. Interest as part of just compensation. 3117. Exclusion of certain property by stipulation of Attorney General. 3118. Right of taking as addition to existing rights. SUBCHAPTER III - BONDS 3131. Bonds of contractors of public buildings or works. 3132. Alternatives to payment bonds provided by Federal Acquisition Regulation. 3133. Rights of persons furnishing labor or material. 3134. Waivers for certain contracts. SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS 3141. Definitions. 3142. Rate of wages for laborers and mechanics. 3143. Termination of work on failure to pay agreed wages. 3144. Authority of Comptroller General to pay wages and list contractors violating contracts. 3145. Regulations governing contractors and subcontractors. 3146. Effect on other federal laws. 3147. Suspension of this subchapter during a national emergency. 3148. Application of this subchapter to certain contracts. SUBCHAPTER V - VOLUNTEER SERVICES 3161. Purpose. 3162. Waiver for individuals who perform volunteer services. SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS 3171. Contract authority when appropriation is for less than full amount. 3172. Extension of state workers' compensation laws to buildings, works, and property of the Federal Government. 3173. Working capital fund for blueprinting, photostating, and duplicating services in General Services Administration. 3174. Operation of public utility communications services serving governmental activities. 3175. Acceptance of gifts of property. 3176. Administrator of General Services to furnish services in continental United States to international bodies. 3177. Use of photovoltaic energy in public buildings.(!1) -FOOTNOTE- (!1) Editorially supplied. Section 3177 added by Pub. L. 109-58 without corresponding amendment of chapter analysis. -End- -CITE- 40 USC SUBCHAPTER I - OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER I - OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS -HEAD- SUBCHAPTER I - OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3101 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER I - OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS -HEAD- Sec. 3101. Public buildings under control of Administrator of General Services -STATUTE- All public buildings outside of the District of Columbia and outside of military reservations purchased or erected out of any appropriation under the control of the Administrator of General Services, and the sites of the public buildings, are under the exclusive jurisdiction and control, and in the custody of, the Administrator. The Administrator may take possession of the buildings and assign and reassign rooms in the buildings to federal officials, clerks, and employees that the Administrator believes should be furnished with offices or rooms in the buildings. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1143.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3101 40:285. July 1, 1898, ch. 546, Sec. 1 (6th complete par. on p. 614), 30 Stat. 614. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The word "subtreasuries" in the 6th complete paragraph on p. 614 of section 1 of the Act of July 1, 1898 (ch. 546, 30 Stat. 614), is omitted because section 1 (words in par. under heading "Independent Treasury") of the Act of May 29, 1914 (ch. 214, 41 Stat. 654) discontinued subtreasuries. The word "post-offices" in section 1 is omitted because section 1 of Executive Order No. 6166 (eff. June 10, 1933) transferred administration of post office buildings to the Post Office Department. The words "courthouses, customhouses, appraiser's stores, barge offices, and other" are omitted as unnecessary. The words "or are in course of construction" are omitted as obsolete. The words "Administrator of General Services" are substituted for "Treasury Department" and "Secretary of the Treasury" [subsequently changed to "Federal Works Agency" and "Federal Works Administrator" because of sections 301 and 303, respectively, of Reorganization Plan No. I of 1939 (eff. July 1, 1939, 53 Stat. 1426, 1427)] because of section 103(a) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (ch. 288, 63 Stat. 380), which is restated as section 303(c) [303(b)] of the revised title. PROHIBITION OF CIGARETTE SALES TO MINORS IN FEDERAL BUILDINGS AND LANDS Pub. L. 104-52, title VI, Sec. 636, Nov. 19, 1995, 109 Stat. 507, known as the "Prohibition of Cigarette Sales to Minors in Federal Buildings and Lands Act", required the Administrator of General Services and the head of each Federal agency to promulgate regulations, to be reported to Congress, prohibiting the sale of tobacco products in vending machines or distribution of free samples of tobacco products located in or around any Federal building under the jurisdiction of the Administrator or agency head, and provided that the appropriate congressional committees would promulgate regulations prohibiting tobacco sales in vending machines in certain congressional buildings. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3102 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER I - OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS -HEAD- Sec. 3102. Naming or designating buildings -STATUTE- The Administrator of General Services may name or otherwise designate any building under the custody and control of the General Services Administration, regardless of whether it was previously named by statute. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1143.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3102 40:298d. June 16, 1949, ch. 218, title IV, Sec. 410, 63 Stat. 200; Pub. L. 85-542, July 18, 1958, 72 Stat. 399. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "notwithstanding any other provision of law" and "rename" are omitted as unnecessary. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3103 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER I - OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS -HEAD- Sec. 3103. Admission of guide dogs or other service animals accompanying individuals with disabilities -STATUTE- (a) In General. - Guide dogs or other service animals accompanying individuals with disabilities and especially trained and educated for that purpose shall be admitted to any building or other property owned or controlled by the Federal Government on the same terms and conditions, and subject to the same regulations, as generally govern the admission of the public to the property. The animals are not permitted to run free or roam in a building or on the property and must be in guiding harness or on leash and under the control of the individual at all times while in a building or on the property. (b) Regulations. - The head of each department or other agency of the Government may prescribe regulations the individual considers necessary in the public interest to carry out this section as it applies to any building or other property subject to the individual's jurisdiction. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1143.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3103(a) 40:291 (1st Dec. 10, 1941, ch. 563, 55 sentence). Stat. 796. 3103(b) 40:291 (last sentence). -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (a), the words "Seeing-eye dogs or other" are omitted as unnecessary. The words "or other service animals" are added, and the words "individuals with disabilities" are substituted for "blind masters", because of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794) and Part 39 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which expanded the coverage of the source provision to all service animals and to all individuals with disabilities. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3104 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER I - OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS -HEAD- Sec. 3104. Furniture for new buildings -STATUTE- Furniture for all new public buildings shall be acquired in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Administrator of General Services. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1143.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3104 40:283. May 27, 1908, ch. 200 1 [sic] (7th complete par. on p. 327), 35 Stat. 327. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "Administrator of General Services" are substituted for "Supervising Architect of the Treasury" [subsequently changed to "Secretary of the Treasury" because of section 1 of Executive Order No. 6166 (eff. June 10, 1933) and to "Federal Works Administrator" because of section 301 of Reorganization Plan No. I of 1939 (eff. July 1, 1939, 53 Stat. 1426)] because of section 103(a) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (ch. 288, 63 Stat. 380), which is restated as section 303(c) [303(b)] of the revised title. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3105 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER I - OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS -HEAD- Sec. 3105. Buildings not to be draped in mourning -STATUTE- No building owned, or used for public purposes, by the Federal Government shall be draped in mourning nor may public money be used for that purpose. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1143.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3105 40:286. Mar. 3, 1893, ch. 211, Sec. 3, 27 Stat. 715. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "On and after March 3, 1893" are omitted as obsolete. -End- -CITE- 40 USC SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND -HEAD- SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3111 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND -HEAD- Sec. 3111. Approval of sufficiency of title prior to acquisition -STATUTE- (a) Approval of Attorney General Required. - Public money may not be expended to purchase land or any interest in land unless the Attorney General gives prior written approval of the sufficiency of the title to the land for the purpose for which the Federal Government is acquiring the property. (b) Delegation. - (1) In general. - The Attorney General may delegate the responsibility under this section to other departments and agencies of the Government, subject to general supervision by the Attorney General and in accordance with regulations the Attorney General prescribes. (2) Request for opinion of attorney general. - A department or agency of the Government that has been delegated the responsibility to approve land titles under this section may request the Attorney General to render an opinion as to the validity of the title to any real property or interest in the property, or may request the advice or assistance of the Attorney General in connection with determinations as to the sufficiency of titles. (c) Payment of Expenses for Procuring Certificates of Title. - Except where otherwise authorized by law or provided by contract, the expenses of procuring certificates of titles or other evidences of title as the Attorney General may require may be paid out of the appropriations for the acquisition of land or out of the appropriations made for the contingencies of the acquiring department or agency of the Government. (d) Nonapplication. - This section does not affect any provision of law in effect on September 1, 1970, that is applicable to the acquisition of land or interests in land by the Tennessee Valley Authority. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1144.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3111(a) 40:255 (1st par.). R.S. Sec. 355 (1st-5th pars.); June 28, 1930, ch. 710, 46 Stat. 828; Feb. 1, 1940, ch. 18, 54 Stat. 19; Oct. 9, 1940, ch. 793, 54 Stat. 1083; Pub. L. 91-393, Sec. 1, Sept. 1, 1970, 84 Stat. 835. 3111(b) 40:255 (2d, 3d pars.). 3111(c) 40:255 (4th par.). 3111(d) 40:255 (5th par.). -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (d), the words "in any manner" are omitted as unnecessary. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3112 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND -HEAD- Sec. 3112. Federal jurisdiction -STATUTE- (a) Exclusive Jurisdiction Not Required. - It is not required that the Federal Government obtain exclusive jurisdiction in the United States over land or an interest in land it acquires. (b) Acquisition and Acceptance of Jurisdiction. - When the head of a department, agency, or independent establishment of the Government, or other authorized officer of the department, agency, or independent establishment, considers it desirable, that individual may accept or secure, from the State in which land or an interest in land that is under the immediate jurisdiction, custody, or control of the individual is situated, consent to, or cession of, any jurisdiction over the land or interest not previously obtained. The individual shall indicate acceptance of jurisdiction on behalf of the Government by filing a notice of acceptance with the Governor of the State or in another manner prescribed by the laws of the State where the land is situated. (c) Presumption. - It is conclusively presumed that jurisdiction has not been accepted until the Government accepts jurisdiction over land as provided in this section. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1144.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3112(a) 40:255 (last par. R.S. Sec. 355 (last par.); 1st sentence words June 28, 1930, ch. 710, 46 before semicolon). Stat. 828; Feb. 1, 1940, ch. 18, 54 Stat. 19; Oct. 9, 1940, ch. 793, 54 Stat. 1083. 3112(b) 40:255 (last par. 1st sentence words after semicolon). 3112(c) 40:255 (last par. last sentence). -------------------------------------------------------------------- Subsection (a) is substituted for 40:255 (last par. 1st sentence words before semicolon) to eliminate unnecessary words. In subsection (b), the words "exclusive or partial" are omitted as unnecessary. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3113 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND -HEAD- Sec. 3113. Acquisition by condemnation -STATUTE- An officer of the Federal Government authorized to acquire real estate for the erection of a public building or for other public uses may acquire the real estate for the Government by condemnation, under judicial process, when the officer believes that it is necessary or advantageous to the Government to do so. The Attorney General, on application of the officer, shall have condemnation proceedings begun within 30 days from receipt of the application at the Department of Justice. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1144.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3113 40:257. Aug. 1, 1888, ch. 728, Sec. 1, 25 Stat. 357; June 25, 1948, ch. 646, Sec. 6, 62 Stat. 986. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "the Secretary of the Treasury or any other" are omitted as unnecessary. The reference to section 258 is omitted because 40:258 is superseded by rule 71A of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (28 App.: U.S.C.). -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3114 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND -HEAD- Sec. 3114. Declaration of taking -STATUTE- (a) Filing and Content. - In any proceeding in any court of the United States outside of the District of Columbia brought by and in the name of the United States and under the authority of the Federal Government to acquire land, or an easement or right of way in land, for the public use, the petitioner may file, with the petition or at any time before judgment, a declaration of taking signed by the authority empowered by law to acquire the land described in the petition, declaring that the land is taken for the use of the Government. The declaration of taking shall contain or have annexed to it - (1) a statement of the authority under which, and the public use for which, the land is taken; (2) a description of the land taken that is sufficient to identify the land; (3) a statement of the estate or interest in the land taken for public use; (4) a plan showing the land taken; and (5) a statement of the amount of money estimated by the acquiring authority to be just compensation for the land taken. (b) Vesting of Title. - On filing the declaration of taking and depositing in the court, to the use of the persons entitled to the compensation, the amount of the estimated compensation stated in the declaration - (1) title to the estate or interest specified in the declaration vests in the Government; (2) the land is condemned and taken for the use of the Government; and (3) the right to just compensation for the land vests in the persons entitled to the compensation. (c) Compensation. - (1) Determination and award. - Compensation shall be determined and awarded in the proceeding and established by judgment. The judgment shall include interest, in accordance with section 3116 of this title, on the amount finally awarded as the value of the property as of the date of taking and shall be awarded from that date to the date of payment. Interest shall not be allowed on as much of the compensation as has been paid into the court. Amounts paid into the court shall not be charged with commissions or poundage. (2) Order to pay. - On application of the parties in interest, the court may order that any part of the money deposited in the court be paid immediately for or on account of the compensation to be awarded in the proceeding. (3) Deficiency judgment. - If the compensation finally awarded is more than the amount of money received by any person entitled to compensation, the court shall enter judgment against the Government for the amount of the deficiency. (d) Authority of Court. - On the filing of a declaration of taking, the court - (1) may fix the time within which, and the terms on which, the parties in possession shall be required to surrender possession to the petitioner; and (2) may make just and equitable orders in respect of encumbrances, liens, rents, taxes, assessments, insurance, and other charges. (e) Vesting Not Prevented or Delayed. - An appeal or a bond or undertaking given in a proceeding does not prevent or delay the vesting of title to land in the Government. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1145.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3114(a) 40:258a (1st par.). Feb. 26, 1931, ch. 307, Sec. 1, 46 Stat. 1421; Pub. L. 99-656, Sec. 1(1), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3668. 3114(b) 40:258a (2d par. 1st sentence words before 1st semicolon). 3114(c)(1) 40:258a (2d par. 1st sentence words after 1st semicolon, last sentence). 3114(c)( 40:258a (3d par.). 2), (3) 3114(d) 40:258a (last par.). 3114(e) 40:258b. Feb. 26, 1931, ch. 307, Sec. 2, 46 Stat. 1422. -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (a), before clause (1), the words "which has been or may be" are omitted as unnecessary. In subsection (b)(1), the words "said lands in fee simple absolute, or such less" are omitted as unnecessary. In subsection (b)(2), the words "deemed to be" are omitted as unnecessary. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3115 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND -HEAD- Sec. 3115. Irrevocable commitment of Federal Government to pay ultimate award when fixed -STATUTE- (a) Requirement for Irrevocable Commitment. - Action under section 3114 of this title irrevocably committing the Federal Government to the payment of the ultimate award shall not be taken unless the head of the executive department or agency or bureau of the Government empowered to acquire the land believes that the ultimate award probably will be within any limits Congress prescribes on the price to be paid. (b) Authorized Purposes of Expenditures After Irrevocable Commitment Made. - When the Government has taken or may take title to real property during a condemnation proceeding and in advance of final judgment in the proceeding and has become irrevocably committed to pay the amount ultimately to be awarded as compensation, and the Attorney General believes that title to the property has been vested in the Government or that all persons having an interest in the property have been made parties to the proceeding and will be bound by the final judgment, the Government may expend amounts appropriated for that purpose to demolish existing structures on the property and to erect public buildings or public works on the property. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1146.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3115(a) 40:258c. Feb. 26, 1931, ch. 307, Sec. 3, 46 Stat. 1422. 3115(b) 40:258e. Feb. 26, 1931, ch. 307, Sec. 5, 46 Stat. 1422; Pub. L. 91-393, Sec. 4, Sept. 1, 1970, 84 Stat. 835. -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (b), the words "possession of" are omitted as unnecessary. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3116 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND -HEAD- Sec. 3116. Interest as part of just compensation -STATUTE- (a) Calculation. - The district court shall calculate interest required to be paid under this subchapter as follows: (1) Period of not more than one year. - Where the period for which interest is owed is not more than one year, interest shall be calculated from the date of taking at an annual rate equal to the weekly average one-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, for the calendar week preceding the date of taking. (2) Period of more than one year. - Where the period for which interest is owed is more than one year, interest for the first year shall be calculated in accordance with paragraph (1) and interest for each additional year shall be calculated on the amount by which the award of compensation is more than the deposit referred to in section 3114 of this title, plus accrued interest, at an annual rate equal to the weekly average one-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, for the calendar week preceding the beginning of each additional year. (b) Distribution of Notice of Rates. - The Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall distribute to all federal courts notice of the rates described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a). -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1146.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3116(a) 40:258e-1 (less Feb. 26, 1931, ch. 307, Sec. last sentence). 6, as added Pub. L. 99-656, Sec. 1(2), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3668; Pub. L. 106-554, Sec. 1(a)(7) [Sec. 307(a)], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2763A-635. 3116(b) 40:258e-1 (last sentence). -------------------------------------------------------------------- -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3117 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND -HEAD- Sec. 3117. Exclusion of certain property by stipulation of Attorney General -STATUTE- In any condemnation proceeding brought by or on behalf of the Federal Government, the Attorney General may stipulate or agree on behalf of the Government to exclude any part of the property, or any interest in the property, taken by or on behalf of the Government by a declaration of taking or otherwise. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1147.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3117 40:258f. Oct. 21, 1942, ch. 618, 56 Stat. 797. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "that may have been, or may be" are omitted as unnecessary. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3118 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER II - ACQUIRING LAND -HEAD- Sec. 3118. Right of taking as addition to existing rights -STATUTE- The right to take possession and title in advance of final judgment in condemnation proceedings as provided by section 3114 of this title is in addition to any right, power, or authority conferred by the laws of the United States or of a State, territory, or possession of the United States under which the proceeding may be conducted, and does not abrogate, limit, or modify that right, power, or authority. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1147.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3118 40:258d. Feb. 26, 1931, ch. 307, Sec. 4, 46 Stat. 1422. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "State, territory, or possession of the United States" are substituted for "State or Territory" for consistency in the revised title and with other titles of the United States Code. -End- -CITE- 40 USC SUBCHAPTER III - BONDS 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER III - BONDS -HEAD- SUBCHAPTER III - BONDS -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3131 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER III - BONDS -HEAD- Sec. 3131. Bonds of contractors of public buildings or works -STATUTE- (a) Definition. - In this subchapter, the term "contractor" means a person awarded a contract described in subsection (b). (b) Type of Bonds Required. - Before any contract of more than $100,000 is awarded for the construction, alteration, or repair of any public building or public work of the Federal Government, a person must furnish to the Government the following bonds, which become binding when the contract is awarded: (1) Performance bond. - A performance bond with a surety satisfactory to the officer awarding the contract, and in an amount the officer considers adequate, for the protection of the Government. (2) Payment bond. - A payment bond with a surety satisfactory to the officer for the protection of all persons supplying labor and material in carrying out the work provided for in the contract for the use of each person. The amount of the payment bond shall equal the total amount payable by the terms of the contract unless the officer awarding the contract determines, in a writing supported by specific findings, that a payment bond in that amount is impractical, in which case the contracting officer shall set the amount of the payment bond. The amount of the payment bond shall not be less than the amount of the performance bond. (c) Coverage for Taxes in Performance Bond. - (1) In general. - Every performance bond required under this section specifically shall provide coverage for taxes the Government imposes which are collected, deducted, or withheld from wages the contractor pays in carrying out the contract with respect to which the bond is furnished. (2) Notice. - The Government shall give the surety on the bond written notice, with respect to any unpaid taxes attributable to any period, within 90 days after the date when the contractor files a return for the period, except that notice must be given no later than 180 days from the date when a return for the period was required to be filed under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). (3) Civil action. - The Government may not bring a civil action on the bond for the taxes - (A) unless notice is given as provided in this subsection; and (B) more than one year after the day on which notice is given. (d) Waiver of Bonds for Contracts Performed in Foreign Countries. - A contracting officer may waive the requirement of a performance bond and payment bond for work under a contract that is to be performed in a foreign country if the officer finds that it is impracticable for the contractor to furnish the bonds. (e) Authority To Require Additional Bonds. - This section does not limit the authority of a contracting officer to require a performance bond or other security in addition to those, or in cases other than the cases, specified in subsection (b). -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1147; Pub. L. 109-284, Sec. 6(8), Sept. 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 1213.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3131(a) 40:270a(a) (words Aug. 24, 1935, ch. 642, Sec. before cl. (1) 1(a)-(c), 49 Stat. 793; Pub. related to L. 95-585, Nov. 2, 1978, 92 definition). Stat. 2484; Pub. L. 103-355, title IV, Sec. 4104(b)(1)(B), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3342; Pub. L. 106-49, Sec. 2(a), Aug. 17, 1999, 113 Stat. 231. 40:270d. Aug. 24, 1935, ch. 642, Sec. 4, 49 Stat. 794. 3131(b) 40:270a(a) (words before cl. (1) related to furnishing bond), (1), (2). 40:270d-1. Aug. 24, 1935, ch. 642, Sec. 5, as added Pub. L. 103-355, title IV, Sec. 4104(b)(1)(A), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3341. 3131(c) 40:270a(d). Aug. 24, 1935, ch. 642, Sec. 1(d), as added Pub. L. 89-719, title I, Sec. 105(b), Nov. 2, 1966, 80 Stat. 1139. 3131(d) 40:270a(b). 3131(e) 40:270a(c). -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (a), the text of 40:270d is omitted because of 1:1. In subsections (b) and (c), the words "or sureties" are omitted because of 1:1. -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, referred to in subsec. (c)(2), is classified to Title 26, Internal Revenue Code. -MISC2- AMENDMENTS 2006 - Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 109-284 substituted "To" for "to" in heading. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3132 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER III - BONDS -HEAD- Sec. 3132. Alternatives to payment bonds provided by Federal Acquisition Regulation -STATUTE- (a) In General. - The Federal Acquisition Regulation shall provide alternatives to payment bonds as payment protections for suppliers of labor and materials under contracts referred to in section 3131(a) of this title that are more than $25,000 and not more than $100,000. (b) Responsibilities of Contracting Officer. - The contracting officer for a contract shall - (1) select, from among the payment protections provided for in the Federal Acquisition Regulation pursuant to subsection (a), one or more payment protections which the offeror awarded the contract is to submit to the Federal Government for the protection of suppliers of labor and materials for the contract; and (2) specify in the solicitation of offers for the contract the payment protections selected. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1148.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3132 40:270a note. Pub. L. 103-355, title IV, Sec. 4104(b)(2), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3342. -------------------------------------------------------------------- -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3133 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER III - BONDS -HEAD- Sec. 3133. Rights of persons furnishing labor or material -STATUTE- (a) Right of Person Furnishing Labor or Material to Copy of Bond. - The department secretary or agency head of the contracting agency shall furnish a certified copy of a payment bond and the contract for which it was given to any person applying for a copy who submits an affidavit that the person has supplied labor or material for work described in the contract and payment for the work has not been made or that the person is being sued on the bond. The copy is prima facie evidence of the contents, execution, and delivery of the original. Applicants shall pay any fees the department secretary or agency head of the contracting agency fixes to cover the cost of preparing the certified copy. (b) Right To Bring a Civil Action. - (1) In general. - Every person that has furnished labor or material in carrying out work provided for in a contract for which a payment bond is furnished under section 3131 of this title and that has not been paid in full within 90 days after the day on which the person did or performed the last of the labor or furnished or supplied the material for which the claim is made may bring a civil action on the payment bond for the amount unpaid at the time the civil action is brought and may prosecute the action to final execution and judgment for the amount due. (2) Person having direct contractual relationship with a subcontractor. - A person having a direct contractual relationship with a subcontractor but no contractual relationship, express or implied, with the contractor furnishing the payment bond may bring a civil action on the payment bond on giving written notice to the contractor within 90 days from the date on which the person did or performed the last of the labor or furnished or supplied the last of the material for which the claim is made. The action must state with substantial accuracy the amount claimed and the name of the party to whom the material was furnished or supplied or for whom the labor was done or performed. The notice shall be served - (A) by any means that provides written, third-party verification of delivery to the contractor at any place the contractor maintains an office or conducts business or at the contractor's residence; or (B) in any manner in which the United States marshal of the district in which the public improvement is situated by law may serve summons. (3) Venue. - A civil action brought under this subsection must be brought - (A) in the name of the United States for the use of the person bringing the action; and (B) in the United States District Court for any district in which the contract was to be performed and executed, regardless of the amount in controversy. (4) Period in which action must be brought. - An action brought under this subsection must be brought no later than one year after the day on which the last of the labor was performed or material was supplied by the person bringing the action. (5) Liability of federal government. - The Government is not liable for the payment of any costs or expenses of any civil action brought under this subsection. (c) Waiver of Right to Civil Action. - A waiver of the right to bring a civil action on a payment bond required under this subchapter is void unless the waiver is - (1) in writing; (2) signed by the person whose right is waived; and (3) executed after the person whose right is waived has furnished labor or material for use in the performance of the contract. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1148; Pub. L. 109-284, Sec. 6(9), (10), Sept. 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 1213.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3133(a) 40:270c. Aug. 24, 1935, ch. 642, Sec. 3, 49 Stat. 794; Pub. L. 86-135, Sec. 2, Aug. 4, 1959, 73 Stat. 279; Pub. L. 98-269, Apr. 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 156. 3133(b)( 40:270b(a). Aug. 24, 1935, ch. 642, Sec. 1), (2) 2(a), (b), 49 Stat. 794; Pub. L. 86-135, Sec. 1, Aug. 4, 1959, 73 Stat. 279; Pub. L. 106-49, Sec. 2(b), Aug. 17, 1999, 113 Stat. 231. 3133(b)(3)- 40:270b(b). (5) 3133(c) 40:270b(c). Aug. 24, 1935, ch. 642, Sec. 2(c), as added Pub. L. 106-49, Sec. 2(c), Aug. 17, 1999, 113 Stat. 231. -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (b)(1), the words "may bring a civil action" are substituted for "shall have the right to sue" for consistency in the revised title and with other titles of the United States Code. The words "or sums" are omitted because of 1:1. In subsection (b)(2), the words "to the contractor at any place he maintains an office or conducts his business, or his residence, or in any manner in which the United States marshal of the district in which the public improvement is situated is authorized by law to serve summons" are restated to reflect the probable intent of Congress. See H. Rept. 106-277, Part 1, 106th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 4, 7. In subsection (c), the words "bring a civil action" are substituted for "sue" for consistency in the revised title and with other titles of the United States Code. AMENDMENTS 2006 - Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 109-284, Sec. 6(9), substituted "To" for "to" in heading. Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 109-284, Sec. 6(10), inserted heading. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3134 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER III - BONDS -HEAD- Sec. 3134. Waivers for certain contracts -STATUTE- (a) Military. - The Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, the Secretary of the Air Force, or the Secretary of Transportation may waive this subchapter with respect to cost-plus- a-fixed fee and other cost-type contracts for the construction, alteration, or repair of any public building or public work of the Federal Government and with respect to contracts for manufacturing, producing, furnishing, constructing, altering, repairing, processing, or assembling vessels, aircraft, munitions, materiel, or supplies for the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Coast Guard, respectively, regardless of the terms of the contracts as to payment or title. (b) Transportation. - The Secretary of Transportation may waive this subchapter with respect to contracts for the construction, alteration, or repair of vessels when the contract is made under sections 1535 and 1536 of title 31, subtitle V of title 46, or the Merchant Ship Sales Act of 1946 (50 App. U.S.C. 1735 et seq.), regardless of the terms of the contracts as to payment or title. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1149; Pub. L. 109-304, Sec. 17(g)(2), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1709.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3134(a) 40:270e. Apr. 29, 1941, ch. 81, Sec. 1, 55 Stat. 147; June 3, 1955, ch. 129, 69 Stat. 83. 3134(b) 40:270f. Apr. 29, 1941, ch. 81, Sec. 2, as added Pub. L. 91-469, Sec. 39, Oct. 21, 1970, 84 Stat. 1036; Pub. L. 97-31, Sec. 12(12), Aug. 6, 1981, 95 Stat. 154. -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (a), the words "Secretary of Transportation" are substituted for "Secretary of Commerce" because of 49:108. The words "the manufacturing, producing, furnishing, construction, alteration, repair, processing, or assembling of" and "of any kind or nature" are omitted as unnecessary. In subsection (b), the words "of any kind or nature" are omitted as unnecessary. The words "sections 1535 and 1536 of title 31" are substituted for "the Act of June 30, 1932 (47 Stat. 382, 417-418), as amended [31 U.S.C. 686, 686b]" because of section 4(b) of the Act of September 13, 1982 (Public Law 97-258, 96 Stat. 1067), the first section of which enacted Title 31, United States Code. -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT The Merchant Ship Sales Act of 1946, referred to in subsec. (b), is act Mar. 8, 1946, ch. 82, 60 Stat. 41, as amended, which is classified to sections 1735 to 1746 of Title 50, Appendix, War and National Defense. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1735 of Title 50, Appendix, and Tables. -MISC2- AMENDMENTS 2006 - Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 109-304 substituted "subtitle V of title 46" for "the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 App. U.S.C. 1101 et seq.)". -TRANS- TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relating thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6. -End- -CITE- 40 USC SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS -HEAD- SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3141 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS -HEAD- Sec. 3141. Definitions -STATUTE- In this subchapter, the following definitions apply: (1) Federal government. - The term "Federal Government" has the same meaning that the term "United States" had in the Act of March 3, 1931 (ch. 411, 46 Stat. 1494) (known as the Davis-Bacon Act). (2) Wages, scale of wages, wage rates, minimum wages, and prevailing wages. - The terms "wages", "scale of wages", "wage rates", "minimum wages", and "prevailing wages" include - (A) the basic hourly rate of pay; and (B) for medical or hospital care, pensions on retirement or death, compensation for injuries or illness resulting from occupational activity, or insurance to provide any of the forgoing, for unemployment benefits, life insurance, disability and sickness insurance, or accident insurance, for vacation and holiday pay, for defraying the costs of apprenticeship or other similar programs, or for other bona fide fringe benefits, but only where the contractor or subcontractor is not required by other federal, state, or local law to provide any of those benefits, the amount of - (i) the rate of contribution irrevocably made by a contractor or subcontractor to a trustee or to a third person under a fund, plan, or program; and (ii) the rate of costs to the contractor or subcontractor that may be reasonably anticipated in providing benefits to laborers and mechanics pursuant to an enforceable commitment to carry out a financially responsible plan or program which was communicated in writing to the laborers and mechanics affected. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1150; Pub. L. 109-284, Sec. 6(11), Sept. 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 1213.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3141(1) (no source). 3141(2) 40:276a(b) (1st Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 411, Sec. par. words before 1(b) (1st par. words before proviso). proviso), as added Pub. L. 88-349, Sec. 1, July 2, 1964, 78 Stat. 239. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Clause (1) is added for clarity. -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT The Davis-Bacon Act, referred to in par. (1), is act of Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 411, 46 Stat. 1494, as amended, which was classified generally to sections 276a to 276a-5 of former Title 40, Public Buildings, Property, and Works, and was repealed and reenacted as sections 3141-3144, 3146, and 3147 of this title by Pub. L. 107- 217, Secs. 1, 6(b), Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1062, 1304. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables. -MISC2- AMENDMENTS 2006 - Par. (1). Pub. L. 109-284 substituted "1494)" for "1494". -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3142 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS -HEAD- Sec. 3142. Rate of wages for laborers and mechanics -STATUTE- (a) Application. - The advertised specifications for every contract in excess of $2,000, to which the Federal Government or the District of Columbia is a party, for construction, alteration, or repair, including painting and decorating, of public buildings and public works of the Government or the District of Columbia that are located in a State or the District of Columbia and which requires or involves the employment of mechanics or laborers shall contain a provision stating the minimum wages to be paid various classes of laborers and mechanics. (b) Based on Prevailing Wage. - The minimum wages shall be based on the wages the Secretary of Labor determines to be prevailing for the corresponding classes of laborers and mechanics employed on projects of a character similar to the contract work in the civil subdivision of the State in which the work is to be performed, or in the District of Columbia if the work is to be performed there. (c) Stipulations Required in Contract. - Every contract based upon the specifications referred to in subsection (a) must contain stipulations that - (1) the contractor or subcontractor shall pay all mechanics and laborers employed directly on the site of the work, unconditionally and at least once a week, and without subsequent deduction or rebate on any account, the full amounts accrued at time of payment, computed at wage rates not less than those stated in the advertised specifications, regardless of any contractual relationship which may be alleged to exist between the contractor or subcontractor and the laborers and mechanics; (2) the contractor will post the scale of wages to be paid in a prominent and easily accessible place at the site of the work; and (3) there may be withheld from the contractor so much of accrued payments as the contracting officer considers necessary to pay to laborers and mechanics employed by the contractor or any subcontractor on the work the difference between the rates of wages required by the contract to be paid laborers and mechanics on the work and the rates of wages received by the laborers and mechanics and not refunded to the contractor or subcontractors or their agents. (d) Discharge of Obligation. - The obligation of a contractor or subcontractor to make payment in accordance with the prevailing wage determinations of the Secretary of Labor, under this subchapter and other laws incorporating this subchapter by reference, may be discharged by making payments in cash, by making contributions described in section 3141(2)(B)(i) of this title, by assuming an enforceable commitment to bear the costs of a plan or program referred to in section 3141(2)(B)(ii) of this title, or by any combination of payment, contribution, and assumption, where the aggregate of the payments, contributions, and costs is not less than the basic hourly rate of pay plus the amount referred to in section 3141(2)(B) of this title. (e) Overtime Pay. - In determining the overtime pay to which a laborer or mechanic is entitled under any federal law, the regular or basic hourly rate of pay (or other alternative rate on which premium rate of overtime compensation is computed) of the laborer or mechanic is deemed to be the rate computed under section 3141(2)(A) of this title, except that where the amount of payments, contributions, or costs incurred with respect to the laborer or mechanic exceeds the applicable prevailing wage, the regular or basic hourly rate of pay (or other alternative rate) is the amount of payments, contributions, or costs actually incurred with respect to the laborer or mechanic minus the greater of the amount of contributions or costs of the types described in section 3141(2)(B) of this title actually incurred with respect to the laborer or mechanic or the amount determined under section 3141(2)(B) of this title but not actually paid. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1150; Pub. L. 109-284, Sec. 6(12), (13), Sept. 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 1213.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3142(a), 40:276a(a) (words Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 411, Sec. (b) before 1st 1(a), 46 Stat. 1494; Aug. semicolon). 30, 1935, ch. 825, 49 Stat. 1011; June 15, 1940, ch. 373, Sec. 1, 54 Stat. 399; Pub. L. 86-624, Sec. 26, July 12, 1960, 74 Stat. 418; Pub. L. 88-349, Sec. 1, July 2, 1964, 78 Stat. 238. 3142(c) 40:276a(a) (words after 1st semicolon). 3142(d) 40:276a(b) (1st Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 411, Sec. par. proviso). 1(b) (1st par. proviso, last par.), as added Pub. L. 88-349, Sec. 1, July 2, 1964, 78 Stat. 239. 3142(e) 40:276a(b) (last par.). -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (a), the words "a State" are substituted for "the geographical limits of the States of the Union" for consistency in the revised title and with other titles of the United States Code and to eliminate unnecessary words. In subsection (b), the words "city, town, village, or other" are omitted as unnecessary. In subsection (d), the words "of a type" are omitted as unnecessary. The words "basic hourly rate of pay" are substituted for "rate of pay described in paragraph (1)" for clarity. AMENDMENTS 2006 - Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 109-284, Sec. 6(12), inserted "of this title" after "amount referred to in section 3141(2)(B)". Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 109-284, Sec. 6(13), inserted "of this title" after "determined under section 3141(2)(B)". -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3143 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS -HEAD- Sec. 3143. Termination of work on failure to pay agreed wages -STATUTE- Every contract within the scope of this subchapter shall contain a provision that if the contracting officer finds that any laborer or mechanic employed by the contractor or any subcontractor directly on the site of the work covered by the contract has been or is being paid a rate of wages less than the rate of wages required by the contract to be paid, the Federal Government by written notice to the contractor may terminate the contractor's right to proceed with the work or the part of the work as to which there has been a failure to pay the required wages. The Government may have the work completed, by contract or otherwise, and the contractor and the contractor's sureties shall be liable to the Government for any excess costs the Government incurs. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1151.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3143 40:276a-1. Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 411, Sec. 2, 46 Stat. 1494; Aug. 30, 1935, ch. 825, 49 Stat. 1012. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "The Government may have the work completed" are substituted for "and to prosecute the work to completion . . . thereby" for clarity. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3144 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS -HEAD- Sec. 3144. Authority of Comptroller General to pay wages and list contractors violating contracts -STATUTE- (a) Payment of Wages. - (1) In general. - The Comptroller General shall pay directly to laborers and mechanics from any accrued payments withheld under the terms of a contract any wages found to be due laborers and mechanics under this subchapter. (2) Right of action. - If the accrued payments withheld under the terms of the contract are insufficient to reimburse all the laborers and mechanics who have not been paid the wages required under this subchapter, the laborers and mechanics have the same right to bring a civil action and intervene against the contractor and the contractor's sureties as is conferred by law on persons furnishing labor or materials. In those proceedings it is not a defense that the laborers and mechanics accepted or agreed to accept less than the required rate of wages or voluntarily made refunds. (b) List of Contractors Violating Contracts. - (1) In general. - The Comptroller General shall distribute to all departments of the Federal Government a list of the names of persons whom the Comptroller General has found to have disregarded their obligations to employees and subcontractors. (2) Restriction on awarding contracts. - No contract shall be awarded to persons appearing on the list or to any firm, corporation, partnership, or association in which the persons have an interest until three years have elapsed from the date of publication of the list. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1152.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3144(a)(1) 40:276a-2(a) (1st Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 411, Sec. sentence words 3, 46 Stat. 1494; Aug. 30, before semicolon). 1935, ch. 825, 49 Stat. 1012. 3144(a)(2) 40:276a-2(b). 3144(b) 40:276a-2(a) (1st sentence words after semicolon, last sentence). -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (b), the words "or firms" are omitted as being included in "persons". -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3145 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS -HEAD- Sec. 3145. Regulations governing contractors and subcontractors -STATUTE- (a) In General. - The Secretary of Labor shall prescribe reasonable regulations for contractors and subcontractors engaged in constructing, carrying out, completing, or repairing public buildings, public works, or buildings or works that at least partly are financed by a loan or grant from the Federal Government. The regulations shall include a provision that each contractor and subcontractor each week must furnish a statement on the wages paid each employee during the prior week. (b) Application. - Section 1001 of title 18 applies to the statements. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1152.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3145(a) 40:276c (1st June 13, 1934, ch. 482, Sec. sentence). 2, 48 Stat. 948; May 24, 1949, ch. 139, Sec. 134, 63 Stat. 108; Pub. L. 85-800, Sec. 12, Aug. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 967. 3145(b) 40:276c (last sentence). -------------------------------------------------------------------- -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3146 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS -HEAD- Sec. 3146. Effect on other federal laws -STATUTE- This subchapter does not supersede or impair any authority otherwise granted by federal law to provide for the establishment of specific wage rates. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1152.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3146 40:276a-3. Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 411, Sec. 4, 46 Stat. 1494; Aug. 30, 1935, ch. 825, 49 Stat. 1012. -------------------------------------------------------------------- -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3147 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS -HEAD- Sec. 3147. Suspension of this subchapter during a national emergency -STATUTE- The President may suspend the provisions of this subchapter during a national emergency. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1153.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3147 40:276a-5. Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 411, Sec. 6, 46 Stat. 1494; Aug. 30, 1935, ch. 825, 49 Stat. 1013. -------------------------------------------------------------------- TERMINATION OF WAR AND EMERGENCIES Joint Res. July 25, 1947, ch. 327, Sec. 3, 61 Stat. 451, provided that in the interpretation of former 40 U.S.C. 276a-5, the date July 25, 1947, was to be deemed to be the date of termination of any state of war theretofore declared by Congress and of the national emergencies proclaimed by the President on September 8, 1939, and May 27, 1941. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3148 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER IV - WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS -HEAD- Sec. 3148. Application of this subchapter to certain contracts -STATUTE- This subchapter applies to a contract authorized by law that is made without regard to section 3709 of the Revised Statutes (41 U.S.C. 5), or on a cost-plus-a-fixed-fee basis or otherwise without advertising for proposals, if this subchapter otherwise would apply to the contract. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1153.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3148 40:276a-7. Mar. 23, 1941, ch. 26 (last proviso in 5th complete par. on p. 53), 55 Stat. 53; Aug. 21, 1941, ch. 395 (last proviso in 14th par. on p. 664), 55 Stat. 664. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "this subchapter" are substituted for "such Act" to correct the reference as stated in 40:276a-7. -End- -CITE- 40 USC SUBCHAPTER V - VOLUNTEER SERVICES 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER V - VOLUNTEER SERVICES -HEAD- SUBCHAPTER V - VOLUNTEER SERVICES -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3161 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER V - VOLUNTEER SERVICES -HEAD- Sec. 3161. Purpose -STATUTE- It is the purpose of this subchapter to promote and provide opportunities for individuals who wish to volunteer their services to state or local governments, public agencies, or nonprofit charitable organizations in the construction, repair, or alteration (including painting and decorating) of public buildings and public works that at least partly are financed with federal financial assistance authorized under certain federal programs and that otherwise might not be possible without the use of volunteers. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1153.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3161 40:276d. Pub. L. 103-355, title VII, Sec. 7302, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3382. -------------------------------------------------------------------- -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3162 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER V - VOLUNTEER SERVICES -HEAD- Sec. 3162. Waiver for individuals who perform volunteer services -STATUTE- (a) Criteria for Receiving Waiver. - The requirement that certain laborers and mechanics be paid in accordance with the wage-setting provisions of subchapter IV of this chapter as set forth in the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et seq.), the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (25 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), and the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) does not apply to an individual - (1) who volunteers to perform a service directly to a state or local government, a public agency, or a public or private nonprofit recipient of federal assistance - (A) for civic, charitable, or humanitarian reasons; (B) only for the personal purpose or pleasure of the individual; (C) without promise, expectation, or receipt of compensation for services rendered, except as provided in subsection (b); and (D) freely and without pressure or coercion, direct or implied, from any employer; (2) whose contribution of service is not for the direct or indirect benefit of any contractor otherwise performing or seeking to perform work on the same project for which the individual is volunteering; (3) who is not employed by and does not provide services to a contractor or subcontractor at any time on the federally assisted or insured project for which the individual is volunteering; and (4) who otherwise is not employed by the same public agency or recipient of federal assistance to perform the same type of services as those for which the individual proposes to volunteer. (b) Payments. - (1) In accordance with regulations. - Volunteers described in subsection (a) who are performing services directly to a state or local government or public agency may receive payments of expenses, reasonable benefits, or a nominal fee only in accordance with regulations the Secretary of Labor prescribes. Volunteers who are performing services directly to a public or private nonprofit entity may not receive those payments. (2) Criteria and content of regulations. - In prescribing the regulations, the Secretary shall consider criteria such as the total amount of payments made (relating to expenses, benefits, or fees) in the context of the economic realities. The regulations shall include provisions that provide that - (A) a payment for an expense may be received by a volunteer for items such as uniform allowances, protective gear and clothing, reimbursement for approximate out-of-pocket expenses, or the cost or expense of meals and transportation; (B) a reasonable benefit may include the inclusion of a volunteer in a group insurance plan (such as a liability, health, life, disability, or worker's compensation plan) or pension plan, or the awarding of a length of service award; and (C) a nominal fee may not be used as a substitute for compensation and may not be connected to productivity. (3) Nominal fee. - The Secretary shall decide what constitutes a nominal fee for purposes of paragraph (2)(C). The decision shall be based on the context of the economic realities of the situation involved. (c) Economic Reality. - In determining whether an expense, benefit, or fee described in subsection (b) may be paid to volunteers in the context of the economic realities of the particular situation, the Secretary may not permit any expense, benefit, or fee that has the effect of undermining labor standards by creating downward pressure on prevailing wages in the local construction industry. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1153.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3162(a) 40:276d-1(a). Pub. L. 103-355, title VII, Secs. 7303, 7304, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3382. 40:276d-2. 40:276d-3. Pub. L. 103-355, title VII, Sec. 7305, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3384; Pub. L. 104-208, div. A, Sec. 101(e) [title VII, Sec. 709(a)(4)], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009-312. 3162(b) 40:276d-1(b). 3162(c) 40:276d-1(c). -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (a), the references to sections 254b and 254c of title 42 in 40:276d-3 are omitted. Sections 329 and 330 of the Public Health Service Act were omitted in the general amendment of subpart I of part D of title III of the Act (42:254b et seq.) by sections 2 and 3(a) of the Health Care Consolidation Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-299, 110 Stat. 3626), which enacted new sections 330 and 330A of the Public Health Service Act. Sections 330 and 330A do not refer to the Act of March 3, 1931 (ch. 411, 46 Stat. 1494). In subsection (b)(1), the words "Volunteers who are performing services directly to a public or private nonprofit entity may not receive those payments" are added for clarity. -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, referred to in subsec. (a), is Pub. L. 93-638, Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2203, as amended, which is classified principally to subchapter II (Sec. 450 et seq.) of chapter 14 of Title 25, Indians. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 450 of Title 25 and Tables. The Indian Health Care Improvement Act, referred to in subsec. (a), is Pub. L. 94-437, Sept. 30, 1976, 90 Stat. 1400, as amended, which is classified principally to chapter 18 (Sec. 1601 et seq.) of Title 25, Indians. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1601 of Title 25 and Tables. The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, referred to in subsec. (a), is Pub. L. 93-383, Aug. 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 633, as amended. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 5301 of Title 42 and Tables. -End- -CITE- 40 USC SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS -HEAD- SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3171 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS -HEAD- Sec. 3171. Contract authority when appropriation is for less than full amount -STATUTE- Unless specifically directed otherwise, the Administrator of General Services may make a contract within the full limit of the cost fixed by Congress for the acquisition of land for sites, or for the enlargement of sites, for public buildings, or for the erection, remodeling, extension, alteration, and repairs of public buildings, even though an appropriation is made for only part of the amount necessary to carry out legislation authorizing that purpose. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1154.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3171 40:261. May 30, 1908, ch. 228, Sec. 34, 35 Stat. 545. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "On and after May 30, 1908" are omitted as obsolete. The words "Administrator of General Services" are substituted for "Secretary of the Treasury" [subsequently changed to "Federal Works Administrator" because of section 303 of Reorganization Plan No. I of 1939 (eff. July 1, 1939, 53 Stat. 1427)] because of section 103(a) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (ch. 288, 63 Stat. 380), which is restated as section 303(c) [303(b)] of the revised title. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3172 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS -HEAD- Sec. 3172. Extension of state workers' compensation laws to buildings, works, and property of the Federal Government -STATUTE- (a) Authorization of Extension. - The state authority charged with enforcing and requiring compliance with the state workers' compensation laws and with the orders, decisions, and awards of the authority may apply the laws to all land and premises in the State which the Federal Government owns or holds by deed or act of cession, and to all projects, buildings, constructions, improvements, and property in the State and belonging to the Government, in the same way and to the same extent as if the premises were under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State in which the land, premises, projects, buildings, constructions, improvements, or property are located. (b) Limitation on Relinquishing Jurisdiction. - The Government under this section does not relinquish its jurisdiction for any other purpose. (c) Nonapplication. - This section does not modify or amend subchapter I of chapter 81 of title 5. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1154.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3172(a) 40:290 (1st par., June 25, 1936, ch. 822, 49 last par. words Stat. 1938. before 1st proviso). 3172(b) 40:290 (last par. 1st proviso). 3172(c) 40:290 (last par. last proviso). -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (a), the words "by purchase or otherwise" and 40:290(last par. words before 1st proviso) are omitted as unnecessary. Subsection (b) is substituted for 40:290(last par. 1st proviso) to eliminate unnecessary words. In subsection (c), the words "subchapter I of chapter 81 of title 5" are substituted for "the United States Employees' Compensation Act as amended from time to time (Act of September 7, 1916, 39 Stat. 742, U.S.C., title 5 and supplement, sec. 751 et seq.)" because of section 7(b) of the Act of September 6, 1966 (Public Law 89-554, 80 Stat. 631), the first section of which enacted Title 5, United States Code. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3173 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS -HEAD- Sec. 3173. Working capital fund for blueprinting, photostating, and duplicating services in General Services Administration -STATUTE- (a) Establishment and Purpose. - There is a working capital fund for the payment of salaries and other expenses necessary to the operation of a central blue-printing, photostating, and duplicating service. (b) Components. - The fund consists of - (1) $50,000 without fiscal year limitation; and (2) reimbursements from available amounts of constituents of the Administrator of General Services, or of any other federal agency for which services are performed, at rates to be determined by the Administrator on the basis of estimated or actual charges for personal services, material, equipment (including maintenance, repair, and depreciation on existing and new equipment) and other expenses, to ensure continuous operation. (c) Deposit of Excess Amounts in the Treasury. - At the close of each fiscal year any excess amount resulting from operation of the service, after adequately providing for the replacement of mechanical and other equipment and for accrued annual leave of employees engaged in this work by the establishment of reserves for those purposes, shall be deposited in the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1155.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3173(a), 40:293 (words May 3, 1945, ch. 106, title (b) before proviso). I, 101 (2d complete par. on p. 115), 59 Stat. 115. 3173(c) 40:293 (proviso). -------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsection (b)(2), the words "Administrator of General Services" are substituted for "Federal Works Agency" and "Public Buildings Administration" because of section 103(a) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (ch. 288, 63 Stat. 380), which is restated as section 303(c) [303(b)] of the revised title. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3174 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS -HEAD- Sec. 3174. Operation of public utility communications services serving governmental activities -STATUTE- The Administrator of General Services may provide and operate public utility communications services serving any governmental activity when the services are economical and in the interest of the Federal Government. This section does not apply to communications systems for handling messages of a confidential or secret nature, the operation of cryptographic equipment or transmission of secret, security, or coded messages, or buildings operated or occupied by the United States Postal Service, except on request of the department or agency concerned. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1155.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3174 40:295. June 14, 1946, ch. 404, Sec. 7, 60 Stat. 258. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "Administrator of General Services" are substituted for "Commissioner of Public Buildings" because of section 103(a) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (ch. 288, 63 Stat. 380), which is restated as section 303(c) [303(b)] of the revised title. The words "in and outside the District of Columbia" are omitted as unnecessary. The words "United States Postal Service" are substituted for "Post Office Department" because of section 6(o) of the Postal Reorganization Act (Public Law 91-375, 84 Stat. 783). -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3175 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS -HEAD- Sec. 3175. Acceptance of gifts of property -STATUTE- The Administrator of General Services, and the United States Postal Service where that office is concerned, may accept on behalf of the Federal Government unconditional gifts of property in aid of any project or function within their respective jurisdictions. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1155.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3175 40:298a. June 16, 1949, ch. 218, title IV, Sec. 404, 63 Stat. 199. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "Administrator of General Services" are substituted for "Federal Works Administrator" because of section 103(a) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (ch. 288, 63 Stat. 380), which is restated as section 303(c) [303(b)] of the revised title. The words "United States Postal Service" are substituted for "Postmaster General" because of section 6(o) of the Postal Reorganization Act (Public Law 91-375, 84 Stat. 783). The words "real, personal, or other" are omitted as unnecessary. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3176 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS -HEAD- Sec. 3176. Administrator of General Services to furnish services in continental United States to international bodies -STATUTE- Sections 1535 and 1536 of title 31 are extended so that the Administrator of General Services, at the request of the Secretary of State, may furnish services in the continental United States, on a reimbursable basis, to any international body with which the Federal Government is affiliated. -SOURCE- (Pub. L. 107-217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1156.) -MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES -------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section -------------------------------------------------------------------- 3176 40:298b. June 16, 1949, ch. 218, title IV, Sec. 405, 63 Stat. 199. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The words "Sections 1535 and 1536 of title 31" are substituted for "section 601 of the Economy Act, approved June 30, 1932, as amended" because of section 4(b) of the Act of September 13, 1982 (Public Law 97-258, 96 Stat. 1067), the first section of which enacted Title 31, United States Code. The words "Administrator of General Services" are substituted for "Public Buildings Administration" because of section 103(a) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (ch. 288, 63 Stat. 380), which is restated as section 303(c) [303(b)] of the revised title. The words "Secretary of State" are substituted for "State Department" because of 22:2651. -End- -CITE- 40 USC Sec. 3177 01/03/2007 -EXPCITE- TITLE 40 - PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS SUBTITLE II - PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS PART A - GENERAL CHAPTER 31 - GENERAL SUBCHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS -HEAD- Sec. 3177. Use of photovoltaic energy in public buildings -STATUTE- (a) Photovoltaic Energy Commercialization Program. - (1) In general. - The Administrator of General Services may establish a photovoltaic energy commercialization program for the procurement and installation of photovoltaic solar electric systems for electric production in new and existing public buildings. (2) Purposes. - The purposes of the program shall be to accomplish the following: (A) To accelerate the growth of a commercially viable photovoltaic industry to make this energy system available to the general public as an option which can reduce the national consumption of fossil fuel. (B) To reduce the fossil fuel consumption and costs of the Federal Government. (C) To attain the goal of installing solar energy systems in 20,000 Federal buildings by 2010, as contained in the Federal Government's Million Solar Roof Initiative of 1997. (D) To stimulate the general use within the Federal Government of life-cycle costing and innovative procurement methods. (E) To develop program performance data to support policy decisions on future incentive programs with respect to energy. (3) Acquisition of photovoltaic solar electric systems. - (A) In general. - The program shall provide for the acquisition of photovoltaic solar electric systems and associated storage capability for use in public buildings. (B) Acquisition levels. - The acquisition of photovoltaic electric systems shall be at a level substantial enough to allow use of low-cost production techniques with at least 150 megawatts (peak) cumulative acquired during the 5 years of the program. (4) Administration. - The Administrator shall administer the program and shall - (A) issue such rules and regulations as may be appropriate to monitor and assess the performance and operation of photovoltaic solar electric systems installed pursuant to this subsection; (B) develop innovative procurement strategies for the acquisition of such systems; and (C) transmit to Congress an annual report on the results of the program. (b) Photovoltaic Systems Evaluation Program. - (1) In general. - Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this section, the Administrator shall establish a photovoltaic solar energy systems evaluation program to evaluate such photovoltaic solar energy systems as are required in public buildings. (2) Program requirement. - In evaluating photovoltaic solar energy systems under the program, the Administrator shall ensure that such systems reflect the most advanced technology. (c) Authorization of Appropriations. - (1) Photovoltaic energy commercialization program. - There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out subsection (a) $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010. Such sums shall remain available until expended. (2) Photovoltaic systems evaluation program. - There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out subsection (b) $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010. Such sums shall remain available until expended. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 109-58, title II, Sec. 204(a), Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 653.) -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT The date of enactment of this section, referred to in subsec. (b)(1), is the date of enactment of Pub. L. 109-58, which was approved Aug. 8, 2005. -End-	en
converted_docs	118922	What do funds for a horse, a snowmobile, and an airplane rental have in common? *They have all been funded with* *[Homeland Security grants]{.underline}* Dear Colleague: Please see the recent Arizona Republic article below exposing wasteful Homeland Security grant funding. Other news reports have noted that some fire departments have used Homeland Security grants to buy "gym equipment, sponsor puppet and clown shows, and turn first responders into fitness trainers." These spending problems are not just in Arizona, but are happening across the fifty states. The concept of Congressional oversight demands that we ensure that homeland security funds actually go to advance national security, rather than parochial political interests. With increasing demands on DHS to implement immigration reform and border security, we can not waste money on frivolous district projects. We must not allow homeland security funds to be wasted like this. Sincerely, JEFF FLAKE Member of Congress <http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0511homelandsecurity.html> Local agencies\' use of U.S. security aid questioned Susan Carroll\ The Arizona Republic\ May. 11, 2006 12:00 AM Arizona public safety agencies have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal grant money on equipment they are not certified to use or to pay for projects with only a tenuous link to homeland security.\ \ With little initial guidance and flush with money after the Sept. 11 attacks, police and fire departments statewide shored up budget shortfalls and bought things like ATVs, Q-Tips and \$50,000 worth of binoculars with nearly \$178 million in Homeland Security Department grants.\ \ Despite what one small-town official described as a spending \"frenzy,\" many local officials managed to put the money toward security priorities: shoring up communications, buying better protective gear for police and firefighters and purchasing mobile command centers for emergencies.\ \ But an Arizona Republic review of thousand of pages of records and receipts found that some local governments made many questionable purchases under the guise of homeland security, including \$38 leather wallets for all Capitol Police officers and a \$47 hat badge for the police chief.\ \ Many small cities and towns that are unlikely targets for a terrorist attack received disproportionate amounts of money, often more per capita than Phoenix, Tucson or Mesa.\ \ Consider:\ \ • Gila County spent \$93,000 to rent planes, snowmobiles and a horse to create more accurate assessor maps. Meanwhile, local law enforcement went without protective masks because it was too expensive to certify them.\ \ • The police chief in Holbrook, population 5,100, was approved to spend \$40,000 for a video surveillance system to monitor \"potential terrorist targets,\" including a park, a water tower and intersections.\ \ • Apache County bought a dozen 6X6 ATVs at more than \$11,500 each, while a local fire department relied on 20-year-old air packs for its firefighters.\ \ State officials responsible for administering the federal funds said personnel shortages led to lax oversight and poor tracking in the initial years. But they also said they followed federal guidelines and approved purchase lists and have made improvements since 2003. They also plan to add more staff.\ \ In response to The Republic\'s investigation, Gov. Janet Napolitano has ordered a review of the Arizona Department of Emergency Management\'s handling of the funds. The state also plans to set up a formal site-monitoring program and create an online ordering and approval system. ### \'Boys with toys\' In the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, Congress allocated billions of dollars for the states to divvy up through the State Homeland Security Grant Program. States received money based on a formula roughly the same model used for transportation funding: Each state would get 0.75 percent of the funds, plus a share based on population.\ \ The Phoenix area was identified as a high-risk city for a terrorist attack and was eligible for millions under another grant program, the Urban Area Security Initiative.\ \ Frank Navarrette, Arizona\'s emergency management director, acknowledged that the department struggled to oversee the massive infusion of Homeland Security money, as Arizona\'s share grew from about \$3 million in 2001 to more than \$61 million in 2003.\ \ Each agency wanted \"their own red fire truck in their own driveway, and they each wanted their own bomb squad,\" Navarrette said. \"And that\'s natural, to say, \'I want to take care of my own turf.\' \"\ \ By 2004, Arizona officials set up regional advisory committees to help cut down on duplication and waste and to ensure local governments bought compatible radio systems and equipment that was up to federal standards.\ \ Nationwide, officials on the federal, state and local levels all tried to rein in the spending sprees, which had become at times chaotic and haphazard. Media reports surfaced about Washington, D.C., police buying leather jackets and a remote Alaskan town installing video surveillance.\ \ \"We basically spent money so we could have these first responders running around like boys with toys,\" said James Carafano, a senior fellow for homeland security at the conservative, Washington, D.C.-based Heritage Foundation. "In most cases, these are people spending money just to spend money. They\'re buying things that they would never buy but (that) are just kind of nice to have.\" ### Oversight The Homeland Security grants are designed to better equip first responders for a terrorist attack or major natural disaster. The federal government publishes updated guidelines each year that detail what equipment is acceptable but leaves the specifics about purchasing up to the state and local agencies.\ \ In the first few years after Sept. 11, as long as the equipment was on the federal government\'s approved list, the state generally allowed the orders. Still, the state rejected some purchases, like multiple plasma-screen TVs, even though they were approved under the guidelines.\ \ Four years after the terrorist attacks, Navarrette said the state staff handling the grant programs is still \"overwhelmed.\" Three people administer the program full time, although Navarrette said the department is advertising for another position.\ \ After Sept. 11, the state did not electronically track how much Homeland Security money was spent on specific types of equipment, from protective gear to bomb robots. The state kept thick binders and file folders for grant program receipts during the first few years, but some of those folders were empty.\ \ The state could provide no documentation for site-monitoring visits or formal audits but said a review was launched in April in response to The Republic\'s investigation and will be finished by August.\ \ Recently, the state required some agencies, including the Capitol Police, which spent \$3,100 on wallets, badges and a chief\'s hat badge, to reimburse the government after inquiries from The Republic.\ \ Navarrette said the state plans to investigate any suspect purchases, but he also cautioned that at times, homeland security is \"in the eye of the beholder.\"\ \ Gila County officials defended their decision to put a chunk of Homeland Security funds toward the mapping project, under way before the grants became available. Mariano Gonzalez, the Gila emergency management director, said the project could provide first responders with more-accurate maps and data when they respond to an emergency in a remote area.\ \ And in Holbrook, the small town that received funds for video surveillance cameras, Chief D. Wayne Hartup said the money would go to monitor \"critical government infrastructure.\"\ \ \"We\'ve all been advised that potential (terrorism) targets would be government buildings, major intersections and water towers,\" he said.\ \ Richard Guinn, deputy sheriff for Apache County, said the ATVs were ordered because \"most of our county is extremely rural, and we needed vehicles that could move people in and out of remote areas.\" The state recently asked Apache County to reallocate the ATVs so they would all be put to use. ### Stocking up When the money first started pouring into the state after Sept. 11, some local governments stocked up on the basics, even though the grant program was not designed to fill gaps in local public safety budgets.\ \ La Paz County stocked up like Y2K was coming again. The county bought 50 rolls of police and sheriff\'s barricade tape, 200 bottles of antiseptic hand cleanser and 46 traffic vests. Yuma expensed a rake, Q-Tips and a shoe brush.\ \ Some purchases ended up in storage, like dozens of breathing masks bought for law enforcement in Gila County, including the Payson Police Department, which found it was too costly to certify officers with the required training and fit testing.\ \ \"This money was never supposed to be an entitlement to states to supplement their public safety needs,\" Carafano said. \"State and local governments need to find a way to pay for the things that they\'re responsible for, and that\'s local public safety needs. That\'s their job.\"\ \ Graham County bought 100 pairs of Fujinon binoculars worth more than \$500 each, at the recommendation of a local planning committee. The binoculars went to every police officer and firefighter, and the highway foreman, the county engineer and a few folks in emergency management. Two pairs were given to Eastern Arizona College, where the two campus security officers have put them to use, but not for terrorism-related activity.\ \ \"We\'ve had some problems with vandalism,\" said Bill Mulleneaux, chief of security for the college. \"We\'ve used them from strategic locations to see (suspects) graffitiing.\"\ \ Apache County in northeastern Arizona bought a dozen 6X6 Polaris ATV Rangers that cost more than \$11,500 each for law enforcement, fire agencies and the Public Works Department. One agency, the St. Johns Police Department, lobbied the county to trade their ATV for radio equipment, first-aid kits, GPS, binoculars and trauma kits.\ \ \"We hadn\'t had a use for it (the ATV) in two years,\" Chief Jim Zieler said. \"I figured it was better for me to purchase something my guys could use every day.\" ### Training funds Money also went to training and education, most of it for hazardous materials and bomb squads. But Santa Cruz County sent a staff member who administers the grants to a \"fundamentals of accounting\" seminar. Yuma spent \$1,000 on Yuma Area Ammonia Awareness Safety Day because some factories on the southern side of the border use ammonia.\ \ Officials in Yavapai County held a drill simulating a terrorist attack in Cottonwood (population roughly 10,000) in March 2004. The mock attack involved a twin-engine plane with anthrax onboard crashing into Mingus Union High School. To make it more realistic, officials paid the school drama teacher \$228 to put bloodlike makeup on students in the drill and paid \$65 for a substitute teacher.\ \ And the Phoenix Police Department bought hundreds of new Fruit of the Loom T-shirts and had them custom silk-screened with Homeland Security money to read: \"I Survived a WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) Drill!\" The T-shirts were partly a thank-you to volunteers, officials said, and partly a safety measure to identify participants. ### Tightening spending The 2006 grant guidelines for the State Homeland Security Grant Program require that states follow through on the promise to send funds to more at-risk areas. In some cases, a disproportionate amount of money has gone to rural areas, unlikely to be targeted by terrorists, Homeland Security analysts say.\ \ In 2005, Phoenix received \$1.1 million under the program, or roughly 78 cents a person through the program. Springerville, a town of 4,000 southeast of Flagstaff, received \$155,000, about \$38.75 per person.\ \ \"Are we going to have a 9/11 in Springerville, Arizona? No,\" said Max Sadler, the town\'s fire chief. \"But we do have a major highway, and we still have a lot of other things that go through this town. I\'m not asking for a million and half dollars for a hazardous-materials first-responder team.\ \ \"Is there waste? Yeah, I\'m sure there is somewhere. It\'s just the American way, I guess. You see it all the time, and it makes it bad for people who are trying to survive.\"\ \ Arizona is struggling to keep its share of Homeland Security grant funding, which has decreased by roughly one-third in the past two years. Navarrette said the regional advisory committees set up in 2004 are helping to ensure that any new purchases are in line with the state\'s overall security strategy.\ \ \"For this next year, we need to get away from buying gizmos,\" he said. \"We bought a lot of equipment, a lot of good equipment that\'s been necessary. But I think we\'re to the point now we need to focus more on sustainability, more on training, more on programmatic goals.\"\ \ Carafano said the public should decide where it wants money to go in the struggle to protect the country against a terrorist attack and prepare for natural disasters.\ \ \"The point is that people need to take a deep breath and figure out what they want their federal government to spend their money on,\" he said. \"The fact is that every dollar that we spend buying a fire truck, or a hose or a TV camera for somebody is a dollar we could have spent on preventing terrorist acts to begin with.\"	en
markdown	458351	# Presentation: 458351 ## A Characterization of Approaches to Parrallel Job Scheduling A Characterization of Approaches to Parrallel Job Scheduling - Backfilling - Conservative - Every job is given a reservation when it enters the system and a job is allowed to backfill only if it does not violate any of the previous reservations. - EASY - Only the job at the head of the queue is given a reservation and a job is allowed to backfill if it does not violate this reservation - Backfilling - A later arriving job is allowed to leap frog previously queued jobs - Processors - Processors - Time - Time - Time - Processors - We use the following metrics for evaluating the proposed schemes - Average Slowdown - Average Turnaround Time - Utilization - Effective Utilization - Metrics - Jobs are processed in arrival order by the meta-scheduler - In a heterogeneous context, the site where the job starts the earliest may not be the best site - In order to get the completion of a job at a particular site, conservative backfilling has to be employed at the local site - Conservative performs better than aggressive in all case, quite the opposite of a homogenous context - Improved backfilling caused by holes created due to the dynamic removal of replicated jobs at each site, and an increased number of jobs to attempt to backfill at each site - Aggressive vs. Conservative Gerald Sabin Rajkumar Kettimuthu Arun Rajan P SadayappanSupported in part by Sandia National Laboratory	en
markdown	263119	# Presentation: 263119 ## Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage Overview - CAPT Robert E. Pittman - IHS Principal Pharmacy Consultant - October 13, 2005 - 8/30/05 Notes: A number of provisions are implemented as a result of the passage of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act (MMA). Some of these include: Medicare-approved drug discount card Medicare Advantage Coverage for some new preventive services Changes in Medigap And changes to the Part B deductible and premiums. Another provision, Medicare prescription drug coverage, is the topic of this training module. ## Session Topics - Overview - Key messages - Eligibility and enrollment - Extra help - Out-of-pocket threshold - Medicare prescription drug coverage - Coordination with other coverage - Employment-related coverage options - Protections for people with Medicare - 8/30/05 Notes: We’ll begin with an overview of the Medicare prescription drug coverage. Then we’ll discuss in more detail important information about how the coverage works and the information people with Medicare and their caregivers need to know to make informed decisions about their prescription drug coverage. Some of the topics we’ll be covering include: Key messages Eligibility and enrollment Extra help Out-of-pocket threshold Covered drugs How these plans work with other coverage Employment-related coverage options, and Lastly, we’ll discuss protections for people with Medicare ## Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage - Coverage begins January 1, 2006 - Available for all people with Medicare - Provided through - Prescription drug plans (PDPs) - Medicare Advantage Plans (MA-PDs) - Some employers and unions to retirees - Overview - 8/30/05 Notes: Beginning January 2006, people with Medicare have the option to enroll in a plan that covers prescription drugs. These plans offer prescription drug coverage, which is different from discounts that were offered by the Medicare-approved drug discount cards. CMS contracts with private companies offering prescription drug plans (PDPs) to negotiate discounted prices on behalf of their enrollees. Insurance companies and other appropriate organizations bid to serve as prescription drug plans. People with Medicare can also receive drug benefits through their Medicare Advantage plan (MA-PD) if they are enrolled in one. Some employers and unions may also provide coverage to people with Medicare. You may hear the term “bid” when reading about the PDP and MA-PD application process. “Bid” is the term used for organizations’ projected cost for the standard benefit, based on the population they assume will enroll. Bidding Process Using Competitive Market Forces for Low-Cost, High-Quality Drug Plans: Issue paper 8 ## PDP and MA-PD Regions - 34 PDP regions - 26 MA-PD regions - Key factors in establishing regions - Eligibility population and capacity - Beneficiary consideration - Limited variation in prescription drug spending - Overview - 8/30/05 Notes: Medicare Prescription Drug (PDP) regions and Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MA-PD) regions have been determined. A person with Medicare who is eligible for Medicare prescription drug coverage can enroll in a PDP or MA-PD to get coverage. Key factors in determining the regions include: Eligible population and capacity: the regions were designed to provide a sufficient number of potential enrollees Beneficiary consideration: CMS considered how well PDP regions “nest” or fit with MA regions. CMS’ goal was to make PDP regions fit within MA regions as closely as possible, so that the regions are as transparent as possible to people with Medicare. Limited variation in prescription drug spending: CMS looked at state-by-state variations in prescription drug spending, based on data estimating average state prescription drug spending by individuals age 65 and over in 2006. ## Overview - 8/30/05 Notes: There are 34 regions for the prescription drug plans. As you can see from the map, the smallest service area is a state. The largest area comprises seven states across the Upper Midwest. Larger regions make it more probable that traditionally underserved rural areas would be paired with more profitable urban areas. Plans have to offer identical benefits at identical premiums to every Medicare beneficiary in a region. However, the premium amount can vary among regions. The law allows state licensing regulations to be waived for up to 3 years to allow insurers licensed in one state to operate in another within the same region. Insurers have to apply for a license in the other state. Assuring Access to Drug Coverage Everywhere: Issue Paper 27 ## Overview - 8/30/05 Notes: The Medicare Advantage plans, including the new Preferred Provider Organizations (PPO), operate in 26 regions. Improved Access to Drug Coverage and Lower-Cost Health Plans for Beneficiaries In Rural Areas: Issue Paper 12 ## Medicare Prescription Drug Plans - Must offer basic drug benefit - Standard benefit - May offer supplemental benefits - Enhanced benefit - Can be flexible in benefit design - Must follow marketing guidelines - Overview - 8/30/05 Notes: Medicare prescription drug plans, or PDPs, must offer a basic drug coverage that we call a standard benefit. They may choose to offer supplemental benefits through enhanced alternative coverage for an additional premium. The PDPs have flexibility in how they design their prescription drug coverage. For example, they can establish a formulary to designate specific drugs that will be available within each class of therapeutic medications, or they can have cost-sharing structures other than the standard benefit structure. A formulary is the entire list of drugs covered by a PDP or MA-PD. PDPs can begin marketing in October 2005. CMS is reviewing all PDP marketing materials for approval in June 2005. Alternative Part D Benefit Designs and Options for Enhancing Medicare Drug Coverage: Issue Paper 31 ## Example of Standard Prescription Drug Coverage - Generally less than $32 monthly premium - $250 deductible - Coinsurance of 25% of drug costs from $250 to $2,250 - Medicare pays 75% - 100% of drug costs from $2,251 to $5,100 - After $3,600 in out-of-pocket costs, Medicare pays approximately 95% - Overview - 8/30/05 Notes: Medicare prescription drug plans can vary in design. An example of what a standard plan may look like is this. People with Medicare enrolled in a prescription drug plan in 2006 generally pay less than a $37 monthly premium and are responsible for a $250 deductible each year. Once the deductible has been met, Medicare pays 75% of drug costs up to $2,250 in total expenditures, and the person pays the other 25% of these costs. The person is responsible for 100% of drug costs between $2,250 and $5,100. From $5,100 on up, (or $3,600 in out-of-pocket costs) the catastrophic coverage stage is reached where the PDP pays 95% of the drug costs for the rest of the calendar year and the person with Medicare pays 5%. We’ll talk about what constitutes “out-of-pocket” expenses in a few minutes. Plan sponsors can have variations in design under the “standard benefit” for either: The 25% coinsurance or The 5%, $2/$5 cost sharing after the out-of-pocket threshold is met Alternative Part D Benefit Designs and Options for Enhancing Medicare Drug Coverage: Issue Paper 31 ## Alternative Prescription Drug Coverage - Alternative coverage - Annual deductible is not higher than $250 in 2006 - Catastrophic protection at least as much as under standard coverage - Enhanced coverage - Includes supplemental coverage - Overview - 8/30/05 Notes: Alternative coverage can be either basic alternative or enhanced alternative (includes supplemental coverage). In modifying the standard coverage design to offer alternative coverage, the plan sponsors: Cannot have a deductible greater than the deductible under standard coverage Must provide at least as much catastrophic protection as under standard coverage ## Enhanced Prescription Drug Coverage - Plan can structure benefit differently - Out-of-pocket threshold applies no matter how it is structured - Plan may provide coverage where there’s no coverage under standard plan - May offer additional drug coverage - Overview - 8/30/05 Notes: Plans have the option of structuring their basic prescription drug plan differently from the standard benefit as long as the benefits are at least as good as the standard benefit. Plans themselves, employers/unions, or other third parties may offer additional drug coverage that enhances or supplements the standard benefit. For example, they may choose to provide coverage when the person with Medicare would otherwise pay 100% of drug costs under the standard benefit. However, the out-of-pocket threshold expenses still apply to the basic benefit no matter how it is structured, even when there is additional coverage. In other words, the out-of-pocket threshold must always be satisfied to reach the catastrophic coverage stage. ## Key Messages - Drug coverage that helps beneficiaries pay for the prescriptions they need - Medicare prescription drug coverage is available to all people with Medicare - There is additional help for those who need it most - The Medicare prescription drug coverage pays for brand name and generic drugs - There is a choice of Medicare prescription drug plans and the beneficiary can pick the plan that is right for them - Key Messages - 8/30/05 Notes: Medicare prescription drug coverage is helpful, especially for those who currently don’t have coverage for their prescription drugs. Since this is new, it’s important that people with Medicare understand these key messages. ## Eligibility and Enrollment - Entitled to Part A and/or enrolled in Part B - Reside in plan’s service area - Must enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan to get Medicare prescription drug coverage - 8/30/05 Notes: Anyone who has Medicare Part A (Hospital Insurance) and/or Part B (Medicare Insurance) is eligible to join a Medicare prescription drug plan. A person must live in the service area of a prescription drug plan to enroll. Individuals who reside outside of the U.S. or who are incarcerated are ineligible to enroll in a PDP or MA-PD plan and therefore are not eligible for this coverage. A person must enroll in a plan (PDP or MA-PD) to get Medicare prescription drug coverage. Part D Benefit Eligibility and Enrollment: Issue Paper 19 ## Enrolling in a Plan - People with Medicare can enroll - Directly with the plan sponsor - Through a personal representative - “Stands in the shoes” of a person with Medicare and has authority to act on his or her behalf - This authority comes from state law (e.g., Power of Attorney, guardian) or other applicable law (e.g., tribal or military law) - By enlisting the assistance of others - Spouse, relative, friend, caregiver, or advocacy group volunteer - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: Eligible people with Medicare will enroll directly with the PDP or MA-PD. People with Medicare can enroll themselves directly in a plan. They can use a personal representative who has the legal authority to enroll them, or they can enlist the assistance of others to help them enroll. Plans are required to process applications in a timely manner, and the plan must notify the applicant of acceptance or denial of the enrollment request. ## Enrollment Options - People eligible for Medicare prescription drug coverage may enroll in a - Prescription Drug Plan (PDP) or - Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug plan (MA-PD plan) - People enrolled in an MA plan must receive Medicare prescription drug coverage from the MA-PD plan except if - Enrolled in a PFFS plan without drug coverage; or - Enrolled in an MSA plan - People enrolled in a cost plan can elect to receive Medicare prescription drug coverage from the cost plan or enroll in a PDP - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: People who are in the Original Medicare Plan will receive their Medicare prescription drug coverage through a PDP. People enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan will receive their coverage through that plan. There are exceptions to this rule: If a person with Medicare is in a (Private Fee-for-Service) PFFS Plan with no qualified prescription drug coverage or has an MSA Plan, he or she can enroll in a PDP. People with Medicare enrolled in a PACE plan that offers qualified prescription drug coverage must obtain the drug plan benefit through that PACE plan. PACE (Program of All-inclusive Care for the Elderly) combines medical, social, and long-term care services for frail people. People enrolled in a cost-based HMO have the option either to get Medicare prescription drug coverage from the plan, if it is offered, or to enroll in a PDP. If the person with Medicare is in an MA plan with prescription drug coverage on December 31, 2005, or the MA plan will offer Medicare prescription drug coverage in 2006, they will be enrolled in the MA-PD plan starting on January 1, 2006. ## Enrollment Periods - In general, the enrollment periods for PDPs and MA-PDs are similar - There are three enrollment periods for PDPs - Initial Enrollment Period (IEP) - Annual Coordinated Election Period (AEP) - Special Enrollment Period (SEP) - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: There are three enrollment periods. The Initial Enrollment Period (IEP) allows people to enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan when they are first eligible for Medicare prescription drug coverage. The Annual Coordinated Election Period (AEP) allows people to change their Medicare prescription drug plan, enroll in a prescription drug plan, or disenroll from a Medicare prescription drug plan. And last is the Special Enrollment Periods (SEP). We will discuss these in more detail in a few minutes. ## Initial Enrollment Period - Nov 15, 2005, to May 15, 2006, for people who - Are currently eligible or - Will become eligible in November, December 2005, and January 2006 - For everyone else, the Initial Enrollment Period is similar to the Initial Enrollment Period for Part B - This is a 7-month enrollment period - 3 months before eligibility for Medicare prescription drug coverage - The month of eligibility and - 3 months after eligibility for Medicare prescription drug coverage - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: For the start of the drug coverage, the Initial Enrollment Period (IEP) is from November 15, 2005, to May 15, 2006, for individuals who Are currently eligible, or Become eligible in November and December 2005, and January 2006 For people who become eligible for Medicare after January 2006, the initial enrollment period is similar to the initial enrollment period for Part B. This is a 7-month enrollment period, including 3 months before eligibility for Medicare prescription drug coverage the month of eligibility 3 months after eligibility for Medicare prescription drug coverage ## Annual Coordinated Election Period (AEP) - For the first year, the AEP is the same as the Initial Enrollment Period (November 15, 2005, to May 15, 2006) - In 2006 and after, the AEP is from November 15 to Dec 31 of each year - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: For the first year, the Annual Coordinated Election Period (AEP) is the same as the Initial Enrollment Period: from Nov 15, 2005, to May 15, 2006. In 2006 and after, the AEP is from November 15 to December 31 of each year. ## Special Enrollment Period - Permanent move out of the plan service area - Individual entering, residing in, or leaving a long-term care facility - Involuntary loss, reduction, or non-notification of creditable coverage - Other exceptional circumstances - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: There are circumstances in which people with Medicare are given a Special Enrollment Period (SEP). These include: When an individual permanently moves out of the plan service area Involuntary loss, reduction, or non-notification of creditable coverage. This does not apply when creditable coverage is lost due to non-payment of premiums. If people with Medicare were not adequately informed that their coverage was not creditable or that their current coverage was reduced so that it is no longer creditable, then they qualify for a Special Enrollment Period (SEP). When an individual is entering, residing in, or leaving a long-term care facility. Or exceptional circumstances such as when a PDP terminates its contract or a PDP violates its contract. Full-benefit dual eligibles have a continuous Special Enrollment Period. They can change their Medicare prescription drug plan at any time. ## 2006 PDP Enrollment Periods* JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC DEC Initial Enrollment Period (IEP) Annual Coordinated Election Period (AEP) AEP NOV *Does not reflect SEPs - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 ## Voluntary Disenrollment - Generally, a person with Medicare may disenroll from a PDP only during - The Annual Coordinated Election Period, or - A Special Enrollment Period - They will receive a notice letting them know that they are disenrolling from the plan - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: Generally, a person remains enrolled in a Medicare prescription drug plan for a year. If the person doesn’t choose a plan during the Annual Coordinated Election Period, he or she may not enroll in a plan until the next Annual Coordinated Election Period or a Special Enrollment Period, if the person has one. ## Involuntary Disenrollment - Beneficiaries _must_ be disenrolled from a Medicare prescription drug plan when they - Permanently move out in the service area - Lose eligibility for Medicare prescription drug coverage - Pass away - Are enrolled in a plan that is terminating its contract, or - Misrepresent third party Medicare prescription drug plan coverage - Beneficiaries _may_ be disenrolled for - Not paying their monthly premiums timely - Disruptive behavior - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: People must be disenrolled from a Medicare prescription drug plan if: They move out of the service area They lose entitlement to Part A benefits and are no longer enrolled in Part B They pass away Their PDP’s or MA-PD’s contract is terminating They misrepresent information to the PDP sponsor that they have or expect to receive reimbursement for third party coverage. People may be disenrolled (at the plan’s option) if they: Do not pay their plan premiums on a timely basis Exhibit disruptive behavior. ## Postponing Enrollment - Higher premiums for people who wait to enroll - Exception for those with prescription drug coverage at least as good as a Medicare prescription drug plan (Creditable Coverage) - Assessed 1% of base premium for every month - Eligible to enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan but not enrolled - No drug coverage as good as a Medicare prescription drug coverage for 63 consecutive days or longer - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: If a person with Medicare chooses not to join a Medicare prescription drug plan at the first opportunity, he or she may have to pay a higher premium if he or she decides to enroll later. Exceptions: If someone has prescription drug coverage that covers at least as much as a Medicare prescription drug plan, then he or she may keep the current coverage. He or she will not have to pay a higher premium to enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan at a later date. If someone has prescription drug coverage that covers less than a Medicare prescription drug plan, he or she can... keep the current drug plan and join a Medicare prescription drug plan to provide more complete coverage, or just keep the current drug plan. But if he or she joins a Medicare prescription drug plan later, then he or she will have to pay a higher premium; or drop the current plan and join a Medicare prescription drug plan. But he or she may not be able to get the other coverage back. The higher premium is 1% of the base premium for each month the person did not have creditable coverage. Creditable coverage is coverage that is as good as Medicare prescription drug coverage. People will pay the higher premium for as long as they are enrolled in a Medicare prescription drug plan. People who qualify for the extra help and are subject to the higher premium due to late enrollment will receive additional assistance to help pay for the higher premium. The additional premium subsidy is equal to 80% of the late enrollment higher premium for the first 60 months during which the higher premium is imposed and 100% of their late enrollment premium thereafter. ## Possible Examples of Coverage at Least as Good as Medicare’s - Coverage under a PDP or MA-PD - Some Group Health Plans (GHP) - State Pharmacy Assistance Program (SPAP) - VA coverage - Military coverage including TRICARE - Note: The source of the current drug coverage will send a notice telling the person if it is at least as good as Medicare prescription drug coverage – Creditable Coverage - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: Let’s talk about coverage that is at least as good as Medicare prescription drug plan coverage. Some examples may include: Coverage under a Medicare prescription drug plan or Medicare Advantage prescription drug coverage Group Health Plans (GHP) State Pharmaceutical Assistance Program (SPAP) VA coverage Military coverage including TRICARE Medigap may or may not be creditable coverage. (E.g., plans in the waiver states – Minnesota, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin as well as some of the “rich” plans sold prior to the standardization may be creditable.) People who have other prescription drug coverage will get a notice from their plan that tells them if the plan covers at least as much as a Medicare prescription drug plan. The plan will also notify them if the coverage changes so that it is no longer as good as Medicare prescription drug coverage. ## MA-PD Election Periods - Initial Coverage Election Period (ICEP) - 7-month period surrounding Medicare entitlement (Part B Initial Enrollment Period) - 3 months prior to entitlement to Part A and Part B - Annual Coordinated Election Period (AEP) - In 2006: Nov. 15, 2005, through May 15, 2006 - In 2007 and beyond: Nov. 15 through Dec. 31 - Open Enrollment Period (OEP) - Special Election Period (SEP) - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: Medicare Advantage election periods are similar to PDP enrollment periods with the addition of the Open Enrollment Period. There are four MA election periods. The Initial Coverage Election Period (ICEP) The Open Enrollment Period (OEP) The Annual Coordinated Election Period (AEP) and Special Election Periods (SEPs). ## MA-PD Election Periods - Open Enrollment Period - 2006: January through June - 2007 & beyond: January through March - Enrollment limited to type of coverage as of January 1 (i.e., same “type”) - If MA-PD = MA-PD or Original Medicare + PDP - MA only = MA only or Original Medicare only - Original Medicare + PDP = MA-PD - Original Medicare only = MA only - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: In 2006, the Open Enrollment Period (OEP) will be 6 months long (January – June) and in 2007 and going forward, the OEP will be 3 months long (January – March of each year). This change brings about what is often referred to as “enrollment lock-in.” Someone cannot use the OEP to change whether or not he or she is enrolled in Medicare prescription drug coverage. For example, it’s February 2007 and Mr. Smith is currently enrolled in an MA-PD plan. During the OEP, he could elect another MA-PD plan, or he could elect Original Medicare and a PDP, but he could not drop Medicare prescription drug coverage by electing an MA only (i.e. not an MA-PD) plan. ## 2006 MA-PD Enrollment Periods* JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Initial Coordinated Election Period (ICEP) DEC Annual Coordinated Election Period (AEP) AEP NOV Open Enrollment Period (OEP) Part D Begins Does not reflect SEPs* **Open and limited to same type of drug coverage - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 ## Enrolling in a Plan - Look at Medicare & You 2006 handbook - Read about the prescription drug plans available in the area - Contact the plan to enroll - If someone needs help choosing a plan - Visit _[www.medicare.gov](http://www.medicare.gov/)__ and get personalized information_ - Call 1-800-MEDICARE - TTY users should call 1-877-486-2048 - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: Eligible people with Medicare enroll directly with the PDP or MA-PD. In the fall of 2005, people with Medicare will receive the Medicare & You 2006 handbook in the mail, which will include information about Medicare prescription drug plans available in their area. There are other information sources to help people with Medicare choose a plan. In the fall of 2005, prescription drug plan information will be available and posted on the medicare.gov website. The MA-PD plan information will replace the Medicare Personal Plan Finder (MPPF) and the PDP information will replace PDAP (Prescription Drug and Other Assistance Program database). There will be one portal of entry using a series of questions to get to the information you need. It will be simple and easy to use. People can also call 1-800-MEDICARE (1-800-633-4227). TTY users should call 1-877-486-2048, and State Health Insurance Assistance Programs (SHIP). The Medicare & You handbook contains the local telephone number. ## Auto-Enrollment - Medicaid prescription drug coverage for full-benefit dual eligibles ends 12/31/005 - Full-benefit dual eligibles who do not enroll in a plan by 12/31/05 - CMS will enroll them in a prescription drug plan with a premium covered by the low-income premium assistance - Their Medicare prescription drug coverage will begin 1/1/06 - Full-benefit dual eligibles have a Special Enrollment Period - Can change plans any time - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: Dual eligibles (people with Medicare and full Medicaid benefits) will no longer receive their drug coverage through Medicaid, but rather from Medicare through a PDP or MA-PD. They will be automatically enrolled by CMS in a PDP or MA-PD if they do not select one on their own by December 31, 2005. However, they will have a special enrollment period if they decide to change plans at a later date. CMS will mail a notice to full-benefit dual eligibles in October 2005 that will encourage them to choose a plan and let them know that if they don’t enroll in a plan, Medicare will enroll them in plan XYZ. ## Facilitated Enrollment - CMS is facilitating the enrollment - Of additional people with Medicare if they do not choose a plan by May 15, 2006 - These include people with MSP, SSI-only, and those who apply and are determined eligible for the extra help - Coverage effective June 1, 2006 - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: CMS is also enrolling additional people with Medicare who qualify for extra help if they do not choose a plan on their own by May 15, 2006. These include people with Medicare receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI), people with Medicare who are in a Medicare Savings Program such as QMB, SLMB, or QI, and people who apply and are determined eligible for the extra- help. Their coverage is effective June 1, 2006. QMB is Qualified Medicare Beneficiary; SLMB is Specified Low Income Medicare Beneficiary; and QI is Qualifying Individual. These people receive state help paying for their Medicare deductibles, premiums, and copayments. When CMS facilitates enrollment, the agency will follow the same rules as those used for auto-enrollment. ## Long-Term Care Facilities - LTC residents obtain drug benefits from LTC pharmacy selected by the facility - Special Enrollment Period - For people who enter, reside in or leave a LTC facility - An MA-PD plan may be open for enrollment for people who enter, reside in or leave a LTC facility - PDP and MA-PD must ensure convenient access - Eligibility and Enrollment - 8/30/05 Notes: Generally, long-term care facilities (i.e., nursing homes and skilled nursing facilities) contract with one long-term care pharmacy to supply the prescription drugs needed by the residents. With the implementation of Medicare prescription drug plans, these long-term care pharmacies will have to contract with both the facility and the Medicare prescription drug plans serving the region. CMS requires that all Medicare prescription drug plans have contracts with a sufficient number of long-term care pharmacies to ensure “convenient access” to prescription drugs for institutionalized people with Medicare in the region. Each long-term care facility can select one or more eligible network pharmacies to provide a plan’s long-term care drug benefits to Medicare residents. Long-term care facilities will likely select pharmacies with the largest number of plan networks. Therefore the plan’s enrollees obtain their drug benefits from the eligible long-term care pharmacy selected by the facility. High-Quality Access to Long-Term Care Pharmacies: Issue Paper 26 ## Extra Help - Assistance with premium and cost sharing - Eligibility determined by SSA or state - Income and resources are counted - Some groups are “deemed” eligible - Multiple ways to apply - Can apply as early as May 2005 - 8/30/05 Notes: The extra help is designed to provide people with limited income and resources extra assistance with premium and cost sharing under the Medicare prescription drug coverage. A person must enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan to receive extra help. An application for the extra help may be filed with either the Social Security Administration (SSA) or the state’s Medicaid program office. CMS is strongly encouraging states to consider using the SSA application and to assist people in filing their applications with SSA. States may assist individuals who present themselves at state offices in completing the SSA application, with the state sending the completed applications to SSA for processing. The SSA application relies on self-attestation—a certification by an individual that the information is correct. There is a verification process that relies primarily on automated data matches with sources such as the IRS. The verification process may also involve some follow-up with the individual on an exception basis when additional information is needed. The office that processes the application , either SSA or the state Medicaid agency, will decide when and how often someone must reapply and how they can appeal a determination. Certain groups of people with Medicare are “deemed” eligible, meaning that they do not have to apply for the assistance; they automatically qualify. People with Medicare can apply for the extra help by: Completing the SSA form that is sent to potential eligibles Applying on the SSA website Going to an SSA field office Going to a state Medicaid Office Working with community-based organizations ## Deemed Eligible - Full-benefit dual eligibles - SSI recipients - Medicare Savings Program groups, e.g., QMBs, SLMBs, QIs - All others must file an application for low-income assistance - Extra Help - 8/30/05 Notes: On the previous slide we discussed people with Medicare who are considered “deemed.” These are certain groups of people who are automatically considered eligible for the extra help. These include: Full-benefit dual eligibles (People with Medicare who also get full Medicaid benefits) People with Medicare who get Supplemental Security Income (SSI) but no Medicaid benefits. People with Medicare who qualify for a Medicare Savings Program (MSP) such as QMB (Qualified Medicare Beneficiary), SLMB (Specified Low-Income Medicare Beneficiary), or QI (Qualifying Individual). All other people with Medicare must file an application. CMS is mailing a notice to these groups in May 2005 letting them know they automatically qualify for the extra help and do not need to apply. Starting in May through August of 2005, SSA is mailing an application to people who may qualify for the extra help (but will not be deemed eligible) and will begin processing applications on July 1, 2005. SSA will send the applicant a determination once the application is processed. ## Applying for Extra Help - People with Medicare can apply - Personal representatives can apply - Who has authority to act on behalf of a person with Medicare under state law (e.g., Power of Attorney, guardian) or other applicable law (e.g., tribal or military) - Representative payee appointed by SSA - People with Medicare and personal representatives may enlist others to apply - Spouse, child, caregiver, advocacy group volunteer - Extra Help - 8/30/05 Notes: People with Medicare can apply on their own behalf for the extra help to pay for their prescription drug coverage. They may also enlist the help of a personal representative who has the authority to act on their behalf, such as Power of Attorney. They may also enlist the help of others such, as a spouse, family member, caregiver, or advocate. ## How is Income Counted? - Follows SSI rules - Includes income of applicant and spouse - Income is compared to family size standard - Family includes dependent relatives who reside with the applicant and who rely on them for at least half their support - Assistance available to people with income below 150% of the Federal poverty level (FPL) who also meet the resource test - Extra Help - 8/30/05 Notes: Income is counted using the rules of the SSI program. Since the SSI rules are clear on what is income is counted, CMS goes by SSI rules. In terms of whose income to count, CMS looks at the income of the applicant and the spouse residing with the applicant, regardless of whether or not the spouse is applying for the extra help. The issues of what income to count and whose income to count are only half the equation. The other half is the standard against which to determine eligibility. The standard is the Federal poverty level standard appropriate to the size of the applicant’s family. Basically, the size of the family takes into consideration whether the applicant or his or her spouse have dependent relatives who reside with them and who rely on them for at least half of their support. Thus, a grandparent raising grandchildren may qualify as a result of using a greater family size, but the same person might not have qualified as an individual. Extra help is available to people with incomes below 150% of the Federal poverty level. Contact SSA for additional information on income requirements. ## How Are Resources Counted? - Includes resources of applicant and spouse - Uses a more streamlined definition than what SSI uses - Will only consider - Liquid assets - Can be converted to cash within 20 days - Real estate - Does not include applicant’s primary residence - Extra help available to people with resources up to $11,500 for individuals and $23,000 for couples who also meet the income test - Trust Income - Extra Help - 8/30/05 Notes: In simple terms, resources are counted for an applicant and a spouse residing with the applicant and compared against a resource standard. Because this section does not actually define resources, and because the law envisioned a simplified application in which applicants attest to their level of resources and submit only minimal documentation, CMS was able to propose a streamlined definition of resources compared to what is normally used under the SSI. In order to keep the process simple and minimize administrative cost, only two resources are considered available to the applicant to pay for the Medicare prescription drug coverage premiums, deductibles, and copayments: Liquid resources (e.g., savings accounts, stocks, bonds and other assets that could be converted to cash within 20 days) and Real estate does not include the applicant’s primary residence or land on which the primary resident is located Items such as wedding rings and family heirlooms are not considered resources for the purposes of the extra help. ## Extra Help - Group 1 - Full-benefit dual eligibles with incomes at or below 100% Federal poverty level (FPL) - Group 2 - Full-benefit dual eligibles above 100% of FPL; QMB, SLMB, QI, SSI-only, or non-dual eligible beneficiaries with incomes below 135% FPL and limited resources ($6,000 per individual and $9,000 married couple) - Group 3 - Beneficiaries with incomes below 150% FPL and limited resources ($11,500 individual and $23,000 married couple) - 8/30/05 Notes: Three groups have been identified for the extra help: Group 1 are full-benefit dual eligibles with incomes at or below 100% of the Federal poverty level (FPL). Group 2 are full-benefit dual eligibles above 100% of FPL; QMB, SLMB, QI, SSI-only, or non-dual eligible beneficiaries with incomes below 135% of the FPL, with resource limits of $6,000 per individual and $9,000 for a married couple. Group 3 are Medicare beneficiaries with incomes below 150% of the FPL, with resource limits of $10,000 for an individual and $20,000 for a married couple. Cost sharing and premiums for full-benefit dual eligible beneficiaries on Medicaid who are institutionalized is $0. In other words, they have no cost sharing, no premiums, no deductible. Now let’s look at the assistance for each group. ## Extra Help \| \| Group 1 \| Group 2 \| Group 3 \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| Premium $32/month \| $0 \| $0 \| Sliding scale based on income \| \| Deductible $250/year \| $0 \| $0 \| $50 \| \| Coinsurance up to $3,600 out of pocket \| $1/$3 copay \| $2/$5 copay \| 15% coinsurance \| \| Catastrophic 5% or $2/$5 copay \| $0 \| $0 \| $2/$5 copay \| - 8/30/05 Notes: People who are in Group 1, full-benefit dual eligibles with incomes at or below 100% of FPL, are not responsible for the monthly premium or the annual deductible. They are only responsible for small copayments, $1 for generics and $3 for brand-name drugs. If the extra help combined with these small copayments reach $3,600, the person would not be responsible for any other copayments for the rest of the year. People in Group 2, full-benefit dual eligibles above 100% of FPL; QMB, SLMB, QI, SSI-only or non-dual eligible beneficiaries with incomes below 135% FPL and limited resources ($6K/individual and $9K/married couple), are not responsible for the monthly premium or the deductible. They have a $2 copayment for generic drugs and a $5 copayment for brand-name drugs. Here again, if the extra help and copayments total $3,600, the person would not have any other copayments for the rest of the year. For people in Group 3, those with incomes below 150% FPL and limited resources ($10K/individual and $20K/married couple), the premium is based on a sliding scale depending upon the person’s income. They are responsible for a reduced deductible of $50 per year, and they will be responsible for 15% of the cost of their prescriptions up to the $3,600 out-of-pocket maximum. Once they have reached that maximum, they will have a $2 copayment for generic drugs and a $5 copayment for brand-name drugs for the rest of the year. As you can see, there is not an instance where these groups would be responsible for 100% of the costs. Institutionalized full-benefit dual eligibles will not be responsible for any out-of-pocket costs. NOTE: The premium for Groups 1 and 2 will only be $0 if the person enrolls in a plan with a premium at or below the low-income subsidy amount. If someone chooses a plan with a premium that is greater than the amount of premium assistance available, then he or she is liable for the difference. ## How the Extra Help Works - CMS notifies PDP or MA-PD of member’s eligibility - PDP or MA-PD - Reduces member’s premium and cost sharing - Tracks amounts applied to out-of-pocket threshold - Reimburses any amount paid in excess - Extra Help - 8/30/05 Notes: CMS notifies the Medicare prescription drug plan of the plan member’s eligibility for the extra help and the amount of the assistance. The PDP or MA-PD must reduce the enrollee’s premium and cost sharing as applicable and provide CMS with the amounts of those reductions. The PDP or MA-PD must track the extra help amounts applied to the out-of-pocket threshold. The PDP or MA-PD must reimburse the person with Medicare, and/or organizations paying cost sharing on his or her behalf, for any excess premiums and cost sharing paid after the effective date of the extra help. ## Out-of-Pocket Threshold - The amount of money to reach catastrophic coverage - Consists of - Deductible - $250 in 2006 - 25% coinsurance - $500 in 2006 - 100% between $2,250 and $5,100 - $2,850 in 2006 - Medicare prescription drug plan premium is not part of out-of-pocket threshold - 8/30/05 Notes: What is the out-of-pocket threshold? This is the amount of money a person with Medicare must spend on PDP or MA-PD covered drugs in a calendar year to reach the catastrophic cap. In the standard benefit, the out-of-pocket threshold consists of the three amounts that a person with Medicare is responsible for paying: Deductible ($250) 25% coinsurance in the initial coverage stage ($500) 100% between $2,250 - $5,100 ($2,850) For 2006, the total out-of-pocket threshold amount is $3,600. The PDP or MA-PD premium is not part of the out-of-pocket threshold. ## Sources Applied to Out-of-Pocket Threshold - Payment from - People with Medicare themselves - Another individual such as family member - Medicare’s cost-sharing assistance - Qualified State Pharmacy Assistance Program - Out-of-Pocket Threshold - 8/30/05 Notes: Sources of payments for Medicare prescription drugs that are counted toward the out-of-pocket threshold include: The person with Medicare, as long as he or she is not reimbursed by an insurer Other individuals such as family members or friends, as long as they are not reimbursed by third party coverage Medicare’s cost-sharing assistance for people with low incomes such as QMB, SLMB, or QI A qualified SPAP (State Pharmacy Assistance Program) A bona fide charity A qualified SPAP allows the person with Medicare to enroll in any Medicare prescription drug plan available to him or her and does not steer the person into one plan or another to meet the eligibility requirements or receive higher assistance amounts. If it’s a qualified SPAP, then payment counts toward the out-of-pocket threshold. An unqualified SPAP steers the person with Medicare into one plan or another in order to become eligible for the program or to receive a certain level of assistance. Payments made by unqualified SPAPs do not count toward the out-of-pocket threshold. Your plan (PDP or MA-PD) will calculate the out-of-pocket threshold for you. The deductible does not have to be satisfied by out-of-pocket payments. It can be paid by insurance or another payer. ## Sources Not Applied to Out-of-Pocket Threshold - Employer/retiree group health plans - TRICARE - Black Lung - VA - Worker’s Compensation - Automobile/no-fault/liability insurance - Supplemental benefit portions of PDP or MA-PD - Out-of-Pocket Threshold - 8/30/05 Notes: Here are some examples of sources of payments that would not count toward the out-of-pocket threshold: GHP (such as retiree coverage provided by a former employer or union) Governmental programs such as TRICARE, Black Lung, and VA Worker’s Compensation Automobile, no-fault, or liability insurance Supplemental benefit portions of PDP or MA-PD ## Sources Not Applied to Out-of-Pocket Threshold - Most third party payment arrangements - Drugs purchased outside the US - Over-the-counter drugs - Drugs not on the Plan’s formulary - Drugs not covered by law - Indian Health Service appropriated funds - Out-of-Pocket Threshold - 8/30/05 Notes: Other payments that don’t count toward the out-of-pocket threshold include: Payment made by any other third party payment arrangement Drugs purchased outside the U.S. Over-the-counter drugs Drugs not on the plan’s formulary (sometimes drugs not on a plan’s formulary may be approved for use through an appeals or grievance process and are then treated as being included in the formulary) In general, Flexible Spending Accounts (FSA), Health Savings Accounts (HSA), Medical Savings Accounts (MSA), and Health Reimbursement Accounts (HRA) are not counted toward the out-of-pocket threshold. However, certain, HRAs may be counted, depending on the specific design. Also, payments for drugs considered not covered by law are not applied to the out-of-pocket threshold. ## How Out-of-Pocket Threshold Works - PDPs and MA-PDs will calculate out-of-pocket threshold - PDP will ask person with Medicare what third party coverage he/she has - Total out-of-pocket threshold for 2006 is $3,600 - Wrap-around drug coverage doesn’t count but is beneficial - Out-of-Pocket Threshold - 8/30/05 Notes: The plan (PDP or MA-PD) is required to calculate the out-of-pocket threshold. They will ask what other insurance coverage the person with Medicare has so that they can accurately calculate the out-of-pocket threshold. The plan will send the person a statement at least on a monthly basis showing how much has been spent for the year and where the person is in terms of reaching the out-of-pocket threshold for catastrophic coverage. If a person with Medicare materially misrepresents the supplemental coverage, this constitutes grounds for termination of coverage from any Medicare prescription drug plan. Once the $3,600 in out-of-pocket costs threshold is met, the catastrophic coverage begins. When this occurs, Medicare will pay 80%, the Medicare prescription drug plan will pay 15%, and the person with Medicare will pay 5% of drug costs in that year. Wrap-around coverage, drug coverage that does not count toward the out-of-pocket threshold, is still beneficial because it provides coverage where the PDPs or MA-PDs do not, and essentially delays the start of the catastrophic coverage. Catastrophic coverage is not effective until the $3,600 out-of-pocket threshold is met. ## How Out-of-Pocket Threshold Works - Example under standard benefit - Met $250 deductible - Gets a prescription for $100 - PDP pays $75 - Person with Medicare pays $25 - $250 deductible and $25 co-insurance are counted toward out-of-pocket threshold - Out-of-Pocket Threshold - 8/30/05 Notes: Here is an example of how the out-of-pocket threshold works. A person with Medicare has already paid the $250 deductible (assuming he or she is not receiving extra help). Suppose this person purchases a drug that costs $100. The PDP will pay $75 and the person is responsible for a $25 copayment. The $25 will be counted toward the out-of-pocket threshold. (The $250 deductible paid earlier would count also.) ## Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage - Available only by prescription - Prescription drugs, biologicals, insulin - Medical supplies associated with injection of insulin - A PDP or MA-PD may not cover all drugs - Brand name and generic drugs will be in each formulary - Covered Drugs - 8/30/05 Notes: A Medicare-covered prescription drug must be available only by prescription, approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), used and sold in the United States, and used for a medically accepted indication. A covered drug would include prescription drugs, biological products, and insulin. Medical supplies associated with the injection of insulin, such as syringes, needles, alcohol swabs, and gauze, are covered. (Used needle containers are not covered insulin supplies.) Not all “covered drugs” will be covered by the PDP or MA-PD plan. Each plan may develop a formulary. A formulary is a list of preferred medications covered by the PDP or MA-PD. Each plan is required to meet certain standards for its formulary. For example, the plan formularies must be developed by a Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee. The majority of the committee’s members must be physicians and practicing pharmacists. In addition, the formulary must include drugs in each therapeutic category and class of covered drugs. ## Excluded Drugs - Drugs for - Anorexia, weight loss, or weight gain - Fertility - Cosmetic purposes or hair growth - Symptomatic relief of cough and colds - Prescription vitamins and mineral products - Except prenatal vitamins and fluoride preparations - Non-prescription drugs - Barbiturates - Benzodiazepines - Covered Drugs - 8/30/05 Notes: The drugs excluded from Medicare prescription drug coverage are the same drugs that were excluded under the Medicare-approved drug discount card. These drugs are excluded by statute. In addition, drugs covered under Medicare Part A or Part B are not covered under this part of Medicare (even though a deductible may apply). ## Formulary - PDPs and MA-PDs may have a formulary - CMS will ensure formularies do not discourage enrollment among certain groups of people - Formulary review requirements are posted on the cms.hhs.gov/pdps website - CMS will approve formularies - Covered Drugs - 8/30/05 Notes: CMS relies on industry-recognized best practices for existing drug benefits to ensure non-discriminating, appropriate access for Medicare beneficiaries. CMS looks at drug classes and categories, specific drugs, utilization management tools, and appeals processes of plans to assure that people with Medicare are able to receive access to products in a non-discriminatory and timely manner. Plans are given the flexibility in the benefit design to promote real choice while protecting people with Medicare from discrimination. A plan is required to give a 60-day notice to affected enrollees if it removes a Medicare-covered prescription drug from its formulary or makes changes to its tiered cost-sharing structure during a plan year. If the notice requirement is not met, a plan must provide affected enrollees with a 60-day supply of the medication in dispute and a notice of the change when the enrollee requests a refill. Plans can set their own drug classifications. However, they are required to have more than one drug in their classifications. ## Tiered Formularies - Preferred Drug Levels - Tier 1 is lowest cost sharing - Subsequent tiers have higher cost sharing in ascending order - CMS will review to identify drug categories that may discourage enrollment of certain people with Medicare by placing drugs in non-preferred tiers - Plan must have exceptions procedures for tiered formularies - Covered Drugs - 8/30/05 Notes: Some Medicare prescription drug plans may structure their plan with a preferred drug level also known as a tiered formulary. This is a formulary that has different cost-sharing amounts depending upon the drug that is being purchased. The lowest cost-sharing tier is tier 1 and subsequent tiers have higher cost sharing in ascending order. CMS will review drug categories to ensure there is no discrimination by drug plans discouraging enrollment of certain people with Medicare by placing drugs in a non-preferred tier. Plans must have exceptions procedures for formularies and tiered cost-sharing structures. We’ll talk about that next. ## Exceptions Process - Ensures access to medically necessary Medicare covered prescription drugs - Provides process for enrollee to - Obtain a covered Medicare prescription drug at a more favorable cost-sharing level - Obtain a covered Medicare prescription drug not on the formulary - Covered Drugs - 8/30/05 Notes: The exceptions process is different from an appeal or grievance. This is a process by which enrollees may have access to medically necessary Medicare-covered prescription drugs. There are two types of exceptions: tiering exceptions and formulary exceptions. An enrollee may request a tiering exception to obtain a Medicare covered prescription drug at a more favorable cost-sharing level, or a formulary exception to obtain a Medicare-covered prescription drug that is not on a plan’s formulary. An enrollee’s appointed representative may request a coverage determination (including an exceptions) or any appeal on behalf of the enrollee. A physician may request a standard or expedited coverage determination and an expedited redetermination on the enrollee’s behalf without being the enrollee’s authorized representative. ## Exception Requests - Enrollees may request an exception if - The enrollee is using a drug that has been removed from the formulary - A non-formulary drug is prescribed and is medically necessary - The cost-sharing status of a drug an enrollee is using changes - A drug covered under a more expensive cost-sharing tier is prescribed because the drug covered under the less expensive cost-sharing tier is medically inappropriate - Covered Drugs - 8/30/05 Notes: An enrollee may request an exception under the following circumstances: The enrollee is using a Medicare covered prescription drug on a plan’s formulary that has been removed during the plan year for reasons other than safety The enrollee’s physician prescribed a non-formulary Medicare-covered prescription drug for the enrollee that the physician believes is medically necessary because the formulary drug is medically inappropriate The enrollee is using a Medicare-covered prescription drug that has been moved during the plan year from the preferred to the non-preferred cost-sharing tier The enrollee’s physician prescribed a Medicare-covered prescription drug for the enrollee that is included in a plan’s more expensive cost-sharing tier because the prescribing physician believes the Medicare-covered prescription drug included in the less expensive cost-sharing tier is medically inappropriate for the enrollee. The enrollee can request an exception to obtain a non-preferred Medicare-covered prescription drug at the cost-sharing terms that apply at the preferred (but not generic) level. Generally, plans must grant exceptions when they determine that it is medically appropriate to do so. When a plan denies an exception request, the enrollee may appeal the plan’s decision. ## Exception Procedures - _Adjudication timeframes_: A plan must notify an enrollee of its determination no later than 24 or 72 hours as appropriate - _Failure to meet adjudication timeframes_: Forward enrollee’s request to IRE - Generally, plans are prohibited from requiring additional exceptions requests for refills and from creating a special formulary tier or other cost-sharing requirement applicable only to Medicare covered prescription drugs approved under the exceptions process - Beneficiary Protections - 8/30/05 Notes: The plan must notify the enrollee and the prescribing physician involved, as appropriate, of its determination as expeditiously as the enrollee’s health condition requires, but no later than 24 hours for expedited requests, or 72 hours for standard requests, after receipt of the request for a coverage determination or receipt of the physician’s oral supporting statement for exceptions requests. A plan must provide an expedited coverage determination if it determines, or the enrollee’s prescribing physician indicates, that applying the standard timeframe for making a determination may seriously jeopardize the life or health of the enrollee or the enrollee’s ability to regain maximum function. If a plan does not make its determination within the appropriate timeframe, it must forward the enrollee’s request to the IRE within 24 hours of the expiration of the adjudication timeframe. Once a plan sponsor approves an exception request, it cannot require the enrollees to file additional exception requests for refills for the remainder of the plan year so long as the physician continues to prescribe the drug and it continues to be safe for treating the enrollee’s condition. Plan sponsors are prohibited from assigning drugs approved under the exceptions process to a special formulary tier, copayment, or other cost-sharing requirement. CMS Further Strengthens Beneficiary Protections in Part D to Ensure That All Beneficiaries Get Access to Medically Necessary Drugs: Issue Paper 33 Coverage Determination and Appeals Processes: Issue Paper 21 ## 5-Level Appeals Process - Redetermination by plan sponsor - Reconsideration by Independent Review Entity - Review by Administrative Law Judge - Review by Medicare Appeals Council - Review by Federal District Court - Covered Drugs - 8/30/05 Notes: (Same as MA) Level 1: Redetermination Enrollee can request when the plan’s initial coverage determination is unfavorable; plan has 7 days; can request expedited appeal, up to 72 hours Level 2: Reconsideration Enrollee can request when plan’s redetermination is unfavorable; IRE has 7 days to make its decision; can request expedited appeal, up to 72 hours The IRE must solicit the views of the prescribing physician whenever it processes either a standard or expedited reconsideration. Level 3: Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Enrollee can request when IRE’s determination is unfavorable; must meet amount in controversy requirement Level 4: Medicare Appeals Council (MAC) Enrollee can request when ALJ is unfavorable; MAC is entity within Department of Health and Human Services that reviews ALJ decisions Level 5: Federal District Court Enrollee may request when MAC is unfavorable; must meet amount in controversy ## Coordination with Other Insurers - EGHP - VA - TRICARE - Medicaid - Medigap - Coordination with Insurers - 8/30/05 Notes: There will be a system of data sharing between Medicare, PDPs, SPAPS, GHPs, insurers, and other third-party arrangements. CMS is developing and implementing a coordination of benefits system including the facilitation of tracking out-of-pocket threshold costs that will enable pharmacies to obtain information about secondary insurers as well as the correct billing order. ## Medigap companies that have H, I, or J enrollees must send creditable coverage notice Enrollees will be notified of their options - Enrollees will be notified of their options - Medigap - Coordination with Insurers - 8/30/05 Notes: All issuers of Medigap prescription drug policies (whether standardized H, I, or J or pre-standardized or alternative standardized policies in the three waiver states, Minnesota, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin) must send a disclosure letter to all their policyholders with prescription drug coverage telling them whether the coverage they currently have is creditable or not and what their options are based on this fact. Because some pre-standardized policies contain drug coverage that is richer than the coverage provided by plans H, I, or J, these policies may meet or exceed the actuarial equivalence test for creditable coverage. The coverage provided by some of the drug coverage options available in the three waiver states similarly may be at least as rich as standard Medicare prescription drug coverage. Issuers of these policies, too, will have to send the “Yes, this is a creditable coverage” disclosure letter. New Medigap Options And Supplemental Options: Issue Paper 11 ## Medigap Plans H, I, and J in 2006 - On or after 1/1/06 may not be - Sold - Issued - Renewed - Policy can be renewed if modified to exclude drug coverage or if the person does not enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan - Coordination with Insurers - 8/30/05 Notes: Beginning January 1, 2006, a Medigap prescription drug policy (H, I, or J) may not be sold or issued as it exists today. If a person with Medicare currently has one of these policies, 60 days before the Medicare prescription drug plan initial enrollment period, the company offering the policy will notify the person of his or her options to: Enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan and keep the policy, modified to exclude drug coverage Enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan and purchase a different Medigap policy without drug coverage (guaranteed issue of policies A, B, C or F—including F with the high deductible option—by the same issuer of the Medigap prescription drug plan) within 63 days after the effective date of Medicare prescription drug plan enrollment Not enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan, and keep the current policy with drug coverage Enroll in one of the two new plans, K or L, if the Medigap insurer is offering these Keep the Medigap policy with drug coverage and enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan. People with Medicare may have both, but may not use both at the same time. However, people who choose the last option will not be guaranteed the option of another Medigap policy if they later enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan. If the plan does not provide creditable coverage, they will be subject to higher premiums if they choose to enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan at a later date. ## New Medigap Plan – Plan K - Plan K - Coverage of 50% of cost sharing applicable under Parts A and B except for Part B deductible - 100% of inpatient hospital coinsurance and 365 lifetime days of inpatient hospital services - 100% of any cost sharing for preventive benefits - Annual out-of-pocket limit of $4,000 in 2006 - Coordination with Insurers - 8/30/05 Notes: There are two new Medigap plans: Plans K and L. These plans are designed to protect beneficiaries against catastrophic costs for benefits covered under Original Medicare. They will be available January 1, 2006. Plan K: Covers 50% of cost sharing under Parts A and B except for the Part B deductible Covers 100% of inpatient hospital coinsurance and 365 lifetime days of inpatient hospital services Covers 100% of cost sharing for preventive benefits, and Limits the annual out-of-pocket expenses to $4,000 in 2006 ## New Medigap Plan – Plan L - Plan L - Coverage of 75% of cost sharing applicable under Parts A and B except for Part B deductible - 100% of inpatient hospital coinsurance and 365 lifetime days of inpatient hospital services - 100% of any cost sharing for preventive benefits - Annual out-of-pocket limit of $2,000 in 2006 - Coordination with Insurers - 8/30/05 Notes: The second new Medigap plan is Plan L. Plan L: Covers 75% of cost sharing applicable under Parts A and B except for Part B deductible Covers 100% of inpatient hospital coinsurance and 365 lifetime days of inpatient hospital services Covers 100% of any cost sharing for preventive benefits Limits out-of-pocket expenses to $2,000 in 2006 ## State Pharmacy Assistance Program - Provide wrap-around coverage - Provide same or better coverage and save money - Reduce state costs or expand population served - Costs incurred by SPAP are counted toward out-of-pocket threshold - 21 SPAPs received funding to educate their enrollees - Coordination with Insurers - 8/30/05 Notes: State Pharmacy Assistance Programs (SPAP) can provide wrap-around coverage to help people with Medicare enrolled in an SPAP with their prescription drug cost sharing. Therefore, SPAPs will be able to provide the same or better coverage for their enrollees at a lower cost per enrollee to the state. These savings can then be used to help reduce state budget costs or to expand the population served by their program. The law intends that all Medicare prescription drug plans in a state be given comparable opportunities to provide benefits in a particular state. Therefore, if an SPAP auto-enrolls its enrollees into a Medicare prescription drug plan, the costs incurred by the SPAP are not counted toward the out-of-pocket threshold. However, if the SPAP does not auto-enroll its participants in a Medicare prescription drug plan, any cost sharing provided by the SPAP can be applied toward the out-of-pocket threshold. ## PACE Plans - Medicare prescription drug coverage applies - PACE organizations treated like MA-PD plans - Many administrative requirements will be waived - PACE participants do not have any cost sharing - Coordination with Insurers - 8/30/05 Notes: PACE, or Program of All-inclusive Care for the Elderly, combines medical, social, and long-term care services for frail people. The requirements for Medicare prescription drug coverage applies to PACE programs. Many of the Medicare prescription drug coverage requirements closely parallel those already in place under the PACE program. PACE organizations will be treated similarly to the MA-PD plans, and many of the administrative provisions will be waived for the PACE organizations. Although MMA requires cost-sharing responsibilities for people with Medicare, the PACE program exempts participants from paying deductibles, copayments, coinsurance, or any other cost sharing. PACE Plans and the Drug Benefit: Issue Paper 22 ## Retiree Coverage Goals - Maintain retiree coverage - Minimize administrative burdens - Minimize costs to the taxpayers - Employment-Related Coverage Options - 8/30/05 Notes: Many times employment–related coverage is very generous. Medicare is working with employers to help people with Medicare keep their coverage through a current or former employer or union. The law provides incentives for employers and unions to continue offering coverage. Medicare is committed to facilitating effective coordination of Medicare and employment-based drug coverage to minimize administrative burdens and minimize costs to the taxpayers. Retiree Plan Sponsor Options: More Secure Coverage for Retirees: Issue Paper 5 ## Who Are Plan Sponsors? - Plan sponsors include - Private employers - Unions - Government employers (Federal, State, Local) - Churches - Employment-Related Coverage Options - 8/30/05 Notes: Plan sponsors who can take advantage of MMA’s plan sponsor options include: private and public employers, as well as labor unions. Plan sponsors have multiple options to continue coverage for their retirees. Let’s talk about what some of these options are. ## Plan Sponsor Options - Provide drug coverage in lieu of Medicare prescription drug coverage and receive tax-free subsidy - Must be at least as good as Medicare prescription drug coverage to qualify - Provide drug coverage that supplements the Medicare prescription drug coverage - Through a separate plan that coordinates benefits with Medicare drug plans - Through a contract with one or more Medicare drug plans - By direct contracting with Medicare to become a Medicare drug plan - Pay part or all of Medicare prescription drug plan premiums - Employment-Related Coverage Options - 8/30/05 Notes: Employer-sponsored plans have several options in how they offer their coverage. They can: Offer coverage in place of Medicare prescription drug coverage and receive a tax-free subsidy as long as the plan is at least as good as Medicare prescription drug plan coverage. This is also called creditable coverage and must be actuarially equivalent. Become a PDP or MA-PD Contract with a PDP or MA-PD to offer coverage Provide supplemental coverage in addition to the Medicare prescription drug plan coverage Pay all or part of the beneficiary’s Medicare prescription drug plan premiums Subsidies are conditional on the individual choosing to keep the current employer/union coverage and not enroll in a Medicare prescription drug plan. Employer-sponsored plans are required to send creditable coverage notices to their enrollees. Employers that apply for the subsidy must do so on an annual basis. As a requirement of the subsidy, employers must maintain records for audit purposes and disclose to CMS a notice of creditable coverage. ## What People With Medicare Need to Know About Their Current Employment-Related Coverage - They will get a information from employer/union telling them about their options - They can contact their benefits administrator for more information - They should compare their current plan to available Medicare drug plans - Medicare is working with employers to help keep the coverage people with Medicare have through a current or former employer - Employment-Related Coverage Options - 8/30/05 Notes: If a person with Medicare has insurance through a current or former employer, he/she should contact the benefits administrator to find out about the current drug coverage. Note: If a person with Medicare signs up for a PDP or MA-PD, they may lose their employment-related coverage and not be able to get it back. ## Protections for People With Medicare - Customer service - Pharmacy access - Medication therapy management - Generic drug information - Privacy - Uniform benefits and premiums - Formulary protections - 8/30/05 Notes: MMA incorporates substantial protections for people with Medicare from traditional Medicare and from the Medicare Advantage program. Some of them include: Customer Service: Plans must provide a toll-free telephone number and place information on the internet; notify enrollees of how much prescription drug spending they had for the year and how close they are to reaching the catastrophic coverage limit Pharmacy Access: Plans must provide convenient access no matter where enrollees live Medication Therapy Management: plans must have medication therapy management programs to help those who have multiple, chronic conditions, use multiple drugs and expect to have high drug costs make sure they are taking safe combinations of drugs Generic Drug Information: Plans and pharmacists are required to inform enrollees if you they save money by using a generic drug Privacy: Plans must maintain privacy and confidentiality of patient records Uniform Benefits and Premiums: Plans must provide all enrollees in the plan with the same benefits and charge a community-rated premium Formulary Protections: Formularies, or list of drugs the plan covers, must include two drugs from every therapeutic category and class with only a few exceptions Beneficiary Protections: Issue Paper 6 ## Plan Information Dissemination - Plans must provide information about - Service areas - Benefits - Cost sharing - Formulary - Pharmacy access - Other aspects of coverage available through the plan - Protections for People With Medicare - 8/30/05 Notes: Plans are required to disseminate information on their drug coverage to their enrollees and prospective enrollees about their service areas, the benefits offered under the plan, the cost-sharing amounts, their formularies, pharmacy access, and other aspects of coverage available through the plan. This information must be provided in writing, as well as on the Plan website and upon request through a toll-free call center. ## For More Information - Visit www.pharmacyissues.ihs.gov - Visit www.medicare.gov - Visit www.cms.hhs.gov - Publications such as: Medicare & You handbook Facts About Medicare Prescription Drug Plans - 1-800-MEDICARE - 8/30/05 Notes: There are a number of sources where you can get more information, including: Medicare’s website for people with Medicare, www.medicare.gov Medicare’s website for partners, www.cms.hhs.gov Order publications such as the Medicare & You handbook or Facts About Medicare Prescriptions Drug Plans. They can be ordered from the website or by calling 1-800-MEDICARE The toll-free number for Medicare, 1-800-MEDICARE (1-800-633-4227) and 1-877-486-2048 for TTY users	en
converted_docs	707764	+---------------------------+-------------------+---+-------------------+ \| National Park Service \| Ozark National \| \| P.O. Box 490 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| U.S. Department of the \| Scenic Riverways \| \| Van Buren \| \| Interior \| \| \| \| \| \| Use the complete \| \| Missouri \| \| \| site name here \| \| 63965-0490 \| \| \| (e.g. Palo Alto \| \| \| \| \| Battlefield \| \| 573-323-4236 \| \| \| Historic Site). \| \| phone \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 573-323-4140 fax \| +---------------------------+-------------------+---+-------------------+ ![](media/image1.png){width="0.5597222222222222in" height="0.7201388888888889in"} Ozark National Scenic Riverways News Release ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Use a "short-hand" version of the site name here (e.g. Palo Alto Battlefield not Palo Alto Battlefield National Historical Site). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- May 17, 2004 For Immediate Release Bill O\'Donnell 573-323-4236, ext. 236 Patty Kelley 573-323-4236, ext. 225 [For Immediate Release]{.underline} ### ATV Regulations for Ozark National Scenic Riverways As hunters prepare for the Fall hunting seasons, National Park Service officials at Ozark National Scenic Riverways want to remind the public about the rules and regulations regarding off-road travel and the use of All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) in the park. While no vehicles are permitted off designated roads, ATVs are the most common vehicles to illegally drive off roads. Riding ATVs is popular with many people, and ATVs can be both useful and fun, but Ozark National Scenic Riverways is not the place. Companies that manufacture these vehicles market them as being "all terrain," implying it is okay to ride them virtually anywhere. These vehicles can damage our natural and cultural resources. Operation along streams and rivers can cause erosion and pollution to our aquatic systems, and the noise disturbs all inhabitants within the Riverways. ATVs are prohibited off established roads, on any closed road, on any paved road, on any service road, on power line rights of way, on any campground roads, in the river (unless at an approved river crossing and then only to cross and continue on), and not on any gravel bars. The rangers warn that there are areas within the park that have unauthorized trails starting to develop. If the trail one is on does not look like a maintained road that a full sized pickup could drive on then that trail is closed to ATVs. If you are in doubt, please contact the park before riding on questionable roads. If one has a county permit and abide by Missouri State motor vehicle regulations, he/she may ride ATVs for recreational purposes on park roads open to motorized vehicles. There are over 200 miles of roads within the ONSR boundaries that are open to motorized vehicles and ATVs. A lot of these established roads are in the backcountry and offer excellent opportunities for ATV riding. ATV operators must have the appropriate county permit and must abide by the Missouri State motor vehicle regulations. Operators are reminded that they must have a valid driver's license, the ATV must be registered with the state and must have a valid county permit, no ATV operator may carry a passenger unless that machine is designed to carry a second passenger, and every ATV must be equipped with an adequate muffler and approved spark arrestor, a slow-moving triangular emblem on the back of the machine, a safety flag extending at least 7 feet above the ground, and a lighted headlamp and trail lamp. It is the responsibility of the operator to know the laws and regulations that apply to their activity. While Ozark National Scenic Riverways is not a place for off-road vehicle recreation, there are places on public land that provide ATV trails and routes. There are also some private lands open for ORV recreation. Be sure and get permission from the landowner before traveling off-road on private land. The Department of Natural Resources permits ORV use at Finger Lakes State Park in Boone County and at St. Joe State Park in St. Francois County. The U.S. Forest Service permits ORV use at Chadwick Motorcycle and ATV Use Area in Christian County and at Sutton Bluff Motorcycle and ATV Use Area in Reynolds County. Rules and regulations for ORV use differ for each area so contact the respective office for more information. If you would like more information or have questions about off-road vehicle use at Ozark National Scenic Riverways contact the Chief Ranger at 573-323-4236. For information about the park you can visit with a ranger in the park, call the park headquarters at 573-323-4236, send an email to [email protected], or visit the park website at www.nps.gov/ozar -NPS-	en
all-txt-docs	040292	April 25, 2007 CBCA 660-RELO In the Matter of JOSEPH BUSH Joseph Bush, Fort Worth, TX, Claimant. Leroy G. Babin, Comptroller, 301st Fighter Wing (AFRC), Department of the Air Force, Fort Worth, TX, appearing for Department of the Air Force. VERGILIO, Board Judge. On February 26, 2007, the Board received from the comptroller at the Department of the Air Force, Fort Worth, Texas, a request for an advance decision, 31 U.S.C. 3529 (2000), concerning payment of relocation expenses of an employee, Joseph Bush. Mr. Bush seeks reimbursement of real estate relocation expenses of $5585.16, relating to the purchase of a residence at his new duty station. On April 11, 2007, Mr. Bush supplemented the record in response to the submission by the Government. This relocated employee is not entitled to reimbursement of expenses associated with the purchase of a home at his new duty station, because the employee became obligated for those expenses prior to an official determination to transfer the employee to that new duty station. Background As a Department of Defense civilian employee, Mr. Bush was assigned to a squadron located at a base in Arizona. In 2005, the base was approved for base realignment and closure (BRAC). In May 2006, Mr. Bush and other employees at the base were informed that a reduction in force associated with the closure would be accelerated to March 2007. As early as May 2006, Mr. Bush had discussions with an agency supervisor in Fort Worth, Texas, about obtaining a position in Fort Worth; appropriate positions were not then or immediately available. Mr. Bush engaged in further communications as he attempted to obtain a "by name" request to secure a position. In June 2006, Mr. Bush entered his name with the Clearing House Placement Program, seeking permanent employment in Fort Worth. On July 7, 2006, Mr. Bush entered into a contract to purchase a house from a builder in Fort Worth. On November 2, 2006, a selecting official submitted the name of Mr. Bush to fill a vacant position; the request for personnel action has a proposed effective date of December 10, 2006. On November 20, 2006, Mr. Bush closed on the residence in Fort Worth. On December 6, 2006, the Air Force Personnel Center made a tentative offer to Mr. Bush of a permanent position. Mr. Bush accepted the offer on that date. On December 20, 2006, the Government issued a written authorization for expenses (including real estate expenses) associated with the change in permanent duty station (PDS). On January 3, 2007, Mr. Bush received his official orders relating to the permanent change of station. Mr. Bush seeks payment of $5585.16 incurred and paid for the purchase of the residence in Fort Worth. Discussion The Federal Travel Regulation (FTR), applicable to civilian agency employees, specifies that "reimbursment of any residence transaction expenses . . . that occurs [sic] prior to being officially notified (generally in the form [of] a change of station travel authorization) is prohibited." 41 CFR 302-11.305 (2006). Although "travel authorization" is defined to mean written permission, official notification is not limited to notification through a writing. The applicable Joint Travel Regulations (JTR) (regulations relative to travel and transportation allowances of Department of Defense civilian personnel) state that an eligible employee is authorized reimbursement for certain expenses incurred in connection with the sale of a residence at the old duty station and/or the purchase of a residence at the new duty station after the employee has signed the required transportation agreement. JTR C14000-A. The JTR have explicit provisions regarding the sale of a residence in anticipation of a transfer. Specifically, following the announcement of a base closure, an "employee is authorized reimbursement for real estate expenses incurred before, and in anticipation of, a transfer if a clearly evident administrative intent exists, at the time the expenses are incurred, to transfer the employee[.]" JTR C14000-D.1. The JTR lack a parallel provision for the reimbursement of expenses related to the purchase of a residence incurred before, or in anticipation of, a transfer, or related to the sale of a residence in instances unrelated to base closure. Thus, the base closure alone does not serve as a basis for reimbursement of costs associated with the purchase of a residence at a new duty station in anticipation of a new assignment. Developed case law dictates: Real estate transaction expenses are reimbursable only if the purchase or sale of a residence is incident to the employee's transfer. For that reason, we have established that when a contract for purchase or sale is entered into before an agency manifests an intent to transfer the employee, the transaction will be considered to have been entered into for some reason other than the transfer. That reason may have been anticipation of a transfer, but unless the transfer has been announced, anticipation is insufficient to make the sale incident to the transfer. Peter J. Grace, GSBCA 16790-RELO, 06-1 BCA 33,219, at 164,635; Bernard J. Silbert, B-202386 (Sept. 8, 1981) (although mindful that a reliable verbal notification of tentative selection to a position may be adequate for reliance, the Comptroller General concluded that there was no reliable notification at the time the employee became obligated to purchase the residence at the new duty station). This Board has applied this reasoning in holding that a contract for purchase equates to the incurrence of expenses related to purchase. Gary J. Tennant, CBCA 553-RELO (Apr. 10, 2007). Mr. Bush entered into the contract to purchase the residence in Texas prior to receiving official notification of the location of his new permanent duty station; the July purchase pre-dates the tentative selection in November. Accordingly, the purchase, preceding notification, was not incident to the transfer. The agency should deny reimbursement of the claimed expenses. ____________________________ JOSEPH A. VERGILIO Board Judge	en
all-txt-docs	150372	November 1996 Integrated Use-of-Force Training Program By Brian R. Arnspiger and Gordon A. Bowers, M.A. __________ Realistic scenarios replicate common calls for service and integrate decision-making and technical skills in this training program. __________ Detective Arnspiger is the primary law enforcement trainer for the Burbank, California, Police Department. Captain Bowers commands the Special Operations Division of the Burbank Police Department. __________ Law enforcement use-of-force training traditionally has been rather disjointed. Officers learn shooting as an isolated skill, PR-24 baton qualification occurs annually, handcuffing skills are taught rarely, and defensive tactics training often takes place only to try out a new technique or weapon. Departments frequently depend on field training officers to teach rookies decision-making skills and how to select the appropriate level of force. In addition, most instruction focuses on increasing the efficiency of an isolated element in the force continuum but often fails to demonstrate other techniques, such as verbalization and the use of cover. As demonstrated by recent high-profile cases, law enforcement needs to adopt a training paradigm that encompasses the entire scope of the use of force and that also teaches officers how to present (in reports or courtroom testimony, for example) the rationale and justification for the levels of force they apply. Providing realistic training that covers the full use-of-force continuum, from command presence to deadly force, should be the training objective. Police officers can be thrust into any point on the force continuum without warning. Their training should give them the skills to make and implement appropriate decisions that consider the safety of both officers and subjects, as well as the constantly changing conditions. The training must be realistic, updated regularly, and contain a system of proficiency testing and evaluation. It must include the use of cognitive (knowledge), affective (attitude), and psychomotor (physical) skills. The Burbank, California, Police Department (BPD) developed an integrated use-of-force training program in response to a department-wide assessment of training needs. This article explains the development of the program, reviews two sample scenarios, and describes the department's experiences thus far. It also suggests a direction for future training development and addresses some budget implications of this type of program. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT In a department-wide poll taken in 1993 by the Burbank Police Department's instructional staff, officers expressed a need for more defensive tactics training. Officers reported an initial tendency to back off during field contacts with threatening subjects because they did not feel confident in their ability to address such threats without resorting to deadly force. The instructors then examined the department's reports on incidents in which officers used force. They found that many injuries to officers and subjects occurred because officers did not apply contact and control techniques properly. This information confirmed the need for additional training. Next, the instructors gathered material about numerous training programs throughout the country. They reviewed the programs and evaluated each one to determine whether it met their department's needs. Eventually, staff members designed their own integrated use-of-force training program, drawing on the best components of the courses they had examined. In the summer of 1995, the police department began using its new curriculum. The program employs 15 training scenarios to integrate the following topics: Command presence and verbalization (including Verbal Judo) Use of cover Weaponless defense (emphasizing Krav Maga, an Israeli system of self-defense that enables students to achieve a relatively high level of proficiency within a short period of instruction) Chemical weapons PR-24 side-handle baton Firearms (duty handgun and shotgun) Standardized high-risk vehicle stop Search of subjects Handcuffing techniques (including speedcuffing) First aid and CPR Officer rescue techniques. This type of training rests on the premise that officers never should face a situation in the field completely unlike anything previously faced in training. Integrated use-of-force training seeks to develop in each officer the knowledge, skills, and techniques necessary to: Apply verbalization properly as a tactic to reduce the need for physical force in controlling situations Maximize officer and suspect safety through the correct identification and use of cover available to officers during citizen contacts Minimize the liabilities associated with the use of force by understanding the available range of possible responses, selecting the appropriate force level, constantly reevaluating the level of force required in a situation, and accurately verbalizing the rationale and justification for each use of force. SAMPLE SCENARIOS The use of scenarios provides a viable system for presenting the entire spectrum of use-of-force training. Each scenario incorporates several topics in a way that gives students practical experience in both critical judgment and technical skills. Simulations replicate many common calls to which officers respond. The following typify the scenarios used in the BPD's program. Ambush In one scenario, two officers in a police car, armed with a shotgun and a handgun, respond to an ambush. They must physically restrain, search, and handcuff a combative suspect, played by a trainer in protective gear. They then rescue an injured officer (a 165-pound drag dummy). The dummy is switched with a training mannequin in full police uniform, and the officers must perform CPR (one or two person) on the rescued officer. At the trainer's discretion, this all might take place under fire, using blanks fired from a specially designed robotic unit. To conclude the exercise, each officer must testify to a court of fellow officers, explaining the rationale for each use-of-force decision throughout the scenario. High-Risk Vehicle Stop A second scenario replicates a high-risk vehicle stop. Three police units, a civilian vehicle belonging to a trainer, and a scrap vehicle donated by a city towing service are used in this exercise, which is conducted on the outdoor shooting range of the Burbank Police Training Facility. Metal pop-up targets activated by compressed air have been installed in both the front and rear seats of the donated scrap vehicle. In a 2-hour session, four to six on-duty officers complete a cycle comprised of three training elements--classroom instruction, two dry runs using inoperative training guns, and one "hot" run using service weapons and live ammunition. In the classroom, instructors introduce the standardized high-risk vehicle stop developed for the department. They emphasize vehicle and officer positioning, individual officer assignments, and the specific techniques needed by each team member to conduct the stop successfully. The officers then practice the stop twice. The practice runs use the three police units and the trainer's civilian vehicle, which is occupied by two or more suspects played by actors. To maximize safety, the students use only inoperative training handguns and shotguns. They rehearse the entire process, including positioning the cars, calling the suspects out of their vehicle individually, positioning suspects properly for the designated arrest officer or team, and bringing suspects back behind the police cars. There, the officers search the suspects, who usually have two or more hidden weapons, and place them into the police units for transportation. If suspects resist, the officers must use the appropriate force to subdue them. For every stage of the scenario--from deploying the officers to preparing the suspects for transport--each officer must verbalize the reason for performing each action or technique, justify any use of force, and discuss tactical considerations. Finally, each team of officers conducts a stop using live ammunition. This time, the scrap vehicle containing pop-up targets serves as the suspect vehicle. Each officer must use the proper verbal commands, as if ordering actual suspects to exit the vehicle. At some time during the verbal commands, one or more steel targets pop up. Each officer must make a shooting decision based on the target presented. (The trainers designate white targets as threats and targets of any other color as innocent victims.) The survival shooting situation adds an element of stress to the scenario. After the hot run, the officers critique their own performances, facilitated by the trainers. RESULTS Course evaluations by the students, including BPD's regular and reserve officers, as well as guest officers from a federal agency, several nearby police departments, and at least one large out-of-state agency, have indicated positive outcomes. Students regularly mention the trainers' enthusiasm, the simple but effective techniques, and the overall value of the training. The realistic integrated use-of-force scenarios have increased officers' confidence in their abilities. This confidence has translated into their handling more field incidents with lower levels of force than before the training. When officers are confronted with a threat, the instructors teach them to move toward the threat and disarm it rather than move away and respond to it. Shortly after receiving this training, a BPD officer used this technique, and it probably saved his life. As the officer spoke with a driver during a traffic stop for an equipment violation, the subject drew a handgun from under the front seat and began turning it toward the officer. The officer immediately moved toward the threat, simultaneously striking an offensive blow and deflecting, then restraining, the gun hand. He disarmed the subject and controlled him until assisting officers arrived. The subject, an armed-robbery parolee with 19 bundles of "flash money" in the car, later admitted he was en route to pull a cocaine rip-off when stopped. This situation clearly could have justified deadly force, and if the officer had made any initial move backward, there would have been no alternative. Because of the officer's immediate reaction to move toward the threat to reduce it, however, he avoided the use of deadly force, not to mention avoiding the potential for injury or loss of life. It is likely that in this situation alone, the entire cost of the integrated use-of-force program was offset by savings from the now-unnecessary shooting investigation, damage claim, administrative hearing, and civil suit. A much more common example occurred just 2 weeks after the training program was initiated. Three officers responded to a domestic violence call, which led to the husband's arrest. As two of the officers moved to restrain the subject's arms, he violently jerked back and began to struggle. The third officer later reported that he "instinctively initiated the three-person take-down," as taught in class, which allowed the subject to be taken immediately into custody with no injury to him or the officers. These two incidents have a common element. The officers took immediate, decisive action when faced with situations they had mastered previously with simple, effective techniques in realistic training scenarios. Based on field successes and positive feedback from the students, the BPD is continuing its integrated use-of-force training program. The course will be offered in 2-hour segments on a bimonthly basis. Topics will rotate so that officers can attend all training elements. Officers must get permission from their supervisors and sign up in advance. Because the sessions last only 2 hours and occur during duty time, officers can attend the training and then return to patrol for the remainder of the shift. The BPD deploys officers in three overlapping 12-hour shifts, which enables supervisors to release two to four officers per shift for training without any adverse effects on field patrol strength. FUTURE DIRECTIONS BPD instructors envision the logical extension of this concept as surprise, on-duty training calls for officers, which will be dispatched as actual calls for service. Upon arrival at the scene, officers will be informed by the training lieutenant that this is a training call. They will exchange their pistols, magazines, batons, and pepper spray for training versions; then they will approach the crime scene and handle the call. The proposed location is a Redevelopment Agency house borrowed for training purposes. Video cameras installed in the house will provide coverage of the porch and entry, living room, and dining room. Role players will be trainers from another agency, so they will be unfamiliar to officers. Possible scenarios include an officer injured in an ambush, a woman giving birth, a drunken father threatening an abused daughter, a PCP-crazed subject harassing others, or any other situation that replicates a real call. At the conclusion of each incident, trainers will debrief the officers and critique the scenario. If the scenario involved the use of serious physical control (e.g., neck res-traint, K-9, impact weapon, focused blows), a cool-down period will be provided prior to the officers' return to field duty. This type of regular practice and evaluation increases officers' effectiveness and confidence in their ability to handle field situations. On-duty training calls are easy to schedule, and both administrators and line officers agree that such calls do not significantly disrupt the department's ability to respond to regular calls for service. BUDGET IMPLICATIONS Because budget constraints have such significant impact on training decisions, the cost for integrated use-of-force training must be addressed. Fortunately for the police department, most of the program's components have not cost any additional money; expenses budgeted for task-specific training simply have been reassigned to the integrated system. For example, the department shifted the funds previously designated for contract first-aid and CPR trainers to the integrated system, which incorporates those topics and uses in-house instructors. Savings in field strength also result from the more efficient use of training time. Rather than have an officer miss an entire shift to attend a first-aid class that might only last for one-half or two-thirds of the shift, the same level of training can take place on duty, leaving the officer available for patrol for the remaining portion of the shift. Overtime costs also can be reduced with the use of this approach. On-duty instructors can conduct training during all three watches, eliminating the need to pay overtime to send all officers to school during the day shift. It is much more efficient to pay an in-house trainer to work several graveyard shifts than to pay the whole graveyard shift to attend a class during the trainer's day shift. This program has not been cost-free, however. The six department instructors attended train-the-trainer courses to become certified to teach the full spectrum of topics included in the integrated program. Certification in Krav Maga, for example, cost $1,200 per instructor. Other start-up expenses included approximately $20,000 for equipment, such as protective gear, sparring equipment, and mats. Although this initial outlay was significant, the long-term savings outlined above have made it worthwhile. One way to reduce the financial impact of any training initiative is to put the program in the hands of an enthusiastic manager. Such individuals are likely to consider innovative solutions and approaches. For example, the BPD has had success with such cost-saving measures as: Acquiring asset forfeiture funds to purchase equipment Using reserve officers as trainers and role players in the scenarios Building a shooting range similar to the FBI's Hogan's Alley, mainly using obsolete movie sets donated by a local film studio Sponsoring private training courses at the department's facility in exchange for a few free slots in the classes for BPD trainers Getting donations of items, such as free-standing mailboxes and street light poles, to make the outside training setting more realistic. Accountants and budget specialists frequently attack training expenses on the grounds that the bottom line is all that counts. In today's litigious society, civil judgments against individuals and government agencies, particularly for excessive use of force, have reached historic proportions. The true bottom line is that departments cannot afford not to train their employees and train them well. The police department's integrated use-of-force program provides one way to maximize the value of each training dollar spent and to gain the greatest benefit for the employees as well as the agency. CONCLUSION The Burbank Police Department identified and responded to the need for better instruction in the proper use of force and application of defensive tactics. To avoid the pitfalls of traditional training, which teaches skills in isolation, the department's instructional staff designed a program that integrates a variety of skills in realistic simulations of calls for service. Exposing officers to situations that closely replicate what they might face in the field allows them to learn and practice effective responses. In addition to mastering specific techniques, they gain the critical thinking and decision-making skills that shave life-saving seconds from response times. Forcing them to articulate the reasoning behind their decisions also helps officers write accurate reports and give clear, thorough testimony in court. Police training should prepare officers to carry out their duties safely and effectively. The Burbank Police Department's integrated use-of-force training program has enhanced its ability to serve the public with confidence. Sidebar The Krav Maga System of Defensive Tactics The Burbank Police Department incorporates the Krav Maga defensive tactics system into its integrated use-of-force training. Krav Maga, which translates to "contact combat," originally was developed in Israel in the 1950s. A number of law enforcement agencies in the United States have adopted the system. Krav Maga differs from traditional martial arts-based approaches to defensive tactics. It is a modern, reality-based method of training characterized by coherent and logical thinking that builds easy, natural, and practical techniques based on simple movements of the human body. Common principles apply to a variety of scenarios, enabling students to learn the system quickly, retain the techniques after training, and perform them under stressful conditions. The Krav Maga system offers another important feature for law enforcement. Part of the reality-based training focuses on improving the officer's emotional and physical response to danger. Officers develop the ability to recognize danger, react without hesitation, and escalate and deescalate the levels of force used as the situation develops. Krav Maga instruction covers combative subjects, self-defense, weapon retention, impact weapons, arrest and control/officer safety tactics, and empty-hand defenses against armed assailants. For more information, contact the nonprofit Krav Maga Association of America, Law Enforcement Training Division, P.O. Box 8723, Calabasas, California 91372, or phone (818) 223-9451.	en
converted_docs	915208	##### 2006-2007 No Child Left Behind - Blue Ribbon Schools Program U.S. Department of Education Cover Sheet Type of School: (Check all that apply) \[X \] Elementary \[X \] Middle \[ \] High \[ \] K-12 \[ \] Charter Name of Principal: Ms. Anne T. Carroll Official School Name: St. Bridget\'s School School Mailing Address: 6011 York Road Richmond, VA 23226-2736 County: N/A State School Code Number\* N/A Telephone [(804)288-1994]{.underline} Fax [(804) 288-5730]{.underline} Web site/URL: [www.saintbridget.org](http://www.saintbridget.org/) E-mail <[email protected]> I have reviewed the information in this application, including the eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my knowledge all information is accurate. Date 12/18/2006 (Principal's Signature) Name of Superintendent\* Mr. John F. Elcesser District Name: Diocese of Richmond Tel. [(804) 359-5661]{.underline} I have reviewed the information in this application, including the eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my knowledge it is accurate. Date: [12/18/2006]{.underline}\_ (Superintendent's Signature) Name of School Board President/Chairperson: N/A I have reviewed the information in this application, including the eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my knowledge it is accurate. [N/A]{.underline} Date: [N/A]{.underline} (School Board President's/Chairperson's Signature) \Private Schools: If the information requested is not applicable, write N/A in the space.* PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION \[Include this page in the school's application as page 2.\] The signatures on the first page of this application certify that each of the statements below concerning the school's eligibility and compliance with U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) requirements is true and correct. 1. The school has some configuration that includes grades K-12. (Schools on the same campus with one principal, even K-12 schools, must apply as an entire school.) 2. The school has made adequate yearly progress each year for the past two years and has not been identified by the state as "persistently dangerous" within the last two years. To meet final eligibility, the school must meet the state's adequate yearly progress requirement in the 2006-2007 school year. 3. If the school includes grades 7 or higher, it has foreign language as a part of its core curriculum. 4. The school has been in existence for five full years, that is, from at least September 2001 and has not received the No Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon Schools award in the past five years. 5. The nominated school or district is not refusing OCR access to information necessary to investigate a civil rights complaint or to conduct a district‑wide compliance review. 6. OCR has not issued a violation letter of findings to the school district concluding that the nominated school or the district as a whole has violated one or more of the civil rights statutes. A violation letter of findings will not be considered outstanding if OCR has accepted a corrective action plan from the district to remedy the violation. 7. The U.S. Department of Justice does not have a pending suit alleging that the nominated school or the school district as a whole has violated one or more of the civil rights statutes or the Constitution's equal protection clause. 8. There are no findings of violations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in a U.S. Department of Education monitoring report that apply to the school or school district in question; or if there are such findings, the state or district has corrected, or agreed to correct, the findings. PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA All data are the most recent year available. DISTRICT (Questions 1‑2 not applicable to private schools) 1\. Number of schools in the district: \_\_\_\_\_ Elementary schools \_\_\_\_\_ Middle schools \_\_\_\_\_ Junior high schools \_\_\_\_\_ High schools \_\_\_\_\_ Other \_\_\_\_\_ TOTAL 2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [N/A]{.underline} Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [N/A]{.underline} SCHOOL (To be completed by all schools) 3\. Category that best describes the area where the school is located: > \[ \] Urban or large central city > > \[ \] Suburban school with characteristics typical of an urban area > > \[X \] Suburban > > \[ \] Small city or town in a rural area > > \[ \] Rural 4\. [8]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his position at this school. [N/A]{.underline} If fewer than three years, how long was the previous principal at this school? 5\. Number of students as of October 1 enrolled at each grade level or its equivalent in applying school only: ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- --------- Grade \# of \# of Grade Grade \# of \# of Grade Males Females Total Males Females Total PreK 0 0 0 7 27 25 52 K 24 24 48 8 16 32 48 1 28 26 54 9 2 36 22 58 10 3 24 34 58 11 4 28 30 58 12 5 32 24 56 Other 6 26 34 60 TOTAL 492 STUDENTS IN THE APPLYING SCHOOL ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- --------- > *\[Throughout the document, round numbers 1 or higher to the nearest > whole number.* > > *Use decimals to one place only if the number is below 1.\]* 6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [96]{.underline}% White the school: [0.4]{.underline} % Black or African American [3]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino [0.4]{.underline} % Asian/Pacific Islander [0]{.underline} % American Indian/Alaskan Native 100% Total Use only the five standard categories in reporting the racial/ethnic composition of the school. 7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year: [1]{.underline} % > \[This rate should be calculated using the grid below. The answer to > (6) is the mobility rate.\] ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------ (1) Number of students who 5 transferred *to* the school after October 1 until the end of the year (2) Number of students who 1 transferred *from* the school after October 1 until the end of the year (3) Total of all transferred 6 students \[sum of rows (1) and (2)\] (4) Total number of students in 476 the school as of October 1 (5) Total transferred students 0.013 in row (3) divided by total students in row (4) (6) Amount in row (5) 1.3 multiplied by 100 ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------ 8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [0]{.underline} % [0]{.underline} Total Number Limited English Proficient Number of languages represented: [1]{.underline} Specify languages: English 9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [N/A]{.underline}% Total number students who qualify: [N/A]{.underline} > If this method does not produce an accurate estimate of the percentage > of students from low‑income families, or the school does not > participate in the federally supported lunch program, specify a more > accurate estimate, tell why the school chose it, and explain how it > arrived at this estimate. 10\. Students receiving special education services: [5]{.underline} % [24]{.underline} Total Number of Students Served > Indicate below the number of students with disabilities according to > conditions designated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education > Act. Do not add additional categories. \_\_\_\_Autism \_\_\_\_Orthopedic Impairment \_\_\_\_Deafness \_\_\_\_Other Health Impaired \_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [12]{.underline} Specific Learning Disability \_\_\_\_Emotional Disturbance [12]{.underline} Speech or Language Impairment \_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury > \_\_\_\_Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Visual Impairment Including > Blindness > > \_\_\_\_Multiple Disabilities 11. Indicate number of full‑time and part‑time staff members in each of the categories below: Number of Staff [Full-time]{.underline} [Part-Time]{.underline} Administrator(s) [2]{.underline} [0]{.underline} Classroom teachers [19]{.underline} [1]{.underline} Special resource teachers/specialists [6]{.underline} [5]{.underline} Paraprofessionals [8]{.underline} [0]{.underline} > Support staff [7]{.underline} [9]{.underline} > > Total number [42]{.underline} [15]{.underline} 12. Average school student-classroom teacher ratio, that is, the number of students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers, e.g., 22:1 [26:1]{.underline} 13\. Show the attendance patterns of teachers and students as a percentage. The student dropout rate is defined by the state. The student drop-off rate is the difference between the number of entering students and the number of exiting students from the same cohort. (From the same cohort, subtract the number of exiting students from the number of entering students; divide that number by the number of entering students; multiply by 100 to get the percentage drop-off rate.) Briefly explain in 100 words or fewer any major discrepancy between the dropout rate and the drop-off rate. Only middle and high schools need to supply dropout rates, and only high schools need to supply drop-off rates. Also explain a high teacher turnover rate. ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 2002-2003 2001-2002 Daily student attendance 96% 97% 97% 97% 97% Daily teacher attendance 97% 96% 97% 96% 97% Teacher turnover rate 7% 16% 21% 10% 24% Student dropout rate 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (middle/high) Student drop-off rate N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (high school) ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- PART III ‑ SUMMARY St. Bridget School, located in Richmond, Virginia, opened its doors 54 years ago to educate the parish children in a faith-filled, loving, safe, and stimulating environment. For 37 years, St. Bridget's was staffed by the Religious of the Sacred Heart of Mary (RSHM) from Tarrytown, New York. Gifted with a firm foundation, the school has continued to operate under a dedicated and highly qualified faculty and staff of lay women and men. Proclaiming Catholic identity as the heart of its mission, St. Bridget School provides an excellent education that will nurture and prepare students to live and work in the challenging world of the twenty-first century. Since its existence, St. Bridget's three-story structure has undergone expansion projects and remodeling to include a state-of-the-art library, official size gym, computer lab, art room, and resource center. Each day the faculty and administration greet 492 eager and enthusiastic students whose voices join the echoes of the thousands who went before them. They enter into a warm and inviting setting where they will be engaged in stimulating and creative activities designed to meet individual learning styles. St. Bridget's is a powerhouse of prayer striving to create a Christ-centered environment that fosters an atmosphere of trust and respect. With the support of the pastor, the parish community, and the parents, St. Bridget's devoted teachers prepare students to function as responsible stewards of God's gifts. The full-time staff of professionals includes classroom teachers, a complement of resource teachers, instructional aides in every K-3 classroom, a development/admissions director, registered nurses, cafeteria staff, After School Program staff, Title I teacher, and guidance counselor. As a VCEA accredited school and SACS-CASI candidate, St. Bridget's provides a holistic approach to education. This approach takes into consideration the developmental process of each individual: spiritual, physical, academic, emotional, and social. The faculty also strives daily to develop moral decision-making and critical thinking skills that empower the students to become life-long learners. Rigorous, creative programs at all levels and integration among the disciplines enable St. Bridget's to enjoy a wonderful reputation in the community. The Diocese of Richmond challenged each school to create a middle school following the "School Within a School" model. Five years ago, St. Bridget's fully integrated the sixth grade into the existing middle school program. Today twenty-six different teachers and staff are involved in some capacity in that program. Students follow the diocesan core curriculum in a departmentalized schedule with high school credit opportunities in Algebra I, French I, and Spanish I. They also have an opportunity to choose from a wide variety of over 25 different elective/resource courses. The Exploratory Program allows students time to experience high-interest mini-courses four times a year. Teacher Advisory and Student Council round out the program by offering leadership opportunities to middle school students. As a firm believer of constant communication among stakeholders, St. Bridget\'s has adopted various ways to keep connected to the school families: Principal's Coffees, Parents' Advisory Committee (PAC), School Board, and Parent Teacher Organization (PTO). One strong focus of the PTO is to raise funds to keep the technology program on the cutting edge by updating hardware and software each year. St. Bridget's would not be where it is today without the dedicated faculty and staff who carry on the mission of the church that began over 50 years ago by the RSHM sisters. Today, all full-time faculty, thirteen of whom hold Masters Degrees, have Virginia certification. In addition, 52% of our full-time faculty has 15+ years of teaching experience. St. Bridget School, with its long history, will continue its mission by focusing on nurturing the learning potential in each student and on developing a spirit of life-long learning. While academics are of the utmost importance at St. Bridget School, teachers, in partnership with parents, believe that the teachings of the Catholic faith and its traditions are essential in realizing the vision of creating compassionate, honest, successful citizens in our global society. PART IV -- INDICATORS OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS Assessment Results St. Bridget School administers the TerraNova, Second Edition, a standardized assessment, to grades one, two, three, four, five, and seven every spring. Originally, testing took place in grades one, three, five, and seven, but recently grades two and then four were added to help monitor growth patterns and to address areas of concern. The purpose of the test is to identify knowledge and skills that the students have mastered and those they still need to attain. This assessment provides norm-referenced information, criterion-referenced scores, and performance levels. For more information on TerraNova, please visit [www.ctb.com](http://www.ctb.com/). St. Bridget's is one of 32 schools in the Diocese of Richmond. In the past three years, scores in both reading and math have been above the diocesan percentiles for grades three, five and seven. During this same time frame, the norm-referenced scores have consistently placed St. Bridget's in the top ten percent of the schools in the nation. Since using TerraNova, Second Edition in 2003, outstanding achievement is clear when compared with the National Percentile of the Mean Normal Curve Equivalent. All of the total scores for grades tested in reading and mathematics were above the 75^th^ percentile. Performance Level scores give a description of what a student can do in terms of content and skills; there are five distinct performance levels: advanced, proficient, nearing proficiency, progressing, and step 1. Student progress is monitored from within each grade level and across the following grade spans: (1, 2), (3, 4, 5), and (6, 7, 8). This gives all students an opportunity to demonstrate progress toward the goal of proficiency by the time the grade span is complete. At the end of the grade span in 2006, 87% of second graders and 83% of fifth graders achieved the advanced or proficient level in reading. In math, 75% of second graders and 77% of fifth graders reached advanced or proficient levels. Since the grade span ends with eighth grade, the seventh grade advanced and proficient levels are not reported here. In addition to TerraNova, St. Bridget's uses the Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening (PALS) to assess literacy fundamentals for all kindergarten and first grade students in the fall and spring. Second and third graders are tested based on teacher recommendations. This test guides the planning of literacy instruction within the classroom while utilizing the Title I and Resource teachers. The PALS results help with the early identification of reading problems and with building a strong readiness foundation for reading success. All seventh graders are assessed in the spring to determine readiness for Algebra I, a challenging course offered to eighth grade students for high school credit. The Iowa Algebra Aptitude Test (IAAT) is the standardized assessment tool used, along with a Pre-Algebra screening test designed to measure students' mastery of those skills. The accurate placement of students is the key to success. All students in Algebra I must pass a diocesan final exam in order to receive the Carnegie unit of high school credit. St. Bridget's has had a 100% pass rate on this exam since its inception in 2000, due largely in part to the effectiveness of the screening process. St. Bridget School is proud of the fact that TerraNova scores have historically been in the above average range. In addition, the students' obtained scores consistently surpass the anticipated scores predicted by the InView portion of TerraNova. However, the staff is aware that the clearer strengths have been in the reading/language areas rather than the area of mathematics. Therefore, the following steps have been taken as part of the strategic plan to improve student learning in mathematics: new textbook adoption emphasizing higher-level critical thinking skills and problem solving, staff development, increased use of technology, and parent involvement with small group activities. Using Assessment Results The administration, the testing coordinator, and the classroom teachers review the TerraNova results each year in May, and they identify the overall profile of strengths and weaknesses for each grade level. At the beginning of the following school year, the results are scrutinized more closely in order to establish a specific learning plan for the school, for each grade level, and for each student. First, the Objectives Performance Index (OPI), a criterion-referenced score, is examined for each sub-skill in reading, language, math, science, and social studies. Teachers in each grade level analyze the test scores of the students in their current class, looking for areas where students did not achieve high mastery. They also conference with the teachers from the previous year. This allows for an examination of the skills in need of attention and leads to an understanding of individual learning styles. Through this process, methods and strategies are evaluated, and a plan to address any weaknesses is formulated. This plan may include the use of supplemental materials, alternative teaching methods/assessments, and teacher in-service or workshops. In 2006, St. Bridget's strengths were in reading, language, science, and social studies. Four out of the seven sub-skills in math were also considered strengths; weaknesses were in patterns/functions/algebra, number and number relations, and measurement. The OPI, along with the Performance Levels, helps identify students who may need extra support, remediation, or enrichment. The students in the progressing or step1 levels or below PALS benchmark scores are referred to the Title I or resource teacher to strengthen foundations. Enrichment opportunities abound, not only in the core subject areas, but also within the resource classes, for those in the advanced or proficient levels. Students in grades 5-8 who score in the 97^th^ percentile or above on either reading or math receive an invitation to participate in the Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth program. There are also summer enrichment opportunities offered to these students through the College of William and Mary and the University of Virginia. After the learning plans are developed using the process described above, they are reviewed frequently at unit meetings, and a copy is sent to the Office of Catholic Schools. Communicating Assessment Results St. Bridget School uses several vehicles to communicate student performance. Students and parents receive a weekly communication envelope that contains information relevant to the school community. Assessment folders in grades K-5 are sent home weekly. Progress reports for all students are sent home every four weeks, and computerized report cards are distributed at the end of each nine weeks. Individual student achievement is recognized each quarter through the Honor Roll (A-B) and Principal's List (all A's). School conferences are held twice a year. Teachers communicate with individual parents daily as needed via homework assignment pads, classroom teacher web pages linked to the school website ([www.saintbridget.org](http://www.saintbridget.org/)), e-mails, telephone calls, and additional conferences if necessary. St. Bridget's is committed to a collaborative team approach while working with students' learning styles. This team includes classroom teachers, teacher aides, parents, resource teachers, guidance counselor, tutors, and local educational specialists and psychologists. The school community is kept current through several publications: Bridget's Bulletin, the weekly school newsletter; The Bridge, parish newsletter; The Catholic Virginian, diocesan newspaper; and school and parish websites. It is through these various forms of communication that St. Bridget's publishes achievements such as: Spelling Bee and Geography Bee winners, Reader's Digest Word Challenge and Science Fair winners, competition results from District Chorus, Band, Chess, Math 24, First Lego League Robotics participation, and other notable achievements. At eighth grade graduation, students receive recognition for many accomplishments, including scholarships awarded by local Catholic High Schools, Presidential Academic Excellence Awards, and National French Contest rankings placing many of our students in the top ten in the nation. Educating the parents concerning standardized testing is a priority. Results of the TerraNova scores are shared with them each year through the Home and Individual Profile Reports. Sharing Success St. Bridget School is proud of its successes and welcomes opportunities to share with other schools. Teachers eagerly exchange ideas with colleagues at diocesan meetings, and neighboring diocesan schools are invited to St. Bridget's for staff development workshops. Administration and staff share opportunities for professional growth through e-mails and quarterly principals' meetings. Schools are also kept current of student and school success via The Catholic Virginian, the diocesan newspaper; Wingspan, the annual development newsletter; Connections, the newsletter of the Parents' Council of Richmond; and the Richmond Times-Dispatch. In order to increase enrollment and recruit new families, students from local public elementary schools and parents are invited to an information meeting in the spring designed to explain the middle school "School Within a School" program. For the past five years, enrollment in the middle school has increased by 30% due to this yearly endeavor. It is evident that St. Bridget's reputation is growing in the community as a top-notch program for young adolescents. A yearly Open House is held every January during Catholic Schools Week, so that prospective parents with children in other schools can meet our staff and receive information about St. Bridget's. Some teachers and administrators have served on the Diocesan Accreditation Board, the Master Curriculum Council, and have been members of visiting teams for accreditation for the Virginia Catholic Education Association. Through these associations, teachers share ideas, strategies, and best-practice initiatives. As a result, in November 2006, the school submitted two entries for its best practices in the categories of Catholic Identity and Curriculum/Instruction in Today's Catholic Teacher magazine. Building greater communication with other schools remains a priority. Regular grade level or content level meetings with teachers from other schools would give additional opportunities to discuss curriculum and to exchange successful strategies. PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION Overview of the School's Curriculum The curriculum at St. Bridget School addresses the needs of the individual student, building fundamental skills and fostering higher-level thinking abilities. The guidelines set forth in the Diocesan Consensus Curriculum provide the framework in all subject areas. Lessons are engaging, diversified, and integrated. A primary consideration in both instruction and assessment is the recognition of varied learning styles and abilities. The religion program at St. Bridget School is designed to build a moral foundation to support the individual throughout life. The tenets and traditions of the Catholic Church are taught through age-appropriate lessons and active participation in outreach projects. Each grade level is responsible for the planning of a liturgical celebration or prayer service throughout the year. The focus of the social studies program is to develop the students' historical, ethical, cultural, geographic, economic, and socio-political literacy, using the framework of the national standards. The students learn to identify and appreciate national and global heritage, while recognizing civic values, rights, and responsibilities. Teachers incorporate life science, earth science, physical science, and exploratory science into the curriculum to ensure that students understand how science forms, impacts, and changes the world. Hands-on laboratory activities at all grade levels enable students to connect textbook concepts with actual experiences. Professionals from the community are invited into classrooms in order to enrich the curriculum. Foreign language instruction adheres to the highest of standards. Both French and Spanish are an integral part of the curriculum. One semester of each language is taught at each grade level K-6. Typically each year, over 50% of the seventh and eighth grade students choose French I or Spanish I for high school credit. This class meets five days a week for 50 minutes each day. A non-credit elective class in either language is also available to them. Students are introduced to music concepts through singing, playing instruments, movement, and listening. The development of each student's singing voice, as well as a sense of rhythm, pitch, and form, is stressed. Students are taught to read a music score and creatively express themselves through music. Upper elementary and middle school students elect to participate in various vocal performance groups, bands, or the handbell/chimes choir. The physical education and health program assesses the fitness and ability levels of each student on a regular basis and helps students explore health and wellness by studying topics relating to personal, social, mental, and physical health. The President's Physical Fitness Test is administered annually in grades 2-8. St. Bridget's art curriculum is based on the National Art Education standards and follows the diocesan curriculum. The conceptual framework for the visual arts is a comprehensive, discipline-based arts education that follows four discipline perspectives: art history, aesthetics, production, and art criticism. The framework serves as an innovative and fundamental approach to integrating the arts into the curriculum. It develops awareness, understanding, and appreciation of the visual arts for students. The objectives of the library program for all grades are derived from the National Literacy Standards established by the American Library Association. Students are taught to access information efficiently and effectively using the automated catalog and checkout system and the nine computers at the research stations. Students develop an appreciation of literature and strengthen research and study skills. In addition to teachers integrating technology throughout the curriculum, students in each grade level also receive computer instruction in a lab that is equipped with twenty-two workstations. Each classroom has Internet access so that stationary classroom computers, twenty-four wireless laptops in a mobile cart, and a portable SMART Board can be used on a daily basis. Total office automation includes attendance and other record keeping, computerized report cards, and a grade book program. Overview of the School's Reading Curriculum The integrated language arts program at St. Bridget's is designed to meet the needs of a population who comes with a rich experiential background. Students in grades K-5 develop a strong reading foundation through Scholastic Literacy Place. An emphasis is placed on reading strategies and critical thinking skills with concentration on phonological awareness, phonics, vocabulary development, and reading comprehension. The program provides instruction that addresses the various learning styles of the students. Teaching strategies include whole group instruction, flexible grouping, and a team approach with assistance from resource staff and teacher aides. In addition to creating strong, motivated readers, the environment, rich with language experiences, fosters a love of reading. Author studies and novel sets enrich and extend lessons, while peer tutors and guest readers serve as positive role models. The library at St. Bridget's, filled with a 13,000 volume collection, offers the students unlimited possibilities. In grades 6-8, the curriculum is literature-based with an emphasis on writing. Students explore a variety of genres; stimulating discussions and creative, challenging writing exercises are an essential component of the program. Teachers work to ensure that students gain meaningful insights from the literature and can make strong connections to life. Within the elective framework, middle school students may also enroll in the popular reading roundtable program, which offers ten different genre-specific options. Technology is integrated into the reading program through a variety of media. Students are challenged with research web quests, scavenger hunts, and online games for skill building. Elementary students learn word processing skills to enhance many forms of creative writing for publication. Middle school students use technology to procure information and to prepare their research papers and projects. The reading program was designed to offer a balanced approach. By choosing Scholastic's literature series, teachers were offered multiple forms of assessment to measure progress and identify students who may need intervention. When students leave St. Bridget's, they are articulate, well-rounded, and ready for the next step in the process of learning. Overview of the School's Mathematics Curriculum At St. Bridget's, mathematics instruction is a vital part of the holistic approach to education. The adoption of a new math series in 2004 has provided a more challenging approach to the implementation of the diocesan curriculum. The program fosters and recognizes the students' diverse learning styles. The math curriculum, integrated with science and technology, continually links new information to prior knowledge to ensure that learning becomes a lived reality. Although students in the primary grades receive whole group instruction, there are many opportunities for small groups to gather for remediation, enrichment, and the development of critical thinking and problem solving strategies using manipulatives. These small groups are led by classroom teachers, resource teachers, the Title I instructor, parents, and middle school students acting as peer tutors. The technology teachers integrate the publisher's software programs as part of class instruction. Parents are continually informed, via math newsletters, about the concepts, vocabulary, and strategies being taught. Also included are reinforcement activities that can be completed at home with the family. Middle school students are grouped for math according to ability based on the results of assessments given at the end of each year. The groups are fluid so that students may move from one level to another as warranted by their academic progress, as well as by the maturation process. The course of study for all seventh grade students is Pre-Algebra. For over twenty-five years, eighth graders at St. Bridget School have had an opportunity to study Algebra I for high school credit, or they can complete a course designed to provide a strong foundation for their study of Algebra in ninth grade. St. Bridget's is confident that use of the new textbook series and implementation of the strategic learning plan for mathematics will lead to significant improvement in student learning. Overview of the School's Instructional Methods St. Bridget's teachers utilize visual, auditory, and multi-sensory modalities to meet the individual needs of all students. The curriculum is imparted through whole group, small group, and individual instruction. Additional professionals, including a Title I teacher, an accessible resource teacher, and a tutor for students with dyslexia, assist those with special learning needs. The Diocesan Teachers Assisting Teachers Program (TAT) is an active component of managing the learning development of each child. Based on professional outside testing, accommodations such as untimed testing and a distraction-free setting are offered. Many enrichment opportunities are provided for students through flexible grouping, individualized programs, and the use of accelerated materials. The integration of technology as an instructional method is a primary component of the school's learning plan. Technology enhances both teacher and student-guided instruction through the use of presentation tools and offers an alternative form of assessment for students; the Internet provides extensive research and communication opportunities. Newly selected textbooks include software supplements to continue to enhance learning, providing students with another means to achieve academic success. St. Bridget's continues to explore new, creative methods to encourage the love of learning and to motivate students to reach their maximum potential. Overview of the School's Professional Development St Bridget's faculty members are encouraged to seek and attend professional development workshops throughout the year. Members of the faculty have attended workshops sponsored by Staff Development for Educators and the Bureau of Education and Research held at various hotels in the Richmond area. Those attending the workshops have participated in reading, language arts, math, science, class management, art, and music classes. Three faculty members had the opportunity to attend an all-day conference about neurodevelopmental construction given by Dr. Mel Levine at River Road Baptist Church. In addition to off-site workshops, the administration and PTO have invited guest speakers to St. Bridget's campus: Drs. Steven Butnik and Edward Hallowell, specialists in the field of ADD/ADHD, discussed strategies on working with attention, focus, and stress; Dr. Patricio Torres and his wife, noted psychologists in Richmond, explained the Enneagram and related it to personal faith development; a representative from Title I presented a workshop on the 6 + 1 Traits of Writing to language arts teachers; Kate Bechely presided over an informative meeting on spotting child abuse. Bi-yearly, the Catholic Diocese of Richmond sponsors a teacher conference where noted guest speakers facilitate break out sessions on a variety of topics: differentiated learning, educational environments, ethics and technology, gangs, and bullying. The diocese also invited members of the Secret Service and the Henrico Police Departments to talk to faculty members about threatening situations and preventing school attacks. Occasionally St. Bridget School will host classes for teacher re-certification. Recently, summer classes were held in science and math. In order to defray the cost of workshops and classes, St. Bridget's PTO maintains a fund dedicated to continuing education. As noted above, the administration and faculty adhere to the National Standards for Professional Development and nurture their own lifelong learning. PART VI - PRIVATE SCHOOL ADDENDUM The purpose of this addendum is to obtain additional information from private schools as noted below. Attach the completed addendum to the end of the application, before the assessment data tables. Delete if not used. 1. Private school association(s): [VCEA, NCEA, ASCD, SACS-CASI (pending)]{.underline} > (Identify the religious or independent associations, if any, to which > the school belongs. List the primary association first.) 2. Does the school have nonprofit, tax exempt (501(c)(3)) status? Yes [X]{.underline} No \_\_\_\_\_\_ 3. What are the 2006-2007 tuition rates, by grade? (Do not include room, board, or fees.) 2006-07 TUITION RATES PARISHIONER Family with one child \$[3,890]{.underline} Family with two children \$[7,380]{.underline} Family with three children \$[10,470]{.underline} Family with four children \$[13,160]{.underline} Family with five children \$[15,440]{.underline} NON-PARISHIONER Per student rate \$[6,490]{.underline} 4. What is the educational cost per student? \$[5,215.40]{.underline} (School budget divided by enrollment) 5. What is the average financial aid per student? \$[1,765]{.underline} 6. What percentage of the annual budget is devoted to [1]{.underline}% scholarship assistance and/or tuition reduction? 7. What percentage of the student body receives scholarship assistance, including tuition reduction? [5]{.underline}% PART VII -- ASSESSMENTS RESULTS St. Bridget's School Assessment Data- without subgroups TerraNova 2^nd^ Edition, 2001 CTB McGraw-Hill Scores are reported as percentiles. ---------------------------- -------------- -------------- ------------- 2005-2006 2004-2005 2003-2004 Testing Month April April March Grade 7 Reading 89 89 87 Mathematics 79 85 78 Number of students tested 51 38 47 Percent of students tested 100 97 96 Number of students excluded 0 1 2 Percent of students excluded 0 3 4 Grade 5 Reading 85 86 86 Mathematics 84 83 82 Number of students tested 57 48 59 Percent of students tested 96 79 100 Number of students excluded 2 10 0 Percent of students excluded 4 21 0 Grade 3 Reading 77 81 85 Mathematics 80 85 83 Number of students tested 51 50 60 Percent of students tested 86 92 98 Number of students excluded 7 4 1 Percent of students excluded 14 8 2 Grade 2 Reading 79 79 85 Mathematics 84 86 83 Number of students tested 52 49 51 Percent of students tested 88 86 100 Number of students excluded 6 7 0 Percent of students excluded 12 14 0 Grade 1 Reading 82 82 80 Mathematics 85 83 76 Number of students tested 53 47 54 Percent of students tested 96 85 100 Number of students excluded 1 7 0 Percent of students excluded 4 15 0 ---------------------------- -------------- -------------- ------------- 100% of all students in Grades 1, 2. 3. 4. 5, and 7 were tested. "Excluded" students were administered the TerraNova with appropriate accommodations dictated by Individualized Education Plans.	en
converted_docs	524120	![](media/image1.png){width="6.175in" height="0.5069444444444444in"} ## Instructions to Submit To facilitate submission of your/your organization\'s guidelines, we offer this guidance: 1. Download the [Guidelines Submission Kit](http://www.guideline.gov/submit/submit.aspx#kit) below. This Kit includes various documents to assist you in the submission process. See [Submission FAQs](http://www.guideline.gov/submit/submit.aspx#FAQs) for examples of guideline documentation submitted to NGC from participating guideline developers. 2. Include the following in your Guideline Submission: - The guideline document and any supporting guideline documentation. - The name, address, telephone and fax numbers, and e-mail address of an appropriate contact person. - A completed Copyright Agreement Form. 3. Prepare your submission using the following guides: - Review the [NGC Inclusion Criteria](http://www.guideline.gov/about/inclusion.aspx) (available in the Guideline Submission Kit). Guideline submissions must meet all of the criteria in NGC\'s Inclusion Criteria. - Refer to the Guideline Submission Checklist (available in the Guideline Submission Kit) for guidance on how to prepare your submission. This checklist will assist you in providing the necessary information and/or documentation that is required by NGC. - Complete the Copyright Agreement Form (available in the Guideline Submission Kit). NGC must receive copyright permission to abstract and post the guideline summaries before your organization\'s guidelines can be included on the NGC Web site (unless the guidelines are in the public domain). 4. Your Guideline Submission can be submitted in one of two ways: - Electronic submissions (preferred). Requests to submit electronically should be sent to Vivian Coates, NGC/NQMC Project Director, at <[email protected]>. - Two (2) paper copies of the guideline and its supporting documentation. Include a listing of the titles being submitted for consideration. Paper copy submissions should be sent to: > Vivian Coates\ > NGC/NQMC Project Director\ > ECRI Institute\ > 5200 Butler Pike\ > Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462 Questions regarding submissions can be directed to Ms. Coates at <[email protected]>. For Additional Information Additional information regarding NGC is available from Mary Nix, Project Officer, Center for Outcomes and Evidence, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), e-mail: <[email protected]>. Are You Also a Measure Developer? Visit our Sister Site, the [National Quality Measures Clearinghouse (NQMC)](http://www.qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov/about/invsubmitmeasures.aspx), and submit your evidence-based quality measures and measure sets. ## ##	en
converted_docs	312405	# NCPS TIPS -- May/June 2001 ### Contents: 1. VA/QuIC Patient Safety Summit > 2\. What is QuIC? > > 3\. Dental X-Ray Film Warning > > 4\. Facility Feedback > > 5\. Safety Spotlight > > 6\. Nitrogen or Nitrogen NF > > 7\. Learning Links ### ### 1. VA/QUIC PATIENT SAFETY SUMMIT ##### From the VA National Center for Patient Safety Under the auspices of QuIC (see related article), the VA National Center for Patient Safety (NCPS) is organizing and convening the Summit on Effective Practices to Improve Patient Safety. The symposium will present information on findings, methods, and systems that can be used to improve patient safety, which participants can put to rapid and widespread use in health care settings. This will be held September 5-7, 2001, at the Washington (DC) Hilton and Towers. Including VA and non-VA participants, the summit can accommodate up to 500 participants. We expect that about 200 participants will be from VA, with the rest coming from other QuIC member agencies, state and local governments, and the private sector. NCPS staff are in the process of organizing the details of the conference. Key speakers at the summit will include Dennis O'Leary, President of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, Donald Berwick, M.D., M.P.P, CEO and President of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, and Michael Cohen, Pharm D, President of the Institute for Safe Medication Practices. The topics and presentations planned (some for plenary sessions, some for breakout sessions) will include: • Patient Safety Obstacles and Solutions/Lessons Learned by the VA • Failure Modes Effects and Analysis (FMEA) as Applied to Patient Safety • Root Cause Analysis (RCA) Teams Presentation • NCPS RCA Tools and Safety Assessment Code • Report from AHRQ Evidence-Based Practice Patient Safety Study • New JCAHO Patient Safety Standards • VA/NASA Patient Safety Reporting System • Using Human Factors and Usability Testing to Improve Patient Safety • New NCPS RCA Software Demos • Patient Safety Alerts and Advisories • Effective Management of Medical Teams • Methods to Reduce Falls • Health Care Provider Performance and the Effects of Fatigue • Use of Simulations and Simulators to Improve Patient Safety • Methods for Increasing Medication Safety • Results of the VA Survey on Patient Safety Attitudes • Improving Quality: The Rest of the Iceberg The sessions will be organized so that those new to patient safety as well as those with experience in the field can both benefit from attending. We expect the conference to be especially valuable to staff newly hired or reassigned as patient safety managers. Registration for the VA/QuIC Summit on Effective Practices to Improve Patient Safety is available via the NCPS intranet website (vaww.ncps.med.va.gov) or go directly to vaww.rev.lrn.va.gov/conferences/safety/index.cfm. Please coordinate your registration in cooperation with your VISN as soon as possible to ensure that you get one of the slots assigned to VA. If you are unsure of who to contact in your VISN, a list of contacts for the symposium is available at the registration website. ### 2. WHAT IS QUIC? ##### From the VA National Center for Patient Safety The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is one of 11 members of the federal government's Quality Interagency Coordinating (QuIC) Task Force (see www.quic.gov). QuIC was established in 1998 with the goal to ensure that all Federal agencies that purchase, provide, study, or regulate health care services are working in a coordinated way toward the common goal of improving the quality of health care. QuIC seeks to provide information to help people make choices, to improve the care purchased and delivered by the government, and to develop the infrastructure needed to improve the health care system. QuIC was responsible for the 2000 report [Doing What Counts for Patient Safety: Federal Actions to Reduce Medical Errors and Their Impact]{.underline}, which presented the federal government's response to the Institute of Medicine's 1999 report [To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System]{.underline}, which raised the public's awareness of the need for major improvements in patient safety. ### 3. DENTAL X-RAY FILM WARNING ##### From the VA National Center for Patient Safety The FDA has issued a Public Health Notification warning of the potential for harmful lead exposure from dental film stored in tabletop containers lined with unpainted or coated lead. These containers are usually the size and shape of a shoebox, are made of wood, and are lined with lead that has apparently not been painted or coated. Film stored in these containers has been found to be coated with a whitish film that is about 80% lead. These highly dangerous lead levels are enough to potentially cause serious adverse health effects \-- including anemia and serious neurological damage \-- in patients and healthcare professionals. The FDA recommends the following: • Discard any dental film that has been placed in these containers. None of this film should be used. Wiping the film does not significantly reduce the lead levels. • Remove the containers and dispose of them properly. For more information on this contact your facility Industrial Hygienist. ### 4. FACILITY FEEDBACK ##### From the VA National Center for Patient Safety (Patient safety feedback from throughout the VHA. Please send any comments you'd like to share with us to [email protected].) #### Unannounced JCAHO Survey We recently had our first random, unannounced Joint Commission survey for Home Care/Durable Medical Equipment. From the patient safety perspective, we were scored on Improving Organization Performance Home Care Standards, specifically aggregation and analysis. This was where we had the opportunity to "brag" about our RCA process and walked the surveyor through the SAC score process of all incidents, including close calls and the RCA format. The surveyor was very impressed with our front line staff and senior management involvement. We also pulled our current storyboard circulating to staff regarding "Lessons Learned" from RCA's, listing all staff who participated, whether it was a close call or actual event (over half of our RCA's are close calls), what the RCA incident was, and then the improved outcome (all sanitized of patient identifiers, of course). We scored "substantially compliant" for standards PI.4.3 (undesirable patterns of trends in performance and sentinel events are always evaluated) and PI.4.4. The organization uses the information from the evaluation to develop an action plan that will improve performance or reduce the risk of future sentinel events. Needless to say, we impressed the surveyor with having all this info available on a random, unannounced survey. (I think we knocked his socks off). Thank you to you and your staff for helping us "shine" during this survey --- especially a random, unannounced survey --- and wanted you to share in our success. P.S. We're actually getting good at RCA's and we have several that have been completed in 20 hours or less that are excellent. Thanks again. \-- Sandy Brestowski Wilkes-Barre VAMC ### ### ### 5. SAFETY SPOTLIGHT ##### From the VA National Center for Patient Safety (On a regular basis we will feature teaching examples pulled from medical literature and similar RCAs that we feel are applicable and of interest to the entire VHA healthcare system. These cases are intended to be used for learning purposes only.) ### Failure to obtain consent for surgery #### Description A patient was scheduled to receive a paracentesis, and the resident discussed with the patient the procedure along with the incumbent risks. The veteran, who had experienced relief before with this procedure, was seeking this treatment and consented verbally. The resident had been working a long shift, and failed to receive the written consent. At the time of the procedure, the resident explained to the attending physician that verbal consent had been obtained, and the resident went and got a procedure tray from the open supply room. They performed the surgery without incident, and following the surgery the resident documented that verbal consent had been given. Upon discussion, the resident confirmed that she knew that you should get informed consent, but couldn't remember any orientation regarding the policy and described the atmosphere as relaxed regarding informed consent. #### Vulnerabilities The following vulnerabilities and system weaknesses were identified: A cultural norm (especially among the residents) of a lax approach to informed consent Non-enforcement of existing policies No training or discussion of the informed consent process and its value were built into the orientation A lack of incentives or dis-incentives to change the current behavior Lack of barriers in the environment as the procedure kits/trays can be retrieved from an unlocked supply room regardless of patient consent status, and no individual to verify that the consents have been received Fatigue on the part of staff The process often breaks down during off tour times Insufficient alerts to remind of policy #### Actions To Consider The following actions were recommended: Brightly colored sticker placed on each tray stating "STOP---an informed consent must be completed for this procedure" Included informed consent on procedure tray Supply room locked so that supply/procedure trays cannot be taken Procedure tray will not be issued until signed consent obtained Eye-catching promotional literature in team conference room about informed consent Additional resident and staff educational sessions ### ### 6. NITROGEN OR NITROGEN NF? ##### From the VA National Center for Patient Safety Do you use nitrogen to power operating room surgical equipment or dental office tools? If you answered "yes" to this question, is the nitrogen medical gas grade or industrial, non-medical grade? Does it make a difference? YES!! The Compressed Gas Association (CGA) identified two patient related incidents involving gaseous nitrogen that was used to power tools. These incidents involved the presence of a substance in non-medical grade Nitrogen that gave a strong odor. In one case a patient in a dentist's office required hospitalization. In both cases the odorizing substance was found to be toxic in nature. FDA does not specifically require that nitrogen used to power surgical or dental equipment be listed as either a Medical Device or be Nitrogen NF (medical grade). However, based on these two events CGA recommends that only Nitrogen NF be used. Medical grade Nitrogen NF production procedures require testing for odor prior to distribution, and industrial non-medical grade nitrogen does not. It is recommended that you review the type of Nitrogen gas you use to power this equipment in your hospital and switch to Nitrogen NF if it is not currently being used. If you would like more information on this issue please refer to CGA Safety Alert SA-6-1998. ### 7. LEARNING LINKS ##### From the VA National Center for Patient Safety We have recently come across interesting articles and websites on patient safety issues that we want to pass on to you. [The British Medical Journal]{.underline} The British Medical Journal recently published an article titled "Adverse Events in British Hospitals: Preliminary Retrospective Record Review" ([http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/322/7285/517]{.underline}). This article highlights preliminary findings from a pilot study conducted in the United Kingdom that examined the feasibility of applying U.S. and Australian adverse event reporting methods in the U.K. [FDA Bulletin]{.underline} The Food and Drug Administration publishes a quarterly bulletin called "User Facility Reporting" ([http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/fusenews.html]{.underline}). The purpose of this publication is to assist hospitals and other medical device user facilities in complying with their statutory reporting requirements under the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990 and the Medical Device Amendments of 1992.	en
all-txt-docs	344748	"Forest glade polka /","sm2/sm1853/250000","250630","001.gif","1","1","","001.tif" "Forest glade polka /","sm2/sm1853/250000","250630","002.gif","2","2","","002.tif" "Forest glade polka /","sm2/sm1853/250000","250630","003.gif","3","3","","003.tif" "Forest glade polka /","sm2/sm1853/250000","250630","004.gif","4","4","","004.tif" "Forest glade polka /","sm2/sm1853/250000","250630","005.gif","5","5","","005.tif" "Forest glade polka /","sm2/sm1853/250000","250630","006.gif","6","6","","006.tif" "Forest glade polka /","sm2/sm1853/250000","250630","007.gif","7","7","","007.tif" "Forest glade polka /","sm2/sm1853/250000","250630","008.gif","8","8","","008.tif" "Forest glade polka /","sm2/sm1853/250000","250630","009.gif","9","9","","009.tif" "Forest glade polka /","sm2/sm1853/250000","250630","010.gif","10","10","","010.tif"	en
markdown	252906	# Presentation: 252906 ## Mission Support Inspection - Corporate Learning Course ## Inspection Main Points The Inspector General Program Safety Issues Administration How these actions support CAP’s three main missions Main Points The Inspector General Program Safety Issues Administration How these actions support CAP’s three main missions Mission Support - Corporate Learning Course ## Inspection The Inspector General Program Unit inspection program Self-assessment program Grievance/complaints program Outstanding/problem areas within the wing The Inspector General Program Unit inspection program Self-assessment program Grievance/complaints program Outstanding/problem areas within the wing Mission Support - Corporate Learning Course ## Inspection Safety Issues IG involvement with the No-notice inspection program IG importance with regard to safety and quality assurance Safety Issues IG involvement with the No-notice inspection program IG importance with regard to safety and quality assurance Mission Support - Corporate Learning Course ## Inspection Administration Accessing the IG system for assistance and advice Training How these actions support CAP’s three main missions Aerospace education Emergency Services Cadet Program Administration Accessing the IG system for assistance and advice Training How these actions support CAP’s three main missions Aerospace education Emergency Services Cadet Program Mission Support - Corporate Learning Course ## Inspection The Inspector General Program Safety Issues Administration How these actions support CAP’s three main missions The Inspector General Program Safety Issues Administration How these actions support CAP’s three main missions Mission Support - Corporate Learning Course ## Mission Support Questions? - Corporate Learning Course ## CAPSTONE EXERCISE *CAPSTONE EXERCISE* Corporate Learning Course - Corporate Learning Course	en
all-txt-docs	197911	Dataset: EMAP Lakes Fish Tissue Contaminants (organics) File Name: ftorg Date Created: 12/20/96 # Variables: 62 # Header Records: 72 # Data Records: 178 Missing Value Symbol: . Variables: ALDRIN Wet wt. concentration Aldrin (ug/g) ALDRINT Aldrin flag A_BHC Wet wt. concentration Alpha-BHC (ug/g) A_BHCT Alpha-BHC flag A_CHL Wet wt. concentration Alpha Chlordane (ug/g) A_CHLT Alpha Chlordane flag B_BHC Wet wt. concentration Beta-BHC (ug/g) B_BHCT Beta-BHC flag C_NCHL Wet wt. concentration Cis-nonachlor (ug/g) C_NCHLT Cis-nonachlor flag DATE_COL Start date of sample DIELDRIN Wet wt. concentration Dieldrin (ug/g) DIELDT Dieldrin flag D_BHC Wet wt. concentration Delta-BHC (ug/g) D_BHCT Delta-BHC flag ENDRIN Wet wt. concentration Endrin (ug/g) ENDRINT Endrin flag E_SUL1 Wet wt. concentration Endosulfan I (ug/g) E_SUL1T Endosulfan I flag E_SUL2 Wet wt. concentration Endosulfan II (ug/g) E_SUL2T Endosulfan II flag G_BHC Wet wt. conc. Gamma-BHC (Lindane) (ug/g) G_BHCT Gamma-BHC flag G_CHL Wet wt. concentration Gamma chlordane (ug/g) G_CHLT Gamma chlordane flag HCB Wet wt. concentration Hexachlorobenzine (ug/g) HCBT Hexachlorobenzine flag HCHL Wet wt. concentration Heptachlor (ug/g) HCHLEP Wet wt. conc. Heptachlor Epoxide (ug/g) HCHLEPT Heptachlor Epoxide HCHLT Heptachlor flag LAKENAME Lake Name LAKE_ID Lake Identification Code LAT_DD Lake Latitude (decimal degrees) LIPID % lipids of composite sample LON_DD Lake Longitude (decimal degrees) MIREX Wet wt. concentration Mirex (ug/g) MIREXT Mirex flag MOISTURE % moisture of composite sample OXYCHL Wet wt. concentration Oxychlordane (ug/g) OXYCHLT Oxychlordane flag O_DDD Wet wt. concentration O,P DDD (ug/g) O_DDDT O,P DDD flag O_DDE Wet wt. concentration O,P DDE (ug/g) O_DDET O,P DDE flag O_DDT Wet wt. concentration O,P DDT (ug/g) O_DDTT O,P DDT flag PCBTOT Total PCBs PCBTOTT Total PCBs flag P_DDD Wet wt. concentration P,P DDD (ug/g) P_DDDT P,P DDD flag P_DDE Wet wt. concentration P,P DDE (ug/g) P_DDET P,P DDE flag P_DDT Wet wt. concentration P,P DDT (ug/g) P_DDTT P,P DDT flag SAMPLED Site sampling status SAMP_ID Sample identification code (barcode) SPECIES Genus and species of sample TNONCHL Wet wt. concentration Trans-nonachlor (ug/g) TNONCHLT Trans-nonachlor flag VISIT_NO Visit Number YEAR Sample Year "ALDRIN","ALDRINT","A_BHC","A_BHCT","A_CHL","A_CHLT","B_BHC","B_BHCT","C_NCHL","C_NCHLT","DATE_COL","DIELDRIN","DIELDT","D_BHC","D_BHCT","ENDRIN","ENDRINT","E_SUL1","E_SUL1T","E_SUL2","E_SUL2T","G_BHC","G_BHCT","G_CHL","G_CHLT","HCB","HCBT","HCHL","HCHLEP","HCHLEPT","HCHLT","LAKENAME","LAKE_ID","LAT_DD","LIPID","LON_DD","MIREX","MIREXT","MOISTURE","OXYCHL","OXYCHLT","O_DDD","O_DDDT","O_DDE","O_DDET","O_DDT","O_DDTT","PCBTOT","PCBTOTT","P_DDD","P_DDDT","P_DDE","P_DDET","P_DDT","P_DDTT","SAMPLED","SAMP_ID","SPECIES","TNONCHL","TNONCHLT","VISIT_NO","YEAR" 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00151," ",0.0005,"U",0.002074," ",08/16/93,0.000845," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000721," ",0.000692," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","OXOBOXO LAKE","CT500L",41.4878,.,-72.2015,0.0005,"U",78.13,0.000919," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0633," ",0.004307," ",0.018894," ",0.003817," ","Yes",301600,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.00411," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000648," ",0.0005,"U",0.001291," ",08/11/93,0.001086," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","WHEELER POND","CT501L",41.4637,.,-72.1489,0.0005,"U",75.9,0.000896," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.067," ",0.001545," ",0.016536," ",0.000883," ","Yes",301661,"Pomoxis nigromaculatus",0.003157," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00076," ",0.0005,"U",0.000658," ",08/18/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.010566," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","WHEELER POND","CT501L",41.4637,.,-72.1489,0.0005,"U",82.05,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0208," ",0.000566," ",0.003341," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301599,"Esox niger",0.00142," ",2,1993 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000358," ",0.0002,"U",0.000851," ",07/18/94,0.000334," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","WHEELER POND","CT501L",41.4637,1.47,-72.1489,0.0002,"U",76.95,0.000276," ",0.000336," ",0.0002,"U",0.000198," ",0.067697," ",0.001204," ",0.012912," ",0.000819," ","Yes",311819,"Pomoxis nigromaculatus",0.002471," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000595," ",07/31/94,0.000356," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000311," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","WHEELER POND","CT501L",41.4637,2.47,-72.1489,0.0002,"U",73.15,0.000251," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0362," ",0.000973," ",0.008172," ",0.000395," ","Yes",311791,"Lepomis macrochirus",0.001516," ",2,1994 0.00085," ",0.0005,"U",0.040564," ",0.0005,"U",0.016629," ",08/15/93,0.016258," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000614," ",0.013494," ",0.008729," ",0.0005,0.001073," ","U","COMMUNITY LAKE","CT502L",41.4645,.,-72.829,0.0005,"U",75.35,0.006566," ",0.002567," ",0.0005,"U",0.0027," ",2.2985," ",0.032034," ",0.09493," ",0.003012," ","Yes",301662,"Morone americana",0.037256," ",1,1993 0.00337," ",0.00106," ",0.004921," ",0.00032," ",0.003976," ",08/18/93,0.002565," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001264," ",0.001111," ",0.00226," ",0.000609," ",0.0002,0.003894," ","U","LOWER KOHANZA LAKE","CT504L",41.4158,.,-73.4789,0.0002,"U",76.24,0.009748," ",0.0002,"U",0.001774," ",0.001993," ",0.096411," ",0.003102," ",0.022372," ",0.001723," ","Yes",301663,"Lepomis macrochirus",0.014085," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.000177," ",0.000339," ",0.0002,"U",0.000587," ",08/03/94,0.000269," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000201," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","HOLBROOK POND","CT750L",41.677,1.89,-72.3759,0.0002,"U",77.5,0.0002,"U",0.000244," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.023741," ",0.001838," ",0.014708," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311792,"Micropterus salmoides",0.001314," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000331," ",0.001359," ",0.0002,"U",0.001968," ",08/14/94,0.001361," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000784," ",0.0002,"U",0.000672," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.000199," ","U","HANCOCK BROOK LAKE","CT751L",41.6264,3.38,-73.0334,0.0002,"U",74.14,0.000646," ",0.000462," ",0.000195," ",0.000271," ",0.073708," ",0.003195," ",0.032959," ",0.002085," ","Yes",311845,"Pomoxis nigromaculatus",0.00551," ",1,1994 0.000277," ",0.000207," ",0.01041," ",0.0002,"U",0.007161," ",08/07/94,0.001094," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.003584," ",0.015292," ",0.0002,0.000289," ","U","FALL MOUNTAIN LAKE","CT752L",41.6475,3.2,-72.9882,0.0002,"U",75.1,0.001804," ",0.002328," ",0.000256," ",0.000595," ",0.108783," ",0.01994," ",0.07013," ",0.000828," ","Yes",311803,"Morone americana",0.018002," ",1,1994 0.000469," ",0.0002,"U",0.003782," ",0.0002,"U",0.003248," ",07/10/94,0.000807," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.001764," ",0.011889," ",0.0002,0.000257," ","U","LAKE PLYMOUTH","CT753L",41.652,2.05,-73.0476,0.0002,"U",79.14,0.001088," ",0.000915," ",0.0002,"U",0.000453," ",0.160684," ",0.004971," ",0.06013," ",0.001034," ","Yes",311817,"Pomoxis nigromaculatus",0.007631," ",1,1994 0.000428," ",0.000398," ",0.002719," ",0.0002,"U",0.002361," ",07/06/94,0.002123," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000325," ",0.001251," ",0.000393," ",0.0002,0.000434," ","U","HEMLOCK RESERVOIR","CT754L",41.2187,4.71,-73.2919,0.0002,"U",73.47,0.001114," ",0.001167," ",0.001051," ",0.000612," ",0.110517," ",0.007754," ",0.1291," ",0.002983," ","Yes",311816,"Perca flavescens",0.006573," ",1,1994 0.000271," ",0.000201," ",0.001989," ",0.0002,"U",0.003096," ",07/13/94,0.002444," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000847," ",0.000449," ",0.0002,0.000468," ","U","ASPETUCK RESERVOIR","CT755L",41.2411,2.04,-73.319,0.000229," ",77.24,0.001761," ",0.003893," ",0.000587," ",0.000988," ",0.125453," ",0.028971," ",0.269888," ",0.008889," ","Yes",311818,"Micropterus salmoides",0.010854," ",1,1994 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00114," ",0.0005,"U",0.00555," ",07/25/93,0.00071," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00174," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","QUEEN LAKE","MA252L",42.53417,.,-72.11528,0.0005,"U",72.45,0.0016," ",0.0005," ",0.0005,"U",0.00084," ",0.28459," ",0.01079," ",0.10302," ",0.0023," ","Yes",301558,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.01267," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00143," ",0.0005,"U",0.006728," ",08/19/93,0.000904," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000754," ",0.002252," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","QUEEN LAKE","MA252L",42.53417,.,-72.11528,0.0005,"U",69.4,0.002046," ",0.000636," ",0.0005,"U",0.000849," ",0.2891," ",0.013626," ",0.122074," ",0.002897," ","Yes",301534,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.015583," ",2,1993 0.0005,"U",0.00065," ",0.008954," ",0.0005,"U",0.01138," ",08/08/93,0.001432," ",0.0005,"U",0.001469," ",0.0005,"U",0.019913," ",0.0005,"U",0.002673," ",0.002376," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","GLEN ECHO POND","MA254L",42.15194,.,-71.08889,0.000487," ",81.85,0.004219," ",0.001194," ",0.00088," ",0.001319," ",0.3373," ",0.086618," ",0.294449," ",0.005744," ","Yes",301584,"Perca flavescens",0.022369," ",1,1993 0.00174," ",0.00065," ",0.003564," ",0.0002,"U",0.006324," ",08/15/93,0.002225," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001616," ",0.000423," ",0.001718," ",0.001144," ",0.0002,0.000441," ","U","GLEN ECHO POND","MA254L",42.15194,.,-71.08889,0.000272," ",75.62,0.003519," ",0.000854," ",0.000485," ",0.0002,"U",0.173462," ",0.02685," ",0.06665," ",0.002541," ","Yes",301694,"Esox niger",0.014684," ",2,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.002201," ",0.0005,"U",0.002329," ",07/31/93,0.001112," ",0.0005,"U",0.000695," ",0.0005,"U",0.017851," ",0.0005,"U",0.001107," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","WILLIAMS LAKE","MA500L",42.3388,.,-71.5684,0.0005,"U",73.27,0.000872," ",0.000761," ",0.0005,"U",0.001517," ",0.3011," ",0.023568," ",0.080108," ",0.00408," ","Yes",301562,"Pomoxis nigromaculatus",0.004336," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/27/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","MUDDY BROOK POND","MA501L",42.3433,.,-72.2317,0.0005,"U",71.12,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0118," ",0.001325," ",0.007324," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301560,"Esox niger",0.000653," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000987," ",0.0005,"U",0.001363," ",07/28/93,0.002301," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.000515," ","U","LITTLEVILLE LAKE","MA502L",42.2827,.,-72.8903,0.0005,"U",75.7,0.000684," ",0.000642," ",0.0005,"U",0.000754," ",0.2268," ",0.0057," ",0.015549," ",0.00131," ","Yes",301591,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.001897," ",1,1993 0.00088," ",0.00053," ",0.002715," ",0.0002,"U",0.004992," ",08/12/93,0.001577," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000935," ",0.000603," ",0.001483," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.000345," ","U","SCOKES POND","MA503L",41.9222,.,-70.543,0.0002,"U",75.05,0.001678," ",0.002616," ",0.001184," ",0.0002,"U",0.17781," ",0.046152," ",0.07882," ",0.005999," ","Yes",301693,"Micropterus salmoides",0.008059," ",1,1993 0.00264," ",0.00066," ",0.00531," ",0.0002,"U",0.007118," ",08/18/93,0.024889," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.003986," ",0.00098," ",0.004565," ",0.001368," ",0.000561,0.000753," "," ","BARROWSVILLE POND","MA504L",41.9519,.,-71.2065,0.0002,"U",72.49,0.003948," ",0.00227," ",0.002643," ",0.0002,"U",0.359405," ",0.074981," ",0.16709," ",0.007846," ","Yes",301689,"Perca flavescens",0.01478," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.00094," ",0.011346," ",0.0005,"U",0.006626," ",07/12/93,0.00632," ",0.0005,"U",0.003205," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.003477," ",0.001939," ",0.0005,0.001093," ","U","WACHUSETT RESERVOIR","MA506L",42.3742,.,-71.7332,0.0005,"U",78.11,0.003391," ",0.003054," ",0.00102," ",0.005287," ",0.3605," ",0.055335," ",0.203638," ",0.023511," ","Yes",301537,"Salvelinus namayacush",0.022117," ",1,1993 0.000421," ",0.000235," ",0.006171," ",0.0002,"U",0.009623," ",08/14/94,0.000948," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000215," ",0.003096," ",0.007425," ",0.0002,0.000267," ","U","LAKE WHALOM","MA750L",42.5734,2.91,-71.7412,0.000304," ",74.03,0.002307," ",0.003019," ",0.001024," ",0.0002,"U",0.312734," ",0.09924," ",0.18651," ",0.002338," ","Yes",311811,"Perca flavescens",0.03995," ",1,1994 0.00029," ",0.000391," ",0.004194," ",0.0002,"U",0.00425," ",07/20/94,0.000952," ",0.000281," ",0.000455," ",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000444," ",0.002406," ",0.00357," ",0.000322,0.000309," "," ","LAKE WYOLA","MA751L",42.5014,4.67,-72.431,0.0002,"U",72.27,0.000702," ",0.009416," ",0.005579," ",0.0002,"U",0.151674," ",0.17526," ",0.27352," ",0.00119," ","Yes",311820,"Perca flavescens",0.006427," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.00026," ",0.000351," ",0.0002,"U",0.000303," ",07/24/94,0.000843," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000198," ",0.000233," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.000228," ","U","WICKETT POND","MA752L",42.5511,2.2,-72.4316,0.0002,"U",73.85,0.0002,"U",0.000387," ",0.003575," ",0.0002,"U",0.026532," ",0.003465," ",0.015233," ",0.000317," ","Yes",311821,"Perca flavescens",0.001019," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000741," ",0.001807," ",0.0002,"U",0.003152," ",07/16/94,0.000743," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001068," ",0.000205," ",0.001517," ",0.00033," ",0.0002,0.000538," ","U","KINGSBURY POND","MA753L",42.1223,5.15,-71.3739,0.000295," ",75.23,0.001695," ",0.002129," ",0.000335," ",0.000736," ",0.193185," ",0.02532," ",0.06427," ",0.000613," ","Yes",311787,"Perca flavescens",0.008367," ",1,1994 0.000197," ",0.0002,"U",0.001917," ",0.0002,"U",0.0024," ",07/19/94,0.000473," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.001464," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","LITTLE CREEKS POND","MA754L",42.1342,1.7,-70.7106,0.0002,"U",76.14,0.001874," ",0.002056," ",0.00029," ",0.0002,"U",0.077541," ",0.0466," ",0.18212," ",0.001594," ","Yes",311788,"Micropterus salmoides",0.006086," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000318," ",0.000876," ",0.0002,"U",0.002313," ",07/23/94,0.000913," ",0.0002,"U",0.000567," ",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000189," ",0.000382," ",0.000193," ",0.0002,0.000279," ","U","COPICUT RESERVOIR","MA755L",41.7103,2.98,-71.0365,0.000285," ",73.21,0.001029," ",0.001362," ",0.000504," ",0.00123," ",0.313493," ",0.006826," ",0.09419," ",0.003086," ","Yes",311789,"Esox niger",0.003886," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.003125," ",0.0002,"U",0.006115," ",07/12/94,0.000582," ",0.0002,"U",0.000228," ",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.001529," ",0.000888," ",0.0002,0.0002," ","U","CEDAR POND","MA757L",42.1239,1.85,-72.0886,0.0002,"U",74.5,0.001538," ",0.001713," ",0.0002,"U",0.000993," ",0.238631," ",0.02072," ",0.12532," ",0.001469," ","Yes",311786,"Micropterus salmoides",0.012968," ",1,1994 0.000238," ",0.000478," ",0.001511," ",0.0002,"U",0.002103," ",07/09/94,0.000693," ",0.000601," ",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000495," ",0.000744," ",0.000833," ",0.0002,0.00037," ","U","WALKER POND","MA758L",42.138,4.7,-72.0612,0.0002,"U",70.81,0.00061," ",0.000854," ",0.000549," ",0.000642," ",0.147044," ",0.03323," ",0.15285," ",0.002135," ","Yes",311785,"Perca flavescens",0.003952," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000993," ",0.0002,"U",0.000933," ",08/17/94,0.000446," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001911," ",0.0002,"U",0.000711," ",0.00032," ",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","WINDSOR RESERVOIR","MA759L",42.4863,1.77,-73.1067,0.0002,"U",77.76,0.000311," ",0.000852," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.074491," ",0.002764," ",0.010619," ",0.000824," ","Yes",311776,"Salmo gairdneri",0.00191," ",1,1994 0.0005,"U",0.00073," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/25/93,0.000694," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000618," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","OTTER POND","ME253L",46.37389,.,-68.35806,0.0005,"U",77.83,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0107," ",0.002156," ",0.010905," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301595,"Margariscus margarita",0.000685," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.00066," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/11/93,0.000526," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.016591," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","OTTER POND","ME253L",46.37389,.,-68.35806,0.0005,"U",78.71,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0101," ",0.001738," ",0.007338," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301610,"Margariscus margarita",0.0005,"U",2,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/01/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","CRANBERRY POND","ME264L",45.07528,.,-67.30111,0.0005,"U",77.68,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0017," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301519,"Esox niger",0.0005,"U",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/08/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","CRANBERRY POND","ME264L",45.07528,.,-67.30111,0.0005,"U",78.88,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0029," ",0.0005,"U",0.000562," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301502,"Esox niger",0.0005,"U",2,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/04/93,0.001064," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","MUDDY POND","ME268L",44.28028,.,-69.41639,0.0005,"U",76.68,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.019," ",0.000928," ",0.005831," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301526,"Esox niger",0.0005,"U",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/08/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","MUDDY POND","ME268L",44.28028,.,-69.41639,0.0005,"U",70.1,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0124," ",0.000682," ",0.003644," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",2,"Esox niger",0.0005,"U",2,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/28/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BARTLETT POND","ME500L",46.5555,.,-68.8708,0.0005,"U",79.17,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0052," ",0.0005,"U",0.001245," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301594,"Mixed (WS and YP)",0.0005,"U",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/01/93,0.001389," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","HOT POND","ME502L",46.1628,.,-68.5661,0.0005,"U",80.16,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0098," ",0.001572," ",0.006106," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301596,"Esox niger",0.0005,"U",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.00226," ",0.00096," ",0.0002,"U",0.00054," ",07/17/93,0.003361," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001734," ",0.000575," ",0.002163," ",0.0002,0.001331," ","U","MIDNIGHT POND","ME503L",46.1377,.,-69.242,0.0002,"U",74.07,0.000635," ",0.000212," ",0.0002,"U",0.000267," ",0.018553," ",0.003651," ",0.010261," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",301507,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.001766," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.001241," ",07/20/93,0.001792," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000485," ",0.000552," ",0.000936," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","UPPER SHIN POND","ME504L",46.1197,.,-68.5421,0.0005,"U",77.24,0.000704," ",0.001071," ",0.0005,"U",0.001155," ",0.0586," ",0.027844," ",0.098528," ",0.005713," ","Yes",301618,"Salmo salar",0.002277," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.00236," ",0.001828," ",0.0002,"U",0.002325," ",07/11/93,0.003565," ",0.000919," ",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000631," ",0.000759," ",0.000968," ",0.002711," ",0.0002,0.001216," ","U","MILL BROOK POND","ME505L",45.3222,.,-69.2447,0.0002,"U",69.1,0.002196," ",0.000958," ",0.0002,"U",0.000888," ",0.102343," ",0.015252," ",0.05566," ",0.005731," ","Yes",301506,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.006094," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/11/93,0.001157," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","LUCKY POND","ME506L",45.7064,.,-69.6077,0.0005,"U",75,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0224," ",0.002428," ",0.006124," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301521,"Perca flavescens",0.000833," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/14/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","SPENCER POND","ME507L",45.747,.,-69.5686,0.0005,"U",81.93,0.000643," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0168," ",0.001457," ",0.005573," ",0.000542," ","Yes",301624,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.000729," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/07/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BOG POND","ME508L",44.8855,.,-69.5748,0.0005,"U",76.48,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0045," ",0.001059," ",0.002677," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301505,"Esox niger",0.0005,"U",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/08/93,0.000955," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BOG POND","ME508L",44.8855,.,-69.5748,0.0005,"U",81.91,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0065," ",0.001289," ",0.002674," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301597,"Esox niger",0.0005,"U",2,1993 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000353," ",07/23/94,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000602," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","BOG POND","ME508L",44.8855,1.54,-69.5748,0.0002,"U",76.41,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.024671," ",0.00351," ",0.004748," ",0.000196," ","Yes",311756,"Esox niger",0.000462," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000288," ",08/13/94,0.000221," ",0.0002,"U",0.000252," ",0.0004,"U",0.001273," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","BOG POND","ME508L",44.8855,2.19,-69.5748,0.0002,"U",79.11,0.0002,"U",0.000239," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.016517," ",0.00324," ",0.005777," ",0.000327," ","Yes",311775,"Esox niger",0.000474," ",2,1994 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000731," ",0.0005,"U",0.000776," ",07/04/93,0.001323," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","INGHAM POND","ME509L",44.4542,.,-69.9279,0.0005,"U",75.56,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0249," ",0.00426," ",0.028163," ",0.002313," ","Yes",301501,"Morone americana",0.001419," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/07/93,0.001046," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BARKER POND","ME510L",44.9072,.,-69.6345,0.0005,"U",77.07,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0093," ",0.0012," ",0.003617," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301528,"Esox niger",0.0005,"U",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.00081," ",0.000574," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/13/93,0.001381," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00153," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","STURTEVANT POND","ME511L",44.8668,.,-71.0207,0.0005,"U",66.87,0.0005,"U",0.000994," ",0.0005,"U",0.000772," ",0.062," ",0.035919," ",0.067939," ",0.002645," ","Yes",301522,"Perca flavescens",0.001095," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/28/93,0.000922," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","LOWER OXBROOK LAKE","ME512L",45.281,.,-67.845,0.0005,"U",76.37,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0131," ",0.000563," ",0.00954," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301518,"Morone americana",0.0005,"U",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/05/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","SECOND LAKE","ME513L",44.8582,.,-67.4943,0.0005,"U",80.94,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0153," ",0.000577," ",0.003062," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301509,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.0005,"U",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000884," ",0.0005,"U",0.001144," ",08/04/93,0.001582," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000662," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","UPPER MIDDLE BRANCH POND","ME514L",44.8959,.,-68.2282,0.0005,"U",71.53,0.000657," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000511," ",0.0313," ",0.002134," ",0.022797," ",0.001625," ","Yes",301520,"Salmo salar",0.002261," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000589," ",07/26/93,0.001392," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000477," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","LAKE CATHANCE","ME517L",44.9517,.,-67.4086,0.0005,"U",74.49,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0321," ",0.000487," ",0.0109," ",0.002006," ","Yes",301535,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.001389," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/25/93,0.001049," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","PLEASANT LAKE","ME518L",45.354,.,-67.923,0.0005,"U",70.91,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.012," ",0.000935," ",0.011795," ",0.001405," ","Yes",301517,"Morone americana",0.000821," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.00181," ",0.001215," ",0.0002,"U",0.002016," ",07/31/93,0.002123," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001444," ",0.001167," ",0.0002,"U",0.001781," ",0.0002,0.001417," ","U","SQUARE LAKE","ME519L",47.0824,.,-68.4069,0.00156," ",74.95,0.000804," ",0.002345," ",0.0002,"U",0.002661," ",0.039984," ",0.033746," ",0.16991," ",0.017623," ","Yes",301678,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.002083," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/21/93,0.001587," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","MATTANAWCOOK POND","ME520L",45.3532,.,-68.467,0.0005,"U",69.78,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0206," ",0.006149," ",0.01484," ",0.000765," ","Yes",301540,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.000697," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/09/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","MATTANAWCOOK POND","ME520L",45.3532,.,-68.467,0.0005,"U",81.78,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0128," ",0.002796," ",0.010139," ",0.00114," ","Yes",301646,"Esox niger",0.000542," ",2,1993 0.0002,"U",0.000326," ",0.000275," ",0.000208," ",0.000456," ",07/10/94,0.000243," ",0.0002,"U",0.000431," ",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000177," ",0.0002,"U",0.000282," ",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","MATTANAWCOOK POND","ME520L",45.3532,2.63,-68.467,0.0002,"U",73.69,0.0002,"U",0.000979," ",0.0002,"U",0.000245," ",0.02987," ",0.005804," ",0.017211," ",0.000979," ","Yes",311800,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.000936," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000296," ",0.000319," ",0.0002,"U",0.000475," ",08/07/94,0.000613," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000585," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000218," ",0.0002,0.000195," ","U","MATTANAWCOOK POND","ME520L",45.3532,3.94,-68.467,0.0002,"U",72.66,0.000265," ",0.000735," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.028076," ",0.00679," ",0.03393," ",0.002107," ","Yes",311774,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.001142," ",2,1994 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000462," ",07/20/93,0.001186," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","MUD POND","ME521L",46.1778,.,-69.3162,0.0005,"U",76.42,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0238," ",0.002693," ",0.006041," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301508,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.000761," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.001189," ",07/17/93,0.001262," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","DAMARISCOTTA LAKE","ME522L",44.131,.,-69.4966,0.0005,"U",77.81,0.000515," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0706," ",0.002572," ",0.030805," ",0.002185," ","Yes",301673,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.002301," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.00114," ",0.004229," ",0.0002,"U",0.003459," ",08/06/93,0.003806," ",0.0002,"U",0.001671," ",0.0004,"U",0.001872," ",0.0002,"U",0.000607," ",0.001413," ",0.0002,0.001302," ","U","MOXIE POND","ME524L",45.319,.,-69.8457,0.000377," ",73.63,0.001247," ",0.002546," ",0.000886," ",0.002119," ",0.105487," ",0.022038," ",0.02888," ",0.005165," ","Yes",301679,"Morone americana",0.007391," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.001951," ",0.0005,"U",0.00203," ",08/14/93,0.001782," ",0.0005,"U",0.000524," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000656," ",0.000609," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","MARANACOOK LAKE","ME525L",44.3491,.,-69.9557,0.0005,"U",77.28,0.00106," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.1229," ",0.004003," ",0.034508," ",0.00177," ","Yes",301637,"Perca flavescens",0.003517," ",1,1993 0.001," ",0.00158," ",0.001058," ",0.00053," ",0.0002,"U",08/10/93,0.003541," ",0.000759," ",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001092," ",0.000485," ",0.001603," ",0.0002,0.000882," ","U","UMBAGOG LAKE","ME526L",44.7741,.,-71.0368,0.0002,"U",73.1,0.000491," ",0.001893," ",0.003111," ",0.0002,"U",0.070391," ",0.025943," ",0.06437," ",0.004051," ","Yes",301675,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.002434," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.000358," ",0.000226," ",0.0002,"U",0.000445," ",07/24/94,0.000638," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000611," ",0.000225," ",0.0002,"U",0.000459," ",0.0002,0.000189," ","U","WHEELOCK LAKE","ME750L",47.1998,5.41,-68.7218,0.0002,"U",71.61,0.000227," ",0.000502," ",0.000238," ",0.000201," ",0.014078," ",0.002103," ",0.02268," ",0.000729," ","Yes",311771,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.000802," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000369," ",0.000267," ",0.0002,"U",0.000589," ",08/01/94,0.000766," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000709," ",0.000382," ",0.0002,"U",0.001384," ",0.0002,0.000432," ","U","DEPOT LAKE","ME751L",46.7704,4.1,-69.8329,0.0002,"U",73.14,0.000248," ",0.000664," ",0.000313," ",0.0002,"U",0.027444," ",0.002667," ",0.008118," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311758,"Perca flavescens",0.001087," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",07/27/94,0.000396," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000498," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000214," ",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","NO NAME","ME753L",46.805,3.31,-69.0681,0.0002,"U",75.49,0.0002,"U",0.000249," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.005154," ",0.001613," ",0.001831," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311772,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.000328," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000442," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000574," ",08/08/94,0.001224," ",0.0002,"U",0.000517," ",0.0004,"U",0.000739," ",0.000282," ",0.0002,"U",0.000458," ",0.0002,0.000404," ","U","HORSESHOE POND","ME754L",45.5089,3.7,-69.404,0.0002,"U",73.26,0.0005," ",0.001047," ",0.000434," ",0.0002,"U",0.037114," ",0.002139," ",0.013099," ",0.000712," ","Yes",311759,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.001208," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",08/10/94,0.000326," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000276," ",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","MOUNTAIN BROOK POND","ME755L",45.5225,4.3,-69.4004,0.0002,"U",74.49,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000776," ",0.0002,"U",0.011996," ",0.001035," ",0.002635," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311760,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.00020947," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000336," ",0.000308," ",0.0002,"U",0.00155," ",07/16/94,0.000897," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000899," ",0.000452," ",0.0002,"U",0.000349," ",0.0002,0.000216," ","U","EAST BRANCH LAKE","ME756L",45.5188,2.96,-68.734,0.000308," ",76.06,0.000455," ",0.000296," ",0.0002,"U",0.000324," ",0.069285," ",0.003856," ",0.039369," ",0.002906," ","Yes",311769,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.002941," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.00048," ",0.0002,"U",0.000977," ",07/10/94,0.000305," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000896," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","THURSTON POND","ME757L",44.6632,1.36,-68.7237,0.0002,"U",74.69,0.0002,"U",0.000556," ",0.0002,"U",0.000217," ",0.062026," ",0.004316," ",0.03402," ",0.001094," ","Yes",311768,"Morone americana",0.001664," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000188," ",0.0003," ",0.0002,"U",0.000371," ",07/20/94,0.000285," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","THURSTON POND","ME757L",44.6632,2.36,-68.7237,0.0002,"U",74.59,0.0002,"U",0.000378," ",0.00022," ",0.0002,"U",0.034571," ",0.001413," ",0.009339," ",0.00026," ","Yes",311805,"Morone americana",0.000974," ",2,1994 0.0002,"U",0.00024," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",07/27/94,0.000882," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000848," ",0.000303," ",0.0002,"U",0.000301," ",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","WITHEE POND","ME759L",45.0866,6.35,-69.7745,0.0002,"U",72.63,0.0002,"U",0.000998," ",0.00119," ",0.0002,"U",0.012588," ",0.000554," ",0.001798," ",0.000197," ","Yes",311757,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.000206," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000403," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.00052," ",07/19/94,0.001112," ",0.0002,"U",0.000203," ",0.0004,"U",0.000707," ",0.00026," ",0.0002,"U",0.000693," ",0.0002,0.000524," ","U","NESOWADNEHUNK LAKE","ME761L",46.0379,3.59,-69.0981,0.0002,"U",74.26,0.000541," ",0.000194," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.019196," ",0.001158," ",0.02577," ",0.000354," ","Yes",311770,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.000836," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000247," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000606," ",07/06/94,0.000859," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000219," ",0.0002,"U",0.000451," ",0.0002,0.000176," ","U","LONG POND","ME762L",45.6268,2.65,-70.0834,0.0002,"U",75.95,0.000439," ",0.000871," ",0.000264," ",0.0002,"U",0.029407," ",0.004539," ",0.03929," ",0.000706," ","Yes",311767,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.001068," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000368," ",0.0002,"U",0.000566," ",07/05/94,0.000213," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","UNITY POND","ME763L",44.6493,1.65,-69.3305,0.0002,"U",75.51,0.0002,"U",0.000612," ",0.0002,"U",0.000378," ",0.031815," ",0.002013," ",0.04097," ",0.001417," ","Yes",311799,"Morone americana",0.001006," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000246," ",0.000251," ",0.0002,"U",0.000371," ",07/16/94,0.000265," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000223," ",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","CRAWFORD LAKE","ME764L",45.0494,2.97,-67.5747,0.0002,"U",72.2,0.0002,"U",0.000199," ",0.0002,"U",0.000225," ",0.014752," ",0.001472," ",0.005817," ",0.000545," ","Yes",311804,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.000801," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.00275," ",0.005315," ",0.0002,"U",0.00456," ",07/04/93,0.008398," ",0.000316," ",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.004922," ",0.001007," ",0.002379," ",0.003065," ",0.0002,0.001931," ","U","BARBADOES POND","NH500L",43.1901,.,-70.933,0.0002,"U",71.95,0.002124," ",0.003527," ",0.004325," ",0.002196," ",0.330018," ",0.020311," ",0.04643," ",0.004685," ","Yes",301549,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.008535," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/06/93,0.000812," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BELLAMY RESERVOIR","NH501L",43.1926,.,-70.9538,0.0005,"U",75.02,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.04," ",0.002994," ",0.007678," ",0.001036," ","Yes",301551,"Perca falvescens",0.00082," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00052," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/14/93,0.00102," ",0.0005,"U",0.001572," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","TEWKSBURY POND","NH502L",43.6092,.,-71.9701,0.0005,"U",78.68,0.0005,"U",0.00083," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0301," ",0.020436," ",0.025337," ",0.000688," ","Yes",301554,"Catostomus commersoni",0.000696," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/15/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","TEWKSBURY POND","NH502L",43.6092,.,-71.9701,0.0005,"U",80.41,0.0005,"U",0.001016," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0228," ",0.023668," ",0.023727," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301503,"Catostomus commersoni",0.0005,"U",2,1993 0.0002,"U",0.000768," ",0.000873," ",0.000359," ",0.0016," ",07/05/94,0.002174," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.002319," ",0.000408," ",0.000631," ",0.0002,0.000536," ","U","TEWKSBURY POND","NH502L",43.6092,8.07,-71.9701,0.0002,"U",71.81,0.000382," ",0.002748," ",0.0002,"U",0.000239," ",0.121504," ",0.005519," ",0.04812," ",0.001123," ","Yes",311784,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.002473," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000274," ",0.0002,"U",0.000347," ",08/09/94,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.00043," ",0.0002,"U",0.000317," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","TEWKSBURY POND","NH502L",43.6092,2.14,-71.9701,0.0002,"U",78.64,0.0002,"U",0.002596," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.067574," ",0.04722," ",0.05171," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311810,"Catostomus commersoni",0.000606," ",2,1994 0.0005,"U",0.00081," ",0.000884," ",0.0005,"U",0.001414," ",07/21/93,0.001887," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00052," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","RUSSELL POND","NH503L",44.0091,.,-71.6538,0.0005,"U",79.08,0.000746," ",0.000523," ",0.000572," ",0.000891," ",0.0799," ",0.006083," ",0.018688," ",0.001909," ","Yes",301589,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.002533," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/18/93,0.000839," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","TURKEY POND","NH504L",43.1813,.,-71.5926,0.0005,"U",78.8,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0055," ",0.000715," ",0.002962," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301524,"Esox niger",0.0005,"U",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.00098," ",0.003705," ",0.0005,"U",0.002586," ",07/11/93,0.001757," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000581," ",0.001368," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","MIRROR LAKE","NH505L",43.6224,.,-71.2659,0.0005,"U",65.41,0.000981," ",0.001482," ",0.0005,"U",0.000682," ",0.1018," ",0.031206," ",0.074," ",0.003601," ","Yes",301555,"Morone americana",0.005606," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.003003," ",0.0005,"U",0.004225," ",08/03/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000892," ",0.001405," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","CANOBIE LAKE","NH506L",42.7959,.,-71.2585,0.0005,"U",73.66,0.001637," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00073," ",0.1222," ",0.013229," ",0.067413," ",0.002439," ","Yes",1,"Perca flavescens",0.00937," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/21/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","PRATT POND","NH507L",42.7394,.,-71.9074,0.0005,"U",60.32,0.000525," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.1686," ",0.000589," ",0.007484," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301557,"Esox niger",0.000526," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000737," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/18/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.006452," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","ISLAND POND","NH508L",42.7395,.,-71.9345,0.0005,"U",77.16,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0358," ",0.003679," ",0.00863," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301556,"Esox niger",0.000523," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.000466," ",0.000257," ",0.0002,"U",0.000667," ",07/20/94,0.000478," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000853," ",0.000203," ",0.000199," ",0.000196," ",0.0002,0.000281," ","U","KUSUMPE POND","NH751L",43.787,2.44,-71.4939,0.0002,"U",76.43,0.000285," ",0.000724," ",0.000414," ",0.0002,"U",0.053699," ",0.006688," ",0.02746," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311755,"Perca flavescens",0.001011," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000318," ",0.002465," ",0.0002,"U",0.004486," ",09/11/94,0.00189," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.003624," ",0.0002,"U",0.001072," ",0.000968," ",0.0002,0.000402," ","U","SKATUTAKEE LAKE","NH752L",42.9375,4.32,-72.077,0.0002,"U",72.56,0.001334," ",0.00193," ",0.000417," ",0.002324," ",0.461425," ",0.012844," ",0.063453," ",0.002345," ","Yes",311847,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.006688," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000698," ",0.0002,"U",0.00119," ",08/31/94,0.000517," ",0.0002,"U",0.000583," ",0.0004,"U",0.003355," ",0.0002,"U",0.000309," ",0.001112," ",0.0002,0.000203," ","U","TOLMAN POND","NH753L",42.9749,2.2,-72.1048,0.0002,"U",76.56,0.000595," ",0.000592," ",0.0002,"U",0.000354," ",0.075179," ",0.003999," ",0.015551," ",0.000881," ","Yes",311850,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.002466," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000311," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000228," ",08/06/94,0.000497," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.00024," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","PEARL LAKE","NH754L",44.1997,4.98,-71.8671,0.0002,"U",73.15,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.023817," ",0.000947," ",0.007964," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311809,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.000588," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000605," ",0.0002,"U",0.000714," ",08/28/94,0.0005," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.002539," ",0.000194," ",0.000282," ",0.000209," ",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","CHESHAM POND","NH755L",42.9388,3.37,-72.1352,0.0002,"U",75.98,0.000459," ",0.000423," ",0.0002,"U",0.000275," ",0.027093," ",0.004178," ",0.00934," ",0.00048," ","Yes",311851,"Micropterus salmoides",0.001516," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000393," ",0.001882," ",0.000395," ",0.002781," ",09/06/94,0.001677," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000501," ",0.000434," ",0.000783," ",0.000718," ",0.0002,0.000523," ","U","SEAVERS RESERVOIR","NH756L",42.9436,5.63,-72.1281,0.000641," ",72.59,0.001332," ",0.0017," ",0.0002,"U",0.000794," ",0.147899," ",0.0272," ",0.07008," ",0.002108," ","Yes",311848,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.006925," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000457," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000535," ",09/04/94,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000262," ",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","CHILDS BOG","NH757L",42.9572,0.65,-72.1227,0.0002,"U",82.23,0.0002,"U",0.000247," ",0.0002,"U",0.000198," ",0.018372," ",0.00272," ",0.007647," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311849,"Esox niger",0.000606," ",1,1994 0.000244," ",0.000424," ",0.00163," ",0.0002,"U",0.001469," ",08/29/94,0.001373," ",0.0002,"U",0.000228," ",0.0004,"U",0.003151," ",0.000264," ",0.000589," ",0.00037," ",0.0002,0.00046," ","U","MASSABESIC LAKE","NH758L",42.9937,6.58,-71.3549,0.0002,"U",72.98,0.000736," ",0.001568," ",0.000415," ",0.0002,"U",0.100386," ",0.02683," ",0.08031," ",0.001805," ","Yes",311863,"Morone americana",0.00294," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.001134," ",0.0017," ",0.0002,"U",0.001395," ",07/24/94,0.000969," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001532," ",0.000895," ",0.001431," ",0.0002,0.000698," ","U","SECOND CONNECTICUT LAKE","NH759L",45.1551,8.08,-71.1715,0.0002,"U",72.16,0.000524," ",0.001143," ",0.000411," ",0.0002,"U",0.068736," ",0.00955," ",0.017429," ",0.00188," ","Yes",311806,"Salvelinus namaycush",0.003077," ",1,1994 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/24/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","SPLITROCK RESERVOIR","NJ500L",40.9824,.,-74.4402,0.0005,"U",76.85,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0283," ",0.001892," ",0.010436," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301570,"Esox niger",0.000621," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/14/93,0.001271," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BATSTO RIVER RESERVOIR","NJ503L",39.6534,.,-74.6534,0.0005,"U",73.73,0.000853," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0282," ",0.004316," ",0.038331," ",0.002778," ","Yes",301568,"Lepomis macrochirus",0.001762," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.001141," ",0.0005,"U",0.000838," ",08/22/93,0.002754," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000656," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BATSTO RIVER RESERVOIR","NJ503L",39.6534,.,-74.6534,0.0005,"U",77.5,0.00138," ",0.000518," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0618," ",0.018535," ",0.049969," ",0.002416," ","Yes",301664,"Erimyzon oblongus",0.002771," ",2,1993 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",08/03/94,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","BATSTO RIVER RESERVOIR","NJ503L",39.6534,0.47,-74.6534,0.0002,"U",81.64,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.014688," ",0.001273," ",0.013006," ",0.000403," ","Yes",311824,"Ictalurus natalis",0.000573," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000294," ",0.0002,"U",0.00027," ",08/14/94,0.000608," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000259," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","BATSTO RIVER RESERVOIR","NJ503L",39.6534,1.09,-74.6534,0.0002,"U",78.99,0.0002,"U",0.000282," ",0.000206," ",0.0002,"U",0.031876," ",0.002433," ",0.015855," ",0.000638," ","Yes",311796,"Ictalurus natalis",0.000959," ",2,1994 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00325," ",0.0005,"U",0.001489," ",07/18/93,0.003129," ",0.0005,"U",0.001198," ",0.0005,"U",0.015583," ",0.0005,"U",0.00098," ",0.007178," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","DARETOWN LAKE","NJ504L",39.6117,.,-75.2538,0.0005,"U",72.16,0.001311," ",0.012468," ",0.004404," ",0.00148," ",0.1811," ",0.227237," ",0.593353," ",0.004436," ","Yes",301569,"Morone americana",0.004533," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000976," ",0.0002,"U",0.000649," ",07/11/93,0.000408," ",0.000257," ",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000929," ",0.00031," ",0.00033," ",0.000206," ",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","EAST CREEK POND","NJ505L",39.2262,.,-74.8846,0.0002,"U",83.46,0.0002,"U",0.000402," ",0.002256," ",0.000876," ",0.069877," ",0.01581," ",0.07332," ",0.003763," ","Yes",301567,"Ameiurus nebulosus",0.002134," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.12261," ",0.000208," ",0.1125," ",08/10/94,0.03421," ",0.0002,"U",0.000804," ",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.06928," ",0.000237," ",0.000304,0.002654," "," ","FARMERS POND","NJ751L",40.3121,0.72,-74.5449,0.0002,"U",77.81,0.011079," ",0.06472," ",0.0195," ",0.23803," ",0.299321," ",0.74801," ",4.27174," ",2.02781," ","Yes",311802,"Pomoxis annularis",0.27372," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.001108," ",0.0002,"U",0.001002," ",08/10/94,0.00234," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000585," ",0.000253," ",0.000878," ",0.0002,"U",0.000313,0.0002,"U"," ","MEDFORD LAKES","NJ752L",39.8537,1.53,-74.7928,0.0002,"U",81.09,0.000549," ",0.000516," ",0.000253," ",0.000565," ",0.064618," ",0.016087," ",0.03415," ",0.006415," ","Yes",311826,"Ictalurus natalis",0.003664," ",1,1994 0.002786," ",0.0002,"U",0.02488," ",0.0002,"U",0.029042," ",08/07/94,0.033234," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.002726," ",0.000276," ",0.019712," ",0.000475," ",0.0002,0.003409," ","U","OAKWOOD LAKES","NJ753L",39.873,2.58,-74.8341,0.0002," ",75.35,0.008109," ",0.006374," ",0.000317," ",0.005555," ",0.327682," ",0.02478," ",0.05549," ",0.010356," ","Yes",311825,"Pomoxis nigromaculatus",0.04506," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000343," ",0.002047," ",0.0002,"U",0.003275," ",08/14/94,0.002156," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001572," ",0.000288," ",0.00105," ",0.00033," ",0.0002,0.000334," ","U","ROUND VALLEY RESERVOIR","NJ755L",40.6162,.,-74.8291,0.0002,"U",78.76,0.000663," ",0.000838," ",0.0002,"U",0.000864," ",0.150771," ",0.00435," ",0.04486," ",0.001898," ","Yes",311827,"Perca flavescens",0.007684," ",1,1994 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000756," ",0.0005,"U",0.001022," ",07/07/93,0.00124," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000877," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BENNETT LAKE","NY256L",43.31528,.,-74.19444,0.0005,"U",79.5,0.001014," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0323," ",0.003356," ",0.011618," ",0.000859," ","Yes",301667,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.001959," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00094," ",0.0005,"U",0.001325," ",08/22/93,0.001699," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BENNETT LAKE","NY256L",43.31528,.,-74.19444,0.0005,"U",76.18,0.001576," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0696," ",0.005585," ",0.02137," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301504,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.002748," ",2,1993 0.0005,"U",0.00109," ",0.000856," ",0.0005,"U",0.001324," ",07/07/93,0.002203," ",0.0005,"U",0.000767," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000675," ",0.0005,"U",0.000809," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","HIGHLANDS FORGE LAKE","NY500L",44.4098,.,-73.4443,0.0005,"U",69.56,0.00106," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0695," ",0.013625," ",0.082638," ",0.001363," ","Yes",301660,"Perca flavescens",0.003611," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000624," ",0.0005,"U",0.001058," ",07/04/93,0.000685," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.009093," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","MOODY POND","NY501L",44.3291,.,-74.1188,0.0005,"U",79.03,0.000625," ",0.001873," ",0.0005,"U",0.001208," ",0.0915," ",0.094337," ",0.150873," ",0.008146," ","Yes",301581,"Micropterus salmoides",0.002996," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000717," ",07/18/93,0.001286," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000937," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","PALMER POND","NY502L",43.9518,.,-73.7468,0.0005,"U",75.69,0.001012," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000624," ",0.0522," ",0.006176," ",0.049652," ",0.001636," ","Yes",301672,"Mixed Salmonidae",0.001651," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000863," ",07/11/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","GARNET LAKE","NY503L",43.5253,.,-74.0224,0.000575," ",80.24,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0455," ",0.004075," ",0.033328," ",0.001369," ","Yes",301668,"Micropterus salmoides",0.001747," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/14/93,0.001563," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","LIXARD POND","NY505L",43.5119,.,-74.0449,0.0005,"U",75,0.000524," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0225," ",0.002559," ",0.005299," ",0.000771," ","Yes",301670,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.000899," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.00074," ",0.001027," ",0.0002,"U",0.000549," ",08/11/93,0.001553," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000367," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.000478," ","U","MIRROR LAKE","NY506L",43.0398,.,-74.9932,0.000334," ",77.39,0.000314," ",0.0002,"U",0.001891," ",0.0002,"U",0.060375," ",0.002158," ",0.01443," ",0.000812," ","Yes",301575,"Lepomis macrochirus",0.001882," ",1,1993 .," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.,.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.,.," "," ","NO NAME","NY507L",43.4689,.,-74.6978,.," ",.,.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ","No fish collected",.," ",.," ",.,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/08/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.012071," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","NO NAME (RENZO POND)","NY508L",42.2369,.,-74.2481,0.0005,"U",80.44,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.03," ",0.0017," ",0.013888," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301574,"Micropterus salmoides",0.00088," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.001422," ",0.0005,"U",0.001962," ",07/31/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.008794," ",0.0005,"U",0.000526," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","MERRIEWOLD LAKE","NY509L",41.3735,.,-74.1858,0.0005,"U",81.7,0.000697," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0777," ",0.002718," ",0.04566," ",0.001," ","Yes",301572,"Micropterus salmoides",0.004937," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.096123," ",0.0005,"U",0.090246," ",07/28/93,0.020502," ",0.0005,"U",0.002566," ",0.0005,"U",0.123653," ",0.0005,"U",0.022072," ",0.001128," ",0.0005,0.007318," ","U","RESERVOIR NO. 1","NY510L",40.9602,.,-73.8041,0.000605," ",83.56,0.060578," ",0.001479," ",0.000869," ",0.003516," ",0.828," ",0.084404," ",0.572339," ",0.035505," ","Yes",301571,"Micropterus salmoides",0.283442," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.00076," ",0.001181," ",0.0002,"U",0.000444," ",07/04/93,0.000803," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000588," ",0.00038," ",0.000312," ",0.000323," ",0.0002,0.000239," ","U","NO NAME","NY511L",42.5436,.,-76.0118,0.0002,"U",79.63,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.042906," ",0.005063," ",0.017933," ",0.001173," ","Yes",301565,"Ameiurus nebulosus",0.001133," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/15/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.002873," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","TIMBER LAKE","NY512L",42.353,.,-78.6789,0.0005,"U",80.87,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.022," ",0.0005,"U",0.0108," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301576,"Lepomis macrochirus",0.0005,"U",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.00105," ",0.000824," ",0.0002,"U",0.00148," ",08/22/93,0.00599," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001653," ",0.001142," ",0.000242," ",0.002239," ",0.000308,0.000955," "," ","TIMBER LAKE","NY512L",42.353,.,-78.6789,0.0002,"U",74.28,0.000857," ",0.000387," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.155801," ",0.008543," ",0.04284," ",0.003449," ","Yes",301690,"Micropterus salmoides",0.003806," ",2,1993 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000319," ",07/17/94,0.000315," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","TIMBER LAKE","NY512L",42.353,1.53,-78.6789,0.0002,"U",75.1,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.031009," ",0.00129," ",0.023313," ",0.000521," ","Yes",311838,"Micropterus salmoides",0.00071," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000282," ",0.000334," ",0.0002,"U",0.000629," ",08/17/94,0.00145," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000212," ",0.000225," ",0.000663," ",0.0002,0.000428," ","U","TIMBER LAKE","NY512L",42.353,3.6,-78.6789,0.0002,"U",72.71,0.000244," ",0.000338," ",0.0002,"U",0.000328," ",0.06117," ",0.003867," ",0.031218," ",0.001623," ","Yes",311795,"Perca flavescens",0.001364," ",2,1994 .," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.,.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.,.," "," ","WOLF POND","NY515L",44.304,.,-74.8104,.," ",.,.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ","No fish collected",.," ",.," ",.,1993 0.00182," ",0.00117," ",0.001706," ",0.00031," ",0.001632," ",07/21/93,0.001961," ",0.0002,"U",0.005675," ",0.0004,"U",0.002001," ",0.001225," ",0.001452," ",0.000853," ",0.0002,0.001267," ","U","MUD POND","NY516L",43.8991,.,-74.4496,0.0002,"U",77.96,0.001103," ",0.001647," ",0.004078," ",0.0002,"U",0.097328," ",0.031077," ",0.03252," ",0.001636," ","Yes",301671,"Catostomus commersoni",0.002593," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",07/07/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","NO NAME (OWEGO IBM POND)","NY517L",42.1112,.,-76.2187,0.0005,"U",73.61,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0192," ",0.000539," ",0.00926," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301566,"Micropterus salmoides",0.000474," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/22/93,0.001065," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","NO NAME (OWEGO IBM POND)","NY517L",42.1112,.,-76.2187,0.0005,"U",77.52,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0193," ",0.0005,"U",0.006722," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301530,"Micropterus salmoides",0.0005,"U",2,1993 0.0002,"U",0.0005," ",0.000213," ",0.0002,"U",0.000328," ",06/29/94,0.000824," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000351," ",0.0002,"U",0.000185," ",0.0002,0.000298," ","U","NO NAME (OWEGO IBM POND)","NY517L",42.1112,5.72,-76.2187,0.0002,"U",71.24,0.0002,"U",0.00028," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.02961," ",0.001415," ",0.010293," ",0.000213," ","Yes",311815,"Perca flavescens",0.000566," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000239," ",08/21/94,0.000304," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","NO NAME (OWEGO IBM POND)","NY517L",42.1112,2.77,-76.2187,0.0002,"U",77.59,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.031072," ",0.000589," ",0.006518," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311813,"Micropterus salmoides",0.000438," ",2,1994 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",08/22/93,0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","LAKE PLACID","NY519L",44.3212,.,-73.9738,0.0005,"U",80.26,0.000685," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0087," ",0.002891," ",0.018888," ",0.002258," ","Yes",301611,"Ambloplites ruprestris",0.000621," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.001206," ",0.0005,"U",0.003224," ",07/07/93,0.002521," ",0.0005,"U",0.002264," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000671," ",0.0008," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE","NY520L",43.8519,.,-74.4714,0.0005,"U",79.62,0.002327," ",0.003252," ",0.001863," ",0.003449," ",0.1899," ",0.110612," ",0.469044," ",0.07253," ","Yes",301634,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.008235," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.00053," ",0.000722," ",0.0005,"U",0.001213," ",07/25/93,0.001747," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.019286," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE","NY520L",43.8519,.,-74.4714,0.0005,"U",75.48,0.000951," ",0.000672," ",0.0005,"U",0.000545," ",0.0416," ",0.027591," ",0.128091," ",0.007515," ","Yes",301598,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.002231," ",2,1993 0.0002,"U",0.001038," ",0.001437," ",0.0002,"U",0.002055," ",08/02/94,0.003837," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000579," ",0.000823," ",0.001423," ",0.0002,0.000935," ","U","BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE","NY520L",43.8519,8.51,-74.4714,0.0002,"U",71.57,0.000841," ",0.004991," ",0.00081," ",0.002389," ",0.101628," ",0.03641," ",0.161," ",0.01309," ","Yes",311843,"Salmo salar",0.004889," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000459," ",0.0025," ",0.0002,"U",0.002705," ",08/18/94,0.002727," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001156," ",0.000231," ",0.001165," ",0.001238," ",0.0002,0.000588," ","U","BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE","NY520L",43.8519,2.83,-74.4714,0.000296," ",76.62,0.001112," ",0.007819," ",0.001276," ",0.0002,"U",0.129179," ",0.068004," ",0.241394," ",0.018683," ","Yes",311762,"Salvelinus namaycush",0.005903," ",2,1994 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.001617," ",08/03/93,0.000619," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.067134," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","NEVERSINK RESERVOIR","NY521L",41.8509,.,-74.6626,0.0005,"U",78.48,0.00087," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000581," ",0.1295," ",0.002824," ",0.043389," ",0.002804," ","Yes",301573,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.004648," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.00151," ",0.006466," ",0.0002,"U",0.004159," ",07/03/93,0.004541," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.002417," ",0.001073," ",0.002101," ",0.002088," ",0.0002,0.002223," ","U","CARRY FALLS RESERVOIR","NY522L",44.4119,.,-74.7404,0.000801," ",73.64,0.002491," ",0.00103," ",0.0002,"U",0.005116," ",0.175417," ",0.015036," ",0.12768," ",0.007922," ","Yes",301533,"Stizostedion vitreum",0.01129," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000384," ",08/14/94,0.000382," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000673," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","SWEDE POND","NY750L",43.7393,1.18,-73.5783,0.0002,"U",74.55,0.000209," ",0.000243," ",0.000303," ",0.0002,"U",0.036675," ",0.002996," ",0.016085," ",0.000219," ","Yes",311761,"Perca flavescens",0.000823," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000666," ",0.0002,"U",0.000674," ",09/03/94,0.001131," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000211," ",0.000333," ",0.000904," ",0.0002,0.000314," ","U","BLENHEIM GILBOA RESERVOIR","NY752L",42.443,4.76,-74.4552,0.0002,"U",70.79,0.000335," ",0.000401," ",0.0002,"U",0.000449," ",0.118603," ",0.001071," ",0.003874," ",0.000538," ","Yes",311864,"Ambloplites rupestris",0.001527," ",1,1994 0.000218," ",0.0002,"U",0.00141," ",0.0002,"U",0.001956," ",07/31/94,0.001985," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.00074," ",0.000503," ",0.0002,0.000403," ","U","KINGSTON RESERVOIR #4","NY754L",42.0108,2.3,-74.0732,0.0002,"U",76.42,0.001343," ",0.000679," ",0.000211," ",0.0002,"U",0.040058," ",0.006014," ",0.10702," ",0.001885," ","Yes",311823,"Micropterus salmoides",0.006362," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000406," ",0.0002,"U",0.000745," ",08/21/94,0.000651," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000192," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","KINGSTON RESERVOIR #4","NY754L",42.0108,1.16,-74.0732,0.0002,"U",77.16,0.000447," ",0.000208," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.018103," ",0.002737," ",0.016229," ",0.000354," ","Yes",311777,"LB(4), BLUEGILL(5)?",0.002247," ",2,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000382," ",0.000649," ",0.0002,"U",0.000937," ",07/27/94,0.000587," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000604," ",0.000524," ",0.000253," ",0.0002,0.000169," ","U","DAVIS POND","NY757L",41.5724,3.67,-74.982,0.0002,"U",74.96,0.0002,"U",0.005747," ",0.001542," ",0.0002,"U",0.065041," ",0.19166," ",0.23435," ",0.001778," ","Yes",311822,"Perca flavescens",0.001576," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.00047," ",0.0002,"U",0.000234," ",08/17/94,0.000298," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000371," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","DAVIS POND","NY757L",41.5724,1.76,-74.982,0.0002,"U",77.68,0.0002,"U",0.005516," ",0.001323," ",0.0002,"U",0.190053," ",0.14845," ",0.19389," ",0.000609," ","Yes",311812,"Esox niger",0.000836," ",2,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000504," ",0.003589," ",0.0002,"U",0.002501," ",06/30/94,0.001522," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.002313," ",0.000378," ",0.000998," ",0.002763," ",0.0002,0.000523," ","U","POOLVILLE POND","NY758L",42.7766,0.24,-75.4961,0.0002,"U",69.29,0.001018," ",0.004359," ",0.000462," ",0.000728," ",0.210544," ",0.01644," ",0.04073," ",0.003137," ","Yes",311832,"Esox lucius",0.007384," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000343," ",0.00054," ",0.0002,"U",0.001251," ",07/24/94,0.001537," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000229," ",0.000302," ",0.001954," ",0.0002,0.000214," ","U","TULLY LAKE","NY759L",42.7746,2.67,-76.1355,0.0002,"U",78.77,0.000553," ",0.000323," ",0.0002,"U",0.000234," ",0.0677," ",0.003457," ",0.060966," ",0.002153," ","Yes",311841,"Micropterus salmoides",0.003574," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000393," ",0.000224," ",0.0002,"U",0.001184," ",07/20/94,0.002294," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000266," ",0.000369," ",0.013703," ",0.0002,0.00021," ","U","LAKE PETONIA","NY760L",42.3317,3.37,-75.799,0.000332," ",73.41,0.000743," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.059543," ",0.004883," ",0.012659," ",0.000536," ","Yes",311839,"Lepomis gibbosus",0.002864," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000337," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.001127," ",07/13/94,0.001322," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001238," ",0.000742," ",0.000245," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.000428," ","U","CLEAR LAKE","NY761L",42.5615,4.62,-78.8519,0.0002,"U",78.26,0.000292," ",0.000955," ",0.0002,"U",0.00022," ",0.123412," ",0.004417," ",0.0309," ",0.002017," ","Yes",311837,"Perca flavescens",0.002188," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000302," ",0.0002,"U",0.000929," ",08/21/94,0.000907," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.000223," ","U","CLEAR LAKE","NY761L",42.5615,1.71,-78.8519,0.0002,"U",75.28,0.00019," ",0.000766," ",0.0002,"U",0.000645," ",0.115347," ",0.003058," ",0.08185," ",0.001347," ","Yes",311794,"Perca flavescens",0.00166," ",2,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000301," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000331," ",07/10/94,0.000797," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000222," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","SRMACK'S QUARRY","NY763L",42.6988,1.37,-76.8121,0.0002,"U",76.5,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.023153," ",0.001308," ",0.011685," ",0.000817," ","Yes",311835,"Micropterus salmoides",0.00099," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000201," ",0.000228," ",0.0002,"U",0.000604," ",08/20/94,0.00154," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000201," ",0.0002,0.000305," ","U","SRMACK'S QUARRY","NY763L",42.6988,2.19,-76.8121,0.0002,"U",73.44,0.000272," ",0.0002,"U",0.000222," ",0.000224," ",0.028446," ",0.002637," ",0.016989," ",0.00117," ","Yes",311828,"Perca flavescens",0.00151," ",2,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000887," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000609," ",06/30/94,0.001079," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000827," ",0.000339," ",0.000185," ",0.000613," ",0.0002,0.00026," ","U","GREEN LAKE","NY764L",43.6504,4.82,-74.9103,0.0002,"U",73.89,0.000492," ",0.000666," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.044787," ",0.01201," ",0.03785," ",0.000623," ","Yes",311766,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.001793," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000282," ",0.000322," ",06/29/94,0.001687," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001119," ",0.000444," ",0.0002,"U",0.00029," ",0.0002,0.000324," ","U","HORSESHOE POND","NY765L",43.659,5.36,-74.8837,0.0002,"U",74.07,0.000478," ",0.000189," ",0.000408," ",0.0002,"U",0.031563," ",0.001199," ",0.007157," ",0.000674," ","Yes",311751,"Salvelinus fontinalis",0.000787," ",1,1994 .," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.,.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.,.," "," ","LITTLE MOOSE LAKE","NY766L",43.6891,.,-74.9212,.," ",.,.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ",.," ","Not visited",.," ",.," ",.,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000945," ",0.001281," ",0.0002,"U",0.002639," ",07/06/94,0.004135," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.002337," ",0.000812," ",0.000804," ",0.001985," ",0.0002,0.000974," ","U","TROUT POND","NY767L",44.0942,6.54,-74.6427,0.0002,"U",73.77,0.001458," ",0.001519," ",0.001736," ",0.025919," ",0.139829," ",0.0002,"U",0.13444," ",0.00194," ","Yes",311752,"Salvelinus namaycush",0.001809," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000258," ",0.000497," ",0.00037," ",0.000747," ",07/10/94,0.001133," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.00151," ",0.000323," ",0.000242," ",0.00027," ",0.0002,0.000333," ","U","HITCHINS POND","NY768L",44.1144,2.59,-74.6548,0.0002,"U",78.58,0.00042," ",0.00117," ",0.000214," ",0.000295," ",0.052309," ",0.008455," ",0.01692," ",0.001312," ","Yes",311753,"Micropterus salmoides",0.001598," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000253," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",07/29/94,0.000358," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.000304," ","U","HITCHINS POND","NY768L",44.1144,1.87,-74.6548,0.0002,"U",77.65,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000201," ",0.0002,"U",0.006628," ",0.001235," ",0.002056," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311842,"Lepomis gibbosus",0.00019," ",2,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000284," ",0.000568," ",0.0002,"U",0.000995," ",07/15/94,0.001765," ",0.000204," ",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001546," ",0.000322," ",0.000248," ",0.000415," ",0.0002,0.000479," ","U","HORSESHOE LAKE","NY769L",44.1319,3.69,-74.619,0.0002,"U",75.92,0.000498," ",0.000718," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.046355," ",0.004776," ",0.03473," ",0.001659," ","Yes",311754,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.002035," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000365," ",0.000838," ",0.0002,"U",0.001935," ",09/07/94,0.002573," ",0.0002,"U",0.00019," ",0.0004,"U",0.003205," ",0.000359," ",0.00033," ",0.000985," ",0.0002,0.000777," ","U","PISECO LAKE","NY775L",43.4084,5.23,-74.5526,0.00065," ",71.08,0.001018," ",0.01025," ",0.000832," ",0.0002,"U",0.118915," ",0.12264," ",0.58148," ",0.017338," ","Yes",311865,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.004188," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.000895," ",0.004526," ",0.000205," ",0.002468," ",07/05/94,0.011192," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.002673," ",0.00062," ",0.002298," ",0.001769," ",0.0002,0.001596," ","U","CROSS LAKE","NY776L",43.1252,6.93,-76.4823,0.0002,"U",78.19,0.001211," ",0.006418," ",0.001037," ",0.00096," ",0.288246," ",0.034077," ",0.062088," ",0.007901," ","Yes",311833,"Morone americana",0.005255," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.001168," ",0.007253," ",0.0002,"U",0.009238," ",08/09/94,0.004452," ",0.0002,"U",0.001407," ",0.0004,"U",0.007835," ",0.000657," ",0.003894," ",0.004886," ",0.0002,0.001915," ","U","FORTH CHAIN LAKE","NY778L",43.7409,11.67,-74.8816,0.000199," ",66.58,0.002867," ",0.079488," ",0.018949," ",0.039219," ",0.916902," ",0.594513," ",1.222703," ",0.113972," ","Yes",311844,"Salvelinus namaycush",0.019666," ",1,1994 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.002076," ",0.0005,"U",0.002767," ",08/04/93,0.001784," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.027936," ",0.0005,"U",0.00115," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","YAWGOO MILLPOND","RI500L",41.5224,.,-71.5226,0.0005,"U",84.01,0.002364," ",0.001813," ",0.000708," ",0.001863," ",0.0586," ",0.067017," ",0.347629," ",0.014355," ","Yes",301609,"Micropterus salmoides",0.008465," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.000191," ",0.001022," ",0.0002,"U",0.002131," ",07/27/94,0.000506," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.00045," ",0.000785," ",0.0002,0.000188," ","U","QUIDNICK RESERVOIR","RI750L",41.68,2.01,-71.682,0.000199," ",79.35,0.000626," ",0.000512," ",0.000475," ",0.000711," ",0.118018," ",0.004103," ",0.06888," ",0.002292," ","Yes",311790,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.003995," ",1,1994 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000583," ",0.0005,"U",0.001377," ",07/11/93,0.000651," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.028512," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BURR POND","VT253L",43.76528,.,-73.18389,0.0005,"U",81.14,0.0005,"U",0.000583," ",0.0005,"U",0.00126," ",0.3528," ",0.00202," ",0.026735," ",0.0005,"U","Yes",301585,"Esox lucius",0.001744," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.00259," ",0.0005,"U",0.002433," ",08/23/93,0.001765," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000738," ",0.00081," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","BURR POND","VT253L",43.76528,.,-73.18389,0.0005,"U",69.43,0.001151," ",0.001153," ",0.0005,"U",0.001283," ",0.972," ",0.00785," ",0.059173," ",0.000787," ","Yes",301541,"Micropterus salmoides",0.006203," ",2,1993 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000884," ",0.0002,"U",0.000196," ",07/18/93,0.000286," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000492," ",0.000579," ",0.0002,"U",0.000382,0.000269," "," ","NO NAME","VT500L",44.4137,.,-72.0408,0.001245," ",78.92,0.0002,"U",0.000531," ",0.002606," ",0.0002,"U",0.059237," ",0.008275," ",0.023906," ",0.001571," ","Yes",301586,"Catostomus commersoni",0.001055," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.001269," ",0.0005,"U",0.00116," ",07/25/93,0.000632," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.000824," ",0.000806," ",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","WEATHERHEAD HOLLOW POND","VT501L",42.7427,.,-72.6114,0.0005,"U",75.69,0.000828," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0361," ",0.002868," ",0.0097," ",0.000543," ","Yes",301590,"Perca flavescens",0.002202," ",1,1993 0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.003039," ",0.0005,"U",0.006817," ",07/14/93,0.000925," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.031488," ",0.0005,"U",0.001156," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,0.0005,"U","U","WATERBURY RESERVOIR","VT502L",44.4038,.,-72.7499,0.0005,"U",76.23,0.004204," ",0.0005,"U",0.0005,"U",0.0008," ",0.0734," ",0.003467," ",0.030606," ",0.004971," ","Yes",301587,"Micropterus dolomieu",0.020987," ",1,1993 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000408," ",0.0002,"U",0.000884," ",07/30/94,0.00039," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","NORTH SPRINGFIELD BESERVOIR","VT750L",43.3468,1.92,-72.5065,0.0002,"U",76.18,0.000333," ",0.000389," ",0.0002,"U",0.000195," ",0.080992," ",0.001192," ",0.01404," ",0.000877," ","Yes",311807,"Ambloplites rupestris",0.002688," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000632," ",0.0002,"U",0.000982," ",08/21/94,0.002849," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.000237," ",0.000222," ",0.000465," ",0.0002,0.000301," ","U","NORTH SPRINGFIELD BESERVOIR","VT750L",43.3468,4.74,-72.5065,0.0002,"U",73.29,0.000571," ",0.000491," ",0.0002,"U",0.000466," ",0.169479," ",0.002973," ",0.05629," ",0.001178," ","Yes",311872,"Perca flavescens",0.002714," ",2,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000541," ",0.0002,"U",0.000765," ",06/29/94,0.00056," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000316," ",0.00052," ",0.0002,0.000454," ","U","STOUGHTON POND","VT751L",43.381,1.31,-72.501,0.0002,"U",79.51,0.000239," ",0.000778," ",0.0002,"U",0.000872," ",0.048178," ",0.003603," ",0.018657," ",0.003453," ","Yes",311798,"Salmo gairdneri",0.001699," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000337," ",06/30/94,0.000197," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,0.0002,"U","U","TILDYS POND","VT752L",44.644,1.1,-72.2043,0.0002,"U",77.65,0.0002,"U",0.000607," ",0.0002,"U",0.000294," ",0.100397," ",0.001476," ",0.006191," ",0.0003," ","Yes",311783,"Perca flavescens",0.000683," ",1,1994 0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",08/17/94,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.000597," ",0.0002,0.000229," ","U","TILDYS POND","VT752L",44.644,1.91,-72.2043,0.0002,"U",76.89,0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.022857," ",0.000461," ",0.002957," ",0.0002,"U","Yes",311846,"Perca flavescens",0.0002,"U",2,1994 0.000236," ",0.001317," ",0.002514," ",0.0002,"U",0.003044," ",08/02/94,0.002662," ",0.0002,"U",0.0002,"U",0.0004,"U",0.0004,"U",0.001337," ",0.000915," ",0.005436," ",0.0002,0.000991," ","U","SHADOW LAKE","VT753L",44.6687,10.66,-72.225,0.000687," ",73.2,0.001476," ",0.001918," ",0.000507," ",0.001674," ",0.137342," ",0.01843," ",0.08481," ",0.00775," ","Yes",311808,"Micropterus dolomieui",0.007476," ",1,1994	en
converted_docs	784395	![](media/image1.png){width="1.0in" height="0.8638888888888889in"} [General Services Administration Federal Supply Service Authorized Federal Supply Schedule Price List]{.underline} On‑line access to contract ordering information, terms and conditions, up‑to‑date pricing, and the option to create an electronic delivery order are available through GSA Advantage!, a menu‑driven database system. The internet address for GSA Advantage! is: www.gsaadvantage.gov. Schedule Title: Training Aids, Devices & Instructor Lead Training FSC Group: 69 Special Item Numbers: 27-100, 27-200, 27-300, 27-400, 27-500 FSC Classes: 6910 and 6930 Contract Number: GS-02F-0041R For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the FSS Schedules button at fss.gsa.gov. Contract Period: December 7^th^, 2004 to December 7^th^, 2009 Contractor\'s Name: Training For Life, Inc. Contractor\'s Address: 40 Exchange Place, Suite 302, New York, NY 10005 Contractor\'s Phone Number: 877-876-4543 Contractor\'s Fax Number: 877-876-4543 Contractor's Website: www.training4life.org Business Size & Certifications: Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business ![](media/image1.png){width="1.0in" height="0.8638888888888889in"} [Contract \# GS-02F-0041R Federal Supply Schedule Price List]{.underline} 1a. Please see attached table of awarded special item number(s) with appropriate cross‑reference to item descriptions and awarded price(s). 1b. The lowest priced model number and lowest unit price for that model for each special item number awarded in the contract. This price is the Government price based on a unit of one, exclusive of any quantity/dollar volume, prompt payment, or any other concession affecting price: [SIN \# 27-100 Training Aids & Devices Airway Locking Clamp \$2.00]{.underline} [SIN \# 27-200 Prepared Printed Instructional Materials Pediatric Mod. HS FA w/ CPR & AED \$8.00]{.underline} SIN \# 27-300 Prepared Audio & Visual Instructional CPR for Family & Friends Video \$13.00 [Materials, Multi-Media Program Kits \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} SIN \# 27-400 Instructor Lead Instruction NYC Site Safety Manager 7 Hour \$185.25 [Refresher (6 to 10 students) \_\_\_\_]{.underline} SIN \# 27-500 Course Development/Administration \$45.00 [(Per Man Hour)\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} 1c. Hourly Rates: Not Applicable 2. Maximum Order: \$1,000,000.00 3. Minimum Order: \$100.00 4. Geographic Coverage: 50 United States, Puerto Rico, Washington, DC, and All Other US Territories 5. Point(s) of Production: New York 6. Discount from list prices or statement of net price: Prices shown herein are net. (Discount deducted.) 7. Quantity Discounts: For items in SIN 27-100 purchased in qty. of 10 or more, are eligible for additional 2.5% off of the GSA price. 8. Prompt Payment Terms: Net 30 Days 9a. Government Purchase Cards are accepted at or below the micro-purchase threshold. 9b. Government purchase cards are accepted above the micro-purchase threshold. 10. Foreign Items: Not Applicable 11a. Time of Delivery: 30-45 Days depending upon item 11b. All items listed are available for expedited delivery, i.e. within 5 days of formal request. 11c. Overnight and 2‑day delivery are available on Special Item Number 27-400 Instructor Lead Training Only. The schedule customer may contact Training For Life, Inc. for rates for overnight and 2‑day delivery. 11d. Urgent Requirements. When the Federal Supply Schedule contract delivery period does not meet the bona fide urgent delivery requirements of an ordering agency, agencies are encouraged, if time permits, to contact the Contractor for the purpose of obtaining accelerated delivery. The Contractor shall reply to the inquiry within 3 workdays after receipt. (Telephonic replies shall be confirmed by the Contractor in writing.) If the Contractor offers an accelerated delivery time acceptable to the ordering agency, any order(s) placed pursuant to the agreed upon accelerated delivery time frame shall be delivered within this shorter delivery time and in accordance with all other terms and conditions of the contract. 12. F.O.B. point(s): Destination 13a. Ordering address: 40 Exchange Place, Suite 302, New York, NY 10005 13b. For supplies and services, the ordering procedures, information on Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPA's), and a sample BPA can be found at the GSA/FSS Schedule homepage ([fss.gsa.gov/schedules](http://www.fss.gsa.gov/schedules)). 14. Payment Address: 40 Exchange Place, Suite 302, New York, NY 10005 15. Warranty provision: As Per Manufacturer, as Applicable 16. Export Packing Charges: Not Applicable 17. Terms and Conditions of Government Purchase Card Acceptance: Same as stated in 9a and 9b. 18. Terms and Conditions of Rental, Maintenance, and Repair: Not Applicable 19. Terms and Conditions of Installation: Not Applicable 20. Terms and Conditions of Repair Parts: Not Applicable 20a. Terms and Conditions for any Other Services: Not Applicable 21. List of Service and Distribution Points: Not Applicable 22. List of Participating Dealers: Not Applicable 23. Preventive Maintenance: Not Applicable 24a. Special Attributes Such as Environmental Attributes: Not Applicable 24b. Section 508 Compliance Information: Not Applicable 25. Data Universal Number System (DUNS) Number: 143331648 26. Training For Life, Inc. is Registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) Database	en
all-txt-docs	405441	[Federal Register: May 10, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 89)] [Notices] [Page 25046] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr10my99-83] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. 99N-1069] Changes in the Procedures for Providing Public Notice of the Availability of Completed Environmental Assessments and Findings of No Significant Impact AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), is announcing changes in the procedures used for providing public notice of the availability of completed environmental assessments (EA's) and findings of no significant impact (FONSI's) for new drug applications (NDA's), abbreviated new drug applications (ANDA's), and supplemental applications. Effective Date: May 10, 1999. ADDRESSES: Copies of EA's and FONSI's are available on the Internet at ``http://www.fda.gov.cder/foi/index.htm'' or may be requested by writing the Freedom of Information Staff (HFI-35), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy B. Sager, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (HFD-357), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-594-5633. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), Congress declared that it will be the continuing policy of the Federal Government to ``use all practicable means and measures, including financial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans.'' (See 42 U.S.C. 4331(a).) NEPA requires all Federal agencies to include in every recommendation or report for major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment a detailed statement assessing the environmental impact of, and alternatives to, the proposed action and to make available to the public such statements. (See 42 U.S.C. 4332 and 40 CFR 1506.6.) FDA regulations in part 25 (21 CFR part 25) govern compliance with NEPA, as implemented by the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in 40 CFR part 1500. Under FDA regulations, actions to approve NDA's, ANDA's, and supplements to existing approvals ordinarily require the preparation of an EA. (See Sec. 25.20(l).) In accordance with FDA regulations, FDA must make completed EA's and FONSI's for NDA's, ANDA's, and supplements available to the public upon request in accordance with the procedures in 40 CFR 1506.6. (See Sec. 25.51(b)(2).) The regulations at 40 CFR 1506.6 require that certain environmental documents be made available to the public under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and that these documents be made available to the public without charge, to the extent practicable. (See 40 CFR 1506.6(f).) This is the procedure used by CDER to provide completed EA's and FONSI's for NDA's, ANDA's, and supplements for human drugs to the public when they are requested. Although not required by regulation, CDER has also periodically published notices in the Federal Register (57 FR 18887, 61 FR 49470, 62 FR 22960, 63 FR 27300) that provide a listing of EA's and FONSI's that are available for NDA's, ANDA's, and supplements. FDA is announcing that CDER will no longer publish such notices, because the environmental documents are now available on the Internet. In 1996, FDA established the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) Freedom of Information Office Electronic Reading Room, which can be accessed through the Internet at ``http:// www.fda.gov.cder/foi/index.htm''. The electronic reading room provides a listing of applications approved by CDER and electronic copies of agency documents used to support the approval of the applications under the heading ``Drug Approval Packages.'' The agency documents include an EA and FONSI for each application unless the action was categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an EA. (See Sec. 25.31.) Publication of a notice in the Federal Register announcing the availability of completed EA's and FONSI's for NDA's, ANDA's, and supplements duplicates the information available through the CDER Freedom of Information Office Electronic Reading Room. Therefore, to promote efficient operations, FDA will discontinue publication of such Federal Register notices, effective immediately. Dated: April 30, 1999. William K. Hubbard, Acting Deputy Commissioner for Policy. [FR Doc. 99-11583 Filed 5-7-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-F	en
all-txt-docs	348605	0.086402 11.650083 -8.350616 0.073527 12.155866 -9.023725 0.072612 14.607891 -8.817842 0.045537 15.364514 -9.691133 0.052489 15.201873 -9.830206 0.103840 15.711408 -9.975973 0.080996 16.582853 -9.971820 0.082841 17.304327 -10.835165 0.070067 17.817131 -11.390608 0.082701 19.120092 -12.388465 0.047533 19.036867 -12.776834 0.121489 22.309681 -14.859673 0.048544 21.859213 -15.216417 0.139483 19.370289 -18.401125 0.141113 27.281191 -17.829250 0.101954 27.326185 -15.614532 0.079335 26.582602 -16.356001 0.045347 25.737446 -16.549122 0.032064 27.344501 -16.567959 0.032755 28.094828 -17.682579 0.288850 30.226959 -19.014881 0.129786 28.985306 -21.578444 0.148622 29.233027 -20.059027 0.202220 29.710421 -18.830217 0.219599 29.586267 -20.166061 0.160700 29.641991 -20.996460 0.314021 28.875156 -21.514448 0.275176 29.967400 -24.792360 0.310203 29.299891 -23.723179 0.295627 30.094460 -23.170143 0.331487 29.757208 -22.841196 0.303333 30.524517 -22.405001 0.260958 31.535082 -23.879868 0.344337 30.029945 -25.229511 0.341094 32.731037 -25.748116 0.421676 33.873314 -26.236420 0.279880 34.769253 -26.051016 0.292055 33.993313 -26.509796 0.355039 34.833641 -25.837034 0.392600 35.398232 -26.591866 0.392540 36.014118 -28.132372 0.278398 37.744179 -30.063112 0.296660 36.714924 -29.780558 0.411992 36.394958 -30.140469 0.353605 38.126293 -28.929068 0.291208 39.392506 -29.910898 0.271859 40.596630 -31.180079 0.319421 42.707230 -29.574713 0.189935 43.207142 -29.684013 0.198511 44.460686 -28.327669 0.189579 45.004120 -26.079823 0.231172 44.465412 -23.986193 0.171008 45.828564 -23.630066 0.155370 46.222454 -24.017181 0.173671 45.642883 -24.567610 0.382164 44.726276 -25.757191 0.436211 44.094585 -25.984943 0.397168 44.250172 -28.039299 0.344897 44.875797 -31.400883 0.313130 45.360569 -34.106426 0.396338 46.582607 -35.196930 0.310805 46.043957 -34.427677 0.223785 46.053890 -33.163460 0.188608 45.560467 -33.192497 0.320134 44.555782 -30.802767 0.300652 44.134212 -33.274502 0.409267 45.530048 -33.556057	en
all-txt-docs	186243	NCEP COUPLED GFDL HURRICANE MODEL FORECAST MADE FOR HURRICANE PALOMA 17L INITIAL TIME 6Z NOV 8 HOUR LAT LON PRES WIND DIR/SPD 0 19.3 -80.5 967 97 45/6 6 19.8 -79.7 965 108 59/9 12 20.0 -79.0 970 75 76/8 18 20.3 -78.2 966 82 66/8 24 20.5 -77.6 982 72 74/6 30 20.9 -77.0 992 56 55/7 36 21.0 -76.6 996 40 72/4 42 21.5 -75.9 998 46 56/8 48 21.6 -75.5 999 51 71/4 54 21.6 -75.3 1001 62 81/2 60 21.7 -75.0 1002 54 84/4 66 21.8 -74.8 1005 42 65/1 72 21.9 -74.9 1006 29 329/1 78 21.8 -75.0 1007 30 261/1 84 21.6 -75.5 1008 29 242/5 90 21.3 -75.9 1008 25 240/5 96 20.6 -76.8 1008 24 229/11 102 20.2 -77.7 1009 22 251/10 108 20.3 -78.4 1009 18 277/6	en
markdown	193983	# Presentation: 193983 ## ILC MAIN LINAC SIMULATION KIRTI RANJAN Delhi University & Fermilab & NIKOLAY SOLYAK, FRANCOIS OSTIGUY Fermilab & SHEKHAR MISHRA Fermilab ## OVERVIEW Study single-bunch emittance dilution in Main Linac Compare the emittance dilution performance of two different “beam-based steering” algorithms : “1:1” & “Dispersion Free Steering” under nominal conditions of static misalignments of the various beamline elements Compare the sensitivity of the steering algorithms for conditions different from the nominal Compare the different lattice configurations (with different Quad spacing) Performed similar work for NLC ILC Main Linac Simulation Before Baseline Configuration Document (BCD) Status till Snowmass,’05 After ILC BCD Preliminary results for the ILC BCD curved Linac Benchmarking among various codes Summary / Plans ## ILC MAIN LINAC ILC Main linac will accelerate e-/e+ beam from ~ 15 GeV → 250 GeV Upgradeable to 500 GeV Two major design issues: Energy : Efficient acceleration of the beams Luminosity : Emittance preservation Vertical plane would be more challenging: Large aspect ratio (x:y) in both spot size and emittance Primary sources of emittance dilution (single bunch): * *Transverse Wakefields: Short Range : misaligned cavities or cryomodules Dispersion from Misaligned Quads or Pitched cavities XY-coupling from rotated Quads Transverse Jitter - For High Luminosity - high RF-beam conversion efficiency RF - high RF power PRF small normalised vertical emittance ***n,y* - strong focusing at IP (small y and hence _small_ z) ## Before Baseline Configuration Document (BCD) Status till Snowmass,’05 - (Acknowledgement to Peter Tenenbaum (SLAC)) ## SIMULATION: MATLAB + LIAR (MATLIAR) - LIAR (LInear Accelerator Research Code) - General tool to study beam dynamics - Simulate regions with accelerator structures - Includes wakefield, dispersive and chromatic emittance dilution - Includes diagnostic and correction devices, including BPMs, RF pickups, dipole correctors, magnet movers, beam-based feedbacks etc - MATLAB drives the whole package allowing fast development of correction and feedback algorithms - CPU Intensive: Dedicated Processors for the purpose ## USColdLC MAIN LINAC - Linac Cryogenic system is divided into Cryomodules(CM), with 12 RF cavities / CM - 1 Quad / 2CM : Superconducting Quads in alternate CM, 330 Quads (165F,165D) - Magnet Optics : FODO “constant beta” lattice, with  phase advance of 600 in each plane - Each quad has a Cavity style BPM and a Vertical Corrector magnet; horizontally focusing - quads also have a nearby Horizontal Corrector magnet. USColdLC MAIN LINAC - Main Linac Parameters - ~11.0 km length - 9 Cell cavities at 1.3 GHz; Total cavities : 7920 - Loaded Gradient : 30 MV/m - Injection energy = 5.0 GeV & Initial Energy spread = 2.5 % - Extracted beam energy = 250 GeV (500 GeV CM) - Beam Conditions - Bunch Charge: 2.0 x 1010 particles/bunch - Bunch length = 300 m - Normalized injection emittance: - Y = 20 nm-rad 12 “9-Cell Cavity” CryoModule TESLA SC 9-Cell Cavity ## USColdLC MAIN LINAC \| Tolerance \| Vertical (y) plane \| \| --- \| --- \| \| BPM Offset w.r.t. Cryostat \| 300 μm \| \| Quad offset w.r.t. Cryostat \| 300 μm \| \| Quad Rotation w.r.t. Cryostat \| 300 μrad \| \| Cavity Offset w.r.t. Cryostat \| 300 μm \| \| Cryostat Offset w.r.t. Survey Line \| 200 μm \| \| Cavity Pitch w.r.t. Cryostat \| 300 μrad \| \| Cryostat Pitch w.r.t. Survey Line \| 20 μrad \| \| BPM Resolution \| 1.0 μm \| BPM transverse position is fixed, and the BPM offset is w.r.t. Cryostat Only Single bunch used No Ground Motion and Feedback Steering is performed using Dipole Correctors USColdLC MAIN LINAC *ab initio* (Nominal) installation conditions Normalized Emittance Dilution Budget - DR Exit => ML Injection=> ML Exit => IP USColdLC: Hor./Vert (nm-rad): 8000 / 20 => 8800 / 24 => 9200 / 34 => 9600 / 40 10 nm (50%) Vertical emittance growth in main linac ## ALIGNMENT & STEERING ALGORITHMS - Beam line elements are needed to be aligned with beam-based measurements - “Beam Based Alignments (BBA)” refer to the techniques which provide information on beamline elements using measurements with the beam - Quad strength variation - “One-to-One” Correction - Dispersion Free Steering - Ballistic Alignment - Kick minimization method and possibly others.... - Considered here - Estimate beam-to-quad offset - *Quad Shunting:* Measure beam kick vs. quad strength to determine BPM-to-Quad offset (routinely done) - In USColdLC, it was not assumed that all quads would be shunted Quads are Superconducting and shunting might take a very long time No experimental basis for estimating the stability of the Magnetic center as a function of excitation current in SC magnets In Launch region (1st 7 Quads), we assume that offsets would be measured and corrected with greater accuracy (~30 m) ## Beam based alignment - 1:1 Steering - Quad alignment – How to do? Find a set of corrector readings for which beam should pass through the exact center of every quad (zero the BPMs) Use the correctors to steer the beam One-to-One alignment generates *dispersion* which contributes to emittance dilution and is sensitive to the BPM-to-Quad offsets Beam based alignment - 1:1 Steering - Solving the matrix equation: - x is the vector containing the BPM measurements - Θ is the vector containing the unknown kick angles m is the total number of BPM measurements n is the total number correctors Beam position at downstream BPM corrector kick MATRIX form For equal no. of YCOR and BPM ## Beam based alignment – Dispersion Free Steering - beamline (proposed by Raubenheimer / Ruth, NIMA302, 191-208, 1991) - General principle: Measure dispersion (via mismatching the beam energy to the lattice) Calculate correction needed to zero dispersion Apply the correction - Successful in rings (LEP, PEP ) but less successful at SLC (Two-beam DFS achieved better results)* (Note: SLC varied magnet strengths (center motion?), others varied beam energy)* Beam based alignment – Dispersion Free Steering - Absolute orbit: - Difference orbit: - Constraint: - (2M1) - (2MN) - (N1) - minimize the absolute orbit and the difference orbit simultaneously: ## STEERING ALGORITHM : ONE-to-ONE vs. DFS Read all Q-BPMs in a single pulse Compute set of corrector readings and apply the correction Constraint – minimize RMS of the BPM readings Iterate few times before going to the next segment. Performed for 100 Seeds STEERING ALGORITHM : ONE-to-ONE vs. DFS Divide linac into segments of ~40quads Two orbits are measured Vary energy by switching off cavities in front of a segment (no variation within segment) Measure change in orbit (fit out incoming orbit change from RF switch-off) Apply correction Constraint – simultaneously minimize dispersion and RMS of the BPM readings (weight ratio: ) Iterate twice before going to the next segment Performed for 100 Seeds DFS 1:1 ## BEAM BASED ALIGNMENT - Launch Region (1st seven BPMs) Steering (can not be aligned using DFS) Emittance growth is very sensitive to the element alignment in this region, due to low beam energy and large energy spread First, all RF cavities in the launch region are switched OFF to eliminate RF kicks from pitched cavities / cryostats Beam is then transported through the Launch and BPM readings are extracted => estimation of Quad offsets w.r.t. survey Line Corrector settings are then computed which ideally would result in a straight trajectory of the beam through the launch region The orbit after steering the corrector magnets constitutes a reference or “gold” orbit for the launch The RF units are then restored and the orbit is re-steered to the Gold Orbit. (This cancels the effect of RF kicks in the launch region) ## STEERING ALGORITHM : ONE-to-ONE vs. DFS Number of steering regions: 7 Overlap in steering regions: 0.1 Number iterations steering per region: 3 Number "front-end" BPMs: 7 (used for launch region) DFS Number of DFS regions: 18 Overlap in DFS regions: 0.5 Number iterations DFS per region: 2 DFS Max relative energy change: 0.2 DFS Max absolute energy change [GeV]: 18 DFS Endpoint for Region 1 Energy Change (Q#): 4 STEERING ALGORITHM : ONE-to-ONE vs. DFS ##  Beta Function (m) Lower mean emittance growth for DFS than One-to-One Mean Growth under the Emittance dilution budget No Jitter and No BNS energy spread! FOR USColdLC NOMINAL CONDITIONS - Mean: 9.2 nm-rad Emittance Dilution (nm) Emittance Dilution (nm) DFS 1:1 - Mean: 6.9 nm - 90%: 13.1 nm - Mean: 471 nm - 90%: 941 nm   1:1 DFS NO STEER Gradient : 30 MV/ m; 100 seeds Projected Emittance Dilution = Emittance (Exit) – Emittance (Entrance) ## FOR USColdLC NOMINAL CONDITIONS DFS \| Tolerance \| 1:1 \| DFS \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| Nominal \| 470 \| 6.9 \| \| Wakes only \| 1.9 \| 1.9 \| \| Dispersion only \| 280 \| 2.2 \| \| Quad roll only \| 2.1 \| 2.1 \| Average Normalized Emittance Dilution (nm) Average Normalized Emittance Growth (nm) vs. s (m) 1:1 Wakes include only Cavity and CM offsets; Dispersion includes Quad / BPM Offsets & Cavity / CM pitches Nominal >Wakes+Dispersion+Quad roll (Why?– wakefields causing systematic errors ?) Almost equal contributions ## EFFECT OF QUAD OFFSETS / QUAD ROLLS VARIATION DFS 1:1 Emittance dilution increases slowly with increase in Quad Offsets DFS: Just under the budget for 2x nominal values DFS: Emittance dilution increases more rapidly with increase in Quad Roll DFS: Goes Over the budget even for 1.5x nominal values Keeping all other misalignments at Nominal Values and varied only the Quad offsets DFS 1:1 ## EFFECT OF BPM OFFSETS / RESOLUTION VARIATION DFS 1:1 DFS 1:1 EFFECT OF *BPM OFFSETS / RESOLUTION* VARIATION *Advantage of DFS:* Emittance dilution for 1:1 increases very sharply with BPM offsets DFS: Emittance dilution is almost independent of BPM offset DFS: Remains within the budget even for 5x nominal Emittance dilution for 1:1 is almost independent of the BPM resolution DFS: Emittance dilution is sensitive to BPM resolution DFS: Goes Over the budget even for 5x nominal values ## EFFECT OF STRUCTURE OFFSET / PITCH VARIATION DFS 1:1 Emittance dilution for 1:1 is almost independent of the structure offset DFS: Emittance dilution grows slowly with structure offsets DFS: Goes Over the budget for 2.0x nominal values - DFS: Emittance dilution is sensitive to Cavity pitch - DFS: Goes Over the budget even for 1.5x nominal values DFS 1:1 ## EFFECT OF CRYOMODULE OFFSET/ PITCH VARIATION DFS 1:1 - DFS and 1:1: Emittance dilution grows sharply with CM offset - DFS: Goes Over the budget even for 1.5x nominal values - DFS and 1:1: Emittance dilution is almost independent of the CM pitch - DFS: Remains within the budget for 3x nominal DFS 1:1 ## Effect of Including JITTER Average Normalized Emittance Growth (nm) vs. s (m) Quad Vibration DFS Beam–Beam + Quad Vibration Beam – Beam ## Dispersion Bumps It changes y-position for structure or field for y-corrector Reads information about vertical beam size from wire monitor at the end of linac for a few times Makes approximation of data using parabola: y=A (x - B) 2 + C Takes a minimal value of vertical beam size which corresponds to minimum of parabola Contributed by :N.Solyak + E. Shtarklev - Two y-correctors located 1800 apart in phase such that 1st one generates dispersion and the other one cancels it - Beam size vs. corrector kicks ## Dispersion Bumps Two dispersion bumps applied for bad seed Dispersion Bumps - Inclusion of bumps can help in further minimizing the emittance dilution after steering, also important for bad seeds Contributed by :N.Solyak + E. Shtarklev - DFS only - DFS + Dispersion bumps Average Normalized Emittance Growth (nm) vs. s (m) ## QUAD CONFIGURATION Dispersion Wakes 30 MV/m TTF CM 8 Cavity / CM Number of Quads (NQ) Emittance dilution - Projected emittance growth is dominated by dispersive sources - Large quad spacing seems to be an attractive choice (?) QUAD CONFIGURATION - 8 configurations with diff. quad spacing (from 1 Quad / 1CM to 1 Quad / 8CM) - Dispersion Case – Quad, BPM Offsets and Structure, CM Pitch - Wake Case – Structure, CM offset, wakefields 1:1 - 1 Quad / CM - 1 Quad / 6 CM ## EMITTANCE DILUTION – SOURCES 1Q / 1CM; 36 segments 1 Q / 4 CM; 9 segments 1Q / 2CM; 18 segments 1 Q / 4 CM; 13 segments ## EMITTANCE DILUTION – SOURCES EMITTANCE DILUTION – SOURCES 1:1 DFS - DFS: 1Q/2CM is equilibrium optics with equal contribution from each source. Optics with larger quad spacing is wakefield dominated with the systematic wake-related contribution (Sum of all three contributions is smaller that the total calculated emittance growth). Wake Dispersion Dispersion ## Status after Baseline Configuration Document (BCD) - Released at the Frascati GDE meeting in December, 2005 ## ILC MAIN LINAC - BCD ILC MAIN LINAC - BCD - not to scale TUNNEL - “Until on-going beam dynamics simulations show otherwise, the *linac will follow the curvature of the earth*, unless a site-specific reason (cost driven) dictates otherwise.” CAVITY - “*31.5 MV/m gradient** *and *Q of 1×10**10** *would be achieved on average in a linac made with *eight-cavity cryomodules*.” LATTICE –* “Every fourth CM*** in the linac would include a cos(2phi)-type **quadrupole** *that also would contain horizontal and vertical corrector windings (this corresponds to a *constant beta lattice with one quadrupole every 32 cavities*). “ ## USColdLC vs. ILC BCD Comparison of the LASER STRAIGHT LINACs (ILC BCD vs. USColdLC) All nominal misalignments included; No Jitter, No dispersion bumps; 100 seeds A.) US Cold LC Lattice (1Q/24 cavity), TESLA wakes, E = 5 GeV, Espread = 125 MeV (2.5%) B.) ILC BCD Lattice (1Q/32 cavity), TESLA wakes, E = 5 GeV, Espread = 125 MeV (2.5%) C.) ILC BCD Lattice (1Q/32 cavity), ILC wakes, E = 15 GeV, Espread = 150 MeV (1.0%) \| \| Mean dilution (nm) \| \| 90% dilution (nm) \| \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| \| 1:1 DFS \| \| 1:1 DFS \| \| \| USCold LC \| 471 ± 38 \| 6.9 ± 0.4 \| 940 \| 13.1 \| \| ILC BCD ( 5 GeV) \| 191 ± 16 \| 8.9 ± 0.6 \| 387 \| 15.5 \| \| ILC BCD (15 GeV) \| 197 ± 17 \| 5.7 ± 0.4 \| 398 \| 9.8 \| Mean projected Normalized Emittance (nm) vs. Linac length (m) 1:1 DFS ## LIAR ADD-ONS - Earth curvature effect in simulation : can be done - using vertical S-bend magnets (requires significant work in LIAR particularly since it is meant originally for the laser-straight linacs) - by actually placing the beamline elements on the earth curvature using offsets and pitch (some limitations as in LIAR Quads don’t have the pitch) – Alexander Valishev + Nikolay Solyak - using an arbitrary “dispersion-free” geometrical kick (GKICK) which places beamline elements on the earth curvature by changing the reference trajectory - Didn’t exist in LIAR. Francois Ostiguy has helped in adding this feature. issue about the geometrical transformation - further checks are being carried out - In LIAR, dispersion could not be used as initial condition and there was no provision for propagating it through the Linac - Francois has added this feature. The matched dispersion condition at the beginning of the linac can now be artificially introduced into the initial beam (w/o constructing any matching section) ## ILC BCD CURVED LINAC - SIMULATION Length of CM w/o Quad = 10.651 m; Length of CM w/ Quad = 11.452 m To place the beamline elements on the earth curvature, each of the CM is given two half kicks in y-direction using GKICK (one at the beginning and other at the end) ANGLE_CM = L_CM / R_Earth / 2 = 0.8360 rad (or 0.8989 rad) Since YCORs are with the Quads (which are 1 / 4CM), so an equivalent kick is given to beam to launch it into the reference orbit set by earth curvature *- (2 ANGLE_CM_Quad + 6 * ANGLE_CM_NoQuad) = **- 6.8139 rad - Linac 8 CM Quad package = Quad, BPM, COR ## ILC MAIN LINAC - BCD Linac Cryogenic system is divided into CM, with 8 RF cavities / CM 1 Quad / 4CM : Superconducting Quads in every fourth CM, FODO “constant beta” lattice, with phase advance of 750 / 600 in x/y plane Each quad has a *BPM* and a *Vertical & Horizontal Corrector* magnet; ILC MAIN LINAC - BCD - Main Linac Parameters ~11.0 km length 9 Cell cavities at 1.3 GHz; Loaded Gradient : 31.5 MV/m Injection energy = 15.0 GeV Initial Energy spread = 1.07 %(~150MeV) Extracted beam energy = 251.8 GeV - Beam Conditions Bunch Charge: 2.0 x 1010 particles/bunch Bunch length = 300 m Normalized injection emittance: Y = 20 nm-rad Length (m) : 10417.20 N_quad : 240 N_cavity : 7680 N_bpms : 241 N_Xcor : 240 N_Ycor : 241 N_gkicks : 1920 ## GKICK checks - GKICK provides the reference trajectory ( to incorporate earth curvature effect) so that all the beamline elements get placed on that reference. - YCOR launches the beam on to that reference trajectory - Three cases are simulated - A.) GKICK - OFF , YCOR - ON => Terrible case - B.) GKICK - ON , YCOR - OFF => Terrible case - C.) GKICK - ON, YCOR - ON => Nominal case    ILC BCD LATTICE 1st 1000 meters ## GKICK checks FULL ILC BCD LATTICE: Measurements at the YCOR locations (matched dispersion) - ZOOM - ZOOM ## ILC BCD Main Linac: Matched Lattice 1st 1600 m of ILC BCD CURVED LATTICE: matched dispersion ## ILC BCD: Curved Linac Matched initial beam conditions are used Systematic offset of (maximum) ~40 m through the cavities < Expected 300 um RMS cavity and 200 um RMS CM alignments (Random) foreseen in ILC main Linac Y-orbit only at YCOR locations (4th CM) FULL Linac Y-orbit (BPM at the centre of each CM) ## ILC BCD: Curved vs. Straight Linac Matched initial beam conditions are used ; 100 seeds; BPMs only at YCOR locations All nominal misalignments except that all errors in 1st 25 CMs are reset to 0; WAKES ON 1:1 DFS CURVED STRAIGHT - Mean: 11.9 nm - 90%: 16.3 nm - Mean: 2.7 nm - 90%: 4.7 nm - Mean: 132 nm - 90%: 229 nm - Mean: 143 nm - 90%: 274 nm 1:1 DFS ## ILC BCD CURVED: Matched vs. Unmatched 100 seeds; BPMs only at YCOR locations; WAKES ON All nominal misalignments except that all errors in 1st 25 CMs are reset to zero 1:1 DFS Mean projected Normalized Emittance (nm) vs. BPM index ## Two different CURVED geometries Compare ILC BCD curved linac with a design where GKICK and YCOR are placed together at the centre of every 4th CM Matched beam conditions; 100 seeds; BPMs only at YCOR locations; WAKES ON All nominal misalignments except that all errors in 1st 25 CMs are reset to zero Mean projected Normalized Emittance (nm) vs. BPM index 1:1 DFS ## BENCHMARKING / CROSS – CHECKING - SINGLE BUNCH EMITTANCE DILUTION WITH STATIC MISALIGNMENTS ## BENCHMARKING - Differences in the emittance dilution predictions and sensitivity of the beam based alignments. - Thus, it is generally felt by LET community to understand these subtle differences carefully and hence various analyzers have agreed to cross-check results and so far two exercises were attempted - Codes compared - BMAD (TAO) -- Jeff Smith (Cornell) - PLACET -- Daniel Schulte (CERN) - MERLIN -- Nick Walker (DESY) & Paul Lebrun (Fermilab) separately - SLEPT -- Kiyoshi Kubo (KEK) - MATLIAR -- Peter Tenenbaum (SLAC) and Kirti Ranjan (Fermilab) BENCHMARKING ## BENCHMARKING Exercise # 1 In perfectly aligned LINAC (TESLA lattice), launch the beam with the initial y-offset of 5 microns (including TESLA wakes) Half Linac is low energy section and half if the high energy section. - Difference in the vertical orbit at the BPMs w.r.t. BMAD - Kubo’s old version - Kubo’s new version Paul’s MERLIN - BMAD’s vertical orbit - Paul’s new results are consistent with the Nick’s MERLIN results ## BENCHMARKING Exercise # 1 Diff. in QUAD STRENGTH Diff. in REFERENCE ENERGY Diff. in QUAD STRENGTH / REF. ENERGY Ref. energy and Quad. Strengths of PLACET is quite different PLACET - because of the diff. in the interpretation of ELOSS Differences in Quad strength/ Ref. energy is found in PLACET, beam trajectory doesn’t look significantly different. - Paul’s new results are consistent with the Nick’s MERLIN results - Daniel - Paul’s MERLIN ## BENCHMARKING Exercise # 1 BENCHMARKING Exercise # 1 Diff. in PROJECTED VERTICAL EMITTANCE w.r.t. MATLIAR - 0.1 nm diff. for 1.2 nm emittance growth : 10% variation – are we close enough?? - BMAD’s projected vertical emittance - Paul’s new results are consistent with Nick’s MERLIN results - Paul’s MERLIN ## BENCHMARKING Exercise # 2 Then he generated the vertical corrector’s setting for the DFS Exercise: Include the misalignments and the vertical corrector’s setting and plot the emittance dilution BENCHMARKING Exercise # 2 - Wakes on - ~ 10% variation – are we close enough?? - BMAD results are somewhat different w/ wakes on ## BENCHMARKING Exercise # 2 - BMAD results are also in agreement w/o wakes on - Wakes off - How close do we want to be? - I would say that If we can show agreement among various codes at the 10% level w/ all the input ingredients then it would be REASONABLE agreement ## Summary - We have studied the single bunch emittance dilution for USColdLC Main Linac, compared 1:1 and DFS for static misalignments, and also studied the sensitivity of these algorithms - Studied various lattice configurations for the design of ILC BCD - LIAR has been modified to study the curved Linac - Preliminary results of the ILC BCD curved Linac show that the there is no significant impact on the achievable emittance from the linac which follows the Earth’s geometry as compared to the straight linac. - Different groups have been able to find some small bugs / differences in their code while doing benchmarking tests. - Most of the codes show agreement w/ each other now at the 10% level. - Recently Leo showed the verification of exercise # 1 using CHEF...development is going on...seems like a promising simulation package ! ## Plan - Close look at the ILC BCD curved linac and perform various sensitivity studies and understand the tolerances - Understanding of the outstanding issues of the DFS (for ex. Improved Launch steering and wake related systematic effects) - Add Beam Jitter, Quad Jitter, Ground motion, Dispersion bumps - Bad seeds studies ## SIMULATION: LIAR - Beam with a total charge Q is described as a train of Nb bunches - Each bunch is longitudinally divided into Ns slices that are located at different positions in z. - Each slice is divided into Nm mono-energetic beam ellipses - Vector X describes the centroid motion of thin longitudinal slice - With each slice, a beam matrix is also associated - Both the centroids X and the beam ellipses are tracked through the lattice - Beam emittance w.r.t. beam centroid is defined as - where - and so on ## ILC BCD – Baseline Parameters Baseline Parameters ILC BCD – Baseline Parameters ## Emittance Dilution Emittance Dilution	en
converted_docs	358571	25th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: to ensure the free appropriate public education of all children with disabilities 2003 Vol. II Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services U.S. Department of Education 25th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Vol. 2 2003 to ensure the free appropriate public education of all children with disabilities Prepared by Westat for the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services U.S. Department of Education This report was produced under U.S. Department of Education Contract No. ED01CO0082/0008 with Westat. Judith Holt served as the contracting officer's representative. U.S. Department of Education Margaret Spellings Secretary Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) John H. Hager Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) Troy R. Justesen Acting Director April 2005 This report is in the public domain, except for images on the cover, section dividers, and the logo of VSA arts, all of which are copyrighted. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. While permission to reprint this report is not necessary, the citation should be U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs, 25th Annual (2003) Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, vol. 2, Washington, D.C., 2005. To order copies of this report, write to: ED Pubs, Education Publications Center, U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398; or fax your request to: (301) 470-1244; or e-mail your request to: [email protected]; or call in your request toll-free: 1-877-433-7827 (1-877-4-ED-PUBS). If 877 service is not yet available in your area, call 1-800-872-5327 (1-800-USA-LEARN). Those who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a teletypewriter (TTY), should call 1-800-437-0083; or order online at www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html. This report is also available on the Department's Web site at: www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/OSEP. On request, this publication is available in alternative formats, such as Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette. For more information, please contact the Department's Alternate Format Center (202) 205-8113. Image on front cover FREEDOM © 2001 Kandyce Vessey, CO Image provided courtesy of VSA arts www.vsaarts.org VSA arts is an international nonprofit organization founded in 1974 by Ambassador Jean Kennedy Smith. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., VSA arts is creating a society where people with disabilities can learn through, participate in, and enjoy the arts. Nearly 5 million people with disabilities participate in VSA arts programs every year through a network of affiliates nationwide and in over 60 countries worldwide. 25th OSEP Annual Report to Congress Volume II Contents Notes Concerning the Data Tables That Follow Data Sources Used in This Report Introduction Table AA1 Number of Children Served Under IDEA, Part B by Age Group, During the 2001-02 School Year Table AA2 Number of Children Ages 3-5 Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During the 2001-02 School Year Table AA3 Number of Children Ages 6-21 Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During the 2001-02 School Year Table AA4 Number of Children Ages 6-11 Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During the 2001-02 School Year Table AA5 Number of Children Ages 12-17 Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During the 2001-02 School Year Table AA6 Number of Children Ages 18-21 Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During the 2001-02 School Year Table AA7 Number of Children Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability and Age, During the 2001-02 School Year Table AA8 Number of Children Served Under IDEA, Part B by Age, During the 2001-02 School Year All Disabilities Table AA9 Number of Children Served Under IDEA by Disability and Age Group, During School Years 1992-93 Through 2001-02 Table AA10 Percentage (Based on 2001 Population Estimates) of Children Served Under IDEA, Part B by Age Group, During the 2001-02 School Year All Disabilities Table AA11 Percentage (Based on 2001 Population Estimates) of Children Ages 6-21 Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During the 2001-02 School Year Table AA12 Percentage (Based on 2001 Population Estimates) of Children Ages 6-17 Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During the 2001-02 School Year Table AA13 Percentage (Based on Estimated Enrollment) of Children Ages 6-17 Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During the 2001-02 School Year Table AA14 Racial/Ethnic Composition (Number and Percentage) of Students Ages 3-5 Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During the 2001-02 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury > > Developmental Delay Table AA15 Racial/Ethnic Composition (Number and Percentage) of Students Ages 6-21 Served Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During the 2001-02 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury > > Developmental Delay Table AA16 Percentage of Racial/Ethnic Group (Based on 2001 Population Estimates) Ages 3-5 Served Under IDEA, Part B, During the 2001-02 School Year > American Indian/Alaska Native > > Asian/Pacific Islander > > Black > > Hispanic > > White Table AA17 Percentage of Racial/Ethnic Group (Based on 2001 Population Estimates) Ages 6-21 Served Under IDEA, Part B, During the 2001-02 School Year > American Indian/Alaska Native > > Asian/Pacific Islander > > Black > > Hispanic > > White Table AB1 Number and Percentage of Children Ages 3-5 Served in Different Educational Environments Under IDEA, Part B, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury > > Developmental Delay Table AB2 Number and Percentage of Children Ages 6-21 Served in Different Educational Environments Under IDEA, Part B, by Disability, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury > > Developmental Delay Table AB3 Number and Percentage of Children Ages 6-11 Served in Different Educational Environments Under IDEA, Part B, by Disability, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury > > Developmental Delay Table AB4 Number and Percentage of Children Ages 12-17 Served in Different Educational Environments Under IDEA, Part B, by Disability, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury Table AB5 Number and Percentage of Children Ages 18-21 Served in Different Educational Environments Under IDEA, Part B, by Disability, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury Table AB6 Number of Children Ages 3-21 Served in Correctional Facilities and Parent Initiated Private Schools Under IDEA, Part B, During the 2000-01 School Year > All Disabilities 258 Table AB7 Number of Children Served in Different Educational Environments Under IDEA, Part B by Age Group, During School Years 1991-92 Through 2000-01 Table AB8 Number of Children Ages 6-21 Served in Different Educational Environments Under IDEA, Part B by Disability, During School Years 1991-92 Through 2000-01 Table AB9 Racial/Ethnic Composition (Number and Percentage) of Children Ages 3-5 Served in Different Educational Environments Under IDEA, Part B, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Early Childhood Setting > > Early Childhood Special Education Setting > > Home > > Part-Time Early Childhood/Part-Time Special Education Setting > > Residential Facility > > Separate School > > Itinerant Service Outside the Home > > Reverse Mainstream Setting > > Total Table AB10 Racial/Ethnic Composition (Number and Percentage) of Children Ages 6-21 Served in Different Educational Environments Under IDEA, Part B, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Special Education Outside Class Less Than 21% of the Day > > Special Education Outside Class Between 21% and 60% of the Day > > Special Education Outside Class More Than 60% of the Day > > Public Separate School Facility > > Private Separate School Facility > > Public Residential Facility > > Private Residential Facility > > Homebound/Hospital > > Correctional Facility > > Children with Disabilities Enrolled in Private Schools Not Placed or > Referred by Public Agencies > > Total Table AC1 Total Number of Teachers Employed (in Full-Time Equivalency) To Provide Special Education and Related Services for Children and Youth Ages 3-5 with Disabilities, During the 2000-2001 School Year Table AC2 Total Number of Teachers Employed (in Full-Time Equivalency) To Provide Special Education and Related Services for Children and Youth Ages 6-21 with Disabilities, During the 2000-2001 School Year Table AC3 Number and Type of Other Personnel Employed (in Full-Time Equivalency) To Provide Special Education and Related Services for Children and Youth Ages 3-21 with Disabilities by Personnel Category, During the 2000-2001 School Year Table AD1 Number of Students Age 14 and Older Exiting Special Education, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury Table AD2 Number of Students with Disabilities Exiting Special Education by Age Year, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury Table AD3 Number of Students with Disabilities Exiting School by Graduation with a Diploma, Graduation with a Certificate, and Reached Maximum Age by Age, During School Years 1991-92 Through 2000-01 Table AD4 Racial/Ethnic Composition (Number and Percentage) of Children Ages 14-21+ Exiting Special Education, by Basis of Exit, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Graduated with a Diploma > > Received a Certificate > > Reached Maximum Age > > No Longer Receives Special Education > > Died > > Moved, Known To Continue > > Moved, Not Known To Continue > > Dropped Out > > Total Table AE1 Number of Children with Disabilities Subject to Unilateral Removal by School Personnel for Drug or Weapon Offenses, Removal Based on a Hearing Officer Determination Regarding Likely Injury, or Long-Term Suspension/Expulsion, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury > > Developmental Delay Table AE2 Percentage of Children (Based on Child Count) with Disabilities Subject to Unilateral Removal by School Personnel for Drug or Weapon Offenses, Removal Based on a Hearing Officer Determination Regarding Likely Injury, or Long-Term Suspension/Expulsion, During the 2000-2001 School Year > All Disabilities > > Specific Learning Disabilities > > Speech or Language Impairments > > Mental Retardation > > Emotional Disturbance > > Multiple Disabilities > > Hearing Impairments > > Orthopedic Impairments > > Other Health Impairments > > Visual Impairments > > Autism > > Deaf-Blindness > > Traumatic Brain Injury > > Developmental Delay Table AE3 Number of Children with Disabilities Subject to Unilateral Removal by School Personnel for Drug or Weapon Offenses, Removal Based on a Hearing Officer Determination Regarding Likely Injury, or Long-Term Suspension/Expulsion by Race/Ethnicity, During the 2000-2001 School Year > American Indian/Alaska Native > > Asian/Pacific Islander > > Black > > Hispanic > > White Table AE4 Percentage of Racial/Ethnic Group (Based on Child Count) with Disabilities Subject to Unilateral Removal by School Personnel for Drug or Weapon Offenses, Removal Based on a Hearing Officer Determination Regarding Likely Injury, or Long-Term Suspension/Expulsion by Race/Ethnicity, During the 2000-2001 School Year > American Indian/Alaska Native > > Asian/Pacific Islander > > Black > > Hispanic > > White Population Estimates From the U.S. Census Bureau and Enrollment Estimates From the National Center for Education Statistics Table AF1 Estimated Resident Population for 2000 and 2001 for Children Ages 3-21 Table AF2 Estimated Resident Population for 2000 and 2001 for Children Ages Birth Through 2 Table AF3 Estimated Resident Population for 2000 and 2001 for Children Ages 3-5 Table AF4 Estimated Resident Population for 2000 and 2001 for Children Ages 6-17 Table AF5 Estimated Resident Population for 2000 and 2001 for Children Ages 18-21 Table AF6 2001 Population Estimates (Number and Percent) for Children Ages Birth Through 2 by Race/Ethnicity for the Reporting Year 2001-02 Table AF7 2001 Population Estimates (Number and Percent) for Children Ages 3-5 by Race/Ethnicity for the Reporting Year 2001-02 Table AF8 2001 Population Estimates (Number and Percent) for Children Ages 6-21 by Race/Ethnicity for the Reporting Year 2001-02 Table AF9 Enrollment for Students in Grades Pre-Kindergarten Through Twelve IDEA State Grants and Part C Tables Table AG1 State Grant Awards Under Parts B and C of IDEA Table AH1 Number and Percentage (Based on 2001 Population Estimates) of Infants and Toddlers Receiving Early Intervention Services, December 1, 2001 Table AH2 Number of At-Risk Infants and Toddlers Receiving Early Intervention Services (Duplicated Count), December 1, 2001 Table AH3 Number of Infants and Toddlers Ages Birth Through 2 Served in Different Early Intervention Settings Under Part C, December 1, 2000 Table AH4 Number of Infants and Toddlers Ages Birth Through 2 Exiting Part C Programs, During the 2000-2001 Reporting Year Table AH5 Early Intervention Services on Individualized Family Services Plan Provided to Infants, Toddlers, and Their Families in Accord With Part C, December 1, 2000 Table AH6 Number and Type of Personnel Employed and Contracted To Provide Early Intervention Services to Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities and Their Families, December 1, 2000 Table AH7 Racial/Ethnic Composition (Number and Percentage) of Infants and Toddlers Ages Birth Through 2 Served Under IDEA, Part C by Race/Ethnicity, December 1, 2001 Table AH8 Racial/Ethnic Composition (Number and Percentage) of At-Risk Infants and Toddlers Ages Birth Through 2 Served Under IDEA, Part C by Race/Ethnicity, December 1, 2001 Table AH9 Percentage (Based on 2001 Population Estimates) of Racial/Ethnic Group Ages Birth Through 2 Served Under IDEA, Part C, December 1, 2001 Table AH10 Racial/Ethnic Composition (Number and Percentage) of Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities and Their Families Served Under Part C by Program Settings, December 1, 2000 > Program for Developmental Delay > > Program for Typically Developing Children > > Home > > Hospital (Inpatient) > > Residential Facility > > Service Provider Location > > Other Setting > > Total Setting Table AH11 Racial/Ethnic Composition (Number and Percentage) of Children Ages Birth Through 2 Exiting Part C Programs, by Basis of Exit, During the 2000-2001 School Year > Completion of IFSP Prior to Maximum Age > > Part B Eligible > > Exit to Other Program > > Exit with No Referrals > > Part B Eligibility, Not Determined > > Deceased > > Moved Out of State > > Withdrawal by Parent > > Attempts To Contact Unsuccessful > > Total Number of Infants and Toddlers Exiting Table AH12 Number and Percentage of Infants and Toddlers Ages Birth Through 2 by Early Intervention Services Provided by Race/Ethnicity, December 1, 2000 > American Indian/Alaska Native > > Asian/Pacific Islander > > Black > > Hispanic > > White Data Notes for IDEA, Part B Table 1 State Reporting Patterns for IDEA, Part B Child Count Data 2001, Other Data 2000-01 Data Notes for IDEA, Part C Notes Concerning the Data Tables That Follow The following will assist users of this volume: - The term state is used for column labels in this report to represent the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the BIA Schools, and the outlying areas of American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Marianas, and the Virgin Islands. Note that Section 602 (27) of IDEA '97 (the law under which the data in this report were collected) states that "The term 'State' means each of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each of the outlying areas." - Two national rows are included at the bottom of most tables in the report. The first, "U.S. and Outlying Areas," includes the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the BIA Schools, and the outlying areas. The second,"50 States and DC," includes just the 50 states and the District of Columbia. - Tables that show the percentage of children served based on population data do not include percentages for Puerto Rico, BIA Schools, and the outlying areas as no population data were available from the Census Bureau for these entities. - Many tables have a note indicating that the data included are as of August 30, 2002. This is because the Part B and Part C data included in this report are from a snapshot of the database maintained by Office of Special Education Program's (OSEP's) Data Analysis System. OSEP permits states to update data as necessary after original state submissions; however, a snapshot is used to prepare analyses for the annual reports to Congress. The use of a snapshot ensures that the data are not revised while the report is produced. It also ensures the accuracy of the presentation and analysis of data for the reports and facilitates the Department of Education review process for the reports. - Enrollment data (including students with and without disabilities) collected from states by the National Center for Education Statistics in the Common Core of Data are based on student grade. However, counts of students served under IDEA are based on student age. Therefore, in Table AA13, the numerator is the number of students ages 6 through 17 served under IDEA and the denominator is pre-kindergarten through grade 12 enrollment. - For purposes of Tables AA14 and AA15, racial/ethnic composition is defined as the number (or percentage) of students from a specific racial/ethnic group served under IDEA for a particular disability among all students served under IDEA for that disability. For example, of the total number of children ages 3 through 5 served under IDEA, Part B, in the U.S. and outlying areas, 14.83 percent were Hispanic (see Table AA14 \[continued\] on page 37). Data Sources Used in this Report The tables in this volume of the 25th Annual Report to Congress were developed primarily from the Office of Special Education Programs' (OSEP's) Data Analysis System (DANS). DANS is the repository for all of the data mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to be collected annually from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the BIA Schools, and the outlying areas. These data include the number of infants and toddlers being served under Part C of IDEA and the settings in which they receive program services, as well as their transition out of Part C. The states also report early intervention services provided to this population and the personnel who are providing services. For Part B, states report the number of children and students who are being served, the educational environments in which they receive education, disciplinary actions that affect them, personnel providing educational services, and their exiting from the program. Two additional data sources are used in some tables of this volume: the National Center for Education Statistics' Common Core of Data and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau. NCES The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting and analyzing data that are related to education in the U.S. and other nations. NCES is located within the U.S. Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences. NCES fulfills a congressional mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report complete statistics on the condition of American education; conduct and publish reports; and review and report on education activities internationally. NCES statistics and publications are used by Congress, other federal agencies, state education agencies, educational organizations, the news media, researchers, and the public. The Common Core of Data (CCD) is the Department of Education's primary database on public elementary and secondary education in the United States. CCD is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts that contains data that are designed to be comparable across all states. CCD is made up of a set of five surveys sent to state education departments. Most of the data are obtained from administrative records maintained by the state education agencies (SEAs). Statistical information is collected annually from public elementary and secondary schools, public school districts, and the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Department of Defense schools, and the outlying areas. This report uses information from the CCD for 1999-2000, 2000-01, and 2001-02, as noted in the text. Below is a list of NCES references: - U.S. Department of Education, NCES. (1991). Early Estimates of Public Elementary and Secondary Education Statistics: School Year 1991-92, NCES 92032, by Frank Johnson and Sharon Bobbitt. Washington, DC: Author. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - U.S. Department of Education, NCES. (2001). Early Estimates of Public Elementary and Secondary Education Statistics: School Year 2000-2001, NCES 2001-311, by Lena McDowell. Washington, DC: Author. - U.S. Department of Education, NCES. (2002). Early Estimates of Public Elementary and Secondary Education Statistics: School Year 2000-2001, NCES 2001-311, by Lena McDowell and Frank Johnson. Washington, DC: Author. U.S. Census Bureau Each year, the Population Estimates Program of the U.S. Census Bureau publishes estimates of the resident population for each state and county. Members of the Armed Forces on active duty stationed outside the United States, military dependents living abroad, and other United States citizens living abroad are not included in these estimates. These population estimates are produced by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin. The state population estimates are solely the sum of the county population estimates. The reference date for county estimates is July 1. Estimates are used in federal funding allocations, as denominators for vital rates and per capita time series, as survey controls, and in monitoring recent demographic changes. With each new issue of July 1 estimates, the estimates for years are revised back to the last census. Previously published estimates are superseded and archived. See the Census Bureau's document Estimates and Projections Area Documentation: State and County Total Population Estimates (http://www.census.gov/popest/topics/ methodology/2003_st_co_meth.pdf accessed Feb. 24, 2005) for more information about how population estimates are produced. The Census files used in this report include the following: - U.S. Bureau of the Census. Population data for 1999 retrieved October 2000 from www.census.gov/popest/archives/1990s/stats/st-99-10.txt/. - U.S. Bureau of the Census. Population data for 1998 retrieved October 1999. This file is no longer available on the Web site. Introduction During the two decades that the annual reports to Congress have been published, these documents have undergone several minor stylistic changes and one major substantive redesign and refocus. In 1997, OSEP adopted a policy-oriented approach to the annual report to Congress. The results of this shift were first seen in the 1998 annual report, which used a four-section modular format. The 2002 Annual Report to Congress was the fifth volume to include four sections---Context/Environment, Student Characteristics, Programs and Services, and Results---plus a separate appendix of data tables. The 5-year period since the introduction of the modular format has provided sufficient time for OSEP to evaluate the current approach and to suggest a redesign of the report. The implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2001 amplified the importance of the annual report to Congress. IDEA focuses on accountability and results. As the President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education pointed out, this emphasis means that Congress and the public must know that IDEA is implemented effectively and that federal funds are well spent. This annual report focuses on three goals. First, the report is congruent with NCLB. This means that the annual report focuses on results and accountability throughout the text. The second goal is to make the report more useful to Congress, parents, each state, and other stakeholders. This report concentrates on a more readable and user-friendly style. It focuses on key state performance data in accordance with the recommendations of the President's Commission. OSEP's third goal is to make the report more visually appealing. The 2003 Annual Report to Congress has two volumes. The first volume focuses on the children and students being served under IDEA and provides profiles of individual states' special education environment. In the national picture reported in the first section, the child/student-focused material is presented in a question-and-answer format. It contains three subsections: infants and toddlers served under IDEA, Part C; children ages 3-21 served under IDEA, Part B; and students ages 6-21 served under IDEA, Part B. All information available about each group of children/students is presented in one section. Each subsection focuses on available results. All available data relevant to OSEP's Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) indicators are included in this section. To the extent possible, the data are presented through graphics, short tables, and bulleted text. The second section of vol. 1 contains state-level performance data. These state profiles, which provide all of the key information about a state on one or two pages, will be valuable to Congress and other stakeholders who are interested in individual state performance. The state profiles are a new feature of the annual report. The third section of vol. 1 contains the rank-order tables OSEP uses as part of its continuous improvement and focused monitoring program. These tables are also a new feature of the annual report. Vol. 2 contains all of the state-reported data tables from DANS. OSEP's goal in separating the text of the report from the extensive tables is to make the report usable to all readers. The tables are also posted on www.IDEAdata.org. The artwork for the covers of the report and its divider pages was graciously provided by VSA (Vision, Strength, Artistic expression) arts. \[Founded in 1974 by Jean Kennedy Smith as an affiliate of The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, VSA arts is an international organization that creates learning opportunities through the arts for people with disabilities. The organization offers arts-based programs in creative writing, dance, drama, music and the visual arts implemented primarily through its vast affiliate network in 39 states and the District of Columbia, collaborators in 10 states, and 70 international affiliates in 67 countries. VSA arts programs now serve 4.3 million Americans and 1.3 million people in other parts of the world.\] Note: The actual data tables in Vol. II, due to their format and file structure, are not included in this Word version of the OSEP Annual Report to Congress. They can be accessed on-line in Microsoft Excel format at http://www.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/2003/. Data Notes Data Notes for IDEA, Part B These data notes contain information on the ways in which states collected and reported data differently from the OSEP data formats and instructions. The notes refer to the tables in volume 1, sections I and II. In addition, the notes provide explanations of significant changes in the data from the previous year. The chart below summarizes differences in collecting and reporting data for 12 states. These variations affected the way data were reported for the IDEA, Part B child count and the educational environment, exiting, and discipline collections. Additional notes on how states reported data for specific data collections follow this table. Table 1. State Reporting Patterns for IDEA, Part B Child Count Data 2001, Other Data 2000-01 +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| States \| Dif \| \| \| \| \| \| ferences \| \| \| \| \| \| from \| \| \| \| \| \| OSEP \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| eporting \| \| \| \| \| \| ca \| \| \| \| \| \| tegories \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Where \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| H = \| \| \| \| \| \| Reported \| \| \| \| \| \| in the \| \| \| \| \| \| hearing \| \| \| \| \| \| imp \| \| \| \| \| \| airments \| \| \| \| \| \| category \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| O = \| \| \| \| \| \| Reported \| \| \| \| \| \| in the \| \| \| \| \| \| or \| \| \| \| \| \| thopedic \| \| \| \| \| \| imp \| \| \| \| \| \| airments \| \| \| \| \| \| category \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| P = \| \| \| \| \| \| Reported \| \| \| \| \| \| in the \| \| \| \| \| \| primary \| \| \| \| \| \| di \| \| \| \| \| \| sability \| \| \| \| \| \| category \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| R = \| \| \| \| \| \| Reported \| \| \| \| \| \| in other \| \| \| \| \| \| di \| \| \| \| \| \| sability \| \| \| \| \| \| ca \| \| \| \| \| \| tegories \| \| \| \| +=======================+==========+==========+==========+==========+ \| \| Multiple \| Other \| Deaf-b \| T \| \| \| disa \| health \| lindness \| raumatic \| \| \| bilities \| imp \| \| brain \| \| \| \| airments \| \| injury \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| Colorado \| \| O \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| Delaware \| P \| O \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| Florida \| P \| \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| Georgia \| P \| \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| Illinois \[Illinois \| P \| \| \| \| \| and Minnesota \| \| \| \| \| \| reported children in \| \| \| \| \| \| the multiple \| \| \| \| \| \| disabilities category \| \| \| \| \| \| for the 2001 child \| \| \| \| \| \| count, but reported \| \| \| \| \| \| children according to \| \| \| \| \| \| primary disability \| \| \| \| \| \| for the 2000-01 \| \| \| \| \| \| educational \| \| \| \| \| \| environments, \| \| \| \| \| \| exiting, and \| \| \| \| \| \| discipline tables \| \| \| \| \| \| (see vol. 2).\] \| \| \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| Michigan \| \| O \| H \| R \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| Mississippi \| \| O \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| Minnesota \[Illinois \| P \| \| \| \| \| and Minnesota \| \| \| \| \| \| reported children in \| \| \| \| \| \| the multiple \| \| \| \| \| \| disabilities category \| \| \| \| \| \| for the 2001 child \| \| \| \| \| \| count, but reported \| \| \| \| \| \| children according to \| \| \| \| \| \| primary disability \| \| \| \| \| \| for the 2000-01 \| \| \| \| \| \| educational \| \| \| \| \| \| environments, \| \| \| \| \| \| exiting, and \| \| \| \| \| \| discipline tables \| \| \| \| \| \| (see vol. 2).\] \| \| \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| North Dakota \| P \| \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| Oregon \| P \| \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| West Virginia \| P \| \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ \| Wisconsin \| P \| \| \| \| +-----------------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ Tables AA1-AA17: Child Count Alabama---The state attributed the increase in the number of children reported in the developmental delay category to a change in the state's upper age limit for this category. The 2000 child count is the first year that children over age 6 were reported in this category. Alaska---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 3 through 5 with developmental delay to a change in state policy. Until recently, the state did not have "defined and established eligibility criteria" for developmental delay. This is only the second year that Alaska has reported children in its child count using the developmental delay category. Students currently reported under developmental delay were previously reported in other categories. Arizona---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 with other health impairments to an increase in the number of children diagnosed with attention deficit disorder (ADD) or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 with autism to an increased public awareness of the condition and improvements within school systems in identifying children with autism. California---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 3 through 5 and 6 through 21 with autism to an improved awareness of the condition as well as to a steady increase in enrollment of special education students. Connecticut---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 with autism to an increase in professional and parental awareness and the growth of professional organizations advocating services for children with autism. In addition, the state identifies students at a younger age so more children are reaching age 6 with the identification already in place. In some cases, the state is reclassifying older students with autism. Furthermore, children with autism are not exiting from special education to return to regular education. District of Columbia---The District of Columbia attributed the increase in the number of children reported in many categories of the child count data to the addition of 528 students served in charter schools. This is the first year these students have been counted. Illinois---The 2001 child count is the first time that the state reported children in the multiple disabilities category. In previous years, the state reported students with multiple disabilities according to their primary disability. Indiana---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 3 through 5 with developmental delay to the fact that this is only the second year that Indiana reported students in this category. Most of the students who could have been reported with developmental delay in last year's child count were reported in other categories. The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 with autism to an increased awareness and identification of the condition. Iowa---Iowa does not collect disability data for all 3- through 5-year-olds. In 2000, the state used the disability distribution among children for whom these data were known to assign disability to the count of children without a specific disability. In 2001, the state assigned disability based on incidence data collected several years ago. As a result of this change in methodology, the disability distribution changed substantially between 2000 and 2001. In particular, the reported count of children with speech or language impairments dramatically declined and the count of children with specific learning disabilities or mental retardation dramatically increased. The state is considering resubmitting their data. They have undertaken a study to update the incidence data they use to assign disability to the child count. New data based on the study will be available in future reports Kentucky---The state uses the developmental delay category to classify children ages 3 through 5 unless an alternative disability category is clearly more appropriate. The state attributed the high number of students (compared to the national total) ages 6 through 9 with developmental delay to the high number of children identified during their preschool years. The number of students identified with developmental delay peaks at age 4 and declines thereafter, resulting in gradually decreasing counts as children matriculate through the system. In addition, the state increased the upper age limit for developmental delay from age 5 to age 8. This resulted in a greater number of children in this category. Maryland---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 with autism to an increased awareness of the condition and to improvements within the school system in identifying children with autism. In addition, the increase may be due to families with autistic children moving into Maryland due to its exemplary programs and services for children with autism. Massachusetts---The state is in the first year of a 3-year transition to a new data collection system. Disability counts in prior years were based on a formula. Beginning in 2001, the disability counts are based on actual individual student data. Because the identification of individual students by disability is not required until they either undergo an initial eligibility determination or a 3-year re-evaluation, some of the disability determinations for this school year were based on the professional judgment of the school districts providing the data, rather than representing an IEP team determination. Although this means that the 2001 child count does not fully reflect team decisionmaking, Massachusetts deems that these data are more accurate than the formula-based reporting used in the past. Massachusetts attributed the high number of children (compared to the national total) ages 3 through 5 with traumatic brain injury (TBI), the high number of children ages 6 through 21 with TBI, and the high number of children ages 6 through 21 with deaf-blindness to changes in how the state tracks and counts children using individual data. Michigan---The state attributed the decrease in the total number of Asian/Pacific Islanders served to correcting an error that was made in reporting these children in previous years. Several local districts erroneously were overreporting Asian/Pacific Islanders because of a coding error. The state is still working with some districts to correct this problem. Minnesota---The 2001 child count is the first time that Minnesota reported children in the multiple disabilities category. In previous years, the state reported students with multiple disabilities according to their primary disability. The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 3 through 5 and 6 through 21 with autism to more staff resources, continued outreach programs, better diagnosis and identification of the disorder, and improved training methods and assessments. Missouri---The state reported that the increase in the number of children ages 3 through 5 with speech and language impairments is due to a change in eligibility under the state plan. Districts now choose a categorical diagnosis for children ages 3 and 4 in addition to using the category "young child with a developmental delay." The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 with autism to better diagnosis and identification of the disorder by school personnel. Montana---The state changed its method of reporting disability categories for children ages 3 through 5. Montana has a state statute that allows school districts to identify children ages 3 through 5 under "child with disabilities" without specifying a disability category. Because federal reporting requirements now require states to report students ages 3 through 5 by disability, Montana encouraged school districts to report specific disability categories for this age group. This year about 40 percent of the students in this age group were reported by disability. The state imputed disability for the remaining 60 percent using the data reported for the 40 percent. In previous years, the state imputed disability for 3- to 5-year-olds using the disability distribution for 6-year-olds. Nevada---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 with autism to a change in data collection methodology. Some students previously counted in the mental retardation category are now reported in the autism category. The state also attributed the increase to better diagnosis and identification of autism by school personnel and physicians and improved training methods and assessments. New Jersey---In 1997-98, New Jersey changed its definition of neurologically impaired (NI). Students previously defined as NI were grandfathered into the TBI category until they could be re-evaluated. The state attributed the large number of children (compared to the national total) reported with TBI to the continuing reevaluation of the students who were reclassified from NI to TBI. New Mexico---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 9 with developmental delay to a change in the state definition of this category 3 years ago. The change resulted in more children being reported in the developmental delay category. New York---New York collects data on race/ethnicity of all school-age students with disabilities (ages 4-21) but does not separately collect race/ethnicity data for students with disabilities who are ages 6-21. The reported race/ethnicity for 6- to 21-year-olds was estimated using race/ethnicity data from students ages 4 through 21 with disabilities. New York reported that it collects disability data only for 4- and 5-year-olds in school-age environments (e.g., kindergarten). The state does not collect disability data for 3- through 5-year-olds in preschool environments. Children with disabilities in preschool environments are all reported in the developmental delay category. North Dakota---The state is currently piloting the category of developmental delay for children ages 6 through 9. Children reported in this category are representative of pilot projects only. Oregon---The state noted that its age ranges are different from the OSEP definitions. Children who are 5 years old on September 1 are considered to be school age and are included in the counts of 6- through 21-year-olds rather than the count of 3- through 5-year-olds. The state attributed the increase in the number of American Indian and Asian/Pacific Islanders ages 3 through 5 who were served under IDEA to the changing demographics of Oregon, a trend also observed in previous years. South Carolina---In South Carolina, children ages 3 through 5 with disabilities are served noncategorically. When the state reported these children on the child count, 2,281 could not be categorized with a specific disability. The state reported these students in the other health impairments category, which led to an increase in the number of children ages 3 through 5 reported in this category. The state has criteria for reporting developmental delay but has not fully implemented the developmental delay category into its data collection. For the past 2 years, the state collected the category under a pilot program. The results have not been stable. Texas---The state attributed the relatively high number of children with other health impairments (compared to the national total) to the fact that Texas does not use the developmental delay category to describe young children with disabilities. Children who would otherwise be reported with developmental delay may be reported in other categories, including, but not limited to, other health impairments. Texas attributed the high number of children ages 3 through 5 in the visual impairments category (compared to the national total) to three factors. First, the definition of visual impairments in Texas is a functional definition, based on educational need and not on an acuity number (e.g., some states include only children with acuities of 20/200 or less). Using a functional definition may lead to higher identification of students. Second, because it is the local school districts, in conjunction with the state's early intervention agency, that serve children with visual impairments from birth, these children are already part of the education system when they reach age 3. This may positively affect child-find efforts. Third, the state feels it has a strong networked service delivery system with effective technical assistance and training to districts in regard to identifying and serving young children with visual impairments. With this support, districts may be more able (and willing) to identify children with visual impairments. Utah---The state attributed the decrease in the number of children ages 3 through 5 with visual impairments to the reclassification of many children previously reported in the visual impairments category as having multiple disabilities. The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 9 with developmental delay to the fact that the category has only been used by the state for 2 years, and it has not had time to stabilize. The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 with autism to better diagnosis and identification of the disorder by school personnel. In addition, the state hired an autism specialist who has extensively trained school personnel across the state. Each district now has a training team for autism. Washington---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 with autism to continued outreach programs, better diagnosis and identification of the disorder by school personnel and physicians, and improved training methods and assessments. The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 9 with a developmental delay to an increase in the state's upper age limit for this category from age 6 to age 9. Wisconsin---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 with autism to better diagnosis and identification of the disorder by school personnel and physicians and improved training methods and assessments. Tables AB1-AB10: Educational Environments Alabama---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 3 through 5 served in the part-time early childhood/part-time early childhood special education category to district-level improvements in the transition of children from Part C to Part B. The state attributed the decrease in the number of students ages 6 through 21 served in public residential facilities to a concerted effort to place students with disabilities in regular classrooms. California---The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 who received special education outside the regular class less than 21 percent of the day to an increase in the number of special education students being placed in less restrictive environments. Illinois---The state noted that some of its definitions do not match federal definitions for time outside the regular classroom. Illinois tracks time outside the classroom in two categories: from 1 to 49 percent of the school day and more than 50 percent of the school day. Illinois did not provide a crosswalk of how they report these data. Kentucky---The state attributed the decreases in both the early childhood setting and the early childhood special education setting and the increase in the part-time early childhood/part-time early childhood special education setting to district training on educational environments. Districts have been trained to report students who have any amount of time in both programs in the part-time early childhood/part-time early childhood special education category. Previously, many districts reported students as either full-time early childhood or full-time early childhood special education setting based on percentages similar to those used in the placement categories for students ages 6 through 21. The state attributed the increase in the separate school environment to three specific districts, two of which had new special education directors. Missouri---The state reported that the increase in part-time early childhood special education is due to a change in the crosswalk from the school-age educational environment categories to the early childhood categories used for kindergarten students. Montana---The state has a statute that allows school districts to identify children ages 3 through 5 under the category "child with disabilities," without specifying a disability category. This year about 72 percent of the students in this age group were reported by disability. The state used the reported disability for the 72 percent to impute disability for the remaining 28 percent. In previous years, the state imputed disability for 3- to 5-year-olds using the disability distribution for 6-year-olds. Montana provided unduplicated, rather than duplicated, counts of children with disabilities served in correctional facilities and enrolled in private schools not placed or referred by public agencies. The state will correct this error for the 2001-02 educational environments data. Nebraska---The state reported that 67 students served in private residential facilities were counted in other educational environments. New York---The state reported that school-age (kindergarten) students with disabilities who are 4 to 5 years old are not reported on the educational environments table. North Carolina---The state does not collect race/ethnicity data for children enrolled in private schools, not placed or referred by public agencies. Ohio---The state increased the number of placement options from the 10 used during the 1999-2000 school year to 23 for the 2000-01 school year. The state attributed the changes in the number of children served in some of the educational environments for 6- through 21-year-olds to this change in reporting categories. Oregon---The state considers children who are 5-years-old on September 1 to be school age and includes them in the count of 6- through 21-year-olds. The state counts children who turn 5 after September 1 in the 3-through-5 age group. The state attributed the decrease in the number of children ages 3 through 5 in part-time early childhood/part-time early childhood special education settings to one program in the state that changed how it coded children. This program had 171 students in this category during the previous year, and none in the category for 2000-01. The program increased the number of children reported in early childhood special education. The state is providing additional training to all contractors to improve data quality in the upcoming year. The state attributed the increase in the number of children ages 6 through 21 in public residential facilities to the expanded Youth Correction Education Program in Oregon. Within the past 3 years, five youth correctional facilities and one "boot camp" opened, bringing the state total to 13 facilities. The overall student population served in these facilities, previously capped at 513 students, was raised to around 1,100 statewide. The cap is increased gradually as facilities fill. Many students in Oregon Youth Authority have been previously determined IDEA eligible and were served while in public school (estimates range from 40 percent to 64 percent). In addition, the state reported that 73 students in this category were most likely miscoded by LEAs. The state is working with LEAs to correctly code students in the future. Puerto Rico---The state attributed the changes in the number of students served in various educational environments to population growth and to the state's special education policies. Educational environments are based on children's individual needs and are reevaluated every year. Therefore, the same child may move in and out of different educational environments each year based on need. Texas---The state noted that some of its definitions do not match federal definitions for the amount of time spent outside the regular classroom. When Texas cross-walked state categories into federal categories, many students were counted as spending more time outside the regular classroom than they actually did. The following categories were affected: (1) special education outside regular class less than 21 percent of day, (2) special education outside regular class at least 21 percent of day and no more than 60 percent of day, and (3) special education outside regular class more than 60 percent of day. The definition of the mainstream instructional arrangement in Texas includes only those students who receive their full instructional day in a general education setting with special education support. Specific data about students receiving "pull-out" services for less than 21 percent of the day are unavailable; therefore, many students who could be reported in category 1 were reported in category 2. The Texas definition of self-contained classroom includes students who spend 50 percent or more of their school day outside the regular classroom, whereas the federal definitions use 60 percent as the cutoff. Students in Texas who are outside the regular classroom for 50 percent to 60 percent of their instructional day were included in category 3. Texas revised its data collection system and will more accurately capture data related to federal categories for the 2001-02 school year. Texas state law mandated a change in the collection of data in several environments. Three state categoriesself-contained, separate campus, multidistrict class, and community classwere collapsed into one "off home campus" environment. Students served in these environments were previously reported in the public separate facility and separate class environments. In the 2000-01 count, these students were all reported to OSEP in the public separate facility category. As a result, the number of children reported in public separate facilities is higher than the number of students actually served in this environment. The state does not collect race/ethnicity data for children enrolled in private schools, not placed or referred by public agencies. West Virginia---The state attributed the decrease in the number of children ages 3 through 5 served in part-time early childhood/part-time early childhood special education environments to a change in data collection methodology. The 1999-2000 data collection was the first year that districts used the new definitions and codes for reporting children ages 3 through 5; however, some districts did not update the definitions and codes until 2000-01. The state believes that data collected this year are more accurate. Table AC1-AC3: Personnel Alabama---The state attributed the decrease in the number of counselors to a drop in school enrollment. Arizona---The state attributed the increase in LEA supervisors/administrators to an increase in population at charter schools. Arizona attributed the increase in the number of physical therapists to LEAs that contract with private companies to provide the service. The state attributed the increase in the number of not fully certified interpreters to a shortage of fully certified interpreters. Due to the shortage, the state has hired more interpreters who are not fully certified. Arkansas---The state counts personnel who provide speech services as special education teachers rather than related services personnel. California---The state attributed the increase in nonprofessional staff to a change in the data collection. Recent state legislation has resulted in general policy changes in the state educational system and has changed the way some personnel data are collected and reported. Connecticut---The state changed how it reports kindergarten personnel. For the 2000-01 educational environments table, it reported kindergarten teachers in the count of teachers serving children ages 3 through 5. Last year, the state reported kindergarten teachers in the count of teachers serving ages 6 through 21. The state attributed the decrease in the number of teacher aides to a decrease in the special education population, budget cuts, and aides obtaining teaching certification. Connecticut did not report physical education or vocational education teachers because it was unable to distinguish staff serving special education students from staff serving general education students. However, the state provided data for school psychologists and social workers serving both populations. Illinois---This is the first year that the state reported school psychology interns as fully certified, based on state requirements. Illinois does not collect personnel data for staff in nonpublic schools. Illinois does not collect personnel data by ages served. Data reported for children ages 3 through 5 include personnel who only serve early childhood or preschool students. The state reported other personnel serving ages 3 through 5 as serving children ages 6 through 21. Illinois does not collect full-time equivalency data for personnel working in home or hospital environments, and therefore these personnel have been omitted from the data. Local school districts reported 3,095 people working in home and hospital settings. Kentucky---The state attributed the increase in the number of fully certified interpreters to a new certification credential rather than an increase in the number of interpreters. The state attributed the increase in other professional staff to increased federal funds that provided districts the opportunity to enhance services in many areas and to employ greater numbers of certified professionals to deliver these services. Maine---The state counts personnel who provide speech services as special education teachers rather than related services personnel. The decrease in the number of personnel who provide speech services is due to an error on last year's count, when the state double counted these personnel. Minnesota---The state attributed the increase in the number of occupational therapists to a change in how the state counts Certified Occupational Therapy Assistants (COTAs). In 2000-01, COTAs were included in the occupational therapists category. Previously, they were counted in the other professionals category. The state attributed the increase in the number of supervisors/administrators to districts counting coordinators and due process facilitators in this category. Previously, these personnel had been counted as lead teachers. Minnesota noted an increase in the number of charter schools but reported a high level of noncompliance with reporting data for these schools. Missouri---The state attributed the increase in the number of speech pathologists to a movement from speech/language therapists as the primary provider for early childhood special education to speech/language services being provided as a related service. The state reported that the increase in other professional staff may be due to a change in the reporting method used to count full-time equivalents in the professional staff categories. New Mexico---The state reported professional personnel from the New Mexico Department of Education for the first time in this year's personnel data. The state reported that the New Mexico Department of Education is no longer the licensing authority for speech pathologists and audiologists. Data were not provided for these categories before data were finalized for the annual report to Congress. North Carolina---The state attributed the decreases in many personnel categories to budget deficits during the 2000-01 school year. North Carolina school systems failed to fund a significant number of special education personnel. In addition, changes from the previous year's count in five categories (work study coordinators, recreation therapists, physical therapists, other professional staff, and nonprofessional staff) are due to a database error in last year's count. The state attributed the increase in the number of physical therapists to contracts with school systems that have resulted in full-time positions across North Carolina. North Carolina counts speech pathologists as special education teachers rather than related services personnel. Oregon---Oregon was unable to explain the year-to-year increases in the number of physical education, occupational therapy, diagnostic and evaluation, and other professional staff on the personnel table but reported that they are consistent with preliminary data for 2001-02. Virgin Islands---The Virgin Islands attributed the increase in the number of fully certified counselors in 2000-01 to an error in last year's table. Last year, St. Croix district counselors were erroneously omitted from the personnel table. Virginia---The state reported speech pathologists only in the count of special education teachers. No speech pathologists were counted in the related services personnel count. Wyoming---The state reported that data for the personnel count were from the October count. The previous year's data were from end-of-year counts. Tables AD1-AD4: Exiting Alabama---The state attributed the increases in the number of students exiting special education in the moved, known to be continuing category and the decrease in the reached maximum age category to improvements in its data collection methodology (see vol. 2). Arizona---The state attributed the increase in the number of students reported in the moved, not known to be continuing category to incorrect data. The state noted that it is difficult to collect and report clean data in this category but believes this will change in 1 to 2 years when the new student accountability information system is in place (see vol. 2). Arizona does not use the exit category received a certificate-of-completion. California---The state attributed the decrease in the number of children reported in the moved, not known to be continuing category to a change in the data collection methodology. The state is now forcing school districts to do a better job of tracking students in the two moved categories. Colorado---Data reported for school year 2000-01 are actually data for students exiting between December 1999 and December 2000. Connecticut---In the past few years, many students were counted in the no longer receives special education category because of a change in the state eligibility guidelines. This change meant that many students were no longer eligible for special education. These new eligibility guidelines particularly affected students with specific learning disabilities. This year, there was a decrease in the total number of students who left special education services, as well as a decrease in the number of students with specific learning disabilities who left special education services. The state believes this is because the data have begun to stabilize. District of Columbia---The District of Columbia reported that it did not report any students in the no longer receives special education services exit category because it does not collect these data. Georgia---The state attributed the increase in the number of students in the moved, known to be continuing category to better tracking of transient students in its database. Guam---Guam does not use the exit category received a certificate-of-completion. Hawaii---The state attributed the increase in the number of students with speech or language impairments who are no longer receiving special education services to better training of teachers regarding eligibility for this category under IDEA. As a result of this training, students were identified differently, and many were taken out of all special education services and are now served under Section 504. The state reported that the change in how students are identified also resulted in an overall increase in the number of students exiting special education and an increase in the number of Asian/Pacific Islanders exiting. Many of the students now served under 504 rather than IDEA are of Asian/Pacific Islander descent. The state attributed the decrease in the number of students with specific learning disabilities who received a certificate to the large number of students from this category who exited special education due to state efforts to place students in the least restrictive environments or to mainstream them. Hawaii reported that its data were captured from the Integrated Special Education Database (ISPED), a fairly new system. As improvements are made in ISPED, the state expects the data to become increasingly accurate. The Special Education Section also plans to resume the practice of verifying data with districts. This practice was curtailed this past year due to difficulties with matching information from different databases. Idaho---Data reported for school year 2000-01 are actually data for students exiting between December 1999 and December 2000. The state reported that it awards the same diploma to all students, regardless of whether the diploma is earned by meeting regular graduation requirements or IEP requirements. Kansas---The state does not use the exit category received a certificate-of-completion. Massachusetts---The state does not use the exit category received a certificate-of-completion. New Jersey---The state does not use the exit category received a certificate-of-completion. Ohio---The state noted that the number of children reported as reached maximum age is incorrect. Most of the students reported have clearly not reached maximum age pursuant to state law because they are under 21 years old. The state does not use the exit category received a certificate-of-completion. Oklahoma---The state does not use the exit category received-a-certificate-of-completion. Texas---Each fall, the state collects exiting data for the previous year. Data reported for school year 2000-01 are actually for students exiting in 1999-2000. Due to a different timeframe for the collection of disability data and exiting data, 5,912 records did not have disability data for exiting. Disability was imputed for these students using the disability distribution for known cases. Disability information for the entire school year will be available for the exiting report of 2000-01. Texas does not use the exit category received a certificate-of-completion. Vermont---Data reported for school year 2000-01 are actually data for students exiting between December 1999 and December 2000. Wisconsin---Data reported for school year 2000-01 are actually data for students exiting between December 1999 and December 2000. The state reported that the number of Asian/Pacific Islanders collected by one school district is incorrect. Tables AE1-AE4: Discipline Alabama---The state attributed the increases in the unduplicated count of children and the number of children subject to unilateral removal by school personnel for drug and weapon offenses to improvements in data collection and reporting. California---The state attributed the increase in the unduplicated count of children removed for any reason (subject to unilateral removal for drug or weapon offenses and/or removal by hearing officer determination regarding likely injury and/or long-term suspension/expulsion) to a coding error in the data reported last year (1999-2000 table). This error resulted in an undercount of children. The state made changes to the data system this year to correct the problem. Connecticut---The state noted that there has been an overall increase in the reporting of short- and long-term suspensions for students in both regular and special education from 1999-2000 to 2000-01. The state attributed this increase to improved data reporting and accuracy and schools more consistently following state requirements for reporting disciplinary offense information. District of Columbia---The state reported that it did not report any students in the removal based on a hearing officer determination of likely injury because it does not collect these data. The District of Columbia also noted that its unduplicated count of children is incorrect. It is in the process of collecting the correct numbers and will resubmit a corrected revision in the near future. Georgia---The state attributed this year's increase in the unduplicated count of students to errors in the 1999-2000 data. The state attributed the decrease in the number of children subject to unilateral removal by school personnel to a change in disciplinary policy. The state makes a concerted effort to only remove students when the student's conduct calls for it. Idaho---The state attributed the decrease in the number of acts pertaining to hearing officer removals to a change in data collection methodology. In the past, the data collection differed from the OSEP reporting instructions. This year, the state followed OSEP instructions and reported only the number of acts leading to the 11th day of suspension, rather than reporting all accumulated acts throughout the year (as some districts had in the previous year). Maine---The state attributed the decrease in the number of children subject to unilateral removal by school personnel for drug and weapons offenses to an overall decline in offenses for the entire school population. Many schools in Maine now have police officers on duty during the school day. Drug and weapons checks are randomly conducted by police officers, police dogs, and school staff. The state attributes the decline in the number of students removed by a hearing officer to a change in data collection methodology. The state has emphasized that only a hearing officer trained in special education law should remove a student. In addition, this is only the second year that the state has collected the data, and some of the LEAs are still confused by the form. Michigan---The state reported that a new department, the Center for Educational Performance and Information, was responsible for collecting discipline data for the first time during 2000-01. Due to the transition to a new department, Michigan notes that it is now most likely underreporting suspension data. Minnesota---The state attributed the increase in unduplicated count of students removed for any reason (subject to unilateral removal for drug or weapon offenses and/or removal by hearing officer regarding likely injury and/or long-term suspension/expulsion) to more accurate data and additional data checks of individual student records. Most of this increase was in the short-term suspension category. Missouri---The state attributed the significant year-to-year decreases in several discipline categories to a change in reporting methods. This year, Missouri districts reported all suspensions and expulsions on an incident basis, and the data were then compiled at the state level. In the past, each district compiled its own data for the OSEP report. Montana---The state attributed the substantial increase in the number of students subject to unilateral removal by school personnel for drug or weapons offenses to more accurate data collection and interpretation. The way the state analyzes and interprets the data was revised. Nevada---The state attributed the increase in the number of students subject to long-term suspensions to districts increasingly adopting "zero tolerance" policies for student conduct. In addition, districts are becoming more knowledgeable about compliance with federal laws and regulations. New Jersey---The state attributed the significant increases in many discipline categories from 1999-2000 to 2000-01 to a change to a new web-based application in 1999-2000. This year the data are more complete. Last year, the reporting districts were unfamiliar with the system. The state expects less variation from year to year in the future. Rhode Island---The state was unable to report some disability information on the discipline table because of the way the state collects these data. Rhode Island uses separate databases for its child count and discipline data and does not have a unique student identification number that links the two. Disability information is not part of the discipline data collection system. Utah---The state attributed the increases in the number of students subject to short-term suspensions and removals by school personnel for drug and weapons offenses to the state's "zero tolerance" policies. Vermont---The state reported that the unduplicated count of children removed for any reason (subject to unilateral removal for drug or weapon offenses and/or removal by hearing officer regarding likely injury and/or long-term suspension/expulsion) on the discipline table is incorrect. The state will be unable to provide a correct unduplicated count for this year. West Virginia---The state attributed the decrease in the number of students subject to unilateral removal by school personnel for drug or weapons offenses to mistakes in last year's data. In the past, districts reported students as unilaterally removed for drugs and weapons offenses when they were actually removed for other reasons. This was corrected on the 2000-01 report. Wisconsin---The state noted that this was the first year that information on the number of acts pertaining to hearing officer removals was collected. Therefore, comparisons between this year's data and last year's data are meaningless. Data Notes for IDEA, Part C Counts of Infants and Toddlers Served AlaskaRace/ethnicity was imputed for 99 children. The child count for 2- to 3-year-olds includes 49 children over the age of 3. CaliforniaAlthough the state serves at-risk children, it did not submit data on the number of at-risk children served in the 2001 child count. Due to the time lag between when a delay is identified and when this information is updated in the state's data system, the state is no longer able to distinguish the at-risk population from other Early Start consumers. IndianaThe reported child count is not complete. The state expects to revise the count in the future. IowaThe state reported a 15 percent increase in the child count as a result of improved Child Find and improved data reporting as a result of modifications to the computerized information system. NevadaThe state attributes the decrease in the number of children served to unfilled direct service positions and/or frozen positions for direct service personnel. These staff shortages have resulted in a waiting list. Nevada is unable to serve all of the children with disabilities that it has identified. In addition, as a result of a change in state policy, Nevada no longer serves children who are at-risk. New HampshireThe slight decline in the child count reflects a change in reporting methodology. Last year, the count was based on survey information that was not completely accurate. The state believes this year's data are correct. Rhode IslandThe state imputed race/ethnicity for 122 infants and toddlers using the known distribution. They also counted some children (2.6 percent of total count) who had turned age 3 in the 2-to-3 age category. WashingtonThe state did not report race/ethnicity for 214 children whose race/ethnicity was unknown. Early Intervention Service Settings AlabamaThe decline in the number of infants and toddlers in programs designed for children with developmental delays or disabilities, the decline in the service provider location, and the increase in the number reported in the home setting category are the result of Alabama's move to serve children in more natural environments. FloridaThe change in the number of children reported in the settings categories for 2000 is a result of a change in how the state classifies a child who receives services in a variety of settings. Prior to 2000, Florida assigned the child's setting/location based on the initial service location data in the Florida Early Intervention Program data system. For the December 2000 data, each child's service setting was determined based on a hierarchy of settings. IllinoisThe increase in the number of children served in almost all the settings is the result of caseload growth during the 2000-01 reporting period. This was reflected in the 2000 child count. The state continued implementation of a new front-end data system, so the data are also clean. KentuckyKentucky only determines whether the program setting is home or community based versus office or center based. Because all children may receive services in multiple settings, when the state reports data to OSEP it assigns the service provider location to all children not also served in the home or community setting. MissouriThe decrease in the other settings category is a result of better identification of children's primary settings by the state. These improvements allow the state to assign the applicable OSEP settings category. New YorkThe increase in children served primarily in the home environment is the result of the state's emphasis on the delivery of services in natural environments. This is also the explanation for the decrease in the number of children served in programs designed for children with developmental delays or disabilities. The increase in the number of children served primarily at a service provider location or other setting is a result of guidance the state gave to counties regarding how to code specific settings into the OSEP data collection categories. OklahomaThe state attributes the increase in the other settings category to a mistake in the assignment of settings categories. Through technical assistance, the state encouraged data collectors to use the other settings category when serving children in natural environment settings other than the child's home or child care environments. The state is providing further assistance to data collectors so that they better understand each program settings category. OregonThe state reported that the bulk of the number of infants and toddlers served in the service provider location setting occurred in two regions of the state. These two regions account for most of the decrease in the number of children (N = -54) in the programs for developmental delay category. According to Oregon, because of the similarity in the definitions of these two settings (either can serve a group of children with disabilities), they believe there was a clarification/interpretation made for these two sites. This accounted for the increase in the service provider location setting. They will train service providers in the accurate interpretation of these definitions this coming year. Rhode IslandThe state reported that the increase in the other settings category is related to how service settings are classified into this setting. In Rhode Island, the individualized family service plan (IFSP) form does not provide a space to define other locations. Providers define other on a service-rendered form (SRF) at the time the services are provided. However, the SRF has a different set of location codes that do not correspond with those on the IFSP. In the future, these codes will match, and providers will be asked to define other location on the IFSP. Until then, the other settings category is inflated (e.g., daycare was entered into an SRF under other location. It should be counted as a program designed for typically developing children). The location codes will be revisited and more clearly defined within the next 5 months. The state expects that the data for 2002 will be clearer. Early Intervention Program Exiting AlabamaBecause the state's definition of Part B eligibility does not match OSEP's definition, it was unable to distinguish between children determined to be Part B eligible with an IEP in place and children who had been referred to Part B. As a result, these children were reported in the eligibility not determined category. The state also reports that the increase in the attempts to contact unsuccessful category is a result of more accurate reporting. ArizonaArizona has changed its data collection method for the information reported to OSEP. In previous years, the state retrospectively collected data for the previous year counts. Not all agencies collected the necessary information, or they were unable to submit data for the appropriate time period. Improved data collection efforts for reporting year 2000-01 resulted in better reporting of table counts. CaliforniaThe change in the number of children in the different basis of exit categories is the result of a revised consumer data system implemented in April 2000. California can now distinguish between children exiting early intervention because: - the case was closed during eligibility determination (284); - they moved out of state (147); - they were withdrawn by parent (620); and - attempts to contact were unsuccessful (583). Previously, all of these reasons for exiting were counted in the completion of an IFSP prior to maximum age exit category. The revised data system also reduces data reporting time lags and permits more comprehensive and timely identification of children exiting Early Start who are not Part B eligible and those who exit to other programs. FloridaThe increase in the number of children exiting from the Florida Part C program between 1999 and 2000 is the result of improvements in its reporting requirements beginning in 2000. The number of children reported as exiting Part C services in 1999 represents an underreporting of children. Now, because this information is a critical monitoring factor, the local agencies comply with the data reporting requirements. IdahoThe decline in the number of children reported in the Part B eligibility not determined category is the result of Idaho's dedicating a considerable amount of the 2000 data collection year's effort to cleaning up this category. Due to the lag time in paperwork catching up with the data entry process, the state reported that it will always have a small number of children whose exit status is undetermined. The state plans to keep that number down to 1 percent or 2 percent of the total exited count. It believes that the large number of children whose exit status is Part B eligibility not determined is an indication of a larger systemic problem concerning the child's transition process in the state. MissouriMissouri reports that the increase in the number of children exiting with no referral is because caseloads have increased. In addition, Part C personnel were not as successful in referring children ineligible for Part B to other programs. NebraskaNebraska does not collect data for the following exit categories: not eligible for Part B, exit with no referrals, moved out of state, and attempts to contact unsuccessful. NevadaNevada attributes the increase in the number of children in the Part B eligibility not determined category to the fact that no data tracking system accurately collects Part C to Part B transition information. The state's Part C program plans to provide technical assistance to programs to ensure correct coding for children transitioning to Part B. PennsylvaniaThe state attributes the increase in the category completion of IFSP prior to reaching maximum age to the state's now serving more children and increasing its public awareness program for early intervention. It reports that the decrease in Part B eligibility not determined is a result of increased coordination efforts with the Part B program so that the state is able to establish eligibility earlier. Rhode IslandWhen Rhode Island initiated a new data collection system in 2000, the discharge codes did not clearly reflect the OSEP reporting categories. Exit with referral and exit with no referral were not separate categories. As a result, all of these children were reported in the exit with no referral category. Late in 2000, the discharge codes were updated to break out the categories. Because Rhode Island mandates that all children exiting the system without completing IFSP goals must be referred, the state expects the number of exits with no referral to decline in the next reporting period. Early Intervention Services ArizonaThe state of Arizona changed its methods for collecting Part C data. In previous years, the state collected historical data from service agencies. Not all agencies could provide the information or they were unable to submit data for the appropriate time period. Revised data collection efforts for the reporting year 2000-01 resulted in better reporting of counts. FloridaThe change in the number and type of services provided to children reflects the variation in service needs of a cohort of children from year to year. The greatest change, in the other category, is a result of the state's including evaluations and assessments as services in 1999 and not including them as services in the count for 2000. IllinoisThe increase in the number of services provided in Illinois is the result of caseload growth during the 2000-01 reporting period. The state continued implementation of a new front-end data system, so the data are also cleaner. MinnesotaThe state does not collect services data by race/ethnicity. MissouriThe state attributes the decrease in the family training category to improved staff training and to providing staff with a clearer definition of the service category. In the past, any informal directives or instruction provided to parents were counted under the family training category. Family training is now defined as a formal instructional course or training, and informal instruction to parents is no longer counted in the category. There was also a change in the data reporting method for the 2000-01 data collection. An electronic collection was used, resulting in more timely and improved reporting. This in turn resulted in different and more accurate categorization of services. This is especially noticeable in the health services category, which shows a large decrease from last year. Services previously reported as health services are now reported in other categories. The state no longer includes service coordination in the other services category as was incorrectly done in previous submissions. This accounts for the decrease in the other services category. Changes have also been made to the methods of reimbursement for services provided in a natural environment. This change resulted in a decrease in reported transportation costs. Vision services data have decreased because the state no longer counts vision screening services provided prior to Part C eligibility determination. OklahomaIn 2000, Oklahoma experienced a large increase in other early intervention services. This increase reflects a change in where the state reports child development specialists. In 1999, they were counted in the special instruction category. In 2000, they were counted in the other early intervention services category. OregonOregon reports that the increase in the number of other early intervention services provided is the result of collecting data on an increased range of other early intervention services for state use. Prior to 2000-01 the state reported relatively small numbers (approximately 20) of other early intervention services (e.g., orientation and mobility and autism services), and categories and definitions were changed. The 2000-01 data appear stable and represent an accurate count of other early intervention services from the state. Early Intervention Personnel Employed AlabamaAlabama is unable to account for the decrease in total staff. These data are as reported from providers. FloridaChanges in the number of providers enrolled in the Early Intervention Program reflect the changing array of individuals providing services to the birth through 3-year-old population. Overall, the Florida Early Intervention Program has made an effort to encourage and enroll more professionals as service providers. IllinoisIllinois reported that the increase in the number of personnel employed is the result of caseload growth during the 2000-01 reporting period. The state also continued implementation of a new front-end data system, so the data are cleaner. MissouriThe state reported that the decrease in number of other professional staff is a result of excluding service coordination from the count. In previous years, service coordinators were incorrectly included in the count of personnel. NebraskaNebraska reports that the decline in the total number of full-time equivalent personnel reported by the state may be because they are now able to prorate the full-time equivalency based on caseload. This enables them to collect more accurate full-time equivalency data. New YorkThe state explained that the increase in number of full-time equivalent personnel providing services is due to a change in the requirements for individuals providing services under contract to a provider agency. The New York City Early Intervention Program received approximately 6,500 applications from individuals for approval as an individual provider. If these individuals subcontract with or are employed by a provider agency, they may also be listed as a full-time equivalent on the agency's application or information updates. OhioOhio reported that the decline in the number of personnel is because these data are not representative of service providers across the state. Ohio is instituting a reporting tool to be used by all agencies/organizations providing services to the early intervention population. This survey will provide a more comprehensive report of personnel who provide services to early intervention children in Ohio. OregonOregon reported an increase in the number of paraprofessionals; the number of special educators and speech and language pathologists also increased. The state explained that the increases are not the result of a mistake or specific anomaly. However, they were unable to provide a specific explanation. South DakotaThe state explained that the decrease in the total number of full-time-equivalent personnel employed is the result of newly established criteria for determining billable travel time. This change in criteria reduced the number of hours contracted and thereby reduced the number of full-time equivalents. The state is working on implementing changes to its data system that will help it distinguish between hours contracted and hours reimbursed. These changes should result in more accurate counts of full-time equivalents employed.	en
converted_docs	257747	Pan American Fellowship Program (PAF) Guidelines [History and Rationale]{.underline} In 1995, the Mexican Council for Science and Technology (CONACYT) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) established the Pan American Fellowship Program to support post-doctoral research and training for Mexican scientists in NIH intramural laboratories. This program has brought scientists into the NIH community to work and train on collaborative projects on a vast range of fields including cellular and molecular biology, tuberculosis, human genetics, immunology, neurochemistry, etc. Based on this success, the Fogarty International Center, working with the NIH intramural community, has reformulated the PAF such that it may be open to participation from different Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries. The main objective of this program is to encourage cooperation in the biomedical and behavioral sciences, while supporting the attainment of domestic and international health goals including economic and social development. As part of NIH interest in continuing its tradition of research cooperation with the countries of the Americas, one response to these challenges is the expansion of the Pan American Fellowship Program to other countries of the Latin American and Caribbean region. This can be accomplished by strengthening current relationships with the ministries of health and science and technology, and by developing alliances with other regional and international organizations, as well as government and non-governmental organizations including foundations and universities throughout the region. Goals and Objectives The PAF goals and objectives are to: - Encourage and increase cooperation in the biomedical and behavioral and social sciences between NIH intramural scientists and the scientific community from different countries in the LAC region; - Provide a framework for the exchange of scientists and the support of cooperative biomedical and behavioral research and training consistent with the scientific and technical interests represented by all participants; - Enhance scholarly interaction between U.S. and LAC scientists; - Develop scientific cooperation that will strengthen scientific linkages between all parties involved, while supporting the attainment of domestic and international health goals including economic and social development. ## ## [Eligibility]{.underline} - The PAF program is open to all NIH labs and, on an exceptional basis other NIH offices, and to other qualified science and technology funding agencies, universities, research institutes and other foundations and organizations (including regional and international) in Latin America and the Caribbean. - All PAF fellows candidates must have a doctoral degree or equivalent professional experience and must be a citizen or permanent resident of the United States or participating country. - Potential fellows from LAC must meet specific eligibility criteria established by their sponsoring agency or institution and be accepted by the chief of the host laboratory or Center at NIH. - Potential NIH researchers must meet specific eligibility criteria established by the NIH institute or center and be accepted by the chief of the LAC host laboratory or Center. - Cooperation may address any branch of biomedical or behavioral science, including epidemiological studies, normally supported by the NIH as long as advancement of scientific knowledge or methodology is anticipated. ### Logistics - Planning and Review ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - The coordinator for implementing this initiative for NIH is the Director of FIC and the contact point is the Program Director for the Americas at the Division of International Relations of the Fogarty International Center (FIC). The mailing address is: > National Institutes of Health > > Fogarty International Center > > Division of International Relations > > Attn: Kevin Bialy, Acting Program Officer for the Americas > > Building 31, Rm. B2C11 > > Bethesda, MD, 20892-2220, U.S.A. Phone (301) 496-6273 Fax (301) 480-3414 E-mail: [email protected] - The point of contact for participating LAC institutions will be identified by the Director of the respective organization. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - The coordinators will plan and review activities under the PAF program on a mutually agreeable schedule. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - The contact points will also exchange information about opportunities for cooperative activities. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - Operation of PAF ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - NIH and participating institutions agree to select an agreed upon number of junior, mid-level, or senior scientists annually, not to exceed more than ten in one calendar year, for the duration of the program to receive one or two years of research and advanced training at NIH. - The number of LAC scientists eligible for this program may be modified at any time by mutual agreement. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - Fiscal Responsibilities ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - NIH and participating LAC organizations will contribute to the yearly minimum stipend of USD 30,000 per PAF fellow. NIH and the participating LAC institution will each contribute a minimum of USD 15,000. This amount may be changed by mutual agreement. - NIH host lab or Center assumes full costs for space, equipment, supplies, and support services, as well as pays the cost of health insurance for the PAF and accompanying family members. - LAC institutions will cover transportation costs for Pan American Fellows to arrive and depart from NIH. - Coordinators will encourage U.S. scientists to travel abroad under the program based on the availability of funds. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - If the PAF is receiving funding from any other program at the time of PAF nomination and approval, then the PAF fellow and the participating LAC organization will confirm the funding source and amount of stipend at the time of PAF nomination and approval and prior to the PAF fellow's arrival at NIH ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - Application Process ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - The participating LAC institution will nominate the PAF fellow and provide necessary documentation in support of the candidate's qualifications to the FIC which will communicate with one or more appropriate NIH laboratories for potential placements. PAF Applicants are encouraged to identify and to contact possible host labs. If no laboratory is identified by the LAC institution or the applicant, then FIC, along with the Office of Intramural Research, will seek to determine appropriate placement, with no guarantees of eventual placement. - The FIC will then notify the LAC participating organizations of NIH decisions. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - Renewal Process ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - If the NIH host lab or Center chief would like to extend the PAF into the second year, he or she must contact FIC with details about the work the PAF has completed, a future work plan and expected outcomes, plus the amount of annual funding the NIH Institute has approved for the second year of participation in the PAF Program. - The LAC institution should also send a letter to the contact point at FIC confirming the renewal and the amount of annual funds assigned to each PAF fellow for the second year. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - Duration of Program ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - This program is to continue for a period of time stipulated in the exchange of letters between FIC and the participating LAC institution. The program may be renewed by agreement of both parties.	en
markdown	404125	# Presentation: 404125 ## Progress Report on the Implementation of NOAH LSM Into NCEP GFS Model - Jan 13, 2003 ## GBPHYS routine (Opr.) - Approximate diurnal cycle - progtm - surface energy balance - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - progt2 - surface water balance snowmt rainc rainl snowmt rain - 1-step LSM ## Code Revision #1 Change precip, tmp850 from local variables to state variables - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface energy balance - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Surface water balance - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface energy balance - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP, TMP850 - Surface water balance - 1-step LSM ## Code Revision #2 Merge progtm and progt2 - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface energy balance - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP, TMP850 - Surface water balance - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface energy balance - Surface water balance - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP, TMP850 - 1-step LSM ## Code Revision #3 Remove the calculations of surface exchange coefficients and update of surface layer properties from progtm routine - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface energy balance - Surface water balance - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP, TMP850 - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface exchange coefficients - Surface energy balance - Surface water balance - Update surface layer properties - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP, TMP850 - 1-step LSM ## Code Revision #4 Handling of surface energy/water balance is consolidated - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface exchange coefficients - Surface energy balance - Surface water balance - Update surface layer properties - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP, TMP850 - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface exchange coefficients - Surface energy/water balance - Update surface layer properties - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP, TMP850 - 1-step LSM ## Code Revision #5 Computations over land, sea ice, ocean are separated - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface exchange coefficients - Surface energy/water balance - Update surface layer properties - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP, TMP850 - IF SLMASK = 0. call sfc_ocean - IF SLMASK = 1. call sfc_mrfx - IF SLMASK = 2. call sfc_mrfx - 1-step LSM ## Summary - major changes made on MRF - I. Changes needed for 1step LSM - Precip and T850 become state variables - Two step land models (progtm, progt2) are merged - Computation of surface exchange coefficients and update of surface layer properties are moved outside land package - Calculations of surface energy/water balance over land, sea, and sea ice are separated - 1-step LSM ## 2-step LSM versus 1-step LSM - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface exchange coefficients - Surface energy/water balance - Update surface layer properties - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP/T850 - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface energy balance - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP/T850 - Surface water balance - SNOWMT(T) - TPRCP(T) - SNOWMT(T) - TPRCP(T-1) - 1-step LSM ## Code Revision #6 Plug in NOAH LSM - Approximate diurnal cycle - Surface exchange coefficients - Surface energy/water balance - Update surface layer properties - Vertical diffusion - Gravity wave drag - Deep convection - Shallow convection - Non-convective precipitation - RAIN=RAINL + RAINC - Snow-rain detection - Save TPRCP, TMP850 - IF SLMASK = 0. call sfc_ocean - IF SLMASK = 1. call sfc_noah - IF SLMASK = 2. call sfc_mrfx - Move to land package - Noah LSM ## Soil state variables - Configuration of soil layers - OSU ZSOIL(1:2) = -0.1, -2.0 meter - ZSOIL(1:4) = -0.1, -0.73, -1.36, -2.0 meter - NOAH ZSOIL(1:4) = -0.1, -0.4, -1.0, -2.0 meter - Code Modification - Change the number of soil layers (from 2 to 4) - Modify soil layer configuration - New state variable, SLC (Liquid soil moisture), is computed - Initialization from ‘cold start’ (i.e., 2 soil layers, no SLC) - SMC(1) = SMCI(1) and SMC(2:4) = SMCI(2) - STC(1) = STCI(1) and STC(2:4) = STCI(2) - Estimate SLC from SMC, STC - Noah LSM ## Snow-rain detection - OSU LSM - Computes water equivalent snow depth (SHELEG) only - Compute snow melt only (Snow accumulation is computed at the end of atmosphere module using TMP850) - NOAH LSM : - Computes both water equivalent snow depth (SHELEG) and actual snow depth (SNWDPH) - Computes both snow accumulation (using TSFC) and snow melt - Code Modification for gbphys - OLD: progtm -> atm -> TPRCP/T850 -> detection -> progt2 - NEW: detection -> [progtm/progt2] -> atm -> TPRCP/T850 - Code Modification for LSM - OSU: conduct snow-rain detection before calling progtm - NOAH: use TMP850 for snow-rain detection - Noah LSM ## Summary - major changes made on MRF - II. Changes needed for NOAH LSM - Change soil layer configuration - Conduct snow-rain detection in land module - Convert sfc files to NOAH-ready format - Noah LSM ## Surface energy/water balance over land and sea ice - Initialization - Interface (parent model – LSM) - Snow-rain detection - Call progtm - Call progt2 - Compute Qsurf, DM - Initialization - Interface (parent model – LSM) - Interface (MRF to NOAH) - Call sflx - Interface (NOAH to MRF) - Compute Qsurf, DM - sfc_mrfx - Sfc_noah - sfc_mrfx and sfc_noah have _identical_ calling arguments - Interface (parent model-LSM): compute variables needed by - OSU and NOAH LSM (e.g., Zsoil(LSOIL), Theta1) - Interface (MRF -NOAH): unit conversion, derivation (e.g., ICE - from SLMASK) - Noah LSM ## MRFX vs OPR - MRFX – modified from /nwprod/sorc/global_fcst.fd - Modification - mpi_para routine: correct MPI_BCAST in skip routine - para_fixio_r can read in or skip data records in sfc files - mpi_io routine: zerout tmp0 before local transpose in split2d - checksum can be used to track I/O of selected fields - wrtsfc, wrtsfc_comm routines: set iord for SMC2 to 2 - to be consistent with all other fields in flx files - progtmr: exclude ocean grids in the evap re-evaluation step - SHELEG is not zero over some ocean grid cells and thus evap has been computed twice at these grid cells - OPR-MRFX ## checksum - checksum are used at the following: - _main_: P(getini); _dotstep_: P(wrtout); wrtout: P(wrt_restart) - do I = 1, lonl2 - do j = 1, nlats - checksum = checksum + TPRCP(I,J) - enddo - enddo - 1 lonl2 J I - nlat2 - 1 - OPR-MRFX ## opr: iord = 1 - mrfx: iord = 2 - Sdate = 2002051600 - 24 hr integration - NOTE: - Model results (opr vs mrfx) are identical except SMC(2) from flx files - OPR-MRFX ## Evap over ocean grids - Derive SNOWD from SHELEG - SNOWD=SHELEG/1000. - Initialize SNOWMT (= 0.) - Compute EVAP/QSURF/DM over ocean - Compute surface energy balance - over land/seaice - ......... - Determine SNOWMT - Update SNOWD and TSURF - Re-evaluate EVAP if SNOWD > 0. - ....... - Does not exclude ocean grids - MRFX: Move to sfc_ocean - MRFX: Move to sfc_mrfx - EXP -- Run MRFX (T62L28) for 24 hr starting from 2002051600 - After calling getini, there are 59 ocean grids with sheleg > 0. - At the end of simulation, there are 174 ocean grids with sheleg > 0. - OPR-MRFX ## Sdate = 2002051600 - 24 hr integration - OPR-MRFX ## GFS Exp - a.mrfx: GFS executable using MRFX code - a.mrfy: GFS executable using MRFY (MRFX + NOAH) code - sfc.cycle: preprocessor - Procedure: - (1) Cold start run using a.mrfx - Run sfc.cycle (TPRCP, TMP850 records exist) - Restart run using a.mrfy - Run sfc.cycle (TPRCP=0, TMP850=TSFC) - Cold start run using a.mrfy - Exp and I/O ## Preprocessor - Modified from /nwprod/sorc/global_cycle.fd - Convert gdas type sfcs file to NOAH ready sfc files - Perform the following tasks - Read in fixed fields needed by NOAH LSM, including - SLOPETYP – Class of surface slope - SHDMIN – Minimum vegetation cover - SHDMIN – Maximum vegetation cover - SNOALB – Maximum Albedo over deep snow - Initialize 4-layer SMC/STC from 2-layer SMCI/STCI - Initialize 4-layer SLC from 4-layer SMC/STC - Initialize SNWDPH from SHELEG (using solid to liquid ratio of 5.) - Exp and I/O ## I/O changes – flx files Rec 1. UFLX Rec 2. VFLX ... Rec 6:7 SMC(1:2) Rec 8:9 STC(1:2) ... Rec 53: TCDC SMC(1:4) STC(1:4) 9 NOAH records: SHDMIN, SHDMAX, SLOPE, SNOALB, SNWDPH, SLC(1:4) 13 LSM diag. records: SMCI(1:4), STCI(1:4), EC, EDIR, ETT, HFLX, EVAP - Exp and I/O ## I/O changes – sfc files Rec.1 LABEL Rec.2 DATE RECORD Rec.3 TSF Rec 4. SMC (2 layers) Rec 5. SNOW Rec 6. STC (2 layers) Rec 7. TG3 Rec 8. ZOR Rec 9. CV Rec 10. CVB Rec 11. CVT Rec 12. ALBEDO (4 types) Rec 13. SLIMSK Rec 14. VFRAC Rec 15. CANOPY Rec 16. F10M Rec.17 VTYPE Rec.18 STYPE Rec.19 ALF (2 types) Rec 20. USTAR Rec 21. FFMM Rec 22. FFHH 1.87 MB Rec 23. TPRCP Rec 24. TMP850 2.02 MB Rec 25. SNWDPH Rec 26. SLC (4 layers) Rec 27. SHDMIN Rec 28. SHDMAX Rec 29. SLOPE Rec 30. SNOALB 2.96 MB SMC (4 layers) STC (4 layers) - Exp and I/O - Sfccycle modification - Increase the dimension size for GRIB files from (2048x1024) to (2500x1250) - Modify FIXRDC (read SLOPE by nearest points) - Blending forecast and analysis for added fields (i.e., SLOPE, SHDMIN, SHDMAX, SNOALB, SLC, SNWDPH)? - Sfc and flx files - NOAH fields and 4-layer SMC, STC, SLC are added - Add LSM diag. fields? - post modification to include added fields in PGB files? - cycle modification to include added fields? - Exp and I/O	en
all-txt-docs	408562	This directory contains the MINPACK-2 test problem collection. This version released 11/12/93. Subroutines are named by the following convention: The first letter in each subroutine name dictates arithmetic precision, s for single, d for double. The second thru fifth letters describe the application, eg. fic denotes the flow in a channel problem. The sixth and seventh letters denote the subroutine action. letters 6 and 7 action --------------- ------ fj function, Jacobian, initial approximation js Jacobian times vector fg function, gradient, initial approximation hs Hessian times vector sp Jacobian sparsity structure bc Boundary data Further information on the MINPACK-2 test problem collection is contained in the report B. M. Averick, R. G. Carter, J. J. More', and G. L. Xue, The MINPACK-2 test problem collection, Argonne National Laboratory, Mathematics and Computer Science Division, Preprint MCS-P153-0692, June 1992. A compressed postscript version of this report is contained in the file P153.ps.Z The main difference between the 1993 version and the 1992 version in tprobs.92 is in execution speed. Character comparisons were replaced by integer comparisons; this change often leads to improvements by a factor of 2 or more. Users of the MINPACK-2 test problem collection are requested to send reprints of any paper that uses this software. Please report any comments and errors to: Jorge J. More' Mathematics and Computer Science Division Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, IL 60439 email: [email protected] ============================================================ MINPACK-2 test problem collection. dficfj.f dficjs.f dficsp.f --- flow in a channel dsfdfj.f dsfdjs.f dsfdsp.f --- swirling flow between disks dierfj.f dierjs.f diersp.f --- incompressible elastic rods dsfifj.f dsfijs.f dsfisp.f --- solid fule ignition dfdcfj.f dfdcjs.f dfdcsp.f --- flow in a driven cavity dhhdfj.f --- human heart dipole dcpffj.f --- combustion of propane: full formulation dcprfj.f --- combustion of propane: reduced formulation diacfj.f --- Isomerization of alpha-pinene: collocation diadfj.f --- Isomerization of alpha-pinene: direct diaofj.f --- Isomerization of alpha-pinene: constraints diarfj.f --- Isomerization of alpha-pinene: residuals dctsfj.f --- Coating thickness standardization dedffj.f --- Exponential data fitting dgdffj.f --- Gaussian data fitting datrfj.f --- Analysis of thermistor resistance daerfj.f --- Analysis on an enzyme reaction dchqfj.f --- Chebychev quadrature deptfg.f depths.f deptsp.f --- elastic-plastic torsion dpjbfg.f dpjbhs.f dpjbsp.f --- pressure distribution in a journal bearing dpjbds.f dmsafg.f dmsahs.f dmsasp.f --- minimal surfaces dmsabc.f dodcfg.f dodchs.f dodcsp.f --- optimal design with composites dodcps.f dljcfg.f --- Lennard-Jones clusters dgl1fg.f dgl1hs.f dgl1sp.f --- 1-d Ginzburg-Landau dsscfg.f dsschs.f dsscsp.f --- steady-state combustion dgl2fg.f dgl2hs.f dgl2sp.f --- 2-d Ginzburg-Landau dgl2co.f	en
all-txt-docs	848611	Pueblo, CO (1971-2000) Normal Daily Temperatures (F) and Precipitation (inches) Date Maximum Minimum Mean Precipitation Dec. 1 49 18 33 .02 Dec. 2 49 17 33 .02 Dec. 3 48 17 32 .02 Dec. 4 47 17 32 .02 Dec. 5 47 17 32 .02 Dec. 6 47 17 32 .02 Dec. 7 47 16 32 .02 Dec. 8 46 16 31 .02 Dec. 9 46 16 31 .01 Dec. 10 46 16 32 .01 Dec. 11 46 16 31 .01 Dec. 12 46 15 31 .01 Dec. 13 45 15 30 .01 Dec. 14 45 15 30 .01 Dec. 15 45 15 30 .01 Dec. 16 45 15 30 .01 Dec. 17 45 15 30 .01 Dec. 18 45 15 30 .01 Dec. 19 45 14 30 .01 Dec. 20 44 14 29 .01 Dec. 21 44 14 29 .01 Dec. 22 44 14 29 .01 Dec. 23 44 14 29 .01 Dec. 24 44 14 29 .01 Dec. 25 44 14 29 .01 Dec. 26 44 14 29 .01 Dec. 27 44 14 29 .01 Dec. 28 44 14 29 .01 Dec. 29 44 14 29 .01 Dec. 30 44 13 29 .01 Dec. 31 44 13 29 .01	en
converted_docs	275149	# 3 {#section .Chapter-# .unnumbered} # Cancer 3-1 Overall cancer deaths 3-2 Lung cancer deaths 3-3 Breast cancer deaths 3-4 Cervical cancer deaths 3-5 Colorectal cancer deaths 3-6 Oropharyngeal cancer deaths 3-7 Prostate cancer deaths 3-8 Melanoma deaths 3-9 Sun exposure and skin cancer 3-9a Adolescents in grades 9-12 3-9b Adults aged 18 years and older 3-10 Provider counseling about cancer prevention 3-10a Internists---smoking cessation 3-10b Family physicians---smoking cessation 3-10c Dentists---smoking cessation 3-10d Primary care providers---blood stool tests 3-10e Primary care providers---proctoscopic examinations 3-10f Primary care providers---mammograms 3-10g Primary care providers---Pap tests 3-10h Primary care providers---physical activity 3-11 Pap tests 3-11a Ever received a Pap test 3-11b Received a Pap test within the preceding 3 years 3-12 Colorectal cancer screening 3-12a Fecal occult blood test 3-12b Sigmoidoscopy 3-13 Mammograms 3-14 Statewide cancer registries 3-15 Cancer survival ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-1. Reduce the overall cancer death rate. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ National Data National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, Source NCHS. State Data Source National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, NCHS. Healthy People 2000 16.1 (Cancer) (also 2.2), age adjusted to the Objective 2000 standard population. Measure Rate per 100,000 population (age adjusted---see Comments). Baseline 202.4 (1998). Numerator Number of deaths due to cancer (ICD-9 codes 140-208). Denominator Number of persons. Population U.S. resident population. Targeted Questions Used To Not applicable. Obtain the National Data Expected Annual. Periodicity Comments Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard population. Age-adjusted rates are weighted sums of age-specific rates. For a discussion on age adjustment, see Part A, section 5. This objective differs from Healthy People 2000 objective 16.1, which age adjusted the death rates using the 1940 standard population. See Appendix C for comparison data. See Part C for a description of NVSS and Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-2. Reduce the lung cancer death rate. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ National Data National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, Source NCHS. State Data Source National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, NCHS. Healthy People 2000 Adapted from 16.2 (Cancer) (also 3.2). Objective Measure Rate per 100,000 population (age adjusted---see Comments). Baseline 57.6 (1998). Numerator Number of deaths due to lung cancer (ICD-9 code 162). Denominator Number of persons. Population U.S. resident population. Targeted Questions Used To Not applicable. Obtain the National Data Expected Annual. Periodicity Comments Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard population. Age-adjusted rates are weighted sums of age-specific rates. For a discussion on age adjustment, see Part A, section 5. This objective is measured with slightly different ICD-9 codes from those used to measure the comparable Healthy People 2000 objective 16.2 (ICD-9 code 162 vs. 162.2-162.9). Additionally, the Healthy People 2000 objective age adjusted the death rates using the 1940 standard population. See Appendix C for comparison data. See Part C for a description of NVSS and Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-3. Reduce the breast cancer death rate. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ National Data National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, Source NCHS. State Data Source National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, NCHS. Healthy People 2000 16.3 (Cancer), age adjusted to the 2000 standard Objective population. Measure Rate per 100,000 female population (age adjusted---see Comments). Baseline 27.9 (1998). Numerator Number of female deaths due to breast cancer (ICD-9 code 174). Denominator Number of females. Population U.S. resident population. Targeted Questions Used To Not applicable. Obtain the National Data Expected Annual. Periodicity Comments Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard population. Age-adjusted rates are weighted sums of age-specific rates. For a discussion on age adjustment, see Part A, section 5. This objective differs from Healthy People 2000 objective 16.3, which age adjusted the death rates using the 1940 standard population. See Appendix C for comparison data. See Part C for a description of NVSS and Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-4. Reduce the death rate from cancer of the uterine cervix. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ National Data National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, Source NCHS. State Data Source National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, NCHS. Healthy People 2000 16.4 (Cancer), age adjusted to the 2000 standard Objective population. Measure Rate per 100,000 female population (age adjusted---see Comments). Baseline 3.0 (1998). Numerator Number of female deaths due to cancer of the uterine cervix (ICD-9 code 180). Denominator Number of females. Population U.S. resident population. Targeted Questions Used To Not applicable. Obtain the National Data Expected Annual. Periodicity Comments Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard population. Age-adjusted rates are weighted sums of age-specific rates. For a discussion on age adjustment, see Part A, section 5. This objective differs from Healthy People 2000 objective 16.4, which age adjusted the death rates using the 1940 standard population. See Appendix C for comparison data. See Part C for a description of NVSS and Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-5. Reduce the colorectal cancer death rate. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ National Data National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, Source NCHS. State Data Source National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, NCHS. Healthy People 2000 Adapted from 16.5 (Cancer) (also 2.23). Objective Measure Rate per 100,000 population (age adjusted---see Comments). Baseline 21.2 (1998). Numerator Number of deaths due to colorectal cancer (ICD-9 codes 153, 154). Denominator Number of persons. Population U.S. resident population. Targeted Questions Used To Not applicable. Obtain the National Data Expected Annual. Periodicity Comments Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard population. Age-adjusted rates are weighted sums of age-specific rates. For a discussion on age adjustment, see Part A, section 5. This objective is measured with slightly different ICD-9 codes from those used to measure the comparable Healthy People 2000 objective 16.5 (ICD-9 codes 153.0-154.3, 154.8, 159.0). Additionally, the Healthy People 2000 objective age adjusted the death rates using the 1940 standard population. See Appendix C for comparison data. See Part C for a description of NVSS and Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-6. Reduce the oropharyngeal cancer death rate. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ National Data National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, Source NCHS. State Data Source National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, NCHS. Healthy People 2000 Adapted from 13.7 (Oral Health) (also 3.17 and Objective 16.17). Measure Rate per 100,000 population (age adjusted---see Comments). Baseline 3.0 (1998). Numerator Number of deaths due to oropharyngeal cancer (ICD-9 codes 140-149). Denominator Number of persons. Population U.S. resident population. Targeted Questions Used To Not applicable. Obtain the National Data Expected Annual. Periodicity Comments Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard population. Age-adjusted rates are weighted sums of age-specific rates. For a discussion on age adjustment, see Part A, section 5. This objective differs from Healthy People 2000 objective 16.17, which age adjusted the death rates using the 1940 standard population. Additionally, the Healthy People 2010 objective targets the total population while the Healthy People 2000 objective targeted only persons 45 to 74 years. See Appendix C for comparison data. See Part C for a description of NVSS and Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-7. Reduce the prostate cancer death rate. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ National Data National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, Source NCHS. State Data Source National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, NCHS. Healthy People 2000 Not applicable. Objective Measure Rate per 100,000 male population (age adjusted---see Comments). Baseline 32.0 (1998). Numerator Number of male deaths due to prostate cancer (ICD-9 code 185). Denominator Number of males. Population U.S. resident population. Targeted Questions Used To Not applicable. Obtain the National Data Expected Annual. Periodicity Comments Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard population. Age-adjusted rates are weighted sums of age-specific rates. For a discussion on age adjustment, see Part A, section 5. See Part C for a description of NVSS and Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-8. Reduce the rate of melanoma cancer deaths. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ National Data National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, Source NCHS. State Data Source National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), CDC, NCHS. Healthy People 2000 Not applicable. Objective Measure Rate per 100,000 population (age adjusted---see Comments). Baseline 2.8 (1998). Numerator Number of deaths due to melanoma cancer (ICD-9 code 172). Denominator Number of persons. Population U.S. resident population. Targeted Questions Used To Not applicable. Obtain the National Data Expected Annual. Periodicity Comments Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard population. Age-adjusted rates are weighted sums of age-specific rates. For a discussion on age adjustment, see Part A, section 5. See Part C for a description of NVSS and Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    3-9. Increase the proportion of persons who use at least one of the following protective measures that may reduce the risk of skin cancer: avoid the sun between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m., wear sun-protective clothing when exposed to sunlight, use sunscreen with a sun protective factor (SPF) of 15 or higher, and avoid artificial sources of ultraviolet light. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-9a. (Developmental) Increase the proportion of adolescents in grades 9 through 12 who follow protective measures that may reduce the risk of skin cancer. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ Comments An operational definition could not be specified at the time of publication. The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS), CDC, NCCDPHP, is a proposed data source for this objective. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| 3-9b. Increase the \| \| \| proportion of \| \| \| adults aged 18 \| \| \| years and older who \| \| \| follow protective \| \| \| measures that may \| \| \| reduce the risk of \| \| \| skin cancer. \| \| +=====================+================================================+ \| National Data \| National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), CDC, \| \| Source \| NCHS. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| State Data \| Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System \| \| Source \| (BRFSS), CDC, NCCDPHP. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Healthy People \| Adapted from 16.9 (Cancer). \| \| 2000 Objective \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Measure \| Percent (age adjusted---see Comments). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Baseline \| 47 (1998). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Numerator \| Number of adults aged 18 years and older who \| \| \| report that they are very likely to limit sun \| \| \| exposure, use sunscreen, or wear protective \| \| \| clothing. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Denominator \| Number of adults aged 18 years and older. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Population \| U.S. civilian, noninstitutionalized \| \| Targeted \| population. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Questions Used To \| From the 1998 National Health Interview \| \| Obtain the National \| Survey: \| \| Data \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| - If you were to go outside on a very sunny \| \| \| day for MORE than one hour, are you very \| \| \| likely, somewhat likely, or unlikely to \| \| \| wear protective clothing such as wide \| \| \| brimmed hats or long sleeved shirts? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| - If you were to go outside on a very sunny \| \| \| day for MORE than one hour, are you very \| \| \| likely, somewhat likely, or unlikely to \| \| \| avoid the sun by staying in the shade? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| - If you were to go outside on a very sunny \| \| \| day for MORE than one hour, are you very \| \| \| likely, somewhat likely, or unlikely to \| \| \| use sunscreen or sun block lotion? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Expected \| Annual. \| \| Periodicity \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Comments \| For this objective, a person is defined as \| \| \| following protective measures if the person \| \| \| answers "very likely" to one or more of the \| \| \| questions listed above. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard \| \| \| population. Age-adjusted percents are weighted \| \| \| sums of age-specific percents. For a \| \| \| discussion of age adjustment, see Part A, \| \| \| section 5. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| Although similar questions are used to measure \| \| \| this objective and the comparable Healthy \| \| \| People 2000 objective 16.9, the data for the \| \| \| Healthy People 2010 objective are age adjusted \| \| \| while data for the Healthy People 2000 \| \| \| objective are unadjusted rates. Additionally, \| \| \| the Healthy People 2010 objective combines the \| \| \| data from the three questions into one measure \| \| \| while the Healthy People 2000 objective \| \| \| considered them individually. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| See Part C for a description of NHIS and \| \| \| BRFSS, and Appendix A for focus area contact \| \| \| information. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+    3-10. Increase the proportion of physicians and dentists who counsel their at-risk patients about tobacco use cessation, physical activity, and cancer screening. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-10a. Internists who counsel about smoking cessation. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ Comments A complete operational definition was not specified at the time of publication. This objective is adapted from Healthy People 2000 objectives 16.10 and 3.16. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-10b. Family physicians who counsel about smoking cessation. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ Comments A complete operational definition was not specified at the time of publication. This objective is adapted from Healthy People 2000 objectives 16.10 and 3.16. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-10c. Dentists who counsel about smoking cessation. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ Comments A complete operational definition was not specified at the time of publication. This objective is adapted from Healthy People 2000 objectives 16.10 and 3.16. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-10d. Primary care providers who counsel about blood stool tests. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ Comments A complete operational definition was not specified at the time of publication. This objective is adapted from Healthy People 2000 objective 16.10. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-10e. Primary care providers who counsel about proctoscopic examinations. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ Comments A complete operational definition was not specified at the time of publication. This objective is adapted from Healthy People 2000 objective 16.10. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-10f. Primary care providers who counsel about mammograms. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ Comments A complete operational definition was not specified at the time of publication. This objective is adapted from Healthy People 2000 objective 16.10. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-10g. Primary care providers who counsel about Pap tests. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ Comments A complete operational definition was not specified at the time of publication. This objective is adapted from Healthy People 2000 objective 16.10. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-10h. Primary care providers who counsel about physical activity. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ Comments A complete operational definition was not specified at the time of publication. This objective is adapted from Healthy People 2000 objective 16.10. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    3-11. Increase the proportion of women who receive a Pap test. +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| 3-11a. Women aged \| \| \| 18 years and older \| \| \| who have ever \| \| \| received a Pap \| \| \| test. \| \| +=====================+================================================+ \| National Data \| National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), CDC, \| \| Source \| NCHS. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| State Data \| Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System \| \| Source \| (BRFSS), CDC, NCCDPHP. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Healthy People \| 16.12 (Cancer), age adjusted to the 2000 \| \| 2000 Objective \| standard population. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Measure \| Percent (age adjusted---see Comments). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Baseline \| 92 (1998). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Numerator \| Number of women aged 18 years and older who \| \| \| report ever receiving a Pap test. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Denominator \| Number of women aged 18 years and older. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Population \| U.S. civilian, noninstitutionalized \| \| Targeted \| population. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Questions Used To \| From the 1998 National Health Interview \| \| Obtain the National \| Survey: \| \| Data \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| - Have you ever had a pap smear test? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Expected \| Periodic. \| \| Periodicity \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Comments \| Data include women without a uterine cervix. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard \| \| \| population. Age-adjusted percents are weighted \| \| \| sums of age-specific percents. For a \| \| \| discussion of age adjustment, see Part A, \| \| \| section 5. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| See Part C for a description of NHIS and \| \| \| BRFSS, and Appendix A for focus area contact \| \| \| information. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+    +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| 3-11b. Women aged \| \| \| 18 years and older \| \| \| who received a Pap \| \| \| test within the \| \| \| preceding 3 years. \| \| +=====================+================================================+ \| National Data \| National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), CDC, \| \| Source \| NCHS. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| State Data \| Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System \| \| Source \| (BRFSS), CDC, NCCDPHP. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Healthy People \| 16.12 (Cancer), age adjusted to the 2000 \| \| 2000 Objective \| standard population. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Measure \| Percent (age adjusted---see Comments). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Baseline \| 79 (1998). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Numerator \| Number of women aged 18 years and older who \| \| \| report receiving a Pap test within the past 3 \| \| \| years. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Denominator \| Number of women aged 18 years and older. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Population \| U.S. civilian, noninstitutionalized \| \| Targeted \| population. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Questions Used To \| From the 1998 National Health Interview \| \| Obtain the National \| Survey: \| \| Data \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| - Have you ever had a pap smear test? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| \[If yes:\] \| \| \| \| \| \| - When did you have your most recent pap \| \| \| smear test? Was it a year ago or less, \| \| \| more than 1 year but not more than two \| \| \| years, more than two years but not more \| \| \| than three years, more than three years \| \| \| but not more than five years, or over 5 \| \| \| years ago? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Expected \| Periodic. \| \| Periodicity \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Comments \| Data include women without a uterine cervix. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard \| \| \| population. Age-adjusted percents are weighted \| \| \| sums of age-specific percents. For a \| \| \| discussion of age adjustment, see Part A, \| \| \| section 5. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| See Part C for a description of NHIS and \| \| \| BRFSS, and Appendix A for focus area contact \| \| \| information. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+    3-12. Increase the proportion of adults who receive a colorectal cancer screening examination. +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| 3-12a. Adults aged \| \| \| 50 years and older \| \| \| who have received a \| \| \| fecal occult blood \| \| \| test (FOBT) within \| \| \| the preceding 2 \| \| \| years. \| \| +=====================+================================================+ \| National Data \| National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), CDC, \| \| Source \| NCHS. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| State Data \| Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System \| \| Source \| (BRFSS), CDC, NCCDPHP. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Healthy People \| 16.13 (Cancer), age adjusted to the 2000 \| \| 2000 Objective \| standard population. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Measure \| Percent (age adjusted---see Comments). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Baseline \| 35 (1998). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Numerator \| Number of adults aged 50 years and older who \| \| \| report receiving fecal occult blood testing \| \| \| within the preceding 2 years. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Denominator \| Number of adults aged 50 years and older. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Population \| U.S. civilian, noninstitutionalized \| \| Targeted \| population. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Questions Used To \| From the 1998 National Health Interview \| \| Obtain the National \| Survey: \| \| Data \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| - A blood stool test is when the stool is \| \| \| examined to determine whether it contains \| \| \| blood. Have you ever had a blood stool \| \| \| test? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| \[If yes:\] \| \| \| \| \| \| - When did you have your most recent blood \| \| \| stool test? Was it a year ago or less, \| \| \| more than 1 but not more than 2 years, \| \| \| more than 2 years but not more than 3 \| \| \| years, more than 3 years but not more than \| \| \| 5 years, or more than 5 years ago? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Expected \| Periodic. \| \| Periodicity \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Comments \| A fecal occult blood test (FOBT) is referred \| \| \| to as a blood stool tests in the NHIS. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard \| \| \| population. Age-adjusted percents are weighted \| \| \| sums of age-specific percents. For a \| \| \| discussion of age adjustment, see Part A, \| \| \| section 5. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| See Part C for a description of NHIS and \| \| \| BRFSS, and Appendix A for focus area contact \| \| \| information. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+    +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| 3-12b. Adults aged \| \| \| 50 years and older \| \| \| who have ever \| \| \| received a \| \| \| sigmoidoscopy. \| \| +=====================+================================================+ \| National Data \| National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), CDC, \| \| Source \| NCHS. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| State Data \| Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System \| \| Source \| (BRFSS), CDC, NCCDPHP. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Healthy People \| 16.13 (Cancer), age adjusted to the 2000 \| \| 2000 Objective \| standard population. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Measure \| Percent (age adjusted---see Comments). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Baseline \| 37 (1998). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Numerator \| Number of adults aged 50 years and older who \| \| \| report ever receiving a sigmoidoscopy. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Denominator \| Number of adults aged 50 years and older. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Population \| U.S. civilian, noninstitutionalized \| \| Targeted \| population. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Questions Used To \| From the 1998 National Health Interview \| \| Obtain the National \| Survey: \| \| Data \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| - A proctoscopic examination is when a tube \| \| \| is inserted in the rectum to check for \| \| \| problems. Have you ever had a proctoscopic \| \| \| examination? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Expected \| Periodic. \| \| Periodicity \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Comments \| A sigmoidoscopy is referred to as a \| \| \| proctoscopic examination in NHIS. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard \| \| \| population. Age-adjusted percents are weighted \| \| \| sums of age-specific percents. For a \| \| \| discussion of age adjustment, see Part A, \| \| \| section 5. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| See Part C for a description of NHIS and \| \| \| BRFSS, and Appendix A for focus area contact \| \| \| information. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+    +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| 3-13. Increase the \| \| \| proportion of women \| \| \| aged 40 years and \| \| \| older who have \| \| \| received a \| \| \| mammogram within \| \| \| the preceding 2 \| \| \| years. \| \| +=====================+================================================+ \| National Data \| National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), CDC, \| \| Source \| NCHS. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| State Data \| Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System \| \| Source \| (BRFSS), CDC, NCCDPHP. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Healthy People \| Adapted from 16.11 (Cancer). \| \| 2000 Objective \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Measure \| Percent (age adjusted---see Comments). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Baseline \| 67 (1998). \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Numerator \| Number of women aged 40 years and older who \| \| \| report receiving a mammogram within the past 2 \| \| \| years. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Denominator \| Number of women aged 40 years and older. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Population \| U.S. civilian, noninstitutionalized \| \| Targeted \| population. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Questions Used To \| From the 1998 National Health Interview \| \| Obtain the National \| Survey: \| \| Data \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| - A mammogram is an x-ray taken only of the \| \| \| breasts by a machine that presses the \| \| \| breast against a plate. Have you ever had \| \| \| a mammogram? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| \[If yes:\] \| \| \| \| \| \| - When did you have your most recent \| \| \| mammogram? Was it a year ago or less, more \| \| \| than 1 year but not more than 2 years, \| \| \| more than 2 years but not more than 3 \| \| \| years, more than 3 years but not more than \| \| \| 5 years, or over 5 years ago? \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Expected \| Periodic. \| \| Periodicity \| \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| Comments \| Data are age adjusted to the 2000 standard \| \| \| population. Age-adjusted percents are weighted \| \| \| sums of age-specific percents. For a \| \| \| discussion of age adjustment, see Part A, \| \| \| section 5. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| Although similar questions are used to measure \| \| \| this objective and the comparable Healthy \| \| \| People 2000 objective 16.11, the Healthy \| \| \| People 2010 focuses solely on mammograms \| \| \| received by women 40 years and older while the \| \| \| Healthy People 2000 objective measured women \| \| \| 50 years and older who received both \| \| \| mammograms and clinical breast examinations \| \| \| by. Additionally, the data for the Healthy \| \| \| People 2010 objective are age adjusted while \| \| \| data for the Healthy People 2000 objective are \| \| \| unadjusted rates. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+ \| \| See Part C for a description of NHIS and \| \| \| BRFSS, and Appendix A for focus area contact \| \| \| information. \| +---------------------+------------------------------------------------+    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-14. Increase the number of States that have a statewide population-based cancer registry that captures case information on at least 95 percent of the expected number of reportable cancers. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ National Data National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR), Source CDC, NCI. State Data Source National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR), CDC, NCI. Healthy People 2000 Not applicable. Objective Measure Number of States and the District of Columbia. Baseline 21 (1999) (selected areas---see Comments). Numerator Number of States not covered by the SEER program that capture information on at least 95 percent of the expected number of malignant cases occurring in State residents each diagnosis year. Denominator Not applicable. Questions Used To Not applicable. Obtain the National Data Expected Annual. Periodicity Comments For the purpose of reporting to state registries, a diagnosis year is the date of initial diagnosis by a recognized medical practitioner for the tumor being reported. The NPCR provides funds to 45 States, 3 territories, and the District of Columbia to assist in planning or enhancing cancer registries; develop model legislation and regulations for programs to increase the viability of registry operations; set standards for data quality, completeness, and timeliness; provide training for registry personnel; and help establish computerized reporting and data processing systems. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) covers the remaining five States. NPCR supported registries are expected to meet CDC data standards, as well as incorporate standards for data quality and format as described by the North American Association of Cancer Registries. Additional information on the standards for completeness, accuracy, and timeliness of central registry reporting, can be found at the following Web site: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------    ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-15. Increase the proportion of cancer survivors who are living 5 years or longer after diagnosis. ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ National Data Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Source Program (SEER), NIH, NCI. State Data Source Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER), NIH, NCI. Healthy People 2000 Not applicable. Objective Measure Percent. Baseline 59 (1989--95) (selected areas---see Comments). Numerator 5-year observed survival rate. Denominator 5-year expected survival rate. Population Resident cancer survivors (selected areas---see Targeted Comments). Questions Used To Not applicable. Obtain the National Data Expected Annual. Periodicity Comments This measure is tracked with a calculation commonly referred to as the relative survival rate. The relative survival rate is calculated using a procedure whereby the observed survival rate is adjusted for expected mortality. The relative survival rate represents the likelihood that a patient will not die from causes associated specifically with the given cancer before some specified time (usually 5 years) after diagnosis. To calculate the relative survival rate, the observed survival rate is divided by the expected survival rate. The observed survival rate is based on all causes of death---no one is excluded except for those lost to followup. The expected survival rate is based on lifetables of surviving 1 year in the general population based on age (single year), race, sex, and year (1970, 1980, 1990) of the cohort of cancer patients. This calculation is used so that one does not have to depend on the accuracy and completeness of the cause of death information in order to calculate the effect of the cancer. Survival rates are from the SEER program. They are based of data from population-based registries in Connecticut, New Mexico, Utah, Iowa, Hawaii, Atlanta, GA, Detroit, Michigan, Seattle-Puget Sound, WA, and San Francisco-Oakland, CA. The 1989--95 survival rates used in the baseline are based on patient followup through 1996. Additional information on the SEER program can be found at the following Web site: http://www.seer.ims.nci.nih.gov/. See Appendix A for focus area contact information. -----------------------------------------------------------------------   	en
converted_docs	815635	NAS15-10000 MOD 1114 (S/A) # Section E ## Inspection and Acceptance NAS15-10000 MOD 1114 (S/A) SECTION E - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE E. 1 MATERIAL INSPECTION AND RECEIVING REPORT\ (NFS 18.52.246-72) (OCT 1988) 1\. At the time of each delivery under this contract, the Contractor shall furnish to the Government a Material Inspection and Receiving Report (DD Form 250 series) prepared in 4 copies, an original and 3 copies. 2\. The Contractor shall prepare the DD Form 250 in accordance with NASA FAR Supplement 18-46.672-1. The Contractor shall enclose the copies of the DD Form 250 in the package or seal them in a waterproof envelope which shall be securely attached to the exterior of the package in the most protected location. 3\. When more than one package is involved in a shipment, the Contractor shall list on the DD Form 250, as additional information the quantity of packages and the package numbers. The Contractor shall forward the DD Form 250 with the lowest numbered package of the shipment and print the words "CONTAINS DD FORM 250" on the package. (End of clause) E. 2 MANNED SPACE FLIGHT ITEM\ (NFS 18-52.246-73) (OCT 1988) The Contractor shall include the following statement in all subcontracts and purchase orders placed by it in support of this contract, without exception as to amount, or subcontractual level. "FOR USE IN MANNED SPACE FLIGHT; MATERIALS, MANUFACTURING, AND WORKMANSHIP OF HIGHEST QUALITY STANDARDS ARE ESSENTIAL TO ASTRONAUT SAFETY. IF YOU ARE ABLE TO SUPPLY THE DESIRED ITEM WITH A HIGHER QUALITY THAN THAT OF THE ITEMS SPECIFIED OR PROPOSED, YOU ARE REQUESTED TO BRING THIS FACT TO THE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION OF THE PURCHASER." (End of clause) E.3 INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE 1\. [Inspection]{.underline}, The Government will conduct inspections of work being performed from time to time in accordance with the "inspection of Research and Development--Cost Reimbursement" clause hereof, except for the following: $a$ The effort performed by the Contractor's subcontractor Khrunichev, which shall be in accordance with clause E.4, FGB Inspection and Acceptance. $b$ Government Source Inspection (GSI) of Node 1 hardware required under this contract will take place at the launch site. E-1 NAS15-10000 MOD 1114 (S/A) > 2\. [Acceptance]{.underline}, > > $a$ [Flight Items]{.underline}, > > 1\. Inspection of flight items required under this contract (With the > exception of Node 1 hardware) will take place at the Contractor's > facility). Inspection of Node 1 hardware required under this contract > will take place at the launch site. Provisional acceptance of flight > items required under this contract (hardware) will take place at the > launch site. Except: > > i\. Provisioned Item Orders (PIO, also known as spares) as defined in > Section J-9 (e.g. ship in place or to a contractually designated > storage facility), final acceptance will occur at origin. > > ii\. Flight Hardware/Software that does not deliver to the launch site > (e.g. another NASA site, their designated supplier or an International > Partner for further processing), final acceptance will occur at > origin. 2. Final acceptance of flight items required under this contract (hardware and software) will take place after items have been delivered, launched, and assembled and integrated in space except for the following: ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` i. FGB procured under this contract for which final acceptance shall be separate and not conditioned upon the integration of the space station as a whole. The basis for acceptance will be the performance of the space station elements delivered under this contract. ii. Final acceptance will be on ground for those flight items that are delivered but not launched, assembled and integrated on orbit at the expiration of the contract period of performance. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` 3. FGB procured under this contract for which final acceptance shall be separate and not conditioned upon the integration of the space station as a whole. The basis for acceptance will be the performance of the space station elements delivered under this contract. 4. NASA shall be responsible for the conduct of on-orbit testing to verify acceptable performance of space station elements as contemplated in (a) 2 above during on-orbit checkout to determine that the overall space station is in conformance with functional requirements specified in the ISSA system specification (SSP 41000). E-2 NAS15-10000 MOD 1114 (S/A) 4. If any delivered item or items do not perform in accordance with the requirements of the ISSA systems specification because of reasons beyond the Contractor's control (e.g., misuse or damage of the items by Government personnel), nonperformance for such reasons will not constitute a basis for non-acceptance of the items delivered by the Contractor. $b$ Ground Support Equipment (GSE) that facilitates launch\ activities will be accepted at the Launch site. $c$ [Other Deliverable Hardware]{.underline} Hardware other than flight hardware will be accepted at place of manufacture. $d$ [Non-Flight Software]{.underline} Non-Flight software deliverables will be accepted at the Software Verification Facility in Houston, Texas. $e$ [Data and Documentation]{.underline} Data and documentation will be accepted at the place of delivery. > $f$ [On-orbit]{.underline} [ORU Support Equipment]{.underline} 1. Inspection of each On-orbit ORU Support Equipment item required under this contract will take place at the Contractor's facility. > 2\. Acceptance of each On-orbit ORU Support Equipment item required > under this contract will take place at the launch site, after > completion of a Mini- Acceptance Review (MAR) per SSP 50287. The basis > for acceptance at the MAR will be the successful completion of a First > Article Inspection (FAI) and a First Article Capability Demonstration > (FACD). 3\. If any delivered item or items do not perform in accordance with the requirements of the ISSA systems specification because of reasons beyond the Contractor's control (e.g., misuse or damage of the items by Government personnel), nonperformance for such reasons will not constitute a basis for non-acceptance of the items delivered by the Contractor. 4\. If any delivered On-orbit ORU Support Equipment item or items do not perform in accordance with the requirements of the applicable Support Equipment Item Description because of reasons beyond the Contractor's control (e.g., misuse or damage of the items by Government personnel), nonperformance for such reasons will not constitute a basis for non-acceptance of the items delivered by the Contractor. []{.mark} E.4 FGB INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE > 1\. For purposes of this contract, "KhSC subcontract" shall mean the > M.V Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Center and "KhSC > subcontract" shall mean Boeing subcontract HX3295 with the M.V. > Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Center, dated August > 15, 1995. No modifications to that subcontract are included in this > clause. > > E-3 NAS15-10000 MOD 1114 (S/A) > 2\. The Contractor shall provide and maintain an inspection system > acceptable to the Government (as documented in data submitted under > the KhSC subcontract) covering the work under this contract. Complete > records of all inspection work performed by the Contractor shall be > maintained and made available to the Government during contract > performance and for three years after final payment under this > contract. The Government's right to such records are subject to the > provisions of the KhSC subcontract concerning proprietary data. > > 3\. The Government has the right to inspect and test all work called > for by the contract, to the extent practicable at all places and > times, including the period of performance, and in any event before > acceptance. The Government may also inspect the premises of the > Contractor or any subcontractor engaged in contract performance. Such > rights are subject to the provisions of the KhSC subcontract. The > Government shall perform inspections and test in a manner that will > not unduly delay the work. 4. If the Government performs any inspections or test on the premises of the Contractor or a subcontractor, the Contractor shall furnish and shall require subcontractors to furnish, without additional charge, all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safe and convenient performance of these duties. Except as otherwise provided in this contract, the Government shall bear the expense of Government inspections or tests made at other than the Contractor's or subcontractor's premises. > 5\. The Government shall accept or reject the work as promptly as > practicable after delivery. Government failure to inspect and accept > or reject the work shall not relieve the Contractor from > responsibility, nor impose liability on the Government, for > nonconforming work. Work is nonconforming when it is defective in > material or workmanship or is otherwise not in conformity with > contract requirements. > > 6\. The Government shall provide provisional acceptance of performance > in accordance with the milestone schedule set forth in the KhSC > subcontract. Finality of such acceptance is as described in the KhSC > subcontract. > > 7\. The Government has the right to reject nonconforming work. If the > Contractor fails or is unable to correct or to replace nonconforming > work within the delivery schedule (or such later time as the > Contracting Officer may authorize), the Contracting Officer may accept > the work and make an equitable reduction in fee. Failure to agree on a > reduction shall be a dispute. 8. Inspection and test by the Government does not relieve the Contractor from responsibility for defects or other failures to meet the contract requirements that may be discovered before final acceptance. Final acceptance by the Government shall be made upon on-orbit docking of the FGB with the Service Module and successful transfer of fuel to the FGB. If correction of deficiency requires transportation outside of Russia, the Contractor shall not be financially responsible for such transportation, but shall facilitate efforts to arrange any necessary transportation. E-4 NAS15-10000 MOD 1114 (S/A) > 9\. Prior to the launch of the FGB, the Government, in addition to any > other rights and remedies provided by law, or under other provisions > of this contract, shall have the right to require the Contractor to > correct or replace the defective or nonconforming supplies in > accordance with a reasonable delivery schedule as may be agreed upon > between the Contractor and the Contracting Officer. After launch but > prior to final acceptance of the FGB, the Government, in addition to > any other rights and remedies provided by law, or under other > provisions of this contract, shall have the right to require the > Contractor to (1) correct or replace defective or nonconforming > supplies, the value of which is not to exceed \$11.4M, or (2) make > repayment of such portion of the contract price, not to exceed > (\$11.4M, as is equitable under the circumstances. > > 10\. The procedures of this clause apply to effort performed by > Contractor and by subcontractor KhSC. For matters relating to effort > which KhSC is responsible for under the KhSC subcontract, the > Government's rights and remedies under (5) through (9) are no greater > in scope or duration that as are available to Contractor under the > KhSC subcontract. > > 11\. Notwithstanding any other provision of this clause, the > Government's right to make inspections, witness acceptance test, and > examine data resulting from such tests shall not supersede the > national security interests applicable to the Contractor's > subcontractors. The Contractor shall require its subcontractors to > obtain waivers to national security requirements to the maximum extent > possible. The Contractor is required to make all reasonable efforts to > limit or avoid movement of tests or inspections off of subcontractor > premises based on national security concerns. (End of Clause) E.5 INSPECTION OF SERVICES\--COST-REIMBURSEMENT - EXHIBIT D (52.246-5, APR 1984) $a$ Definition. \"Services,\" as used in this clause, includes services performed, workmanship, and material furnished or used in performing services. $b$ The Contractor shall provide and maintain an inspection system acceptable to the Government covering the services under this contract. Complete records of all inspection work performed by the Contractor shall be maintained and made available to the Government during contract performance and for as long afterwards as the contract requires. $c$ The Government has the right to inspect and test all services called for by the contract, to the extent practicable at all places and times during the term of the contract. The Government shall perform inspections and tests in a manner that will not unduly delay the work. $d$ If any of the services performed do not conform with contract requirements, the Government may require the Contractor to perform the services again in conformity with contract requirements, for no additional fee. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by reperformance, the Government may -- E-5 NAS15-10000 MOD 1114 (S/A) $1$ require the Contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements and $2$ reduce any fee payable under the contract to reflect the reduced value of the services performed. $e$ If the Contractor fails to promptly perform the services again or take the action necessary to ensure future performance in conformity with contract requirements, the Government may -- $1$ by contract or otherwise, perform the services and reduce any fee payable by an amount that is equitable under the circumstances or $2$ terminate the contract for default. (End of clause) E-6	en
all-txt-docs	200248	NASA Daily News Summary For Release: Nov. 18, 1999 Media Advisory m99-239 SUMMARY: PRELAUNCH BRIEFING ON PREMIER EARTH SCIENCE SPACECRAFT TO BE HELD NOV. 23 INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE TEAM TO EXAMINE ARCTIC OZONE Video File for Nov. 18, 1999 ITEM 1 - LEONIDS FLARE OVER EUROPE- AMES ITEM 2 - HIGH-ALTITUDE BALLOON VIDEO OF LEONIDS (shot Nov. 17) - MSFC ITEM 3 - LEONIDS 1999 IMAGES FROM NOV. 17 (replay)/AMES ITEM 4 - LEONIDS 1998 PLUS 1999 INTERVIEWS FROM NOV. 16 AMES/MSFC (replay) ITEM 5 - SOLVE VIDEO FILE - ARC, LARC, DFRC ITEM 6 - MARS MISSIONS CLIP REEL (file footage) LIVE TELEVISION EVENTS THIS WEEK: November 19, Friday 1:00 - 2:00 pm - Space Science Update on Results from First Galileo Flyby of Jovian Moon, Io - HQ ----------------------------- PRELAUNCH BRIEFING ON PREMIER EARTH SCIENCE SPACECRAFT TO BE HELD NOV. 23 A prelaunch briefing to discuss the scientific goals of the upcoming Terra mission, a U.S.-Japanese-Canadian Earth Observing System spacecraft that will study the planet's lands, oceans, clouds and atmosphere, will be held at 1 p.m. EST on Tuesday, Nov. 23, 1999, in the James E. Webb auditorium at NASA Headquarters, 300 E St., SW, Washington, DC. With a complement of five major scientific instruments, the polar-orbiting spacecraft will provide long-term observations about Earth's global climate -- sound science that can be used by leaders when making global environmental decisions. The launch of Terra aboard an Atlas IIAS rocket from Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA, is scheduled for December. Both the science briefing and the launch will be carried live on NASA Television. Contact at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC: David E. Steitz (Phone 202/358-1730). Contact at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD: Allen Kenitzer (Phone 301/286-2806). For full text, see: ftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/note2edt/1999/n99-059.txt ----------------------------- INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE TEAM TO EXAMINE ARCTIC OZONE NASA scientists are joining researchers from Europe, Russia, Canada and Japan to mount the largest field- measurement campaign ever to assess ozone amounts and changes in the Arctic upper atmosphere this winter. This collaborative campaign will measure ozone and other atmospheric gases using satellites, airplanes, heavy-lift and small balloons, and ground-based instruments. From November 1999 through March 2000, researchers will examine the processes that control ozone amounts during the Arctic winter at mid to high latitudes. Contact at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC: David E. Steitz (Phone 202/358-1730). Contact at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA: John Bluck (Phone 650/604-5026). For full text, see: ftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/pressrel/1999/99-137.txt *************************** If NASA issues any news releases later today, we will e- mail summaries and Internet URLs to this list. Index of 1999 NASA News Releases: http://www.nasa.gov/releases/1999/index.html ************************* Video File for Nov. 18, 1999 ITEM 1 - LEONIDS FLARE OVER EUROPE - AMES Contact at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC: Donald Savage (Phone 202/358-1547). Contact at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA: Kathleen Burton (Phone 650/604-1731). ITEM 1a - LEONIDS SHOWER EUROPE----------------------------TRT :57 View out of the window of the ARIA aircraft during the second night ( Nov. 18) of the 1999 Leonid Airborne Campaign. Col. Peter Worden describes the meteor shower. ITEM 1b - VIEWING THE LEONID STORM------------------------TRT 1:15 Footage from specially equipped cameras shows various views from the ARIA aircraft during the Leonid meteor storm. ITEM 1c - IN-FLIGHT OBSERVATION----------------------------TRT :46 Footage shows activity of the crew onboard the ARIA aircraft during the 1999 mission. ITEM 1d - TRACKING THE METEORS-----------------------------TRT :28 Footage shows the tracking and weather maps during the mission. ITEM 1e -INTERVIEW EXCERPTS--------------------------------TRT :51 Peter Jenniskens, Principal Investigator, Leonid Campaign, SETI Institute ITEM 1f - INTERVIEW EXCERPTS-------------------------------TRT :53 Dave Holman, California Meteor Society ITEM 1g - INTERVIEW EXCERPTS------------------------------TRT 1:02 Seth Shostak, Scientist, SETI Institute ITEM 2 - HIGH-ALTITUDE BALLOON VIDEO OF LEONIDS-----------TRT 2:00 (shot Nov. 17 & 18) - MSFC NASA scientists at Marshall Space Flight Center launched a balloon to study the Leonid Meteor shower taking place Nov. 17 and 18. The Leonids balloon experiment launched from MSFC and landed in northern Georgia at approx. 4:30 am on Nov. 18. Researchers will be evaluating their data about the Leonids over the coming weeks. Contact at Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL: Steve Roy (Phone 205/544-0034). Contact at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC: Donald Savage (Phone 202/358-1547). ITEM 3 - LEONIDS 1999 IMAGES FROM NOV. 17 (replay)/AMES Contact at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC: Donald Savage (Phone 202/358-1547). Contact at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA: Kathleen Burton (Phone 650/604-1731). ITEM 3a - 1999 LEONID B-ROLL-------------------------------TRT :42 Meteor streaks from the ARIA aircraft during the first night of the 1999 Leonid Airborne Campaign. ITEM 3b - INTERVIEW EXCERPTS------------------------------TRT 1:20 Jane Houston, U.S. Astronomer, Leonid Meteor Count Team ITEM 4 - LEONIDS 1998 PLUS 1999 INTERVIEWS FROM NOV. 16---TRT 9:50 AMES/MSFC (replay) Contact at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA: Laura Lewis (Phone 650/604-2162). Contact at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC: Donald Savage (Phone 202/358-1547). Item 4a - Animation of the Earth Passing through---------TRT 10:00 the Leonid Meteor Shower This package includes animation of the Earth passing through the Leonid meteor shower and scientists conducting a balloon experiment in which a camera attached to an aloft balloon will photograph the shower. Interviews follow with scientists from NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL. Item 4b - Leonid Animation A multinational team of astrobiologists are using two U.S. Air Force planes as a platform to view the annual Leonid meteor shower this week. The 1999 Leonid Multi-instrument Airborne Campaign (MAC), a mission jointly funded by NASA and the U.S. Air Force, has been designed to fly over the longitudes of Europe and the Middle East to observe for three nights, from Nov. 16-18, 1999. Package from NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett-----------TRT 8:27 Field, CA: Item 4c - Airplane B-roll----------------------------------TRT :30 Footage shows preparation of the two U.S. Air Force planes, the ARIA and FISTA, at Edwards Air Force Base, CA, for the 1999 Leonid mission. Item 4d - Onboard the FISTA-------------------------------TRT 1:54 Footage onboard one of the Leonid mission planes. Item 4e - Interview---------------------------------------TRT 1:41 Scott Sandford, Scientist, Astrophyics Branch, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA Item 4f - Interview---------------------------------------TRT 2:00 Peter Jenniskens, Principal Investigator, Leonid Mission, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA Item 4g - Interview----------------------------------------TRT :58 Mark Fonda, Project Manager, Leonid Mission, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA Item 4h - Leonids - NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Releases Balloon With Camera To Study Leonids (replay) Contact at Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL: Steve Roy (Phone 205/544-0034). Contact at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC: Donald Savage (Phone 202/358-1547). Package from NASA Marshall Space Flight Center------------TRT 1:28 Huntsville, AL ITEM 5 - Scientists Study Arctic Ozone in SOLVE campaign Contact at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA: John Bluck (Phone 650/604-5026). Contact at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC: David E. Steitz (Phone 202/358-1730). ITEM 5a - EXAMINING ARCTIC OZONE--------------------------TRT 1:38 NASA scientists are joining researchers from Europe, Russia, Canada and Japan to mount the largest field-measurement campaign ever to assess ozone amounts and changes in the Arctic upper atmosphere this winter. This collaborative campaign will measure ozone and other atmospheric gases using satellites, airplanes, heavy-lift and small balloons, and ground-based instruments. From November 1999 through March 2000, researchers will examine the processes that control ozone amounts during the Arctic winter at mid to high latitudes. ITEM 5b - ER-2 AIRCRAFT------------------------------------TRT :52 B-roll: ER-2 aircraft being prepped at NASA Ames; pilot getting onboard; takeoff. ITEM 5c - INTERVIEW---------------------------------------TRT 1:11 Dr. Michael Kurylo, Manager, Upper Atmosphere Research Program at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC ITEM 5d - INTERVIEW---------------------------------------TRT :29 Dr. Phil DeCola, Program Manager, Upper Atmosphere Research Program at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC ITEM 5e - INTERVIEW---------------------------------------TRT :40 Katja Drdla, Principal Investigator, SOLVE campaign, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA ITEM 5e - INTERVIEW--------------------------------------TRT 1:01 Steve Hipskind, SOLVE Co-Project Manager, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA More information (including a list of participating institutions) can be found at: http://cloud1.arc.nasa.gov/solve/index.html and http://www.ozone-sec.ch.cam.ac.uk ITEM 6 - MARS MISSIONS CLIP REEL (file footage)--approx. TRT 35:00 Mars missions resource reel (file footage) features various missions, images from Hubble Space Telescope, 3-D mapping, etc. ---------- Unless otherwise noted, ALL TIMES ARE EASTERN. ANY CHANGES TO THE LINE-UP WILL APPEAR ON THE NASA VIDEO FILE ADVISORY ON THE WEB AT ftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/tv-advisory/nasa-tv.txt WE UPDATE THE ADVISORY THROUGHOUT THE DAY. The NASA Video File normally airs at noon, 3 p.m., 6 p.m., 9 p.m. and midnight Eastern Time. NASA Television is available on GE-2, transponder 9C at 85 degrees West longitude, with vertical polarization. Frequency is on 3880.0 megahertz, with audio on 6.8 megahertz. Refer general questions about the video file to NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC: Ray Castillo, 202/358-4555, or Elvia Thompson, 202/358-1696, [email protected] During Space Shuttle missions, the full NASA TV schedule will continue to be posted at: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/nasatv/schedule.html For general information about NASA TV see: http://www.nasa.gov/ntv/ ****** Contract Awards Contract awards are posted to the NASA Acquisition information Service Web site: http://procurement.nasa.gov/EPS/award.html ****** The NASA Daily News Summary is issued each business day at approximately 2 p.m. Eastern time. Members of the media who wish to subscribe or unsubscribe from this list, please send e-mail message to: [email protected] ******** end of daily news summary	en
all-txt-docs	273183	STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA, ROBERT E. HANSON, STATE TREASURER OF NORTH DAKOTA, APPELLANTS V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA No. 88-926 In the Supreme Court of the United States October Term, 1989 On Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Brief for the United States TABLE OF CONTENTS Question Presented Opinions below Jurisdiction Constitutional, statutory, and regulatory provisions involved Statement Summary of argument Argument: The State of North Dakota's regulation of the United States military's purchase of alcoholic beverages from out-of-state suppliers for its North Dakota installations unconstitutionally interferes with federal procurement of those products A. Federal law requires the military to purchase alcoholic beverages at the lowest available price in order to maximize profits to support morale, welfare, and recreational activities on military bases B. North Dakota's liquor regulations are invalid under the Supremacy Clause since they prevent the United States military from obtaining alcoholic beverages from the most competitive source, as required by federal law C. The Twenty-first Amendment does not authorize the State of North Dakota to interfere with the federal government's exclusive authority to regulate military procurement of alcoholic beverages Conclusion OPINIONS BELOW The opinion of the court of appeals (J.S. App. A1-A22) is reported at 856 F.2d 1107. The opinion of the district court (J.S. App. A23-A32) is reported at 675 F. Supp. 555. JURISDICTION The judgment of the court of appeals was entered on September 9, 1988. The notice of appeal was filed on November 16, 1988 (J.S. App. A35), and the jurisdictional statement was docketed on December 5, 1988. The Court noted probable jurisdiction on March 27, 1989. The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under 28 U.S.C. 1254(2). /1/ CONSTITUTIONAL, STATUTORY, AND REGULATORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED 1. Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution provides in pertinent part: "The Congress shall have Power * * * To raise and support Armies * * * (and) To make Rules for the * * * Regulation of the land and naval Forces * * ." Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution further provides in pertinent part: "The Congress shall have Power * * To exercise * * * Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings * * ." Article IV, Section 3 of the United States Constitution provides in pertinent part: "The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States * ." Article VI, Section 2 of the United States Constitution provides in pertinent part: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof * * shall be the supreme Law of the Land * * ." Section 2 of the Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited." 2. Title 10, United States Code, Section 2488 (Supp. V 1987), provides in pertinent part: (a) The Secretary of Defense shall provide that -- (1) covered alcoholic beverage purchases made for resale on a military installation located in the United States shall be made from the most competitive source, price and other factors considered, except that (2) in the case of malt beverages and wine, such purchases shall be made from, and delivery shall be accepted from, a source within the State in which the military installation concerned is located. Department of Defense Armed Services Military Club and Package Store Regulation 1015.3-R, ch. 4, Section C (codified at 32 C.F.R. 261.4), /2/ provides in pertinent part: The Department of Defense shall cooperate with local, state, and federal officials to the degree that their duties relate to the provisions of this chapter. However, the purchase of all alcoholic beverages for resale at any camp, post, station, base, or other DoD installation within the United States shall be in a manner and under such conditions as shall obtain for the government the most advantageous contract, price and other factors considered. These other factors shall not be construed as meaning any submission to state control, nor shall cooperation be construed or represented as an admission of any legal obligation to submit to state control, pay state or local taxes, or purchase alcoholic beverages within geographical boundaries or at prices or from suppliers prescribed by any state. 3. Section 84-02-01-05(7), N.D. Admin. Code (1986), provides: All liquor destined for delivery to a federal enclave in North Dakota for domestic consumption and not transported through a licensed North Dakota wholesaler for delivery to such bona fide federal enclave in North Dakota shall have clearly identified on each individual item that such shall be for consumption within the federal enclave exclusively. Such identification must be in a form and manner prescribed by the state treasurer. Section 84-02-01-05(1), N.D. Admin. Code (1986), provides: All persons sending or bringing liquor into North Dakota shall file a North Dakota Schedule A Report of all shipments and returns for each calendar month with the state treasurer. The report must be postmarked on or before the fifteenth day of the following month. QUESTION PRESENTED Whether regulations of the State of North Dakota, requiring out-of-state liquor suppliers to affix to each bottle of liquor sold to federal enclaves located in North Dakota a label stating that the liquor must be consumed on those premises and requiring those suppliers to file monthly reports, imperissibly interfere with the federal procurement scheme and otherwise fall outside the State's authority under the Twenty-first Amendment. STATEMENT 1. The State of North Dakota contains two federal enclaves, Grand Forks Air Force Base and Minot Air Force Base, over which the State and the federal government exercise concurrent jurisdiction. Each military installation contains clubs and package goods stores that sell alcoholic beverages exclusively to military personnel and their families. These clubs and stores are "non-appropriated fund instrumentalities" (NFIs) of the federal government. Although operated by the military, they do not receive congressionally appropriated funds. Instead, the facilities support themselves; any profits generated from liquor sales are used to finance recreational and other support services for each base's military personnel and their families. J.S. App. A3, A23. Under 10 U.S.C. 2488(a)(1) (Supp. V 1987), the military must obtain liquor (exclusive of beer and wine) for the NFIs from "the most competitive source, price and other factors considered * ." /3/ In order to minimize cost, the military operates a "joint-military service consolidated purchasing program for distilled spirits" (J.A. 25). Under this program, at the time pertinent here, all military facilities in a thirteen-state area, including the two North Dakota installations, purchase alcoholic beverages in bulk directly from distillers/suppliers, as opposed to purchasing from local wholesalers. This program enables the military to negotiate the best possible price, since it can avoid buying from distributors at local wholesale prices (which include additional markups). /4/ Prices for liquor purchased by the military from out-of-state suppliers are significantly lower than those for liquor bought from licensed wholesalers within North Dakota. /5/ See J.A. 5, 25. 2. Effective January 1, 1986, the State of North Dakota issued specific regulations aimed at the federal government's purchase of liquor for the two military bases located in the State. /6/ The principal regulation, the labeling provision, requires all out-of-state liquor suppliers to affix to each bottle of liquor sold to those federal installations a label stating that the liquor must be consumed on those premises. N.D. Admin. Code Section 84-02-01-05(7) (1986). The regulation imposes no such labeling requirement on local suppliers and distributors. A companion provision calls for all suppliers to file a monthly report showing the quantity of liquor shipped into the State during the preceding month. N.D. Admin. Code Section 84-02-01-05(1) (1986). In early November 1986, the State held a meeting for representatives of out-of-state distillers/suppliers to explain the labeling and reporting requirements for direct sales of liquor to the two bases. /7/ As a result of the added administrative burdens and costs imposed by compliance with those new requirements, five out-of-state suppliers, Heublein, Inc., James B. Beam, Joseph Seagrams, Somerset Importers, and Hiram Walker & Sons, Inc., informed the military that they would no longer ship liquor to the bases in North Dakota. /8/ Another out-of-state distiller, Kobrand Importers, Inc., agreed to continue supplying liquor to the NFIs in North Dakota, but told the military that its prices would increase from $.85 to $20.50 per case in order to cover the additional costs of complying with the State's regulations. /9/ In light of these developments, the official responsible for the military's procurement of liquor stated: "If the installations in North Dakota are forced to purchase their distilled spirits requirements from in-State sources in the future, it will cost the installations involved between $200,000 and $250,000 per year more than if the purchases are made from out-of-State distillers/importers" (J.A. 27). J.S. App. A4, A25-A26; J.A. 23, 25, 26. /10/ 3. On November 26, 1986, the United States filed this action against appellants in the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota. Reciting the factual background set out above, the complaint alleged that the labeling and reporting requirements of the State's regulations interfere with the federal military's procurement of liquor, conflict with governing federal procurement law, and therefore violate the Supremacy Clause. The complaint sought a judgment declaring those regulations invalid and an injunction barring the State's enforcement of them as applied to military bases in North Dakota. J.S. App. A2; J.A. 3-8. Appellants answered by contending that their regulations did not conflict with federal law. Appellants also argued that in any event the Twenty-first Amendment authorized the regulations as necessary "to prevent the unlawful diversion of alcohol from military enclaves into the internal commerce of North Dakota" (J.A. 11). The parties thereafter entered into a stipulation of facts and filed cross-motions for summary judgment. /11/ 4. The district court granted appellants' motion for summary judgment, concluding that the State's regulations do not conflict with the federal law requiring the military to purchase liquor at the "lowest cost" (J.S. App. A28). The court reasoned that the "state's regulations may have indirectly caused the price of out-of-state supplies of alcoholic beverages to increase, but they do not prevent the federal government from obtaining those beverages at the 'lowest cost.' The 'lowest cost' has merely increased" (ibid.). Even if there were a conflict, the court stated, it would need to balance the State's authority to regulate liquor under the Twenty-first Amendment against the federal government's interests (J.S. App. A28-A29). In that regard, the court ruled that a State enjoys authority to impose regulations designed to prevent the unlawful diversion of liquor. The court accepted that proffered reason for the State's regulations, stating that it was not "pretextual," /12/ and therefore concluded that those regulations are "a valid exercise of (the State's) core power under the Twenty-first Amendment" (id. at A31). Turning to the competing interests, the court found that the State's "significant interest in preventing unlawful diversion of alcoholic beverages" clearly outweighed the federal government's interest "in keeping its costs down" (ibid.). Accordingly, the court held, alternatively, that the regulations at issue fall within the State's powers under the Twenty-first Amendment and are not barred by the Supremacy Clause (ibid.). 5. The court of appeals reversed (J.S. App. A1-A22). It first noted that Congress, in 10 U.S.C. 2488(a)(1) (Supp. V 1987), implemented "a longstanding policy of purchasing alcoholic beverages at the lowest available price and using the proceeds for the benefit of the welfare and morale of military personnel and their families" (J.S. App. A12). The court recognized the State's power under the Twenty-first Amendment, but observed that such power "reaches its limits when the state attempts to exercise that power over an instrumentality of the federal government itself" (id. at A10). Accordingly, the court concluded that the Twenty-first Amendment "provides no basis for regulating the means by which Congress has sought to order military liquor procurement and to provide for the welfare and morale activities of military personnel" (id. at A13). The court of appeals also weighed the competing interests at stake in concluding that federal law preempts the State's regulations (J.S. App. A13-A18). It recognized the State's "traditional power to regulate unlawful diversion of liquor in transit to the (military) bases" (id. at A17), but found that the State's efforts here impermissibly conflict with federal law. "Congress has mandated that the military procure liquor on a competitive basis in order to maximize profits for the support of welfare and morale activities" (id. at A15). The court observed that the State's regulations will increase the military's annual liquor bill by more than $200,000, and that "the effect (of the regulations) in large part is to require the military to make purchases within the State -- purchases that would not otherwise be competitive with out-of-state sources" (id. at A15-A16). The court held that "this result conflicts with Congress' desire for open competition designed to maximize revenue for welfare and morale activities" (id. at A16). Chief Judge Lay dissented (J.A. App. A18-A22). He concluded that the State's regulations, designed solely "to prevent diversion of out-of-state liquor destined for military bases," fall within the State's power under the Twenty-First Amendment (id. at A22). In his view, under those circumstances, "(t)he federal government must accept the resulting increase in the cost of out-of-state liquor when it considers sources from which to purchase its liquor" (ibid.). SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT A. Federal law mandates that the military purchase alcoholic beverages (exclusive of beer and wine) to be resold on military installations located in the United States "from the most competitive source, price and other factors considered * ." 10 U.S.C. 2488(a)(1) (Supp. V 1987). As the statutory language suggests, the federal procurement scheme directs the military to purchase liquor for its facilities at the lowest available price. And as the legislative history of this provision makes plain, Congress, by this statute, reinstituted what until recently had been a longstanding military procurement policy -- the purchase of alcoholic beverages from suppliers and distillers at the lowest available price, regardless of whether those sources are located in a base's home state, in order to maximize the profits that support non-appropriated morale, welfare, and recreational activities on military bases. By contrast, Congress has specified in related legislation that in-state suppliers must be used for the military's purchase of beer and wine and for the purchase of distilled spirits for bases in Alaska and Hawaii. These distinctions, evident on the face of the pertinent military procurement statutes, are not inadvertent. They should not be subjected to state nullification. By enacting Section 2488(a)(1), Congress did not intend the military to consider price as only one of several equally competing factors in determining whether a particular liquor supplier is the "most competitive source." In choosing liquor suppliers, the military must take into account, among other factors, a supplier's reliability, service record, and access to particular brands. But as the court of appeals recognized (J.S. App. A12), and the legislative history of Section 2488(a)(1) confirms, Congress enacted the statute for the specific purpose of ensuring that the military purchases alcoholic beverages "in the most efficient and economic manner, without regard to the location of the source of the beverages, except as that location may affect cost * ." S. Rep. No. 331, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. 283 (1986). B. As applied to the two military bases in North Dakota, the federal procurement scheme under 10 U.S.C. 2488(a)(1) (Supp. V 1987) effectively requires military procurement officials to purchase liquor in bulk quantities directly from out-of-state distillers/suppliers because those suppliers offer lower prices than licensed wholesalers within the State. In the face of this carefully crafted framework, North Dakota's liquor regulations imposed burdensome labeling and reporting requirements on the military's out-of-state sources of liquor; those requirements will, in effect, force the military to obtain liquor for its North Dakota facilities from less competitive in-state sources at an increased annual cost of more than $200,000. This forced change in military procurement wrought by North Dakota's new regulatory regime is precisely what Congress sought to preclude by enacting Section 2488(a)(1), since the military is required by that measure to purchase alcoholic beverages from "the most competitive source" in order to maximize profits from the resale of those beverages -- profits that are the principal source of funding for the Armed Services' nonappropriated morale, welfare, and recreational programs on military installations. Under the Supremacy Clause, federal law preempts State regulation where the latter "stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress." Hines v. Davidowitz, 312 U.S. 52, 67 (1941). That well-established principle applies here. North Dakota's protectionist regulations plainly interfere with and thwart the federal procurement scheme mandating "open competition" (J.S. App. A16). As a result, the State's regulatory efforts must fail under the Supremacy Clause. Moreover, a longstanding companion principle under the Supremacy Clause, namely "that the activities of the Federal Government are free from regulation by any state," Mayo v. United States, 319 U.S. 441, 445 (1943), likewise bars the State's regulatory efforts over the military's procurement of alcoholic beverages. In decisions such as Mayo v. United States, supra, Leslie Miller, Inc. v. Arkansas, 352 U.S. 187 (1956), and Paul v. United States, 371 U.S. 245 (1963), this Court applied that Supremacy Clause principle in striking down States' efforts to interfere with federal activities. Those decisions compel the conclusion that North Dakota may not regulate the military's procurement of distilled spirits for its installations. Just as the California minimum price regulation in Paul collided with the applicable federal procurement law requiring the "most advantageous contract -- price, quality, and other factors considered," 371 U.S. at 252, the restrictions imposed by North Dakota upon the military's procurement of alcoholic beverages clash with federal law governing the military's procurement of liquor. North Dakota's regulatory efforts may not evade this Supremacy Clause principle on the basis that the State's regulations apply only to third-party suppliers who happen to do business with the government. First, as is apparent from decisions such as Paul and Leslie Miller, Inc., the fact that a State's regulation applies by its terms only to the federal government's suppliers (as opposed to the government itself) does not free that regulation from the constraints of the Supremacy Clause. Second, although nominally aimed at out-of-state suppliers, North Dakota's regulations are, in point of fact, designed to regulate the federal enclaves' procurement of alcoholic beverages. Finally, although the district court stated that "the purpose advanced by the State (for its regulations) does not appear to be pretextual" (J.S. App. A31), and the court of appeals did not quarrel with that assessment (id. at A15), a close examination of North Dakota's regulatory scheme leads to the contrary conclusion -- appellants imposed the regulations for the very purpose of forcing the military to purchase its alcoholic beverages from in-state wholesalers subject to the State's taxing authority. C. The Twenty-first Amendment does not authorize North Dakota to interfere with the federal government's exclusive authority to regulate military procurement of distilled spirits. As this Court has held, that Amendment generally permits the States to regulate and tax private commerce in alcoholic beverages in a manner that, without the Amendment, would be prohibited under the Commerce Clause. See Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190, 206 (1976). But even in this limited area, the Court has rejected the proposition that the Twenty-first Amendment renders the Commerce Clause inoperative simply because the State seeks to regulate alcoholic beverages. See Hostetter v. Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp., 377 U.S. 324, 331-332 (1964). And outside the context of the Commerce Clause, the Court has made clear that "the relevance of the Twenty-first Amendment to other Constitutional provisions becomes increasingly doubtful." Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. at 206. In light of the limited scope of the Twenty-first Amendment with respect to competing constitutional commands, this Court has held that the immunity of federal activities and property from state control or regulation remains wholly unaffected by the Amendment. See Collins v. Yosemite Park & Curry Co., 304 U.S. 518, 537-538 (1938). And the Court's companion decisions in United States v. Mississippi Tax Comm'n, 412 U.S. 363 (1973), and 421 U.S. 599 (1975), which struck down Mississippi's efforts to regulate shipments of liquor destined for both exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction military bases located in the State, establish beyond doubt that the Twenty-first Amendment does not confer authority on the States to regulate the federal government's procurement of alcoholic beverages. Here, North Dakota's regulations conflict with federal procurement law and with federal regulation of military enclaves; the State's regulatory regime thus does not survive scrutiny under the Supremacy Clause. Those regulations may not be resurrected under the Twenty-first Amendment. ARGUMENT THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA'S REGULATION OF THE UNITED STATES MILITARY'S PURCHASE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FROM OUT-OF-STATE SUPPLIERS FOR ITS NORTH DAKOTA INSTALLATIONS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY INTERFERES WITH FEDERAL PROCUREMENT OF THOSE PRODUCTS A. Federal Law Requires The Military To Purchase Alcoholic Beverages At The Lowest Available Price In Order To Maximize Profits To Support Morale, Welfare, And Recreational Activities On Military Bases 1. In 10 U.S.C. 2488(a)(1) (Supp. V 1987), Congress mandated that the military purchase alcoholic beverages (exclusive of beer and wine) to be resold on military installations located in the United States "from the most competitive source, price and other factors considered * ." /13/ As the statutory language suggests, the federal procurement scheme directs the military to purchase liquor for NFIs and other facilities at the lowest available price. In other words, the military, operating as a rational business firm, must follow practices designed to maximize profits by purchasing at the lowest prices the products that consumers demand. This straightforward reading of the statute is hardly surprising. The federal procurement regulation at issue in Paul v. United States, 371 U.S. 245 (1963), for example, directed officials to buy milk under "the most advantageous contract -- price, quality, and other factors considered" (id. at 252 (internal quotation marks omitted)). This Court construed that regulation as "command(ing) * * federal officials to procure supplies at the lowest cost to the United States" (id. at 253). 2. The legislative purpose of Section 2488(a)(1) becomes all the more manifest when its language is contrasted with that of Section 2488(a)(2), requiring in-state purchases of beer and wine, and with that of contemporaneously enacted provisions requiring in-state purchases of distilled spirits for bases in Alaska and Hawaii (see pp. 20-21 & n.15, infra). Moreover, as the court of appeals found (J.S. App. A12), the legislative history of Section 2488 confirms that Congress, by this statute, reinstituted what until recently had been a longstanding military procurement policy -- the purchase of alcoholic beverages at the lowest available price in order to maximize the profits that support non-appropriated morale, welfare, and recreational (MWR) activities on military bases. a. In 1985, the House of Representatives, by voice vote, passed an amendment to the Department of Defense authorization bill for fiscal year 1986. That amendment required the military to purchase alcoholic beverages to be resold on military installations from suppliers and distributors in the State in which an installation was located. The House amendment, however, drew opposition in the Senate. Senate opponents of this in-state purchasing requirement contended that it would increase the military's costs of purchasing alcoholic beverages for its NFI facilities by as much as $30 million annually. See, e.g., 131 Cong. Rec. 35,490-35,491 (1985) (statement of Sen. Glenn). As Senator Kennedy, one of the sponsors of the Senate's amendment to delete the House provision pointed out: While these dollar amounts may not be very significant in comparison with the other sums the Senate will be discussing in the defense appropriation bill, these sums are of enormous importance to the services' morale, welfare, and recreation programs. These MWR funds depend heavily on revenues obtained from sales of alcohol on installations, and if installations were required to purchase their alcohol requirements from within the State in which they are located, the costs will skyrocket and the MWR funds will be correspondingly depleted. 131 Cong. Rec. 35,492 (1985). The Senate succeeded in deleting the in-state purchasing requirement from the Department of Defense authorization bill for fiscal year 1986. Nevertheless, Congress included such a provision in that fiscal year's Department of Defense Appropriations Act. See Act of Dec. 19, 1985, Pub. L. No. 99-190, Tit. VIII, Section 8099, 99 Stat. 1219. Consequently, from December 1985 through October 1986, all alcoholic beverages for military bases had to be procured in the State in which the particular base was located. b. The following year, Congress again confronted the issue of requiring military bases to purchase liquor only from in-state suppliers. The Senate Armed Services Committee decided to drop that requirement from the National Defense Authorization bill for fiscal year 1987. The Committee explained that it continues to object to such a requirement and has included a provision mandating that purchases of such alcoholic beverages for resale be made in the most efficient and economic manner, without regard to the location of the source of the beverage, except as that location may affect cost. * * * (T)he committee believes that procurement of alcoholic beverage(s) for resale should be subjected to the same favorable effects of competition as is useful in the procurement of other goods and services. Additionally, the committee does not believe it appropriate to impose upon the Department, or the morale and welfare activities of the Department, a requirement which will result in additional costs of tens of millions of dollars, caused by the imposition of indirect State taxation in (sic) the Federal government and the lack of competition. S. Rep. No. 331, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. 283 (1986). The House Armed Services Committee agreed to delete the in-state purchasing requirement for distilled spirits, but decided to include a provision which retained that requirement for beer and wine. The House Committee noted that it was customary for the military to buy beer and wine from local sources and that, accordingly, retaining the in-state purchasing requirement for those beverages would have little effect on the military's overall cost of procuring liquor for its facilities. H.R. Rep. No. 718, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. 183-184 (1986). On the other hand, the House Committee heeded the military's estimate that the in-state purchasing requirement "will raise its costs for alcoholic beverages by $20 million per year * * (,) increased costs (that) relate almost entirely to distilled spirits that were previously purchased directly from manufacturers." H.R. Rep. No. 718, supra, at 183. The House Committee thus joined its Senate colleagues in recommending "a return to competitive procurement of alcoholic beverages," namely, "allow(ing) the (military) to return to direct procurement of distilled spirits -- the acceptable industry practice." H.R. Rep. No. 718, supra, at 184. The full House agreed with the Armed Services Committee's recommendation on this point, specifically voting down a proposed amendment to change it. /14/ On the Senate floor, however, Senator Andrews of North Dakota also sponsored an amendment to reinstitute the in-state purchasing requirement for all alcoholic beverages, and that amendment was adopted by a voice vote. See 132 Cong. Rec. 20,219-20,223 (1986). The House and Senate conferees then adopted instead the Committee-sponsored House provisions retaining the in-state purchasing requirement only for beer and wine and directing the military to buy distilled spirits at the lowest price available. See H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 1001, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. 39,464 (1986). Several weeks later, Congress passed the 1987 National Defense Authorization bill and the procurement provision was signed into law. See Act of Nov. 14, 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-661, Tit. III, Section 313, 100 Stat. 3853 (codified at 10 U.S.C. 2488(a) (Supp. V 1987)). Significantly, legislation enacted less than three weeks earlier required the military to purchase from in-state sources all alcoholic beverages for installations located in the States of Alaska and Hawaii, while explicitly providing otherwise for bases located in the contiguous 48 States and the District of Columbia. /15/ See Act of Oct. 30, 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-591, Tit. IX, Section 9090, 100 Stat. 3341-116. 3. In sum, with the exception of legislation relating to bases located in Alaska and Hawaii, Congress has made no pertinent change in the federal law governing the military's procurement of alcoholic beverages since the enactment of 10 U.S.C. 2488(a). See, e.g., Act of Oct. 1, 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-463, Tit. VIII, Section 8122, 102 Stat. 2270-40. Accordingly, Congress has maintained the policy of requiring the military to purchase liquor for its NFI facilities from suppliers and distillers at the lowest available price, regardless of whether those sources are located in a base's home state. In contending otherwise, appellants and their supporting amici are asking this Court effectively to nullify the very distinctions Congress deliberately drew between the acquisition of beer and wine and the acquisition of distilled spirits and, with respect to the latter, between acquisitions for bases in Alaska and Hawaii and those for bases in the 48 other States. Those telling differences on the face of closely related procurement provisions are not drafting errors; they are clear distinctions that Congress purposefully adopted. Those distinctions should be fully honored by the courts to achieve their intended pro-competitive purpose. As we have recounted (see p. 20 & n. 14, supra), members of the House and Senate from North Dakota tried, but failed, to eliminate those distinctions on the floor of Congress. Under the Supremacy Clause, it is not the proper role of the State to attempt through regulation to nullify those federal statutory distinctions, in whole or in part. To be sure, under the federal procurement scheme, price is the predominant, but not the sole, determinant. In choosing liquor suppliers, the military must also take into account, among other factors, a supplier's reliability, service record, and access to particular brands. But as the court of appeals recognized, "the history of military alcohol procurement reflects a longstanding policy of purchasing alcoholic beverages at the lowest available price and using the proceeds for the benefit of the welfare and morale of military personnel and their families" (J.A. App. A12); see United States v. South Carolina, 578 F. Supp. 549, 553 (D.S.C. 1983). Indeed, as detailed above, the legislative history of Section 2488(a)(1) makes plain that Congress enacted the statute for the specific purpose of ensuring that the military purchases its alcoholic beverages "in the most efficient and economic manner, without regard to the location of the source of the beverages, except as that location may affect cost * ." S. Rep. No. 331, supra, at 283 (1986); see H.R. Rep. No. 718, supra, at 183-184. /16/ B. North Dakota's Liquor Regulations Are Invalid Under The Supremacy Clause Since They Prevent The United States Military From Obtaining Alcoholic Beverages From The Most Competitive Source, As Required By Federal Law 1. a. As we have explained, under governing federal law, /17/ the military must purchase liquor from the "most competitive source." As applied to the two military bases in North Dakota, that federal scheme requires military procurement officials to purchase the liquor in bulk quantities directly from out-of-state distillers/suppliers because those suppliers offer lower prices than licensed wholesalers within the State. See J.A. 5, 25; see also note 4, supra. By virtue of the added administrative burdens and costs of complying with the State's labeling and reporting requirements, however, five major out-of-state suppliers informed the military that they would no longer ship liquor to the bases in North Dakota. Another major out-of-state supplier advised the military that it would increase its prices on North Dakota sales by as much as $20.50 per case in order to recover the additional costs of complying with the state-imposed regime. J.S. App. A4. In sum, the record shows that the State's regulations, if left intact, will effectively force the military to obtain liquor for its North Dakota facilities from less competitive in-state sources at an increased annual cost of more than $200,000. J.S. App. A4, A15-A16, A25-A26; J.A. 25-27. This forced change in military procurement is precisely what Congress sought to preclude by enacting 10 U.S.C. 2488(a)(1). Congress directed that distilled spirits be procured from "the most competitive source" in order to maximize profits from the resale of those beverages -- profits that are the principal source of funding for the Armed Services' non-appropriated MWR programs on military installations. Congress was acutely aware that the military's annual cost of purchasing alcoholic beverages could increase by as much as $30 million if the military were required to purchase its liquor from less competitive in-state sources, and was concerned that such increased cost would have a devastating effect on the funding of the MWR programs -- programs that do not receive appropriated funds. See, e.g., S. Rep. No. 331, supra, at 283; 131 Cong. Rec. 35,490-35,491 (1985) (statement of Sen. Glenn); id. at 35,491-35,492 (statement of Sen. Kennedy). b. The Court has long held that, under the Supremacy Clause, federal law preempts state regulation where the latter "stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress." Hines v. Davidowitz, 312 U.S. 52, 67 (1941); e.g., California v. ARC America Corp., 109 S. Ct. 1661, 1665 (1989); Capital Cities Cable, Inc. v. Crisp, 467 U.S. 691, 699 (1984). That established principle applies with full force in this case. Under Section 2488(a)(1), as the court of appeals correctly observed, "Congress has mandated that the military procure liquor on a competitive basis in order to maximize profits for the support of welfare and morale activities" (J.S. App. A15). That is a legitimate federal legislative purpose which fully justifies pro tanto displacement of state regulatory authority over a subject matter otherwise principally regulated by the States. Cf. United States v. Oregon, 366 U.S. 643 (1961) (upholding federal statutory provision that estate of a veteran who dies in a VA hospital intestate and without legal heirs shall escheat to the United States, notwithstanding contrary state law on devolution of property). Here, as detailed above, the record shows that the State's regulations will, in effect, increase the military's annual liquor bill by more than $200,000 and "require the military to make purchases within the State -- purchases that would not otherwise be competitive with out-of-state sources" (J.S. App. A15-A16). In these circumstances, the State's regulations plainly interfere with and thwart the federal procurement scheme mandating "open competition" (id. at A16). Under the Supremacy Clause, the State's regulatory efforts must fall. 2. a. A longstanding companion principle under the Supremacy Clause likewise bars the State's attempt to regulate the military's procurement of alcoholic beverages. As this Court has explained: Since the United States is a government of delegated powers, none of which may be exercised throughout the Nation by any one state, it is necessary for uniformity that the laws of the United States be dominant over those of any state. Such dominancy is required also to avoid a breakdown of administration through possible conflicts arising from inconsistent requirements. The supremacy clause of the Constitution states this essential principle. Article VI. A corollary to this principle is that the activities of the Federal Government are free from regulation by any state. No other adjustment of competing enactments or legal principles is possible. Mayo v. United States, 319 U.S. 441, 445 (1943) (footnote omitted; emphasis added). Thus, putting aside for the moment the potential impact of the Twenty-first Amendment (see pp. 35-42, infra), there can be no serious doubt that the constitutional command of the Supremacy Clause, as construed by this Court since M'Culloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819), together with the specific constitutional authority to provide for, maintain, and regulate the nation's military forces, /18/ would bar North Dakota from directly regulating the military's procurement of alcoholic beverages. /19/ A close look at this case reveals that the State's liquor regulations represent a thinly veiled effort to accomplish that forbidden goal. The corollary Supremacy Clause principle, as the Court's decisions show, imposes limits on state power as regards the federal government that extend well beyond taxation, the issue in M'Culloch v. Maryland. In Johnson v. Maryland, 254 U.S. 51, 55-57 (1920), for example, the Court held that Maryland could not require a post office employee to obtain a state driver's license in order to drive a postal truck. In so holding, the Court viewed the principle expressed in M'Culloch and succeeding cases as providing to "the instruments of the United States (an immunity) from state control in the performance of their duties." 254 U.S. at 57. Similarly, in Mayo v. United States, supra, the Court made clear that the Supremacy Clause precludes any State from attempting to regulate the activities of the federal government. There, the Court struck down a Florida law insofar as it would have required agents of the United States Department of Agriculture, as a condition of distributing fertilizer under a federal statute, to submit the fertilizer for state inspection and pay the accompanying inspection fee. 319 U.S. at 444-448. Such attempted state regulation of federal activities, the Court concluded, was fundamentally at odds with Supremacy Clause principles and thus the federal government's "inherent freedom continues" (id. at 448). And in Public Utilities Comm'n v. United States, 355 U.S. 534 (1958), the Court held that California could not prohibit common carriers from transporting federal government property at rates lower than those approved by the State's Public Utilities Commission. The State's law, the Court concluded, impermissibly interfered with federal law requiring negotiated rates and the use of the "least costly means of transportation." Id. at 542. See also United States v. Georgia Public Service Comm'n, 371 U.S. 285 (1963). In this same vein, the Court has specifically vindicated Congress's exclusive right under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution to authorize the military to procure goods and services from whatever sources it chooses, free of state limitations or restrictions. In Leslie Miller, Inc. v. Arkansas, 352 U.S. 187 (1956), for example, the Air Force had awarded a base construction contract to a private firm under Section 3 of the Armed Services Procurement Act of 1947, ch. 65, 62 Stat. 23, 41 U.S.C. 152 (1952), providing that awards on advertised bids "shall be made * * to that responsible bidder whose bid, conforming to the invitation for bids, will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered * * " (352 U.S. at 188 (internal quotation marks omitted)). The State then instituted proceedings against the contractor for its failure to obtain a license before executing the contract and starting to build, as required by state law. The Court rebuffed that regulatory intrusion, concluding that the state licensing standards, designed to ensure a contractor's reliability, created "a virtual power of review over the federal determination of 'responsibility'" (id. at 190). Accordingly, following the rationale of Johnson v. Maryland, supra, the Court held that the State had no authority to regulate the Air Force's awarding of the base construction contract, since application of state law would "frustrate the expressed federal policy of selecting the lowest responsible bidder" (352 U.S. at 190). More recently, the case of Paul v. United States, 371 U.S. 245 (1963), involved California's efforts to apply its minimum milk price regulation to military bases' milk purchases, where the applicable federal regulation required procurement by the method that would "obtain for the Government the most advantageous contract -- price, quality, and other factors considered" (id. at 252 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). The Court struck down the State's regulation under the Supremacy Clause, recognizing that the "collision between the federal policy of negotiated prices and the state policy of regulated prices is * * clear and acute" (id. at 253), and concluding that the State's regulation precluded the military from complying with federal law to obtain milk at the lowest cost. As the Court explained: While the federal procurement policy demands competition, the California policy, as respects milk, effectively eliminates competition. The California policy defeats the command to federal officers to procure supplies at the lowest cost to the United States, by having a state officer fix the price on the basis of factors not specified in the federal law. Ibid. b. This Court's decisions compel the conclusion that North Dakota may not regulate the military's procurement of distilled spirits for its installations. Just as the California minimum price regulation in Paul collided with the applicable federal procurement law requiring the "most advantageous contract -- price, quality, and other factors considered," the restrictions imposed by North Dakota upon the military's procurement of alcoholic beverages clash with federal law governing the military's procurement of liquor. Congress has mandated that the military obtain its liquor from the "most competitive source, price and other factors considered" (10 U.S.C. 2488(a)(1) (Supp. V 1987)). Yet in the face of this federal directive, the State seeks to impose labeling and reporting requirements on the military's out-of-state suppliers of distilled spirits that will essentially eliminate those suppliers as available sources of those products. As a result, the State's regulations will, in effect, require the military to procure those beverages locally at an annual increased cost of more than $200,000. In these circumstances, as the court of appeals correctly held (J.S. App. A11-A18), the Supremacy Clause invalidates the State's liquor regulations directed solely to procurement by the federal government, just as it did the attempted state regulation of federal activities in Paul, Leslie Miller, Inc., Mayo, and Public Utilities Comm'n. 3. Appellants (Br. 17-20), joined by the National Beer Wholesalers' Association, Inc. (Br. 9-14)), the National Alcoholic Beverage Control Association, et al. (Br. 7-9), and the National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. (Br. 17-19), as amici curiae, contend that this case does not even implicate the federal government's constitutional immunity from state regulation of its activities since North Dakota's regulations apply only to third-party suppliers who do business with the federal government. In their view, the fact that suppliers may choose to treat the regulations as so onerous as to cause them to stop dealing with the military entirely, or to raise their prices on military sales, does not implicate Supremacy Clause principles. For several reasons, that argument misses the mark. a. First, as is apparent from this Court's decisions in Paul, Leslie Miller, Inc., and Public Utilities Comm'n, the fact that a State's regulation applies by its terms to the federal government's suppliers, as opposed to the federal government itself, does not free that regulation from the constraints of the Supremacy Clause. In each of those decisions, the Court struck down on Supremacy Clause grounds state laws that were both applicable to and enforceable against only third parties with whom the government did business. The Court thus recognized that a State's attempted regulation of the conditions or terms upon which the United States chooses to do business with a third party contravenes the Supremacy Clause, notwithstanding the fact that the State ostensibly has aimed its regulatory efforts at the activities of the third party. Here, North Dakota's liquor regulations are just as much an impermissible attempt to regulate the activities of the federal government as were the ill-fated regulatory efforts in Paul, Leslie Miller, Inc., and Public Utilities Comm'n. b. Second, although nominally aimed at out-of-state suppliers, North Dakota's regulations admittedly are designed to regulate the federal enclaves' procurement and handling of alcoholic beverages. /20/ The State has contended throughout the litigation that it imposed the labeling and reporting requirements "in order to prevent the unlawful diversion of liquor, either en route to the military enclaves or off the enclaves after delivery, into the state's domestic commerce" (J.S. 9). Indeed, appellants have now made clear that the real targets of their regulatory efforts are the State's two federal military installations, not the military's out-of-state suppliers: "The State's significant interest underlying the regulations challenged here is predicated on the fact that liquor is diverted off the military bases into the State's commerce. The NFIs sell packaged liquor to authorized purchasers who reside off base. This practice alone guarantees that liquor will be diverted into the State's territory * * ." (Appellants' Br. 21). In other words, appellants object, so they claim, to the military's practice of selling packaged alcoholic beverages (obtained from out-of-state sources) to military personnel who reside off-base, and seek through the State's regulations to put a stop to, or at least inhibit, this practice. But in our federal system it is simply not the province of the States to regulate activities of the United States or its instrumentalities. This Court made that point with unmistakable clarity in Mayo v. United States, 319 U.S. at 445, stating that "the activities of the Federal Government are free from regulation by any state." And that constitutional principle, as the Court has held, obtains with particular force where a State seeks to regulate the government's exclusive authority over military procurement derived from Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. E.g., Paul v. United States, 371 U.S. at 253; Leslie Miller, Inc. v. Arkansas, 352 U.S. at 190. /21/ Furthermore, the Secretary of Defense, under his rulemaking authority conferred by 50 U.S.C. App. 473, has promulgated a regulation that specifically states that military package stores, such as the NFIs located on the two bases in North Dakota, "shall provide the sale of alcoholic beverages purchased for off-premise consumption by authorized patrons * * ." 47 Fed. Reg. 34,533 (1982) (codified at 32 C.F.R. 261.3). Accordingly, to the extent the State's regulations are aimed at preventing, inhibiting, or burdening the military from selling packaged alcoholic beverages to military personnel who reside off-base (where, as here, consumption of alcoholic beverages off-base is not in itself prohibited by the State), the regulations directly contravene federal law and must, accordingly, fall by virtue of the Supremacy Clause. /22/ c. Finally, although the district court indicated that "the purpose advanced by the State (for its regulations) does not appear to be pretextual" (J.S. App. A31, and the court of appeals accepted that assessment (id. at A15), a close examination of North Dakota's regulatory scheme leads to the contrary conclusion -- appellants imposed the regulations in order to force the military to purchase more of its alcoholic beverages from in-state wholesalers subject to the State's taxing authority. Appellants now assert (Br. 21) that the liquor regulations' principal purpose is to put a stop to the diversion of liquor from the two federal enclaves into the State's commerce that results from the military's practice of selling packaged alcoholic beverages to military personnel who reside off-base. The military facilities, however, not only sell packaged liquor purchased from out-of-state suppliers; those facilities also sell packaged beer and wine that, as required by federal law, are obtained from licensed wholesalers located in the State, see 10 U.S.C. 2488(a)(2) (Supp. V 1987), and, if prices are competitive, the facilities are entirely at liberty to purchase packaged liquor from such local wholesalers. But the State's labeling and reporting requirements apply only to liquor obtained by the federal enclaves from out-of-state suppliers. The State's wholesalers, unlike out-of-state suppliers, are not required to affix special labels to the alcoholic beverages they sell to the military installations stating that the items must be consumed on those premises, or to file monthly reports concerning their sales. This disparate treatment of out-of-state liquor suppliers and in-state wholesalers is telling evidence that the real aim of the State's regulations is not to prevent the diversion of alcoholic beverages from the federal enclaves into the State's commerce. To the contrary, those regulations seek to compel the military to purchase its alcoholic beverages from in-state wholesalers -- transactions in which the State has a direct pecuniary interest since it imposes a tax on such wholesale transactions. See N.D. Cent. Code Sections 5-03-04 and 5-03-07 (1975). C. The Twenty-First Amendment Does Not Authorize The State Of North Dakota To Interfere With The Federal Government's Exclusive Authority To Regulate Military Procurement Of Alcoholic Beverages Appellants (Br. 12-14), again joined by the National Beer Wholesalers' Association, Inc. (Br. 14-28), the National Alcoholic Beverage Control Association, et al. (Br. 5-7), and the National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. (Br. 19-22), as amici curiae, seek to vindicate North Dakota's interference with the military's procurement of alcoholic beverages on the basis of the State's reserved power under the Twenty-first Amendment to regulate intrastate commerce in alcoholic beverages. To be sure, as the court of appeals fully recognized, "the state has always had the right pursuant to its police power to take reasonable measures to prevent the unlawful diversion of liquor into its stream of commerce" (J.S. App. A16 (citations omitted)). But contrary to the assertion of the State and amici, the Twenty-first Amendment does not authorize the States to pursue that objective by regulating federal procurement of liquor to be supplied to federal military enclaves. /23/ 1. Section 2 of the Twenty-first Amendment /24/ generally permits the States to regulate and tax private commerce in alcoholic beverages in a manner that, without the Amendment, would be prohibited under the Commerce Clause as a burden on interstate commerce. See Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190, 206 (1976). Thus, in State Bd. of Equalization v. Young's Market Co., 299 U.S. 59, 62-63 (1936), the Court held that the Twenty-first Amendment permitted California to impose a license fee upon private parties wishing to import beer into the State, although the Commerce Clause would otherwise have barred such a fee. But even in this limited area, the Court has rejected the proposition that the Twenty-first Amendment renders the Commerce Clause inoperative simply because the State seeks to regulate alcoholic beverages. /25/ "To draw a conclusion * * * that the Twenty-first Amendment has somehow operated to 'repeal' the Commerce Clause wherever regulation of intoxicating liquors is concerned would, however, be an absurd oversimplification." Hostetter v. Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp., 377 U.S. 324, 331-332 (1964). Thus, in Hostetter, the Court held that New York had no authority to interfere with the sale of liquor at a local airport for delivery to consumers in foreign countries, where the airport was under the supervision of the Bureau of Customs (now the Customs Service). And the Court there noted that to conclude that Congress had retained no regulatory power over commerce in alcoholic beverages would be "patently bizarre and * * * demonstrably incorrect" (377 U.S. at 332). See Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 U.S. 263, 274 (1984); California Retail Liquor Dealers Ass'n v. Midcal Aluminum, Inc., 445 U.S. 97, 110 (1980); see also Healy v. Beer Institute, Inc., No. 88-449 (June 19, 1989), slip op. 17-19. 2. As this Court has made clear, "(o)nce passing beyond consideration of the Commerce Clause, the relevance of the Twenty-first Amendment to other constitutional provisions becomes increasingly doubtful." Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. at 206. For example, in Department of Revenue v. James B. Beam Distilling Co., 377 U.S. 341 (1964), Kentucky attempted to tax the importation of Scotch whiskey into the State for later sale throughout the United States. Recognizing that the tax violated the Export-Import Clause (U.S. Const. Art. I, Section 10, Cl. 2), the State argued that the Twenty-first Amendment nevertheless authorized its imposition. In rejecting the State's argument, the Court distinguished those cases involving conflicts between state liquor laws and the Commerce Clause and noted that it had never so much as intimated that the Twenty-first Amendment permits what the Export-Import Clause explicitly forbids (377 U.S. at 344). Indeed, the Court emphasized: Nothing in the language of the Amendment nor in its history leads to such an extraordinary conclusion. * * * (N)ow that the claim for the first time is squarely presented, we expressly reject it. Id. at 345-346. Similarly, the Twenty-first Amendment has not insulated state liquor provisions from the commands of the Fourteenth Amendment. In striking down under the Equal Protection Clause a state law prohibiting the sale of 3.2% beer to males under 21 years of age, but permitting such sales to women aged 18 years or over, the Court in Craig v. Boren, supra, specifically held that "the operation of the Twenty-first Amendment does not alter the application of equal protection standards that otherwise govern this case" (429 U.S. at 209). And in Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 400 U.S. 433, 436-439 (1971), where a state statute authorized the posting in a public place of the names of excessive drinkers, the Court held that the Twenty-first Amendment could not save that statute from violating the Due Process Clause, where such persons were not first given notice and an opportunity to be heard. /26/ 3. In light of the limited scope of the Twenty-first Amendment with respect to competing constitutional commands, this Court has held that the immunity of federal activities and property from state control or regulation remains wholly unaffected by the Amendment. In Collins v. Yosemite Park & Curry Co., 304 U.S. 518 (1938), for example, California sought to apply its liquor licensing requirements to a corporation selling alcoholic beverages in Yosemite National Park under a lease from the United States. The Court squarely held that the Twenty-first Amendment did not give the State jurisdiction to regulate the sale of alcoholic beverages on an enclave of exclusive federal jurisdiction, and thus the State could not apply its regulations. 304 U.S. at 537-538. In more recent decisions involving Mississippi's efforts to regulate military facilities' procurement of alcoholic beverages, the Court has made clear that the rationale of Collins is not limited to situations where the federal government exercises exclusive jurisdiction. In United States v. Mississippi Tax Comm'n, 412 U.S. 363 (1973) (Mississippi Tax Comm'n I), Mississippi sought to compel the four military facilities located in that State to purchase liquor either from the State Tax Commission (at a 17 or 20% markup) or from distillers who were required to collect and remit the same markup to the State. Since two of the four bases were areas of exclusive federal jurisdiction, the case initially turned on the resolution of a conflict between the State's asserted power under the Twenty-first Amendment and the federal government's exclusive authority over such bases under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution. See 412 U.S. at 364-368. Following Collins, the Court held that "the Twenty-first Amendment confers no power on a State to regulate -- whether by licensing, taxation, or otherwise -- the importation of distilled spirits into territory over which the United States exercises exclusive jurisdiction" (id. at 375). Indeed, the Court recognized that a different result would not obtain even if it were assumed that some of the liquor purchased on the installations would be consumed off-base and hence within the State's jurisdiction (id. at 376-377). The Court, however, remanded the case for consideration, among other issues, of whether the Twenty-first Amendment empowers the State to regulate shipments of liquor destined for its two concurrent jurisdiction bases. See 412 U.S. at 379-381. On appeal from the remand, this Court squarely held that the State's reliance on the Twenty-first Amendment to regulate the military's importation of liquor for the two concurrent jurisdiction bases rested on no stronger foundation than its ill-fated attempt to regulate out-of-state shipments to exclusive jurisdiction bases. United States v. Mississippi Tax Comm'n, 421 U.S. 599, 613-614 (1975) (Mississippi Tax Comm'n II). As the Court made clear: Nor does the Twenty-first Amendment require a different result. When the case was last here we held that "the Twenty-first Amendment confers no power on a State to regulate -- whether by licensing, taxation, or otherwise -- the importation of distilled spirits into territory over which the United States exercises exclusive jurisdiction (pursuant to Art. I, Section 8, cl. 17, of the Constitution)." 412 U.S., at 375; see Collins v. Yosemite Park & Curry Co., 304 U.S. 518, 538 (1938). Cf. James v. Dravo Contracting Co., 302 U.S. 134, 140 (1937). We reach the same conclusion as to the concurrent jurisdiction bases to which Art. I, Section 8, cl. 17, does not apply * * . 421 U.S. at 613 (brackets in original)). /27/ 4. Taken together, this Court's decisions in Mississippi Tax Comm'n I and Mississippi Tax Comm'n II, when considered in light of settled doctrine that the Twenty-first Amendment has little force outside the Commerce Clause arena, establish that the Amendment does not confer authority on the States to regulate the federal government's procurement of alcoholic beverages. In this area, as in all others, the Supremacy Clause precludes state regulation of federal activities. E.g., Leslie Miller, Inc. v. Arkansas, 352 U.S. at 190; Mayo v. United States, 319 U.S. at 448; Johnson v. Maryland, 254 U.S. at 57. Here, as we have shown, North Dakota's regulations conflict with federal procurement law and with federal regulation of military enclaves and thus do not survive scrutiny under the Supremacy Clause. And, as this Court's decisions make clear, those regulations may not be resurrected under the Twenty-first Amendment. /28/ 5. Confronted with this daunting line of precedent, appellants and their supporting amici seize upon the Court's statement in Mississippi Tax Comm'n I, 412 U.S. at 377 -- that a State may, "in the absence of conflicting federal regulation," regulate liquor shipments destined for military bases located within the State -- as support for North Dakota's regulations. Appellants and amici have grasped a straw man. First, the Court plainly stated that as a necessary (but not sufficient) condition, any state regulatory effort must not conflict with federal law. Here, as we have shown and as the court of appeals correctly held, the State's regulations contravene applicable federal procurement law. See pp. 16-30, supra. Thus, North Dakota has not even satisfied the criteria for valid state liquor regulation suggested in Mississippi Tax Comm'n I. Second, after stating that there was no need at that time to delineate the precise contours of the State's authority to regulate liquor passing through its territory, the Court in Mississippi Tax Comm'n I, 412 U.S. at 378, concluded that the State could not regulate direct transactions between the two exclusively federal enclaves in Mississippi and its out-of-state suppliers. And in Mississippi Tax Comm'n II, as discussed above, the Court made clear that its earlier holding was not grounded on rigid notions of territoriality. To the contrary, after noting its earlier conclusion that the Twenty-first Amendment "confers no power on a State to regulate -- whether by licensing, taxation, or otherwise -- the importation of distilled spirits into territory over which the United States exercises exclusive jurisdiction * ," the Court expressly held that "(w)e reach the same conclusion as to the concurrent jurisdiction bases * ." Mississippi Tax Comm'n II, 421 U.S. at 613 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). Accordingly, the Twenty-first Amendment does not save North Dakota's regulations, which, in contravention of the Supremacy Clause, interfere with the federal government's procurement of liquor for bases located within the State. /29/ CONCLUSION The judgment of the court of appeals should be affirmed. Respectfully submitted. KENNETH W. STARR Solicitor General SHIRLEY D. PETERSON Assistant Attorney General LAWRENCE G. WALLACE Deputy Solicitor General MICHAEL R. LAZERWITZ Assistant to the Solicitor General RICHARD FARBER Attorney JULY 1989 /1/ The Court's appellate jurisdiction conferred in Section 1254(2) was repealed by the Act of June 27, 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-352, Section 2(a), 102 Stat. 662, but the repeal did not take effect until September 25, 1988 (Section 7, 102 Stat. 664). The repeal does not apply to this case, because it does "not * * affect the right to review or the manner of reviewing the judgment or decree of a court which was entered before such effective date" (ibid.). /2/ In 1983, the Department of Defense amended the regulation by substituting the phrase "price and other factors considered" for the phrase "price and other considered factors." Department of Defense Change No. 1 for Armed Services Military Club and Package Store Regulation 1015.3-R, ch. 4, Section C. The Code of Federal Regulations inaccurately contains the original phrasing. We have inserted the corrected phrasing in our citation to the codified version of the regulation in the Code of Federal Regulations and will refer to that corrected version. /3/ Department of Defense Armed Services Military Club and Package Store Regulation 1015.3-R, ch. 4, Section C, also requires the military to obtain liquor for the NFIs "under such conditions as shall obtain for the government the most advantageous contract, price and other factors considered" (32 C.F.R. 261.4). The Secretary of Defense promulgated the Department of Defense Armed Services Military Club and Package Store Regulations under his rulemaking authority conferred by 50 U.S.C. App. 473, which empowers him "to make such regulations as he may deem to be appropriate governing the sale, consumption, possession of or traffic in beer, wine, or any other intoxicating liquors to or by members of the Armed Forces." /4/ In response to prodding by Congress, the military recently has further consolidated its purchasing program for alcoholic beverages sold by NFIs located on Army and Air Force bases. See H.R. Rep. No. 563, 100th Cong., 2d Sess. 200-201 (1988); H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 753, 100th Cong., 2d Sess. 375-376 (1988). Effective March 25, 1989, the Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES) became solely responsible for operating those NFIs. See Transfer of Function Agreement Between the Departments of the Army and Air Force and the Army and Air Force Exchange Service for the Management and Operation of Army and Air Force Class VI (Package Beverage) Stores (Nov. 1, 1988). AAFES, whose primary purpose is to provide discount goods and services to military personnel, is an established entity within the Army and the Air Force. See Department of the Army Regulation 60-10/Department of the Air Force Regulation 147-7, ch. 1 (1984). As a result of this transfer of authority, AAFES currently coordinates alcoholic beverage purchases for NFIs on military bases located throughout the country; AAFES purchases in bulk quantities whenever appropriate and utilizes a central distribution system. With respect to purchases of alcoholic beverages for the North Dakota installations, AAFES continues to buy most of those spirits directly from out-of-state distillers/suppliers. /5/ Under the State's regulatory scheme, there are three levels of liquor suppliers: out-of-state distillers/suppliers, state-licensed wholesalers, and state-licensed retailers. The State imposes a tax at the wholesale and retail levels. See N.D. Cent. Code Sections 5-03-04 and 5-03-07 (1975); N.D. Cent. Code Section 57-39.2-03.2 (1983 & Supp. 1987). /6/ Appellant Robert E. Hanson, as the State Treasurer of North Dakota, promulgated the regulations under his statutory authority to regulate the State's liquor distribution system. See N.D. Cent. Code Section 5-03-05 (1975). The regulations "have the force of law thirty days after the date of mailing to the persons affected by such regulations" (ibid.). /7/ From December 1985 through October 1986, federal law required the military to procure liquor from suppliers within the State in which the base was located. See Act of Dec. 19, 1985, Pub. L. No. 99-190, Tit. VIII, Section 8099, 99 Stat. 1219. As of November 1, 1986, however, Congress authorized the military once again to purchase liquor from the most competitive source regardless of location. See Act of Oct. 30, 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-591, Tit. IX, Section 9090, 100 Stat. 3341-116; Act of Nov. 14, 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-661, Tit. III, Section 313, 100 Stat. 3853. Hence, the labeling and reporting requirements imposed by appellants' regulations had no practical effect until November 1986. /8/ We have been informed by military officials responsible for liquor procurement that these suppliers are the primary distillers or importers of many popular brands of distilled spirits, including Smirnoff vodka, Jose Cuervo tequila, Johnnie Walker Black Label and Red Label scotch, Tanqueray gin, Canadian Club whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Jim Beam bourbon, Chivas Regal scotch, and Seagrams 7 Crown whiskey. /9/ Kobrand imports Beefeaters gin, another popular brand of liquor. /10/ That official also estimated that the State's regulations would impose an additional cost of $50,000 for the military's immediate liquor procurement needs in November and December 1986 (J.A. 26-27). /11/ Appellants did not dispute the declaration submitted by the United States detailing the expected additional costs imposed by the regulations. Nor did appellants dispute that the five identified out-of-state suppliers would no longer service the bases in North Dakota and that another supplier would substantially raise its prices. See Declaration of Kim Keltz, Chief of the Special Contracts Branch, Air Force Nonappropriated Fund Purchasing Office, San Antonio, Texas (J.A. 25-27). In support of their position, however, appellant submitted an affidavit of appellant Robert E. Hanson. That affidavit stated that "(v)arious distillers/suppliers have notified (him) that they intend to comply with (the regulations)" (J.A. 34). The affidavit did not identify those out-of-state suppliers. Moreover, the affidavit declared that Hanson, in his capacity as State Treasurer, is "aware of the diversion of alcoholic beverages from North Dakota federal enclaves into the state's domestic commerce in contravention of the state's established liquor distribution system" (J.A. 35). The affidavit did not identify any such diversions, although it mentioned two such incidents in Hawaii and Washington (J.A. 36). In a second affidavit, Hanson ultimately did mention two instances of apparent diversion of liquor from the North Dakota military bases. Hanson could neither confirm that those diversions actually occurred nor relate the amount of liquor involved. J.A. 49-52. /12/ The court stated that "(w)hether or not there have been actual cases of unlawful diversion is not particularly relevant" (J.S. App. A31); see note 11, supra. /13/ In enacting the statute, Congress, in effect, codified the provisions of Department of Defense Armed Services Military Club and Package Store Regulation 1015.3-R, ch. 4, Section C (codified at 32 C.F.R. 261.4), which similarly states that the purchase of all alcoholic beverages for resale on any military installation "shall be in a manner and under such conditions as shall obtain for the government the most advantageous contract, price and other factors considered." /14/ On the House floor, Representative Robinson of Arkansas had sponsored an amendment to reinstitute the in-state purchasing requirement for all alcoholic beverages. See 132 Cong. Rec. 21,225 (1986). That amendment, which Representative Dorgan of North Dakota supported (see 132 Cong. Rec. 21,639 (1986)), was defeated by a recorded vote (see 132 Cong. Rec. 21,638-21,640 (1986)). /15/ That statute provides in pertinent part: None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall be used for the support of any nonappropriated fund activity of the Department of Defense that procures malt beverages and wine with nonappropriated funds for resale * * * on a military installation located in the United States, unless such malt beverages and wine are procured in that State, or in the District of Columbia, within the District of Columbia, in which the military installation is located: Provided, That in a case in which a military installation is located in more than one State, purchases may be made in any State in which the installation is located: Provided further, That such local procurement requirements for malt beverages and wine shall apply to all alcoholic beverages for military installations in states which are not contiguous with another state: Provided further, That alcoholic beverages other than wine and malt beverages in contiguous states and the District of Columbia shall be procured from the most competitive source, price and other factors considered. Act of Oct. 30, 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-591, Tit. IX, Section 9090, 100 Stat. 3341-116. /16/ Without support in the statutory language or history, appellants (Br. 16-17, 22), joined by the National Beer Wholesalers' Association, Inc. (Br. 6-7 & n.6), the National Alcoholic Beverage Control Association, et al. (Br. 9-10), and the National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. (Br. 16), as amici curiae, appear to suggest that federal law itself directs the military to consider complying with state liquor control laws as a factor overriding price considerations in choosing its suppliers for alcoholic beverages. That notion is not only antithetical to the federal statutory purpose, it flies in the face of the controlling federal regulation, Department of Defense Armed Services Military Club and Package Store Regulation 1015.3-R, ch. 4, Section C (codified at 32 C.F.R. 261.4). That regulation provides that, although the Department of Defense will cooperate with state and local officials regarding alcoholic beverages, the purchase of all alcoholic beverages for resale at any military facility shall be under such conditions as shall obtain for the government the most advantageous contract, price and other factors considered. These other factors shall not be construed as meaning any submission to state control, nor shall cooperation be construed or represented as an admission of any legal obligation to submit to state control, pay state or local taxes, or purchase alcoholic beverages within geographical boundaries or at prices or from suppliers prescribed by any state. Department of Defense Armed Services Military Club and Package Store Regulation 1015.3-R, ch. 4, Section C (emphasis added). The National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. (Br. 14-15), as amici curiae, seek to blunt the force of that regulation by pointing out that the Secretary of Defense promulgated it not under Section 2488(a)(1), but rather under 50 U.S.C. App. 473. That observation, although factually accurate, see note 3, supra, is legally irrelevant, since it is undisputed that the Secretary's regulation has the force of law, and is wholly consistent with Congress's statutory directive. /17/ 10 U.S.C. 2488(a)(1) (Supp. V 1987); see Department of Defense Armed Services Military Club and Package Store Regulation 1015.3-R, ch. 4, Section C (codified at 32 C.F.R. 261.4). /18/ See U.S. Const. Art. I, Section 8, Cls. 12, 14. /19/ Appellants (Br. 18-19 & n.5), together with the National Beer Wholesalers' Association, Inc. (Br. 6-7 & n.6), the National Alcoholic Beverage Control Association, et al. (Br. 9-11), and the National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. (Br. 17-19), as amici curiae, appear to concede as much. /20/ By its express terms, the State's labeling regulation applies only to sales by out-of-state suppliers to the federal military installations located within the State. See N.D. Admin. Code Section 84-02-01-05(7) (1986) (quoted p. 4, supra). /21/ Appellants (Br. 18-19), together with the National Alcoholic Beverage Control Association, et al. (Br. 7), and the National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. (Br. 12-14 & n.13), as amici curiae, mistakenly rely on Penn Dairies, Inc. v. Milk Control Comm'n, 318 U.S. 261, 269-275 (1943). In that case, the Court upheld a State's refusal to renew the license of a milk dealer who had sold milk to a military installation at prices below those prescribed by state law. In holding that state law did not impermissibly interfere with federal procurement law, the Court made clear that the then-applicable federal regulation, which otherwise called for competitive procurement, suspended that requirement "when the price is fixed by federal, state, municipal or other competent legal authority" (318 U.S. at 277 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). In other words, the State's regulatory efforts had not been preempted because Congress effectively had implemented a "hands off policy" concerning state minimum price laws (id. at 278). By contrast, here, as in Paul v. United States, 371 U.S. at 254-255 (implementing a procurement policy revised by Congress after Penn Dairies), applicable federal law requires, without exception, that the military's procurement proceed on a competitive basis. Thus, as the court of appeals correctly concluded (J.S. App. A16-A17), Penn Dairies does not save North Dakota's regulations. /22/ For that reason as well, this case is readily distinguishable from the hypothetical examples cited by appellants (Br. 17-18) and the National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. (Br. 12), as amici curiae, where a particular State's health or safety regulation applies equally to all firms, whether owned by private parties, state or local governments, or the United States. /23/ To the extent the real aim of the State's regulations is to force the military to purchase its alcoholic beverages from in-state sources and thereby to increase the State's liquor tax revenues, appellants and amici can take no refuge in the Twenty-first Amendment. /24/ Section 2 of the Twenty-first Amendment provides: The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited. /25/ The Court's decision in Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 U.S. 263, 274-276 (1984), even casts doubt on the continuing vitality of Young's Market Co. /26/ Furthermore, the Court has not given controlling weight to state law when resolving conflicts between State regulation of alcoholic beverages under the Twenty-first Amendment and competing federal law. Thus, in South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987), the State, which had established 19 as its legal drinking age for 3.2% beer, challenged a federal law that required the Secretary of Transportation to withhold a percentage of federal highway funds available to the State if the State did not raise its minimum drinking age to 21. The federal government defended the provision as a valid exercise of Congress's spending power; the State relied upon its exclusive right, under the Twenty-first Amendment, to set the drinking age for its residents. 483 U.S. at 205-206. In upholding the federal law, the Court concluded that the Twenty-first Amendment could not nullify Congress's valid exercise of its spending power (id. at 209-212). See also Kleppe v. New Mexico, 426 U.S. 529 (1976) (recognizing Congress's broad power under the Property Clause (U.S. Const. Art. IV, Section 3, Cl. 2)). /27/ See also United States v. Texas, 695 F.2d 136, 139-141 (5th Cir.) (invalidating state regulation of military's procurement of alcoholic beverages), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 933 (1983); United States v. South Carolina, 578 F. Supp. 549, 553 (D.S.C. 1983) (same). /28/ Appellants suggest (Br. 20-24) that the Court should balance the State's interests in regulating the sale of alcoholic beverages with the federal government's interest in military procurement. That suggestion is inappropriate. To be sure, this Court has applied a balancing test in certain cases to determine the validity of state liquor laws enacted under authority of the Twenty-first Amendment that conflict with other constitutional provisions or federal law. But none of those cases has involved the federal government's immunity under the Supremacy Clause from state regulation of its affairs. Rather, each of those decisions involved a challenge to state liquor laws by private parties claiming the protection of federal law or overriding federal policy. See, e.g., Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 U.S. 263 (1984) (conflict between Hawaii liquor tax provision and Commerce Clause resolved in favor of Commerce Clause); California Retail Liquor Dealers Ass'n v. Midcal Aluminum, Inc., 445 U.S. 97 (1980) (conflict between State's wine minimum pricing system and the Sherman Act resolved in favor of federal interests reflected in the Sherman Act); Hostetter v. Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp., 377 U.S. 324 (1964) (conflict between New York State liquor regulation and Commerce Clause resolved in favor of Commerce Clause). See also 324 Liquor Corp. v. Duffy, 479 U.S. 335 (1987); Brown-Forman Distillers Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 476 U.S. 573 (1986); Capital Cities Cable, Inc. v. Crisp, 467 U.S. 691 (1984). /29/ The National Beer Wholesalers' Association, Inc. (Br. 22-24 & n.9) and the National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. (Br. 18), as amici curiae, seek to blunt the force of Mississippi Tax Comm'n II by suggesting that the decision "has only forbidden state taxation -- and specifically, only where the state places the legal incidence of the tax on the United States or its instrumentalities" (National Beer Wholesalers' Association, Inc. Br. 22). That contention cannot be squared with the Court's express conclusion (421 U.S. at 613) that the Twenty-first Amendment does not empower the States to regulate the federal government's direct importation of liquor into federal enclaves, like military bases, where the government exercises exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction. Moreover, as we have shown (see pp. 31-34, supra), North Dakota, through its regulations, is effectively trying to "tax" the federal government (and favor in-state business interest in the process) by forcing it to change its procurement policy and purchase liquor from in-state suppliers.	en
markdown	016421	# Presentation: 016421 ## CONSENSUS STANDARDS - OIVD WORKSHOP - April 22-23, 2003 - Rockville MD - Ginette Y. Michaud, M.D. - OIVD ## INTRODUCTION - CDRH recognizes many consensus standards relevant to IVDs - IVD SPECIFIC STANDARDS - GENERIC DEVICE STANDARDS ## INTRODUCTION - IVD SPECIFIC STANDARDS – NCCLS - automation and informatics - clinical chemistry and toxicology - evaluation protocols - general laboratory practices - hematology - immunology and ligand assay - microbiology - molecular methods ## INTRODUCTION - “GENERIC” DEVICE STANDARDS- - AAMI, ANSI, CEN, IEC, IEEE, ISO, UL - software - medical device risk management - human factors - electrical safety - electromagnetic compatibility ## INTRODUCTION - _CONSENSUS STANDARDS_ I. Role of consensus standards in IVD premarket review II. FDA’s role in development of STNDs III. Process for FDA recognition of STNDs - Focus on consensus documents ## I. Role of consensus standards in IVD premarket review - FDA Modernization Act of 1997 - Creates Section 514(c) of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act - FDA recognition of national and international standards (Federal Register) - voluntary conformance by manufacturers to recognized standards - submission of declaration of conformity ## I. Role of consensus standards in IVD premarket review - Conformity with recognized standards may affect: - safety and effectiveness determinations - IDE, HDE, PMA, PDP - substantial equivalence determinations - 510(k)/abbreviated - amount of test data submitted/reviewed - Manufacturer obligated to: - maintain records - submit data upon request ## I. Role of consensus standards in IVD premarket review - Conformance to STNDs is voluntary - Alternate approaches allowed - Refer to: "Recognition and Use of Consensus Standards; Final Guidance for Industry and FDA". _http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfggp/search.cfm_. ## I. Role of consensus standards in IVD premarket review - Other guidance: "The New 510(k) Paradigm. Alternate Approaches to Demonstrating Substantial Equivalence in Premarket Notifications, Final Guidance." * - and "Frequently Asked Questions on the New 510(k) Paradigm". ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - Significant OIVD participation in standards development organizations (SDOs) - official membership by individuals - informal document reviews ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - FDA SDO participation governed by 21CFR10.95 Participation in outside standard-setting activities. - FDA encourages participation if in the public interest - CDRH supports participation through the CDRH Standards Program - Individual participation by invitation ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - Organization must meet minimum standards as an SDO: - activity based on sound scientific and technological information; - revisions on the basis of new information; - goal to protect the public against unsafe, ineffective, or deceptive products or practices; - activity not for economic benefit of any group; - activity not involving specific approval of individual products; - existence of commenting procedure. ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - FDA official participation restricted to organizations that meet requirements - Standards are considered for FDA recognition only if developed in conformance with requirements ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - OIVD participation in standards development: - NCCLS - ISO - GHTF ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - NCCLS: - international, voluntary, consensus SDO - Goal: to “enhance the value of medical testing...through the development and dissemination of standards, guidelines, and best practices” ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - NCCLS Participation: - proposal of new standards projects - committee writing assignments - commenting on documents - voting on proposed standards ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - International Organization for Standardization/ISO: - Voluntary, consensus SDO; non-governmental federation of national SDOs, covering all technical fields except electrical - Mission: to promote international standardization to reduce technical barriers to trade ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - ISO: - ~200 technical committees each for different technical areas - OIVD participates in ISO TC 212 Clinical laboratory testing and in vitro diagnostic test systems ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - ISO TC 212: - Goal: standardization in laboratory medicine and IVD test systems - 3 working groups: - WG 1 Quality management in the clinical laboratory - WG 2 Reference systems - WG 3 In vitro diagnostic products ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - ISO TC 212: - 4 completed standards: - medical laboratory quality and competence - reference measurement procedures - reference materials - labeling of staining reagents ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - ISO TC 212: - Standards under development: - laboratory safety - requirements for reference measurement laboratories - metrological traceability ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - ISO TC 212: - Documents under development (continued): - requirements for blood glucose self-testing systems - specifications for self-testing Prothrombin Time instruments - quality management of point of care testing ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - Global Harmonization Task Force (GHTF): - voluntary multi-national organization - representatives: medical device regulatory authorities and industry associations - Goal: harmonization and convergence of medical device regulatory practices ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - GHTF: - publishes harmonized documents on regulatory practices & definitions - for use by emerging economies and developed nations - 4 Study Groups focused on all phases of product life cycle ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - GHTF: - Harmonization projects: - premarket regulatory practices, - standardized premarket submission format, - labeling requirements - data collection - post-market surveillance reporting systems - quality system requirements - medical device auditing processes ## II. FDA’s role in the development of consensus standards - CDRH active in all Study Groups (SG); OIVD active in SG 1 - SG1: operational aspects of medical device regulation including IVD products - Current IVD harmonization projects: - classification - labeling - IVD premarket conformity with principles for safety and performance ## III. Process for FDA Recognition of Consensus Standards - 62 IVD Standards recognized by CDRH (NCCLS) - numerous non-IVD standards recognized ## III. Process for FDA Recognition of Consensus Standards - Mechanisms for proposing CDRH recognition of consensus standards: - Proposals by CDRH Specialty Task Groups (STG) - Proposals submitted by outside persons and considered by STG - Publication in Federal Register ## III. Process for FDA Recognition of Consensus Standards - Specialty Task Groups: - Review previously recognized Standards for relevance - Prepare list of priorities for new projects - Propose the revision of existing consensus documents ## CONCLUSION - OIVD acknowledges the importance of consensus standards: - impact on safety & effectiveness - greater premarket requirement transparency - review of submissions facilitated - Active OIVD participation in development & recognition of STNDs - _http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/stdsprog.html_	en
converted_docs	212660	Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Request for Review of the ) Decision of the ) Universal Service Administrator by ) ) St. Patrick's School ) File No. SLD-180718 Dickinson, North Dakota ) ) Federal-State Joint Board on ) CC Docket No. 96-45 Universal Service ) ) Changes to the Board of Directors of the ) CC Docket No. 97-21 National Exchange Carrier Association, Inc. ) order Adopted: November 9, 2000 Released: November 13, 2000 By the Accounting Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau: 1. The Accounting Policy Division has under consideration a Letter of Appeal filed by St. Patrick's School (St. Patrick), Dickinson, North Dakota, seeking review of a decision issued by the Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) of the Universal Service Administrative Company (Administrator).[^1] St. Patrick seeks review of SLD's refusal to consider St. Patrick's appeal to SLD on the grounds that it was untimely filed. For the reasons set forth below, we deny St. Patrick's appeal. 2. SLD issued a Funding Commitment Decision Letter on May 12, 2000, denying St. Patrick's request for discounted services under the schools and libraries universal service support mechanism.[^2] Specifically, SLD denied St. Patrick's request for discounts for internal connections and internet access. On June 12, 2000, St. Patrick's filed an appeal of SLD's decision to deny funding.[^3] On June 15, 2000, SLD issued an Administrator\'s Decision on Appeal indicating that it would not consider St. Patrick's appeal because it was received more than 30 days after the Funding Commitment Decision Letter was issued.[^4] St. Patrick subsequently filed the instant Letter of Appeal with the Commission. 3. Under section 54.720 of the Commission's rules, an appeal must be filed with the Commission or SLD within 30 days of the issuance of the decision as to which review is sought.[^5] Documents are considered to be filed with the Commission or SLD only upon receipt.[^6] The 30-day deadline contained in section 54.720 of the Commission's rules applies to all requests for review filed by a party affected by a decision issued by the Administrator. Because St. Patrick failed to file an appeal of the May 12, 2000 Funding Commitment Decision Letter within the requisite 30-day appeal period, we affirm SLD's decision to dismiss St. Patrick's appeal to SLD as untimely and deny the instant Letter of Appeal. 4. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to authority delegated under sections 0.91, 0.291, and 54.722(a) of the Commission\'s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, and 54.722(a), that the Letter of Appeal filed by St. Patrick's School, Dickinson, North Dakota on July 5, 2000, IS DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Mark G. Seifert Deputy Chief, Accounting Policy Division Common Carrier Bureau [^1]: Letter from Brenda L. Selinger, St. Patrick's School, to Federal Communications Commission, filed July 5, 2000 (Letter of Appeal). [^2]: Letter from Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative Company, to Patricia Hardy, St. Patrick's School, dated May 12, 2000 (Funding Commitment Decision Letter). [^3]: Letter from Brenda L. Selinger, St. Patrick's School, to Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative Company, filed June 12, 2000. [^4]: Letter from Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative Company, to Brenda L. Selinger, St. Patrick's School, dated June 15, 2000 (Administrator's Decision on Appeal). [^5]: 47 C.F.R. § 54.720. [^6]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.7.	en
converted_docs	164567	----------------------------------------------------------------------- MSFC Problem Reporting and Corrective Action (PRACA) System WHOLE RECORD REPORT( + ADDENDUM) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| MSFC \| In-Flight \| C \| \| * \| \| \| Record \#\ \| Anomaly \| ontractor \| JSC#\ \| KSC \| \| \| A08605 \| Number\ \| Report \| \-- \| #\ \| \| \| \| \-- \| Number\ \| \| \-- \| \| \| \| \| S-066 \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Problem \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Title\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| LH2 DOME \| \| \| \| \| \| \| T \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ANGS/CHORDS- \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MISALIGNMENT \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| EICN#\ \| ELEMENT\ \| Cont \| F \| * \| \| \| \-- \| ET \| ractor\ \| SCM#\ \| FCRI \| \| \| \| \| MMMSS \| \-- \| T\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 3 \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| HCRIT\ \| Sys_Lvl\ \| Misc \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| N \| Codes\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| A (3)** \| \| \| \| \| \| \| B C D E F \| \| \| \| \| \| \| G H I J K \| \| \| \| \| \| \| L M N O \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| * \| *NO \| \| *SER/ \| \| \| \| HARDWARE\ \| MENCLATURE\ \| PART#\ \| LOT#\ \| MAN \| \| \| EIM \| EXTERNAL TANK \| 82 \| LWT-20 \| UFAC \| \| \| \| \| 601000000 \| \| TURE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| R\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MMC \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| \| *NO \| \| *SER/ \| \| \| \| HARDWARE\ \| MENCLATURE\ \| PART#\ \| LOT#\ \| MAN \| \| \| LRU \| N/A \| N/A \| N/A \| UFAC \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TURE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| R\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| N/A \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| \| *NO \| \| *SER/ \| \| \| \| HARDWARE\ \| MENCLATURE\ \| PART#\ \| LOT#\ \| MAN \| \| \| NCA \| LH2 DOME \| 80 \| N/A \| UFAC \| \| \| \| \| 914920900 \| \| TURE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| R\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MMC \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Test/ \| Prevailing \| F / \| Fail \| * \| \| \| Operation\ \| Condtion\ \| U\ \| Mode\ \| Caus \| \| \| M - MFG \| N - \| UC \| UC - \| e\ \| \| \| \| INSPECTION \| \| UNSAT \| M \| \| \| \| \| \| \| AT - \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MFG- \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ASY- \| \| \| \| \| \| \| EQUP \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| System\ \| Defect\ \| Ma \| Work \| \| \| \| STRUCTURAL \| MA - ME ADJ \| terial\ \| Con \| Fail \| \| \| \| \| S - \| tact\ \| Dat \| \| \| \| \| STRUCT \| C. \| e\ \| \| \| \| \| \| VOGEL \| 08 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| /25/ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 1984 \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Received \| Date \| FMEA \| *IFA: \| \| \| \| at MSFC\ \| Isolated\ \| Ref \| Mission \| Mis \| \| \| 09/10/1984 \| \-- \| erence\ \| P \| sion \| \| \| \| \| 1.1.1 \| hase\ \| Ela \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| psed \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Tim \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| \| \| S \| \| \| \| \| Location\ \| \| ymptom\ \| \| Time \| \| \| MAF \| \| UC - \| \| Cycl \| \| \| \| \| UNSAT \| \| e\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Effectivity \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Text\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| LWT-30 AND \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SUBS \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Vehicle \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Effectivity \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Codes* \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Vehicle \| Vehicle \| Vehicle \| \| * \| \| \| 1\ \| 2\ \| 3*\ \| Vehicle \| Veh \| \| \| \-- \| \-- \| \-- \| 4\ \| icle \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| 5\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Mission \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Effectivity \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Codes \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Mssn 1\ \| Mssn 2\ \| Mssn \| Mssn \| \| \| \| \-- \| \-- \| 3\ \| 4\ \| Mssn \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \-- \| 5\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Estimated \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Completion \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Dates \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| MSFC \| Contractor \| *LVL 3 \| \| \| \| \| Approved \| Req Defer \| Close*\ \| Remark \| \| \| \| Defer Until \| Until Date\ \| \-- \| / \| \| \| \| Date\ \| \-- \| \| Ac \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| \| tion\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| I \| \| \| \| \| \| \| nvestigation \| \| \| \| \| \| \| / Resolution \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Summary \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Last MSFC \| CN RSLV \| Defer \| *Add \| \| \| \| Update\ \| SBMT\ \| Date\ \| Date\ \| R/C \| \| \| 10/07/1987 \| 06/17/1985 \| \-- \| \-- \| Code \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 3 - \| \| \| \| \| \| \| F/TE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Assignee* \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Design\ \| Chief \| S & \| *Pro \| \| \| \| J. WHITE \| Engineer\ \| MA\ \| ject*\ \| Pro \| \| \| \| \-- \| D. NEWMAN \| M. \| ject \| \| \| \| \| \| PESSIN \| MG \| \| \| \| \| \| \| R\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Approval \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Design\ \| Chief \| S & \| Pro \| * \| \| \| J. NICHOLS \| Engineer\ \| MA\ \| ject*\ \| Pro \| \| \| \| \-- \| D. NEWMAN \| M. \| ject \| \| \| \| \| \| PESSIN \| MG \| \| \| \| \| \| \| R\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| PAC \| PAC Review \| MSFC \| *St \| \| \| \| Assignee\ \| Complete\ \| Closure \| atus*\ \| F/A \| \| \| G. MILLER \| GM \| Date\ \| C - \| C \| \| \| \| \| 0 \| CLOSED \| ompl \| \| \| \| \| 7/09/1985 \| \| etio \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Problem \| SEV\ \| Program \| \| O \| \| \| Type\ \| \-- \| Name\ \| REVL\ \| PRIN \| \| \| \-- \| \| \-- \| \-- \| C\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| FUNC \| Software \| * \| \| SU \| So \| \| MOD*\ \| E \| Software \| \| BTYP \| ftware \| \| \-- \| ffectivity\ \| Fail \| \| E\ \| C \| \| \| \-- \-- \-- \| CD\ \| \| \-- \| losure \| \| \| \-- \-- \| \-- \| \| \| CD\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| RES PERSON \| Approval \| \| \| \| \| \| L2\ \| Signature \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| L3\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Related \| Related \| \| \| \| \| \| Document \| Document \| \| \| \| \| \| Type\ \| ID\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \-- \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Related \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Document \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Title\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Related \| Related \| \| \| \| \| \| Document \| Document \| \| \| \| \| \| Type\ \| ID\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \-- \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Related \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Document \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Title\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Related \| Related \| \| \| \| \| \| Document \| Document \| \| \| \| \| \| Type\ \| ID\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \-- \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Related \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Document \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Title\ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \-- \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Contractor \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Status \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Summary \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Reliabi \| \| \| \| \| \| \| lity/Quality \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Assurance \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Concerns, \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Recomm \| \| \| \| \| \| \| endations: \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Problem \| \| \| \| \| \| \| D \| \| \| \| \| \| \| escription \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| REF: A \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PRODUCTION \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PROBLEM \| \| \| \| \| \| \| EXISTS IN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ALIGNMENT OF \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE INNER \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TANGS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WHICH ARE A \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PORTION OF \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE DOME \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CHORDS. AN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| OFFSET \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BETWEEN THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TANGS OF \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ADJACENT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CHORDS HAS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BEEN SEEN AT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE DOME \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MECHANICAL \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ASSEMBLY \| \| \| \| \| \| \| LEVEL \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THIS HAS IN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SOME CASES \| \| \| \| \| \| \| REQUIRED THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| USE OF \| \| \| \| \| \| \| OPTICS FOR \| \| \| \| \| \| \| LEVELING THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| DOME \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PRIOR TO \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MACHINING \| \| \| \| \| \| \| AND IN SOME \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CASES MRB \| \| \| \| \| \| \| DISPOSITION \| \| \| \| \| \| \| FOR \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MISALIGNED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| HOLES (REF. \| \| \| \| \| \| \| T-27929). \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THIS IS A \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PRODUCTION \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PROBLEM. THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PROBLEM OF \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| INNER TANG \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ALIGNMENT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BETWEEN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CHORDS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| USUALLY \| \| \| \| \| \| \| RESULTS IN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| INCREASED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PRODUCTION \| \| \| \| \| \| \| EFFORT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BECAUSE OF \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE NEED FOR \| \| \| \| \| \| \| OPTICS AT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE T02A7018 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| FIXTURE FOR \| \| \| \| \| \| \| LEVELING. IN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SOME CASES \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SUCH AS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| LWT-20 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| (T-69670) \| \| \| \| \| \| \| HOLE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ALIGNMENT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| RELATIVE TO \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PLANE AC \| \| \| \| \| \| \| RUNNING THRU \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE TANG IS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| VIOLATED AND \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MRB REVIEW \| \| \| \| \| \| \| IS REQUIRED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| (STRESS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ANALYSIS OF \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ALL CASES TO \| \| \| \| \| \| \| DATE HAS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SHOWN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| AN ADEQUATE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MS). PRIOR \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CORRECTIVE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ACTION TAKEN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| IN MARCH \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 1984 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| RESULTED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| IN TCN 277 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THAT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CORRECTED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE HEIGHT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| OF THE PADS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WHICH THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| INNER TANGS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| REST ON IN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE 7018 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| FIXTURE. \| \| \| \| \| \| \| RECURRENCE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| OF LEVELING \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PROBLEMS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WHEN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MACHINING \| \| \| \| \| \| \| DOMES IN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THIS FIXTURE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| HAS RESULTED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| IN RENEWAL \| \| \| \| \| \| \| OF \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| I \| \| \| \| \| \| \| NVESTIGATION \| \| \| \| \| \| \| INTO THIS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PROBLEM. IT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| HAS BEEN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| NOTED THAT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE TANG \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ALIGNMENT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| REQUIREMENT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| OF .020\" \| \| \| \| \| \| \| HAS BEEN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| VIOLATED IN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SOME DOMES \| \| \| \| \| \| \| AND \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PRODUCTION \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PROCESSES \| \| \| \| \| \| \| AND HARDWARE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SHALL BE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| INVESTIGATED \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| Contractor \| \| \| \| \| \| \| In \| \| \| \| \| \| \| vestigation/ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Resolution \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| R/A - TBD \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 6/6/85 PRB \| \| \| \| \| \| \| STATUS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 4-16-85 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MTG - \| \| \| \| \| \| \| READJUSTED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TOOL \| \| \| \| \| \| \| T10A5002 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ADJUSTED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| LOCATOR \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BLOCKS & \| \| \| \| \| \| \| COLOR CODED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TO PREVENT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MISID \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ENTIFICATION \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| REPLACED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TRIMMING SAW \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WITH ROUTER. \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ECD IS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 6-15-85. \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 6/6/85 PRB \| \| \| \| \| \| \| STATUS - \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 5-16-85 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MTG - \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PROBLEM \| \| \| \| \| \| \| APPEARS TO \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BE RESOLVED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WITH USE OF \| \| \| \| \| \| \| NEW ROUTER \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MMC WILL \| \| \| \| \| \| \| EXPEDITE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CLOSURE. \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 6/18/85 - A \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WAVY TRIM \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CUT ON THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 5002 TOOL \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WAS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| DETERMINED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TO BE THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CAUSE OF THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| M \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ISALIGNMENT. \| \| \| \| \| \| \| RESOLUTION - \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 5002 QUARTER \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PANEL-CHORD \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TRIM & WELD \| \| \| \| \| \| \| FIXTURE WAS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TRIMMING AN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| UNEVEN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| EDGE ON THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CHORD. THIS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SUBSEQUENTLY \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CAUSED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| OFFSETS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BETWEEN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TANGS TO \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SHOW UP IN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE T02A7018 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MECHANICAL \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ASSY \| \| \| \| \| \| \| FIXTURE. THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TRIM LINE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WAS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CORRECTED BY \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SEVERAL \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CHANGES. THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| LOCATORS FOR \| \| \| \| \| \| \| POSITIONING \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE CHORD \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WERE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| REALIGNED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| FOR EACH \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TYPE OF \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CHORD & \| \| \| \| \| \| \| COLOR CODED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TO PREVENT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ACCIDENTAL \| \| \| \| \| \| \| IN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TERCHANGING. \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE CIR- \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CULAR SAW \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CUTTER, \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WHICH WAS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ANGLED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BY DESIGN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| FROM \| \| \| \| \| \| \| VERTICAL, \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WAS REPLACED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WITH A \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ROUTER \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ORIENTED \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| VERTICALLY. \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE SAW \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BLADE COULD \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MISTRACK DUE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| TO THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| HIGHER \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BENDING \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MOMENTS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PLACED ON IT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| FROM THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WIDE BLADE. \| \| \| \| \| \| \| NO MARS TO \| \| \| \| \| \| \| DATE HAVE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BEEN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| WRITTEN AT \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THE T02A7018 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| FOR THE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ABOVE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| PROBLEM \| \| \| \| \| \| \| SINCE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| LWT-30, WHEN \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THESE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CHANGES WERE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| MADE (6 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| UNITS \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CHECKED). \| \| \| \| \| \| \| RECOMMEND \| \| \| \| \| \| \| THIS PROBLEM \| \| \| \| \| \| \| REPORT BE \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| CLOSED \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ \| MSFC \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Response/C \| \| \| \| \| \| \| oncurrence \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------+--------+ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- MSFC Problem Reporting and Corrective Action (PRACA) System ASSESSMENT ADDENDUM REPORT ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------- ----------- ------------ MSFC Report#\ IFA#\ Contractor JSC#\ KSC#\ EICN#\ A08605 \-- RPT#\ \-- \-- \-- S-066 Asmnt Part#\ Asmnt Part Asmnt 80904000000-020 Name\ Serial/Lot#\ LH2 TANK COMPLETE N/A HCRIT CD\ FCRIT CD\ CAUSE CD\ FAIL \-- 3 MAT - MFG-ASY-EQUP MODE\ UC - UNSAT Asmnt FMEA\ Asmnt FM\ FMEA CSE\ FMEA N/A N/A N/A SCSE\ N/A Asmnt FMEA\ Asmnt FM\ FMEA CSE\ FMEA \-- \-- \-- SCSE\ \-- Asmnt FMEA\ Asmnt FM\ FMEA CSE\ FMEA \-- \-- \-- SCSE\ \-- Correlated Correlated Correlated Part#\ Part#\ Part#\ \-- \-- \-- Associated Associated Associated LRU#\ LRU#\ LRU#\ \-- \-- \-- MAJOR DESIGN CHANGES APRV DATE\ DESCRIPTION OF \-- CHANGES\ \-- ASSESSMENT TEXT ----------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------- ----------- ------------	en
markdown	432244	# Presentation: 432244 ## Slide 1 ## Purpose: To improve the QUALITY COMPARABILITY UTILITYof elementary & secondary education data - http://nces.ed.gov/forum ## ASBO® International - Promotes the highest standards of school business management practices - Supports a standing committee on school facilities - 6,200 members with dissemination to >15,000 LEAs - http://www.asbointl.org ## Task Force Members - Roger Young MA / ASBO / Forum / MASBO - Frank Norwood TX / ASBO / TASBO - Joan Hubbard MP / ASBO / Facilities Consultant - John Bowers MI / ASBO / Facilities Consultant - Tim Shrom PA / ASBO / PASBO - David Uhlig VA / ASBO / Forum / VASBO - Christine Lynch MA / MA DOE - Jay Sullivan MA / MA DOE - Janet Emerick IN / Forum - Judy Marks DC / National Clearinghouse Educational Facilities - Mary Filardo DC / Forum / 21st Century School Fund - Patty Murphy UT / Forum / USABO - Lee Hoffman DC / Forum / NCES - Tom Szuba VA / Project Consultant ## This planning guide focuses on... - School facility maintenance as a vital component of the responsible management of an education organization. - The needs of an education audience. Strategies and* procedures* for planning, implementing, and evaluating effective maintenance programs. - A process to be followed, rather than a canned set of ‘one size fits all’ solutions. - ‘Best practice’ recommendations rather than mandates. ## In a nutshell... - These guidelines are written to help school administrators, staff, and community members better understand why and how to develop, implement, and evaluate a facilities maintenance plan. - _How_ does an organization...* develop, implement, and evaluate...a maintenance plan? - This planning guide is not:** * - Presented as a how-to manual of maintenance procedures and instructions. - An attempt to dictate policy making in local and state education agencies. ## Target Audience - School business officials - Superintendents and principals (and their assistants) - Other policy makers (e.g., school board members) - Other facilities maintenance planners - Maintenance and custodial staff - Secondary audiences include state education agency staff, community members, vendors, and regulatory agencies (e.g., the EPA) ## Chapter Headings - Introduction to School Facility Maintenance Planning - Planning for School Facilities Maintenance - Facilities Audits: Knowing What You Have - Providing a Safe Environment for Learning - Maintaining School Facilities and Grounds - Effectively Managing Staff and Contractors - Evaluating Facilities Maintenance Efforts ## Chapter Framework - Table of Contents - Chapter Goals and Objectives - Best Practice Recommendations - Vignettes/Real World Examples - Commonly Asked Questions - Checklist (i.e., a To-Do-List) - Additional Resources (primarily Web-based) ## Chapter 1: Introduction Why Does Facilities Maintenance Matter? Table of Contents: Why Does Facilities Maintenance Matter? Who Should Read this Document? In a Nutshell Planning Guide Framework In Every Chapter... Commonly Asked Questions Additional Resources Introductory Facilities Maintenance Checklist Goals: To explain how clean, orderly, safe, cost-effective, and instructionally-supportive school facilities enhance education. To introduce the purpose, structure, and format of the planning guide. ## Chapter 1: Introduction To err is human... *... **but you’d like to avoid this kind of thing all the same! * * *The school board was happy, the community was proud, and the students were ecstatic. In 1992 the high school finally invested in a gymnasium that would meet the needs of the physical education department, the athletic department, and community organizations alike. After six years of use, the facility looked to be in great shape, so everyone was shocked to find that school had been cancelled on a Monday morning so that the maintenance staff could combat a flood that had gushed across the gym floor and into the main building. What had happened? A $12 gasket had failed—but it happened to be the one that sealed the 40,000 gallon back up water tank that lay adjacent to the gymnasium. Even that, however, could have been overcome had not the tank’s emergency drain been covered with boxes of books in a misguided attempt to increase the building’s storage space. As it was, school was cancelled for two days, emergency response cost $26,000, and the gymnasium was closed to school and community users alike for five weeks while $160,000 worth of repair work was performed. So how could this problem have been avoided? In truth, there were many things that could have saved the district from its woes: Solution 1. Pr_oper Planning_* – Might there have been another, less perilous, place to construct the the water tank, rather than over the gymnasium floor? Probably so!* Solution 2. _Acceptable Maintenance_* – Might regular equipment inspections of the backup water tank have identified a rotting gasket and prevented the flood? Perhaps so!* Solution 3. _Appropriate Operations_* – Shouldn’t there have been someone who had enough common sense to know that covering an emergency drain with boxes wasn’t an acceptable storage system? Definitely so!* ## Chapter 1: Introduction Commonly Asked Questions How will a maintenance plan make our schools better? - Learning does not occur in a vacuum. Students and staff interact more constructively in an environment that is orderly, clean, and safe. Poor air quality, for example, can negatively impact student alertness, and student and teacher attendance, which has a corresponding impact on student learning. On the other hand, classrooms that are well ventilated, suitably lighted, and properly maintained actually facilitate learning. Moreover, appropriate facilities maintenance extends the life span of older facilities and maximizes the useful life of newer facilities. Thus, a facilities maintenance plan contributes to both the instructional and financial well being of an education organization and its community. ## Chapter 1: Introduction Checklists ## Chapter 1: Introduction Additional Resources Guide for Collecting and Using Data on Elementary and Secondary Educational Facilities: A publication from the National Forum on Education Statistics which defines a set of data elements that are critical to answering overarching policy questions related to elementary and secondary school facility management. (_[http://](http://nces.ed.gov/forum/publications.asp)__[nces](http://nces.ed.gov/forum/publications.asp)__[.ed.](http://nces.ed.gov/forum/publications.asp)__[gov](http://nces.ed.gov/forum/publications.asp)__[/forum/publications.asp](http://nces.ed.gov/forum/publications.asp)_) Indoor Air Quality and Student Performance. (2000) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Indoor Environments Division, Washington, DC. This report examines how indoor air quality (IAQ) affects a child's ability to learn and provides several case studies of schools that have successfully addressed their indoor air problems, the lessons learned from that experience, and what long-term practices and policies emerged from the effort. (_[http://www.](http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/performance.html)__[epa](http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/performance.html)__[.](http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/performance.html)__[gov](http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/performance.html)__[/](http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/performance.html)__[iaq](http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/performance.html)__[/schools/performance.html](http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/performance.html)_) ## Chapter 1: Introduction Why Does Facilities Maintenance Matter? - The appearance of your community’s school buildings says a lot about its values - A positive relationship exists between school conditions and student achievement and behavior1 - Students who attend schools in poor condition score 11% lower than those attending schools in excellent condition2 - Physical conditions have a direct effect on teacher morale, sense of personal safety, and feelings of effectiveness in the classroom3 - 1Department of Education (1998) Impact of inadequate school facilities on student learning - 2American Association of School Administrators (1992) Building our Future: Making School Facilities Ready for the 21st Century, NASBE - 3Corcoran T.B., Walker L.J., and White J.L. (1998) Working in Urban Schools. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership. ## Chapter 1. IntroductionWhat causes facilities problems? - Environmental Conditions - Deferred maintenance - Inadequate funding - Inadequate staff training - Poor practices - The occurrence of facilities problems is less likely a function of geography or socioeconomics and more directly related to _staffing levels, staff training, and staff practices._ ## Chapter 1. IntroductionWhat if we don’t plan to protect our investments? - Buildings and equipment deteriorate - Warranties become invalidated - Student and staff morale is affected - Future public investment in the education system is discouraged ## Chapter 1. IntroductionFacts about Facilities... - We know that both routine and unexpected maintenance demands will arise. This is inevitable. - Facilities maintenance is big and costly. It can get even more costly if it handled in a haphazard manner. - It seems that we are always having to weigh short term demands against long term demands. - An organization must _PLAN_ to meet these challenges. ## Chapter 1. IntroductionWhat is a facilities maintenance plan? - A document that details an organization’s strategy for proactively maintaining its facilities. - Reflects the vision and mission of the entire organization. - Includes an accurate assessment of existing facilities. - Incorporates the perspectives of various stakeholder groups. - Focuses on preventive measures. - Provides a formal way of communicating the district’s priorities. - Establishes necessary documentation for funding authorities and other approving organizations. - Demonstrates organizational commitment to facilities maintenance. ## Chapter 1: Introduction How Does Facilities Maintenance Save $$$ - Unlike other investments, the return on investment for facilities maintenance doesn’t necessarily result in increased revenues. Instead, good facilities maintenance produces savings by lowering: - Replacement costs - Labor costs - Overhead and utility costs ## Chapter 1: Introduction Other Benefits... - Effective school facility maintenance can... - Improve the cleanliness, orderliness, and safety of an organization’s facilities. - Contribute to an organization’s instructional effectiveness and financial well-being. - Reduce operational costs and life cycle costs. - Help staff deal with limited resources by identifying priorities proactively rather than reactively. - Extend the useful life of buildings. - Increase energy efficiency and help the environment. ## Chapter 2: PlanningEffective Management = Planning - “Planning” is the formulation of a strategy for getting an organization from the here and now to the future - As circumstances change over time, strategies for achieving tomorrow’s successes also change - Good planners are always mindful of the need to review and revise plans to meet the changing needs of the organization ## Chapter 2. PlanningIdentify Stakeholders Stakeholders include anyone who has a sense of ownership in facilities decision-making - Maintenance Staff/Contractors Parents - Custodial Staff/Contractors Students - Superintendents Community Groups/Users - Principals School Business Officials - PTA Representatives Teachers - State DOE Staff School Board Members - Public Safety Officials/Regulators Contracted Experts - Taxpayers Againsters* - * Againsters are those people who make a habit of opposing any kind of change. In order to minimize the likelihood of last minute delay tactics, planners must include these stakeholders in the decision making process from its onset. ## Chapter 2. PlanningBe Clear About What You Want *‘**CLEAN’ IS A RELATIVE TERM* - Your local high school can be cleaned by a single person...no kidding. - The only catch is that you have to be willing to live with the job that would be done. Thus, it is imperative that there be agreement on expectations. Somebody is bound to be unhappy if parents expect 4-star hotel but planners only budget for discount motel standards. ## Chapter 2. PlanningData for Informed Decision-Making - Good data are necessary to inform good decision-making. - Without data, planners are forced to work without context, and planning becomes guesswork: - Vision = What you WANT - Plans = What you EXPECT - Data = What you KNOW ## Chapter 2. PlanningPlanning + Information = Success - Planners must know: - what facilities exist - where they are located - how old they are - their status/condition - Are equipment and facilities working: - as designed? - as they should? - as they need to? - The only way to make effective decisions is to collect data in a regular, timely, and consistent manner ## Chapter 3: Knowing What You HaveThe Facilities Audit - A facilities audit is a comprehensive inventory and review of all aspects of new or existing facilities - It provides a snapshot in time of how the various systems and components are operating. - It provides the landscape against which all facilities maintenance efforts will occur. - It requires time, energy, and expertise. ## Chapter 3: Knowing What You HaveCommissioning - A type of facilities audit that occurs after building construction or renovation in order to document that the facility operates as designed and is able to meet the requirements of intended use - Performed by a neutral third party. - Must be included in all construction and renovation contracts as a standard expectation to occur _before transfer of liability_. - Re-commissioning measures current performance against as-new performance - Retro-Commissioning allows baselines to be established for older buildings ## Chapter 4: SafetyProviding a Safe Environment for Learning - Safety is the priority over cleanliness, orderliness, cost-effectiveness, and even instructional support - Efforts to provide safe facilities are regulated by: - Federal regulations - State law - Local law - District policy - Good old fashioned common sense ## Chapter 4: SafetyProviding a Safe Environment for Learning - Major catastrophes and other serious incidents are not the preferred method of learning about environmental regulations. - The first step in complying with environmental regulations is to become aware of their existence, intent, applicability, and requirements. - In most cases, this knowledge can come from regulatory agencies, professional associations, and on-the-job training. - Getting this information may not always be expensive, but it does demands considerable expertise, either hired or developed. ## Chapter 4: Safety“Four Horsemen” of Facilities Maintenance - Indoor Air Quality - Asbestos - Water Management - Waste Management ## Chapter 4: SafetyBest Practice Recommendations: Asbestos - The Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) regulates the management of asbestos-containing materials in all public and private schools - Local education agencies are required to: - Designate and train an asbestos coordinator - Identify friable and non-friable asbestos containing materials - Develop and implement an asbestos management plan - Develop and implement a responsible operations and maintenance program - Perform semiannual surveillance activities - Notify all occupants (and occupant guardians) about the status of asbestos-containing materials on an annual basis - For more information: http://www.epa.gov/reg5foia/asbestos/ahera.html ## Chapter 4: SafetyOther Major Safety Concerns - Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs and HCFCs) - Emergency Power Systems - Hazardous Materials - Integrated Pest Management (IPM) - Lead Paint - Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB’S) - Radon - Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) ## Chapter 5: Maintaining School Facilities and GroundsTypes of Maintenance - _Emergency Maintenance_: The main water line breaks and floods the lunchroom... someone better fix it NOW! - _Routine Maintenance_: The pencil sharpener in a classroom needs to be replaced... get to it when you can. - _Preventive Maintenance_: The air conditioner filter is due for replacement every 3 months... schedule the work. - _Predictive Maintenance_: Monitoring software indicates that a piece of equipment will fail within a predicted time frame based on user demand and other performance measures... get out your computer. ## Chapter 5: Maintaining School Facilities and Grounds Maintenance & Operations Issues - Access Controls - Boilers - Electrical Systems - Energy Management - Fire Alarms - Floor Coverings - Gym Floors - HVAC - Hot Water Heaters - Kitchens - Painting Plumbing - Public Address Systems and Intercoms - Roofs - Water Softeners ## Chapter 5: Maintaining School Facilities and Grounds Grounds Management - Courtyards - Exterior lighting and signage - Pools - Museums - Bike trails - Modular facilities - Paved surfaces (e.g., side walks, parking lots, and roads) - Athletic fields; outdoor learning equipment - Use of fertilizers/herbicides - Watering and sprinkler systems - Use of recycled water (gray water) for plumbing, watering fields - Drainage - Scheduling ‘rest’ time for fields - The aesthetic benefits of flower beds versus the health costs of increasing allergy events and bee stings - Use of the grounds as a classroom (e.g., ‘science’ courtyards) ## Chapter 6: Effectively Managing Staff and ContractorsHiring Staff - Expertise on the hiring team is essential - Many maintenance jobs require technical skills - Identify the qualities you want before the interviews begin - Job descriptions must include: - Duties and responsibilities - Working conditions - Physical requirements - Educational requirements - Credentials and licensure - Equipment used - At-will vs. unionized position - Channels of authority and supervision - Evaluation mechanisms ## Chapter 6: Effectively Managing Staff and ContractorsTraining New Employees - _Equipment instructions_: Training on all tools, machinery, and vehicles the individual will be expected to use - _Lessons_: Show the trainee how to perform the job properly, common mistakes that lead to improperly completed tasks, and what the job looks like when it is done right - _Expectations_: A clear description of precisely what the individual must do in order to meet the requirements of the job - _Evaluation information_: A clear explanation of all criteria on which the individual will be evaluated - _Potential ramifications of the evaluations_: Some mistakes result in retraining, others warrant reprimands, and a few demand punishment or dismissal... be clear. ## Chapter 6: Effectively Managing Staff and ContractorsEvaluating Staff - Establish performance standards and evaluation criteria - Develop an evaluation instrument and use it objectively, consistently, and regularly (e.g., a checklist and a rating scale) - Be positive and encouraging - Provide retraining/remediation as necessary... termination is an expensive option and should not be used without good reason - Document evidence that supports assessment ## Chapter 6: Effectively Managing Staff and ContractorsMaintaining Staff - What keeps people on the job? - Good pay - Good benefits - A sense that they are respected - A feeling that their work is valued - Opportunities for advancement - Remember that the organization has made an investment in the employee. If they lose the employee, that investment is lost - Consider incentives and awards. ## Chapter 7: Evaluating Facilities Maintenance EffortsEvaluating the Maintenance Program - After demonstrating their support of maintenance, it is fair for stakeholders to expect the maintenance program to yield results - Establish measurable baselines against which progress can be measured (e.g., average time it takes to complete a work order) - Accurate, timely, and comparable data are the key to measuring and documenting status - A good computerized maintenance management system can provide the evaluation data (work orders, energy use, etc.) ## Chapter 7: Evaluating Facilities Maintenance EffortsMeasurable Components of Evaluation - Number of work orders accomplished - Major incident reviews (e.g., number of school shutdowns, etc.) - “Customer” feedback - Weekly foreman’s meetings - Visual inspections by supervisors and managers - Comprehensive Management Audits - Performance Audits - Organizational Studies - Annual snapshots (cost per square foot or per student) - Facility Report Cards - Comparisons with “peer” organizations/ Peer reviews - Progress toward the organization’s long-range plans - Staff turnover rates - Public opinion (e.g., newspaper articles, etc.) ## Other Forum Publications Other Forum Publications - School Facility Data Elements (expected July 2003) - Safety in Numbers: Collecting and Using Crime,Violence, and Discipline Incident Data to Make a Difference in Schools - Technology in Schools: Suggestions, Tools and Guidelines for Assessing Technology in Elementary and Secondary Education - Weaving a Secure Web Around Our Schools - Basic Education Finance Data Elements - Protecting the Privacy of Student/Staff Records - Building an Automated Student Record System ... and more! ## Publication Orders Publication Orders - Browse pubs at: - http://nces.ed.gov/forum/publications.asp - For FREE single copies, call: 1-877-4ED-PUBS - For large orders, visit: - http://bookstore.gpo.gov/index.html - or write: U.S. Government Printing Office - New Orders, Superintendent of Documents - P.O. Box 371954 - Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954	en
converted_docs	184162	![](media/image1.png){width="5.972916666666666in" height="0.4791666666666667in"} Top of Form ## Complete Summary #### TITLE Adult low back pain: percentage of acute low back pain patients without red flag indicators undergoing anterior-posterior (AP) or lateral (LAT) x-rays. #### SOURCE(S) Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI). Adult low back pain. Bloomington (MN): Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI); 2006 Sep. 65 p. \[124 references\] ### Measure Domain #### PRIMARY MEASURE DOMAIN Process The validity of measures depends on how they are built. By examining the key building blocks of a measure, you can assess its validity for your purpose. For more information, visit the [Measure Validity](http://www.qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov/resources/measure_domains.aspx) page. #### SECONDARY MEASURE DOMAIN Does not apply to this measure ### Brief Abstract #### DESCRIPTION This measure is used to assess the percentage of patients with acute low back pain without red flag indicators undergoing anterior-posterior (AP) or lateral (LAT) x-rays. #### RATIONALE The priority aim addressed by this measure is to reduce unnecessary imaging studies in patients with acute low back pain. #### PRIMARY CLINICAL COMPONENT Acute low back pain; x-ray (anterior-posterior \[AP\], lateral \[LAT\]); red flag indicators (see the \"Denominator Inclusions/Exclusions\" field in the Complete Summary) #### DENOMINATOR DESCRIPTION Number of patients who present to clinic with low back pain six weeks or less without red flag indicators (see the related \"Denominator Inclusions/Exclusions\" field in the Complete Summary) #### NUMERATOR DESCRIPTION Number of patients receiving anterior-posterior (AP) or lateral (LAT) x-rays. Include only patients who meet the criteria for the denominator. ### Evidence Supporting the Measure #### EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE CRITERION OF QUALITY - A clinical practice guideline or other peer-reviewed synthesis of the clinical evidence #### NATIONAL GUIDELINE CLEARINGHOUSE LINK - [Adult low back pain.](http://www.guideline.gov/summary/summary.aspx?ss=15&doc_id=9863) ### Evidence Supporting Need for the Measure #### NEED FOR THE MEASURE Unspecified ### State of Use of the Measure #### STATE OF USE Current routine use #### CURRENT USE Internal quality improvement ### Application of Measure in its Current Use #### CARE SETTING Physician Group Practices/Clinics #### PROFESSIONALS RESPONSIBLE FOR HEALTH CARE Physicians #### LOWEST LEVEL OF HEALTH CARE DELIVERY ADDRESSED Group Clinical Practices #### TARGET POPULATION AGE Age greater than or equal to 18 years #### TARGET POPULATION GENDER Either male or female #### STRATIFICATION BY VULNERABLE POPULATIONS Unspecified ### Characteristics of the Primary Clinical Component #### INCIDENCE/PREVALENCE Unspecified #### ASSOCIATION WITH VULNERABLE POPULATIONS Unspecified #### BURDEN OF ILLNESS Unspecified #### UTILIZATION Unspecified #### COSTS Unspecified ### Institute of Medicine National Healthcare Quality Report Categories #### IOM CARE NEED Getting Better #### IOM DOMAIN Effectiveness ### Data Collection for the Measure #### CASE FINDING Users of care only #### DESCRIPTION OF CASE FINDING Patients who present to the clinic with acute low back pain Identify patients with acute low back pain using diagnosis codes (see the \"Denominator Inclusions/Exclusions\" field). Patients should be included if the onset of symptoms was six weeks or less. The medical record of each patient is reviewed to determine if the patient meets any of the red flag indicators (see the \"Denominator Inclusions/Exclusions\" field). If none of the red flag indicators are present, the chart is further reviewed for use of anterior-posterior (AP) or lateral (LAT) x-ray. The suggested time period for data collection is a calendar month. #### DENOMINATOR SAMPLING FRAME Patients associated with provider #### DENOMINATOR INCLUSIONS/EXCLUSIONS Inclusions\ Number of patients who present to clinic with low back pain\* six weeks or less without red flag indicators\\ \Patients who are within six weeks of onset of low back pain and related symptoms, as identified by the following International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes: 720.x, 721.x, 722.x, 724.xx, 847.2, 738.4, 738.5, 738.6. \\Lumbar spine x-rays should be considered when the following red flag indicators exist: - Unrelenting night pain or pain at rest (increased incidence of clinically significant pathology) - Fever above 38 degrees C (100.4 degrees F) for greater than 48 hours without obvious cause - Progressive or new onset of neuromotor or sensory deficit (computed tomography \[CT\] or magnetic resonance imaging \[MRI\] may be the preferred imaging) - Pain with distal numbness or leg weakness - Loss of bowel or bladder control (retention or incontinence) - Clinical suspicion of ankylosing spondylitis - Significant trauma (accident or injury other than twisting or lifting injury unless other risk factors are present) - History of or suspicion of cancer Other conditions that may warrant anterior-posterior (AP) or lateral (LAT) x-rays: - Over 50 years old (increased risk of malignancy, compression fracture) - Failure to respond after 6 weeks of conservative therapy - Drug or alcohol abuse (increased incidence of osteomyelitis, trauma, fracture) Exclusions\ See \"Inclusions\" above. #### RELATIONSHIP OF DENOMINATOR TO NUMERATOR All cases in the denominator are equally eligible to appear in the numerator #### DENOMINATOR (INDEX) EVENT Clinical Condition\ Encounter #### DENOMINATOR TIME WINDOW Time window is a single point in time #### NUMERATOR INCLUSIONS/EXCLUSIONS Inclusions\ Number of patients receiving anterior-posterior (AP) or lateral (LAT) x-rays. Include only patients who meet the criteria for the denominator. Exclusions*\ Unspecified #### MEASURE RESULTS UNDER CONTROL OF HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS, ORGANIZATIONS AND/OR POLICYMAKERS The measure results are somewhat or substantially under the control of the health care professionals, organizations and/or policymakers to whom the measure applies. #### NUMERATOR TIME WINDOW Encounter or point in time #### DATA SOURCE Administrative data\ Medical record #### LEVEL OF DETERMINATION OF QUALITY Individual Case #### PRE-EXISTING INSTRUMENT USED Unspecified ### Computation of the Measure #### SCORING Rate #### INTERPRETATION OF SCORE Better quality is associated with a lower score #### ALLOWANCE FOR PATIENT FACTORS Unspecified #### STANDARD OF COMPARISON Internal time comparison ### Evaluation of Measure Properties #### EXTENT OF MEASURE TESTING Unspecified ### Identifying Information #### ORIGINAL TITLE Percentage of acute low back pain patients without red flag indicators undergoing AP or LAT x-rays. #### MEASURE COLLECTION [Adult Low Back Pain Measures](http://www.qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov/Browse/DisplayOrganization.aspx?org_id=26&doc=4454) #### DEVELOPER Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement #### ADAPTATION Measure was not adapted from another source. #### RELEASE DATE 2003 Sep #### REVISION DATE 2006 Sep #### MEASURE STATUS This is the current release of the measure. This measure updates a previous version: Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI). Adult low back pain. Bloomington (MN): Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI); 2005 Sep. 64 p. #### SOURCE(S) Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI). Adult low back pain. Bloomington (MN): Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI); 2006 Sep. 65 p. \[124 references\] #### MEASURE AVAILABILITY The individual measure, \"Percentage of patients with acute low back pain receiving AP or LAT x-rays,\" is published in \"Health Care Guideline: Adult Low Back Pain.\" This document is available from the [Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI) Web site](http://www.icsi.org/guidelines_and_more/guidelines__order_sets___protocols/). For more information, contact ICSI at, 8009 34th Avenue South, Suite 1200, Bloomington, MN 55425; phone: 952-814-7060; fax: 952-858-9675; Web site: [www.icsi.org](http://www.icsi.org/); e-mail: <[email protected]>. #### NQMC STATUS This NQMC summary was completed by ECRI on May 4, 2004. This NQMC summary was updated by ECRI on October 14, 2004, November 3, 2005, and again on December 6, 2006. #### COPYRIGHT STATEMENT This NQMC summary (abstracted Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement \[ICSI\] Measure) is based on the original measure, which is subject to the measure developer\'s copyright restrictions. The abstracted ICSI Measures contained in this Web site may be downloaded by any individual or organization. If the abstracted ICSI Measures are downloaded by an individual, the individual may not distribute copies to third parties. If the abstracted ICSI Measures are downloaded by an organization, copies may be distributed to the organization\'s employees but may not be distributed outside of the organization without the prior written consent of the Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement, Inc. All other copyright rights in the abstracted ICSI Measures are reserved by the Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement, Inc. The Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement, Inc. assumes no liability for any adaptations or revisions or modifications made to the abstracts of the ICSI Measures. ### Disclaimer #### NQMC DISCLAIMER The National Quality Measures Clearinghouse™ (NQMC) does not develop, produce, approve, or endorse the measures represented on this site. All measures summarized by NQMC and hosted on our site are produced under the auspices of medical specialty societies, relevant professional associations, public and private organizations, other government agencies, health care organizations or plans, individuals, and similar entities. Measures represented on the NQMC Web site are submitted by measure developers, and are screened solely to determine that they meet the NQMC Inclusion Criteria which may be found at <http://www.qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov/about/inclusion.aspx>. NQMC, AHRQ, and its contractor ECRI Institute make no warranties concerning the content or its reliability and/or validity of the quality measures and related materials represented on this site. The inclusion or hosting of measures in NQMC may not be used for advertising or commercial endorsement purposes. Readers with questions regarding measure content are directed to contact the measure developer. Bottom of Form © 2008 National Quality Measures Clearinghouse Date Modified: 11/10/2008	en
all-txt-docs	270496	Title :NGRAPH (Subroutine Library) - Documentation Keywords :GRAPHICS Computer :DEC VAX 11/730-785, DEC PDP 11/2-11/73 Operating System :VAXVMS, RT-11 Programming Language :Fortran IV Hardware Requirements :None Author(s) :Nestor J. Zaluzec Correspondence Address :Argonne Nat. Lab, Electron Microscopy Center, Bldg 212 :Materials Science Division, Argonne, Illinois 60439, USA Description: Start on the 10th line Outline/Description and the purpose of the code. References: Operating Instructions for Tektronics 4010 terminals supplied by the manufacturer. Compilation Procedure: Using VAX-Fortran compiler 1. Rename file to NGRAPH.FOR 2. At DCL prompt type FORTRAN/EXTEND/NOF77 NGRAPH.FOR Using RT-11 Fortran IV compiler 1. Rename file to NGRAPH.FOR 2. At RT-11 prompt type FORTRAN/EXTEND/WARNINGS NGRAPH.FOR Linking Procedure: Include the object module NGRAPH.OBJ in your standard link procedure for example when linking the NGRAPH library into the main program NGTEST you would use the following procedure Using VAX-Linker 1. At DCL prompt type LINK NGTEST,NGRAPH Using RT-11 Linker 1. At RT-11 prompt type LINK NGTEST,NGRAPH Test Data: None, this routine generates graphics plots no data available General Comments: To run the demonstration program type RUN NGTEST upon receipt of the system ready prompt. NOTE: If NGRAPH is to be used with smaller computer systems such as PDP 11's it may be necessary to divide the routines up into an overlay structure to allow for swapping on and off the disk an example of an overlay structure which will work is given below. The NGRAPH library requires the existance of a data file called TERMIN.DAT on the default storage device named DAT:. This file is called by the subroutine TERMIN, which attempts to read the terminal type currently in use. If the file doesnot exist the library will default to a TEKTRONICS 4010-1 terminal, operating at 9600 baud, with no hardcopy device. The user is allowed to change the terminal type through access of the TERMIN routine see the program NGTEST for an example. The following is an example of the format of the TERMIN.DAT file, only the first three lines are required, please note that the comments begining each of the first three lines are both spacers as well reminders as to the function of the parameters on each line. GRAPHICS TERMINAL TYPE:8 BAUD RATE FOR GRAPHICS:9600 HARDCOPY DEVICE TYPE:5 C -------------------------------------------------------- C TERMINAL DEFINITIONS: C --------------------- C -3 = ASCII TERMINAL: NO GRAPHICS, & NO VT-100 compatibility & <32 COLUMNS C -2 = ASCII TERMINAL: NO GRAPHICS, & NO VT-100 compatibility C -1 = ANSI X3.4 ASCII TERMINAL: NO GRAPHICS, VT-100 compatible C 0 = TEKTRONICS 4010-1,4014-1 (WITH HARDWARE CURSOR) C 1 = TEKTRONICS 4006 ,4010 (NO HARDWARE CURSOR) C 2 = LEAR SIEGLER ADM-3,ADM-5 (WITH RETROGRAPHICS RG-512) C 3 = PERITEK VCG-512 BIT MAP COLOR GRAPHICS C 4 = TEKTRONICS 4027 C 5 = HP 7470A/7475A HARDCOPY PLOTTER C 6 = LA100/LA50 HARDCOPY GRAPHICS C 7 = INTECOLOR VT-100 with 4010-1,4014-1 mode C 8 = INTECOLOR VT-100 with 4027 mode C 9 = DEC VT-200 with 4010-1,4014-1 mode C 10 = TEKTRONICS 4105/4107 with VT-100 compatibility mode C 11 = PLESSEY VT-100/TEK 4010-1 C 12 = ESPIRIT VT-100/TEK 4010-1 C 13 = TEKTRONICS 4010-1 HARDCOPY VIDEO TO VERSATIC C 14 = TEKTRONICS 4695 Color Copier C -------------------------------------------------------- C BAUD RATE RANGE FOR GRAPHICS (110 - 19200) C --------------------------------------------------------	en
converted_docs	694490	+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| PNT MEDIA ITEMS \| \| \| \| [www.pnt.gov](http://www.pnt.gov/) \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ October 17, 2007 4TH MODERNIZED GPS SATELLITE LAUNCHED 17 October 2007 [PR Newswire (U.S.)](javascript:void(0)) CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, Fla\-- A U.S. Air Force modernized Global Positioning System Block IIR (GPS IIR-M) satellite, designed and built by Lockheed Martin, was successfully launched today from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station aboard a United Launch Alliance (ULA) Delta II launch vehicle. Designated GPS IIR-17M, the satellite is the fourth in a series of eight Block IIR-M spacecraft that Lockheed Martin Navigation Systems has modernized for its customer, the Global Positioning Systems Wing, Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, Calif. The Block IIR-M series includes new features that enhance operations and navigation signal performance for military and civilian GPS users around the globe. \" Lockheed Martin is extremely proud of its partnership with the Air Force to sustain and improve the GPS constellation,\" said Don DeGryse, Lockheed Martin\'s vice president of Navigation Systems. \"We look forward to executing a timely and efficient on-orbit checkout of this advanced spacecraft and providing GPS users worldwide with increased navigation capabilities.\" Each IIR-M satellite includes a modernized antenna panel that provides increased signal power to receivers on the ground, two new military signals for improved accuracy, enhanced encryption and anti-jamming capabilities for the military, and a second civil signal that will provide users with an open access signal on a different frequency. The satellite launched today joins three IIR-M satellites and 12 other operational Block IIR satellites within the current 28-spacecraft constellation. The Global Positioning System enables properly equipped users to determine precise time and velocity and worldwide latitude, longitude and altitude to within a few meters. Air Force Space Command\'s 2nd Space Operations Squadron (2 SOPS) at Schriever Air Force Base, Colo., manages and operates the GPS constellation for both civil and military users. Lockheed Martin is also leading a team which includes ITT and General Dynamics in the competition to build the U.S. Air Force\'s next-generation Global Positioning System, GPS Block III. The next-generation program will improve position, navigation, and timing services for the warfighter and civil users worldwide and provide advanced anti-jam capabilities yielding improved system security, accuracy and reliability. A multi-billion dollar development contract is scheduled to be awarded by the Global Positioning Systems Wing, Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, Calif. in early 2008. GERMANY AND FRANCE SPAR OVER EU SATELLITE PROJECT Bloomberg News Service 16 October 2007 The European Union failed to break a deadlock earlier this month over a satellite project as Germany held out for more control over the venture, which would rival the US system. The EU faces an additional bill of €2.4 billion (\$3.4 billion) for the Galileo road, rail, ship and air-traffic control network after companies such as European Aeronautic, Defence & Space Co. refused to pay two-thirds of the launch costs. Germany says national governments should fund at least part of a bailout and France wants all the extra money to come from the EU budget. "We want to defend our interests," Joerg Hennerkes, a state secretary in the German Transport Ministry, told reporters after a ministerial meeting today in Luxembourg. "It's about the financing." EU leaders may have to try to overcome the impasse at a mid-December summit. The €4.5 billion satellite program, one of Europe's biggest projects since Airbus in the 1970s, is faltering because of mounting costs. The European Commission, the 27-nation EU's regulatory arm, proposed a rescue last month by shifting to Galileo some money earmarked for agriculture and administration in the bloc's 2007-2013 budget. National subsidies for any rescue of Galileo would increase the influence of individual governments over the project and, for big contributors to the EU budget such as Germany, limit the political risks of endorsing a bailout. Companies from countries including Germany, France, the UK, Italy and Spain are seeking to profit from the project. EU Transport Commissioner Jacques Barrot, a Frenchman, says national funding undermines the EU's role. He has the backing of a French-led group of EU nations as well as of the European Parliament. "Barrot's proposal is an excellent basis for work," said Dominique Bussereau, France's state secretary for transport. The French government supports it "100 percent," he said. Governments have already pledged €1.5 billion to cover the entire initial "development" phase of Galileo and earmarked another €600 million for part of the launch costs. The EU had expected industry to meet most of the remaining expenses, saying the growth of commercial satellite markets would make the venture profitable. Profitability isn't guaranteed because the government-funded US global positioning system, known as GPS and designed primarily for defense, is used for free by businesses worldwide. The EU's planned 30-satellite system wouldn't become operational before 2012, four years later than originally foreseen. The EU abandoned talks with industry on a concession contract in June after companies refused to take on the risks tied to launching and operating the system. Faced with having to spend more taxpayers' money to save the project, governments are keen to secure a role for their national industrial champions after any new tenders. In an October joint statement, transport ministers sidestepped the financing questions and stressed the need for "a balanced participation of all member states during the different phases of the project while taking maximum benefit of open competition." In addition to overestimating the lure of satellite markets for companies, the EU may be paying a price for letting two bidding groups led by EADS and Alcatel SA join forces two years ago in the program. The combination ended a competition aimed at ensuring industry would limit the cost to taxpayers. Combining the groups also brought together French military electronics company Thales SA, the UK's Inmarsat Ventures Ltd., Italy's Finmeccanica SpA, Spanish satellite operator Hispasat SA and Spanish airport operator Aena. Deutsche Telekom AG was involved as well through a stake in another partner called TeleOp GmbH. Of the money spent so far on Galileo, half has come from the EU budget and half from the government-funded European Space Agency. GLONASS SYSTEM TO MONITOR DANGEROUS CARGOES AT BAIKONUR 16 October 2007 [Russia & CIS Military Newswire](javascript:void(0)) KALUGA. Oct 16\-- The Russian Scientific-Research Institute of Space Instrument Engineering is planning to create a system of satellite control over vital objects and dangerous cargoes at the Baikonur space center, Kazakhstan, the institute\'s First Deputy General Director Vyacheslav Bezborodov told reporters. \"We have reached agreement with Russian Railways on two projects. One deals with the monitoring of vital facilities and dangerous cargoes, such as fuel and carrier rockets, and the other concerns the installation of navigation devices on railway lines in the north and south of the country,\" he said. To monitor dangerous cargoes at Baikonur and freight trains in Russian regions, the GLONASS global satellite navigation system will be used, Bezborodov said. An experimental section of Baikonur will be GLONASS-monitored starting from late 2007, he said.	en
all-txt-docs	109033	SEXX03 KNEC 261430 EQRQED U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NO. 6-207 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY JUL 26, 2006 NEIC QUICK EPICENTER DETERMINATIONS UTC TIME LAT LONG DEP GS MAGS SD STA REGION--COMMENTS HRMNSEC MB Msz USED JUL 19 012936.0 4.739S 149.621E 47 5.0 0.8 46 BISMARCK SEA 015855.3 9.191S 108.332E 10G 5.4 1.2 99 S JAVA, INDONESIA 020212.7s 4.854S 149.409E 78* 4.7 1.0 15 BISMARCK SEA 021239.0s 23.825S 66.405W 195 4.2 0.8 33 JUJUY, ARGENTINA 023525.4s 9.666S 107.963E 10G 4.8 0.8 33 S JAVA, INDONESIA 035340.4 9.322S 107.203E 10G 4.9 0.9 45 S JAVA, INDONESIA 041531.8s 53.972N 159.200E 153 4.2 0.9 17 NR E CST KAMCHATKA, RUSSIA 041941.4 9.384S 108.823E 10G 4.9 0.5 33 S JAVA, INDONESIA 053149.2 9.186S 107.386E 10G 4.8 0.7 27 S JAVA, INDONESIA 055925.0 21.505S 177.944W 361D 4.9 0.9 161 FIJI REGION 072506.5 9.524S 107.267E 10G 5.6 5.2 1.2 123 SOUTH OF JAVA, INDONESIA. MW 5.7 (GS), 5.6 (HRV). Felt (IV) at Tasikmalaya and (III) at Sukabumi. Moment Tensor (GS): Dep 24 km; Principal axes (scale 10*17 Nm): (T) Val=3.89, Plg=13, Azm=3; (N) Val=-0.01, Plg=77, Azm=195; (P) Val=-3.87, Plg=2, Azm=94; Best double couple: Mo=3.91017 Nm; NP1: Strike=139, Dip=79, Slip=7; NP2: Strike=48, Dip=83, Slip=169. Centroid, Moment Tensor (HRV): Centroid origin time 07:25:10.7; Lat 9.73 S; Lon 107.19 E; Dep 12.0 km Fix; Half-duration 1.6 sec; Principal axes (scale 1017 Nm): (T) Val=3.67, Plg=13, Azm=20; (N) Val=-0.73, Plg=74, Azm=167; (P) Val=-2.94, Plg=8, Azm=288; Best double couple: Mo=3.31017 Nm; NP1: Strike=63, Dip=75, Slip=176; NP2: Strike=154, Dip=86, Slip=15. 093501.5 14.624N 145.445E 26D 4.8 0.7 40 ROTA REGION, NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS. Felt on Saipan. 095307.5 32.985N 96.230E 17D 5.3 0.6 121 S QINGHAI, CHINA 100941.9s 10.908S 112.042E 10G 4.4 0.4 14 S JAVA, INDONESIA 104301.9s 9.655S 108.308E 10G 4.4 0.3 13 S JAVA, INDONESIA 105736.9 6.540S 105.371E 45G 5.8 6.1 0.9 281 SUNDA STRAIT, INDONESIA. MW 6.1 (GS), 6.1 (HRV). ME 5.8 (GS). Felt (IV) at Bogor, Merak and Jakarta; (II) at Depok. Also felt at Bandung, Bekasi, Cibinong, Serpong and Tangerang. Broadband Source Parameters (GS): Dep 45 km; Radiated energy 1.31013 Nm. Moment Tensor (GS): Dep 45 km; Principal axes (scale 1018 Nm): (T) Val=2.02, Plg=84, Azm=25; (N) Val=0.08, Plg=4, Azm=162; (P) Val=-2.10, Plg=4, Azm=253; Best double couple: Mo=2.11018 Nm; NP1: Strike=347, Dip=41, Slip=96; NP2: Strike=159, Dip=49, Slip=84. Centroid, Moment Tensor (HRV): Centroid origin time 10:57:41.6; Lat 7.17 S; Lon 105.28 E; Dep 46.0 km; Half-duration 2.9 sec; Principal axes (scale 1018 Nm): (T) Val=2.01, Plg=67, Azm=333; (N) Val=0.23, Plg=16, Azm=106; (P) Val=-2.24, Plg=16, Azm=201; Best double couple: Mo=2.11018 Nm; NP1: Strike=313, Dip=32, Slip=121; NP2: Strike=98, Dip=63, Slip=72. 114143.5f 40.281N 124.425W 21 4.4 82 OFFSHORE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA. <NC>. MW 5.0 (BRK). Felt (V) at Ferndale; (IV) at Carlotta, Fortuna, Hydesville, Loleta, Rio Dell and Whitethorn; (III) at Bayside, Bridgeville, Eureka, Garberville, Myers Flat, Petrolia, Redway and Scotia; (II) at Arcata, McKinleyville and San Francisco. Felt at Alderpoint, Berkeley, Blocksburg, Blue Lake, Burnt Ranch, Fort Brag, Fresno, Korbel, Laytonville, Leggett, Littleriver, Peircy, Redcrest, Redding, Salyer, San Jose, Santa Cruz, Trinidad, Willits and Willow Creek. Also felt at Brookings and Williams, Oregon. Moment Tensor (BRK): Dep 30 km; Principal axes (scale 1016 Nm): (T) Val=3.53, Plg=10, Azm=57; (N) Val=0.00, Plg=80, Azm=237; (P) Val=-3.53, Plg=0, Azm=327; Best double couple: Mo=3.51016 Nm; NP1: Strike=193, Dip=83, Slip=7; NP2: Strike=102, Dip=83, Slip=173. 114433.0f 57.126N 154.961W 37 5.2 262 KODIAK ISLAND REGION, ALASKA. <AEIC>. ML 5.0 (AEIC). Felt at Kodiak. 114858.3 5.440S 150.677E 28D 5.6 6.5 1.1 98 NEW BRITAIN REGION, PAPUA NEW GUINEA. MW 6.4 (HRV), 6.3 (GS). Moment Tensor (GS): Dep 22 km; Principal axes (scale 1018 Nm): (T) Val=2.78, Plg=17, Azm=354; (N) Val=0.69, Plg=73, Azm=172; (P) Val=-3.47, Plg=1, Azm=264; Best double couple: Mo=3.11018 Nm; NP1: Strike=38, Dip=78, Slip=169; NP2: Strike=130, Dip=79, Slip=12. Centroid, Moment Tensor (HRV): Centroid origin time 11:49:01.9; Lat 5.40 S; Lon 150.76 E; Dep 20.6 km; Half-duration 3.9 sec; Principal axes (scale 1018 Nm): (T) Val=4.92, Plg=1, Azm=354; (N) Val=-0.47, Plg=89, Azm=108; (P) Val=-4.45, Plg=1, Azm=264; Best double couple: Mo=4.71018 Nm; NP1: Strike=39, Dip=89, Slip=-179; NP2: Strike=309, Dip=89, Slip=-1. Scalar Moment (PPT): Mo=8.21018 Nm. 120154.9p 10.76 S 107.02 E 10G 4.9 0.8 15 S JAVA, INDONESIA 120500.6s 5.266S 150.849E 10G 4.6 0.9 10 NEW BRITAIN REGION, PAPUA NEW GUINEA 125805.5f 39.786N 123.461W 5 5 N CALIF. <NC>. MD 2.6 (NC). 132319.6f 35.520N 116.426W 6 10 S CALIF. <PAS>. ML 3.4 (PAS). 143931.0f 19.582N 66.070W 36 7 PUERTO RICO REGION. <RSPR>. MD 3.4 (RSPR). 165908.4f 35.970N 26.920E 30 6 CRETE, GREECE. <ATH>. MD 2.9 (ATH). 180857.7 5.311S 150.723E 10G 5.7 1.2 83 NEW BRITAIN REGION, PAPUA NEW GUINEA. MW 5.9 (HRV), 5.6 (GS). Moment Tensor (GS): Dep 15 km; Principal axes (scale 1017 Nm): (T) Val=3.63, Plg=28, Azm=5; (N) Val=0.07, Plg=61, Azm=168; (P) Val=-3.69, Plg=7, Azm=271; Best double couple: Mo=3.71017 Nm; NP1: Strike=44, Dip=65, Slip=165; NP2: Strike=141, Dip=76, Slip=25. Centroid, Moment Tensor (HRV): Centroid origin time 18:09:03.0; Lat 5.34 S; Lon 150.67 E; Dep 15.1 km; Half-duration 2.2 sec; Principal axes (scale 1017 Nm): (T) Val=9.40, Plg=7, Azm=2; (N) Val=-0.70, Plg=77, Azm=120; (P) Val=-8.80, Plg=12, Azm=270; Best double couple: Mo=9.110*17 Nm; NP1: Strike=46, Dip=77, Slip=-176; NP2: Strike=316, Dip=86, Slip=-13. 185810.7 6.330S 146.118E 116D 4.8 0.8 42 E NEW GUINEA REG, P.N.G. 190628.7s 9.784S 107.830E 10G 4.4 1.2 12 S JAVA, INDONESIA 194226.6s 12.030N 87.128W 38 4.7 1.1 20 NR COAST NICARAGUA 210120.1s 10.124S 108.594E 17? 4.6 0.4 16 S JAVA, INDONESIA 210332.5p 12.96 N 87.15 W 214* 4.5 0.9 23 NR COAST NICARAGUA 220923.5 9.388S 108.599E 10G 5.3 1.1 82 S JAVA, INDONESIA 221127.0f 32.466S 71.888W 31 4.7 33 OFFSHORE VALPARAISO, CHILE. <GUC>. Felt (III) at La Ligua, Papudo, Quillota, Valparaiso and Vina del Mar; (II) at Rancagua, San Antonio and Santiago. 224702.1 9.358S 107.669E 10G 5.1 1.0 80 S JAVA, INDONESIA golden co usa 2006 JUL 26 11:13	en
converted_docs	729640	MESSAGE NO: 8329211 DATE: 11/24/2008 CATEGORY: ADA TYPE: LIQ REFERENCE: REFERENCE DATE: CASES: A-470-807 PERIOD COVERED: 09/01/2007 TO 08/31/2008 LIQ SUSPENSION DATE: TO: DIRECTORS OF FIELD OPERATIONS, PORT DIRECTORS FROM: DIRECTOR, SPECIAL ENFORCEMENT RE: AUTOMATIC LIQUIDATION INSTRUCTION FOR STAINLESS STEEL, WIRE ROD FROM SPAIN (A-470-807), LIQUIDATE ALL ENTRIES FROM ALL FIRMS. THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS ON THE RELEASE OF THIS INFORMATION. 1\. COMMERCE DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY CONDUCT ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS OF ANTIDUMPING FINDINGS/DUTY ORDERS. INSTEAD, REVIEWS MUST BE REQUESTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 751(a)(1) AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 351.213 OF THE COMMERCE DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS. 2\. COMMERCE HAS NOT RECEIVED A REQUEST FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF THE ANTIDUMPING DUTY FINDING/ORDER FOR THE PERIOD AND ON THE MERCHANDISE LISTED BELOW. THEREFORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 351.212(c) OF THE COMMERCE DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS, YOU ARE TO ASSESS ANTIDUMPING DUTIES ON MERCHANDISE ENTERED, OR WITHDRAWN FROM WAREHOUSE, FOR CONSUMPTION AT THE CASH DEPOSIT OR BONDING RATE IN EFFECT ON THE DATE OF ENTRY. PRODUCT: STAINLESS STEEL WIRE ROD COUNTRY: SPAIN CASE NUMBER: A-470-807 PERIOD : 09/01/2007-08/31/2008 LIQUIDATE ALL ENTRIES FOR ALL FIRMS. 3\. THERE ARE NO INJUNCTIONS APPLICABLE TO THE ENTRIES COVERED BY THIS INSTRUCTION. 4\. NOTICE OF THE LIFTING OF SUSPENSION OF LIQUIDATION OF ENTRIES OF SUBJECT MERCHANDISE DURING THE PERIOD 09/01/2007 THROUGH 08/31/2008 OCCURRED WITH THE PUBLICATION OF THE NOTICE OF INITIATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW FOR THE 09/2008 ANNIVERSARY MONTH (73 FR 64305, 10/29/2008). FOR ALL OTHER SHIPMENTS OF STAINLESS STEEL WIRE ROD FROM SPAIN, YOU SHALL CONTINUE TO COLLECT CASH DEPOSITS OF ESTIMATED ANTIDUMPING DUTIES FOR SUBSEQUENT ENTRIES OF THE SUBJECT MERCHANDISE AT THE CURRENT RATES. 5\. THE ASSESSMENT OF ANTIDUMPING DUTIES BY CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION ON SHIPMENTS OR ENTRIES OF THIS MERCHANDISE IS SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 778 OF THE TARIFF ACT OF 1930. SECTION 778 REQUIRES THAT CBP PAY INTEREST ON OVERPAYMENTS OR ASSESS INTEREST ON UNDERPAYMENTS, OF THE REQUIRED AMOUNTS DEPOSITED AS ESTIMATED ANTIDUMPING DUTIES. THE INTEREST PROVISIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO CASH OR BONDS POSTED AS ESTIMATED ANTIDUMPING DUTIES BEFORE THE DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE ANTIDUMPING DUTY ORDER. INTEREST SHALL BE CALCULATED FROM THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF ESTIMATED ANTIDUMPING DUTIES THROUGH THE DATE OF LIQUIDATION. THE RATE AT WHICH SUCH INTEREST IS PAYABLE IS THE RATE IN EFFECT UNDER SECTION 6621 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1954 FOR SUCH PERIOD. 6\. UPON ASSESSMENT OF ANTIDUMPING DUTIES, CBP SHOULD REQUIRE THAT THE IMPORTER PROVIDE A REIMBURSEMENT STATEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 351.402(f)(2) OF THE COMMERCE DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS. THE IMPORTER SHOULD PROVIDE THE REIMBURSEMENT STATEMENT PRIOR TO LIQUIDATION OF THE ENTRY. IF THE IMPORTER CERTIFIES THAT IT HAS AN AGREEMENT WITH THE MANUFACTURER, PRODUCER, SELLER, OR EXPORTER TO BE REIMBURSED ANTIDUMPING DUTIES, CBP SHOULD DOUBLE THE ANTIDUMPING DUTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE- REFERENCED REGULATION. ADDITIONALLY, IF THE IMPORTER DOES NOT PROVIDE THE REIMBURSEMENT STATEMENT PRIOR TO LIQUIDATION, CBP SHOULD PRESUME REIMBURSEMENT AND DOUBLE THE ANTIDUMPING DUTIES DUE. 7\. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS MATTER BY CBP OFFICERS, THE IMPORTING PUBLIC OR INTERESTED PARTIES, PLEASE CONTACT DAVINA HASHMI OR RON TRENTHAM AT OFFICE OF AD/CVD OPERATIONS, IMPORT ADMINISTRATION, INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, AT (202) 482-0984 OR (202) 482-3577 RESPECTIVELY (GENERATED BY: O2:AB). 8\. THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS ON THE RELEASE OF THIS INFORMATION. DAVID M. GENOVESE	en
converted_docs	917287	Standard Firefighting Orders: Shifts in Meaning and Authority (1950s-today) Answers to questions like... What are the Fire Orders for? How should they be used? ...have changed over time as: approaches to managing people have changed approaches to managing fire have changed [Before the Fire Orders (1930s-1950s)]{.underline} > "Heroes" were publicly praised for displaying two virtues > (e.g., in Fire Control Notes): > > keeping fires small > > while also > > keeping crews safe > > Failures were publicly singled out. But they were also offered second chances... > "Praise and blame" approach eventually considered unfair: > > "Same actions praised in one situation is criticized in another." > > Many called for standardization: > > "There ought to be a rule..." [Standard Firefighting Orders (developed,1957)]{.underline} Chief convened a safety task force (1957) > Analyzed 20 years of fatality fires > > Focused on 5 fires where 10 or more firefighters were killed at once > > e.g., Inaja Fire, California, 1956 (11 dead) > > Also examined "successful" fires > > "Sinners" > > "Men who know better...just did not pay adequate attention" to small > details when it mattered most. (Considered a problem of forgetting.) > > "Coolheads" > > Someone who "sized up a local change in fire behavior and figured out > what would happen in time to get the men to safety." > ([How]{.underline} they did so not really understood.) > > Found 11 common factors among the failures > > Successes attributed to: "Someone did not fail in one of these > critical categories." > > Turned them into orders > > Rearranged, edited down to 9 > > Chief McArdle added #10: > > "Fight fire aggressively but provide for safety first" > > (Note that Fire Order #10 looks a lot like "keep fires small" and > "keep people safe" \-- the two heroic virtues) [Ten Standard Fire Orders (first revision, 1987)]{.underline} > Now applied to all agencies through the NWCG > > Reordered for easier memorization > > Fire Orders [shifted]{.underline}... > > ...from an individual to an organizational list > > "Checklist" for evaluating individual fires > > ...from a list of virtues to a list of duties > > Accident reports started to find Fire Order "violations"* in > 1990s* > > Violation of employee-employer contract [TriData Study (1996-1998)]{.underline} > Revealed a split in opinion over the precise authority of the Fire > Orders. (1,000 firefighters were surveyed) > > Some called them "guidelines." > > Some called them "hard and fast rules." > > http://www.wildfirelessons.net/documents/WFSAS_Part_3_Chapter_4.pdf [Standard Firefighting Orders (second revision, 2003)]{.underline} > Many called for NWCG to get "back to the original intent" of the > Fire Orders > > Steps to be followed in order > > Aligned with concept of "risk management" > > Fire Order #10 changed to: > > "Fight fire aggressively *having provided for* safety first." > > (i.e., permission to fight the fire is earned after the first nine > items are completed) [Same Items, Three Different Kinds of Lists:]{.underline} > 1957 Personal taskbook for individual transformation > > 1987 Orders to follow in all situations (e.g., even driving) > > 2003 Tool for broader organizational "risk management" [Same Items in Same Order, Different View of the Group Process:]{.underline} > 1957 Fire Orders are described as a tool for the group to help the > individual to not forget things they already knew (until the > individual virtues became automatic). > > 2003 Fire Orders are described as a tool for the individual to use > to question a decision emerging in the group (e.g., Cramer Fire > accident investigation report).	en
markdown	454756	# Presentation: 454756 ## Slide 1 ## Aeronautics Research Partners Government Agency Partners Universities AeronauticsResearch Industry NASA’s other Missions Aeronautics Research Partners Notes: Customers/partners ARMD Mission Statement: To provide advanced aeronautical technologies to meet the challenges of next generation systems in aviation, for civilian and scientific purposes, in our atmosphere and in those of other worlds. Our success is measured by the extent to which our results are used by others to improve the quality of life and enable exploration and scientific knowledge ## National Guidance President’s Commission on the Future of the U.S. Aerospace Industry (Nov 2002) - “recommends that the United States boldly pioneer new frontiers in aerospace technology....” - “recommends transformation of the U.S. air transportation systems as a national priority.” National Research Council (NRC) report “Securing the Future of U.S. Air Transportation: A System in Peril” (Nov 2003) - “[Develop a] vision...related to safety and security, capacity of the air transportation system, environmental compatibility (noise and emissions), the satisfaction of customer needs, and industrial competitiveness.” Next Generation Air Transportation System (Dec 2004) - Establishes national goals and sets direction for transformation - Creates governance model for multi-agency cooperation NASA AeronauticsResearch National Guidance ## NRC Review of NASA Aeronautics (2004) “NASA should provide world leadership in aeronautics research and development.” “NASA should reduce the number of tasks in its aeronautics technology portfolio.” “NASA should pursue more high-risk, high-payoff technologies” “NASA’s aeronautics technology infrastructure exceeds its current needs....” Excerpts from OMB public release - “Major Saving and Reforms in the President’s FY 2006 Budget” “reduces funding for program activities in which the government role is no longer justified” “emphasizes higher risk NASA research programs where the private sector will not invest the necessary funds due to the risk of inadequate financial returns” “reduce the number of civil servants, contractors, and facilities affiliated with the program” “emphasize more extensive use of peer review” - “NASA should provide world leadership in aeronautics research and development.” - “NASA should reduce the number of tasks in its aeronautics technology portfolio.” - “NASA should pursue more high-risk, high-payoff technologies” - “NASA’s aeronautics technology infrastructure exceeds its current needs....” Excerpts from OMB public release - “Major Saving and Reforms in the President’s FY 2006 Budget” - “reduces funding for program activities in which the government role is no longer justified” - “emphasizes higher risk NASA research programs where the private sector will not invest the necessary funds due to the risk of inadequate financial returns” - “reduce the number of civil servants, contractors, and facilities affiliated with the program” - “emphasize more extensive use of peer review” Guidance from Reviews ## Aeronautics ResearchPriorities and Programs Programs Airspace Systems Aviation Safety & Security Increase planetary aircraft research Assess possibilities for supersonics Enhance uninhabited aerial vehicles (UAV) research Emphasize public good research Ensure NASA contribution to Joint Planning & Development Office (JPDO) Vehicle Systems Programmatic Priorities Determine if there is a requirement to continue hypersonics research Aeronautics ResearchPriorities and Programs ## FY2006 President’s Budget Request FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2005 President's Budget 919.2 956.7 937.8 925.8 941.9 Aviation Safety & Security 188.0 175.1 178.0 173.7 179.2 Airspace Systems 154.4 175.2 183.7 176.7 179.8 Vehicle Systems 576.8 606.4 576.2 575.3 582.9 Proposed FY 2006 President's Budget 906.2 852.3 727.6 730.7 727.5 717.6 Aviation Safety & Security 185.4 192.9 173.5 170.5 176.2 176.3 Airspace Systems 152.2 200.3 180.5 174.6 177.9 175.7 Vehicle Systems 568.6 459.1 373.6 385.5 373.5 365.6 - $M - $M - The FY2005 budgets reflect the NASA Initial Operating Plan, December 2004 - * - * - * - * - * FY2006 President’s Budget Request ## Agency Transformation President’s Vision for Space Exploration President’s Management Agenda - Competitive Sourcing Aldridge Commission Report Response Core Competencies Assessment Aeronautics Transformation Since Mid 1990’s, Increased Investment in Public Good Technologies (air traffic management, safety, security, and environment) From Technology R&T to Barrier Breaking Demonstrations Increase Use of Competition Through Merit-Based Research Selection President’s Vision for Space Exploration President’s Management Agenda - Competitive Sourcing Aldridge Commission Report Response Core Competencies Assessment Aeronautics Transformation Since Mid 1990’s, Increased Investment in Public Good Technologies (air traffic management, safety, security, and environment) From Technology R&T to Barrier Breaking Demonstrations Increase Use of Competition Through Merit-Based Research Selection Major Transformation Underway ## Decrease the aircraft fatal accident rate and the vulnerability of the air transportation system to threats and mitigate the consequences of accidents and hostile acts - Develop and demonstrate technologies that reduce aircraft accident rates and reduce aviation injuries and fatalities when accidents do occur - Develop technologies that reduce the vulnerability of the National Airspace System to terrorist attacks while dramatically improving efficiency of security - Transfer these advanced concepts, technologies and procedures through a partnership with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in cooperation with the U.S. aeronautics industry Approach: Goal: Benefit: - Breakthrough technologies and knowledge products will reduce safety and security risks and loss of life in commercial and general aviation - - By eliminating and/or mitigating risks due to unintended causes (for improved safety) - - By identifying and mitigating risks due to intentional causes (for improved security) - NASA-appropriate R&D enhances the effectiveness of Other Government Agencies in achieving their mission requirements Aviation Safety & Security Program Notes: Rationale: Breakthrough technologies and knowledge products from scientific investigations can reduce risks and loss of life in commercial and general aviation By eliminating and mitigating aviation risks due to unintended events Eliminate major categories of recurring accidents and precursors. Provide early identification of emerging risks and prevent hidden and potential safety issues from causing accidents. Reduce risk of injury to passengers and crew in the unlikely event of an accident. By identifying and mitigation aviation risks due to intentional actions Mitigate the effects of intrusions and terrorist attacks on airports and aircraft. Deny use of aircraft as targets of terror or weapons of mass destruction. Enable appropriate and timely decision making in threat situations. ## Airspace Systems Program Goal: - Enable major increases in the capacity and mobility of the air transportation system through development of revolutionary concepts for operations and vehicle systems - Improve throughput, predictability, flexibility, collaboration, efficiency, and access of the NAS - Enable general aviation and runway-independent aircraft operations - Maintain system safety, security and environmental protection - Enable modeling and simulation of air transportation operations Benefits: - Enable more people and goods to travel faster and farther with fewer delays - In alliance with the FAA, increase air traffic management effectiveness, flexibility and efficiency, while maintaining safety - Enable use of small aircraft at under-utilized, rural/suburban airports to offload congestion at large, urban airports - Develop capability to perform trade-off assessments of future air transportation systems concepts and technologies Airspace Systems Program ## Technology Demonstration Projects in Vehicle Systems Program ZERO EMISSIONS AIRCRAFT — Start by demonstrating an aircraft powered by hydrogen fuels cells. SUBSONIC NOISE REDUCTION — Start by demonstrating a 50% noise reduction compared to 1997 state of the art. SONIC BOOM REDUCTION — Start by demonstrating technology that could enable an acceptable sonic boom level. HIGH ALTITUDE LONG ENDURANCE REMOTELY OPERATED AIRCRAFT — Start by demonstrating a 14-day duration high-altitude, remotely operated aircraft. - NASA and other agencies should sustain the most attractive noise reduction research to a technology readiness level high enough to reduce the technical risk and make it worthwhile for industry to complete development and deploy new technologies in commercial products, even if this occurs at the expense of stopping other research at lower technology readiness levels. Review of NASA’s Aerospace Technology Enterprise, NRC ASEB - NASA should focus new initiatives in supersonic technology development ... airframe configurations to reduce sonic boom intensity, especially with regard to the formation of shaped waves and the human response to shaped waves (to allow developing an acceptable regulatory standard). Commercial Supersonic Technology:The Way Ahead, NRC ASEB - The use of fuel cell technology to create an all-electric, zero-emission aviation propulsion system is a paradigm-shifting approach consistent with NASA’s mission. The committee ... urges NASA to pursue future work in this area, which leads to the long-range goal of a zero-emissions propulsion system. Review of NASA’s Aerospace Technology Enterprise, NRC ASEB - The committee fully expects that the Helios (HALE ROA) vehicle will yield significant results for the earth sciences portion of NASA, its primary customer. The committee further applauds NASA for innovative thinking in identifying other possible uses and other possible markets for the aircraft, such as serving as a low-cost, high-altitude (relatively) stationary telecommunications. Review of NASA’s Aerospace Technology Enterprise, NRC ASEB Technology Demonstration Projects in Vehicle Systems Program ## Foundational Research Program Desiderata - Need to ensure ability to define next demonstrations in our portfolio - Need to provide basis for “seed corn” research - Need to corporatize management of aeronautics facilities Program Attributes - Approximately 20% of available ARMD funds will be used to instantiate a foundational research activity - A percentage of this program will be devoted exclusively to merit-selected university research in aeronautics to support long-term aeronautical goals - Approximately $25M will be used as the basis for an aeronautical test project ## NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate Field Centers NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) Mountain View, CA Current Replacement Value: $2.0B Staffing: 1375 Civil Servants Core Competencies Astrobiology Air Transportation System Entry/Descent/Landing Systems Intelligent/Adaptive Systems NASA Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC) Edwards, CA Current Replacement Value: $0.3B Staffing: 568 Civil Servants Core Competencies Atmospheric Flight Research and Test NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) Cleveland, OH Current Replacement Value: $2.6B Staffing: 1875 Civil Servants Core Competencies In-Space Propulsion (Including Nuclear Systems) Aero-propulsion Systems Power & Energy Conversion Systems - NEED LANGLEY - INFO NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) Hampton, VA Current Replacement Value: $2.5B Staffing: 2109 Civil Servants Core Competencies Sensors and Instruments Aerosciences Entry/Descent/Landing Systems Aerospace Materials & Manufact Systems Analysis/Engineering & Safety NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate Field Centers ## Institutional The overall Vehicle Systems budget may be reduced up to 40% at GRC (Ohio) and 50% at LaRC (Virginia). Work will increasingly be awarded through competitive processes, and will fund less Civil Service positions by the end of FY 06 at the aeronautics research centers, with primary impact at GRC and LaRC. Test Facilities GRC and LaRC will lack funding support for almost all major test facilities in FY 06 (Total Impact: 20 facilities), creating potential issues with DoD and industry. We have adopted, therefore, a corporate management approach to deal with this issue. Programmatic Terminates the Ultra Efficient Engine Technology (UEET) program at GRC by the end of FY 05. The Advanced Aircraft Program (AAP) and the Rotorcraft research will be terminated in FY 06. - The overall Vehicle Systems budget may be reduced up to 40% at GRC (Ohio) and 50% at LaRC (Virginia). - Work will increasingly be awarded through competitive processes, and will fund _less_ Civil Service positions by the end of FY 06 at the aeronautics research centers, with primary impact at GRC and LaRC. _Test Facilities_ - GRC and LaRC will lack funding support for almost all major test facilities in FY 06 (Total Impact: 20 facilities), creating potential issues with DoD and industry. We have adopted, therefore, a corporate management approach to deal with this issue. _Programmatic_ - Terminates the Ultra Efficient Engine Technology (UEET) program at GRC by the end of FY 05. - The Advanced Aircraft Program (AAP) and the Rotorcraft research will be terminated in FY 06. Institutional Impacts Notes: Agency Aeronautics Investment Levels The Aeronautics Budget in FY 06 reflects over a $100M decrease from the FY 05 Budget level and over a $200M decrease in FY07 & beyond (i.e. 12% – 25% budget reductions)– with a 5 year reduction totaling $850M ## Vision for Space Exploration has been incorporated into revised National Space Policy. Many, many reports and commissions from the past ten years call for a National Aeronautics Policy Recommend uniting Congressional delegations and initiating informed national dialog with Executive Branch, industry, and academia. - Many, many reports and commissions from the past ten years call for a National Aeronautics Policy - Recommend uniting Congressional delegations and initiating informed national dialog with Executive Branch, industry, and academia. National Aero Strategy ## FY 04 Accomplishments Demonstrated Synthetic Vision Systems that increase a pilot’s situational awareness and lower the probability of visibility-related accidents. Performed in-service evaluations of a Turbulence Prediction and Warning System designed to give flight crews enough advance warning to avoid turbulence or advise passengers to sit down and buckle up to avoid injury. Released icing analysis tools to the aviation community that will lead to safer aircraft and aircraft sub-system designs with respect to operations in icing conditions Developed and evaluated a prototype air traffic decision support tool to detect rogue aircraft and provide emergency response data. FY 05 Highlights Demonstrate improvements to flight critical systems that prevent loss of control. Demonstrate next generation cockpit weather information systems. Evaluate advanced fire and explosion protection systems. Demonstrate confidential system for collecting security problems from aviation system users. FY06 Plans Demonstrate a voluntary aviation safety information sharing process to be used by the aviation community for identification and resolution of safety issues. Complete the assessment of the Security Program technology portfolio with regard to risks, costs, and benefits and project the impact of the technologies on reducing the vulnerability of the air transportation system. - Demonstrated Synthetic Vision Systems that increase a pilot’s situational awareness and lower the probability of visibility-related accidents. - Performed in-service evaluations of a Turbulence Prediction and Warning System designed to give flight crews enough advance warning to avoid turbulence or advise passengers to sit down and buckle up to avoid injury. - Released icing analysis tools to the aviation community that will lead to safer aircraft and aircraft sub-system designs with respect to operations in icing conditions - Developed and evaluated a prototype air traffic decision support tool to detect rogue aircraft and provide emergency response data. FY 05 Highlights - Demonstrate improvements to flight critical systems that prevent loss of control. - Demonstrate next generation cockpit weather information systems. - Evaluate advanced fire and explosion protection systems. - Demonstrate confidential system for collecting security problems from aviation system users. FY06 Plans - Demonstrate a voluntary aviation safety information sharing process to be used by the aviation community for identification and resolution of safety issues. - Complete the assessment of the Security Program technology portfolio with regard to risks, costs, and benefits and project the impact of the technologies on reducing the vulnerability of the air transportation system. Aviation Safety & Security ## FY 04 Accomplishments Successfully completed the Advanced Air Transportation Technologies (AATT) project which provided a wide variety of decision support tools and technologies to the FAA, airlines, and industry. Demonstrated the feasibility of pilots safely separating themselves from other air traffic while landing at non-radar equipped airports under low visibility conditions Virtual Airspace Modeling & Simulation (VAMS) Air transportation system modeling and analysis tools are being used to assess technologies and procedures for use by the Joint Planning and Development Office Multi-Center Traffic Management Advisor (McTMA) successfully evaluated by FAA in operational environment FY 05 Highlights Conduct Small Aircraft Transportation System (SATS) integrated technology demonstration in an operational environment Complete analysis of revolutionary operational concepts using VAMS modeling and simulation capabilities Defining a detailed operational concept of wake vortex prediction and avoidance system Conducting and initial concept evaluation for the Eurocontrol/FAA/NASA Future Communications Study supporting the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) policy development FY06 Plans Complete development of VAMS simulation and modeling toolbox for the evaluation of advanced operational concepts for the National Airspace System (NAS) Define aircraft climb advisory tool prototype which will provide greater capacity in Procedural Airspace (such as Oceanic Airspace) Complete development of the System-Wide Evaluation and Planning Tool (SWEPT) for use by the FAA System Command Center for strategic planning of flight operations Complete the Eurocontrol/FAA/NASA Future Communications Study - Successfully completed the Advanced Air Transportation Technologies (AATT) project which provided a wide variety of decision support tools and technologies to the FAA, airlines, and industry. - Demonstrated the feasibility of pilots safely separating themselves from other air traffic while landing at non-radar equipped airports under low visibility conditions - Virtual Airspace Modeling & Simulation (VAMS) Air transportation system modeling and analysis tools are being used to assess technologies and procedures for use by the Joint Planning and Development Office - Multi-Center Traffic Management Advisor (McTMA) successfully evaluated by FAA in operational environment FY 05 Highlights - Conduct Small Aircraft Transportation System (SATS) integrated technology demonstration in an operational environment - Complete analysis of revolutionary operational concepts using VAMS modeling and simulation capabilities - Defining a detailed operational concept of wake vortex prediction and avoidance system - Conducting and initial concept evaluation for the Eurocontrol/FAA/NASA Future Communications Study supporting the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) policy development FY06 Plans - Complete development of VAMS simulation and modeling toolbox for the evaluation of advanced operational concepts for the National Airspace System (NAS) - Define aircraft climb advisory tool prototype which will provide greater capacity in Procedural Airspace (such as Oceanic Airspace) - Complete development of the System-Wide Evaluation and Planning Tool (SWEPT) for use by the FAA System Command Center for strategic planning of flight operations - Complete the Eurocontrol/FAA/NASA Future Communications Study Airspace Systems	en
converted_docs	287188	![](media/image1.png){width="7.033333333333333in" height="1.1965277777777779in"} U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geologic Map of Central (Interior) Alaska compiled by Frederic H. Wilson1, James H. Dover1, Dwight C. Bradley1, Florence R. Weber2, Thomas K. Bundtzen3, and Peter J. Haeussler1 1998 Text to accompany U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report OF 98-133 Prepared in cooperation with the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil and Gas and Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. ^1^ U.S. Geological Survey, 4200 University Dr., Anchorage AK 99508-4667; ^2^ U.S. Geological Survey, P.O. Box 80586, Fairbanks, AK 99708-0586; ^3^ Pacific Rim Geological Consulting, P.O. Box 81906, Fairbanks, AK 99708-1906 Geologic Map of Central (Interior) Alaska Table of Contents Introduction 1\ Acknowledgements 2 DESCRIPTION OF MAP UNITS\ GENERAL UNITS bu Bedrock of unknown type or age 3 QUATERNARY AND LATE TERTIARY ROCKS AND DEPOSITS Qs Surficial deposits, undifferentiated 3\ Qv Volcanic rocks, undivided 3\ QTv Volcanic rocks, undivided 3\ QTi Intrusive rocks, undivided 3 TERTIARY ROCKS\ Sedimentary rocks Tsu Sedimentary rocks, undivided 3\ Tk Kenai Group, undivided 3\ Tsf Sterling Formation 4\ Tkb Beluga Formation 4\ Tty Tyonek Formation 4\ Tn Nenana Gravel 4\ Tcb Coal-bearing rocks 4\ Ttw Tsadaka, West Foreland, and Wishbone Formations, undivided 4\ Tts Tsadaka Formation 4\ Twf West Foreland Formation 4\ Tw Wishbone Formation 4\ Tvs Volcanic and sedimentary rocks, undivided 4\ Tfv Fluviatile sedimentary rocks and subordinate volcanic rocks 5\ Tch Chickaloon Formation 5\ Tar Arkose Ridge Formation 5\ Tovs Orca Group, undivided 5\ Tos Sedimentary rocks of the Orca Group 5\ Toc Conglomerate of the Orca Group 5\ Tov Volcanic rocks of the Orca Group, undivided 5 Igneous rocks\ Volcanic and hypabyssal rocks Tvu Volcanic rocks, undivided 5\ Trs Rhyolitic volcanic and sedimentary rocks 5\ Tb Basalt 6\ Thf Hypabyssal felsic and intermediate intrusive rocks 6\ Thm Hypabyssal mafic intrusive rocks 6 Pliocene Thd Hornblende dacite 6 Miocene Tba Basaltic andesite 6 Oligocene and Eocene Tvr Crystal and crystal-lithic ash-flow tuff 6\ Tvb Andesite and basalt 6 Paleocene Tcv Volcanic rocks of the Cantwell Formation 7 Plutonic rocks Tiv Granitic and volcanic rocks, undivided 7 Oligocene Togr Granite 7 Oligocene or Eocene Toegr Granitic rocks 7\ Toem Granodiorite to tonalite 7 Eocene Tegr Granite and granodiorite 7\ Td Felsic intrusive rocks 7 Paleocene Tpgr Granitic rocks 8\ Thgd Granodiorite and other intermediate plutonic rocks 8\ Tgl Gabbro 8 TERTIARY AND/OR CRETACEOUS\ Sedimentary rocks TKcg Conglomerate, sandstone, and lignite 8 Igneous rocks\ Volcanic and hypabyssal rocks TKv Flows, tuff, and breccia, undivided 8\ TKd Dikes and subvolcanic rocks of intermediate composition 8\ TKgp Hypabyssal granite porphyry dikes and rhyolitic sills, and plugs 8\ TKvr Rhyolite and related rocks 8\ TKvi Andesite and related rocks 9\ TKiv Mafic to intermediate volcano-plutonic complexes 9 Intrusive rocks TKi Intrusive rocks, undivided 9\ TKg Granitic rocks 9\ TKgd Granodiorite, tonalite, and monzonite dikes, and stocks 9\ TKqd Quartz diorite and diorite dikes and stocks 9\ TKl Lamprophyre, alkali gabbro, and alkali diorite 9\ TKgb Gabbro and leucogabbro 9\ TDg Gabbro 9 Metamorphic rocks TKc Melange or cataclastite of the Orca Group 9\ TKgg Gneissose granitic rocks 9\ TPza Amphibolite facies metamorphic rocks 10 UNDIVIDED MESOZOIC ROCKS\ Sedimentary rocks KT[r]{.smallcaps}g Gemuk Group 10 Igneous rocks Mzi Intrusive rocks 10\ Mzum Ultramafic and associated rocks 10 Metamorphic rocks Mzsa Schist and amphibolite 11\ Mzpca Phyllite, pelitic schist, calc-schist, and amphibolite of the MacLaren\ metamorphic belt 11 CRETACEOUS ROCKS\ Sedimentary rocks Kcs Cantwell Formation, sedimentary rocks subunit 11\ Kms Minto unit 11\ Km Matanuska Formation 11\ Kuskokwim Group\ Kk Kuskokwim Group, deep marine rocks 12\ Kkn Kuskokwim Group, non-marine and shallow-marine rocks 12\ \ Sedimentary rocks of the Yukon-Koyukuk region \-- introduction 12\ Kme Melozitna sequence 12\ Kss Nonmarine sandstone, quartz conglomerate, shale, and siltstone 13\ Kqc Quartz-pebble conglomerate 13\ Kcg Igneous pebble-cobble conglomerate 13\ Kvm Volcanic graywacke and conglomerate 13\ Knb Norton Bay sequence 13\ Kshn Nonmarine shale, siltstone, and sandstone 13\ Ksse Marine sandstone and siltstone 13\ Kmm Marine mudstone and sandstone 13\ Kgw Graywacke sandstone and mudstone 14\ Kwcf Wilber Creek flysch 14\ Kvgm Volcanic graywacke and mudstone 14\ Ksm Quartz-carbonate sandstone and pebbly mudstone 14\ Knl Nelchina Limestone 14\ Kb Berg Creek Formation 14 Melange KT[r]{.smallcaps}m McHugh Complex 15\ Kmar Melanges of the Alaska Range 15\ T[r]{.smallcaps}Sl Limestone blocks 15\ mlu Ultramafic and associated rocks 15 Igneous rocks\ Volcanic and hypabyssal rocks Kvl Volcanic rocks 16\ Ktg Volcaniclastic rocks 16\ Kve Andesite and related rocks 16 Intrusive rocks Kg Granitic rocks 16\ Kmum Mafic and ultramafic rocks 16\ Ktt Leucotonalite and trondhjemite 16 Metamorphic rocks Kvs Metasedimentary rocks of the Valdez Group 17\ Kvv Metavolcanic rocks of Valdez Group 17 CRETACEOUS AND/OR JURASSIC\ Sedimentary rocks KJw Wolverine quartzite 17\ KJwc Wilber Creek flysch and Wolverine quartzite, undivided 17\ KJs Argillite, chert, sandstone, and limestone 17\ KJf Kahiltna flysch sequence 17\ KJfk Flysch sequence 18\ KJfn Flysch sequence 18\ KJfm Metasedimentary rocks 18\ KJcg Conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone, shale, and volcanic rocks 18\ KJvr Vrain unit 19 Intrusive rocks KJg Granitic rocks 19 Metamorphic rocks KJhc Haley Creek metaplutonic and metasedimentary rocks 19 JURASSIC\ Sedimentary rocks Jn Naknek Formation 19\ Jct Chinitna Formation, Tuxedni Group, and coeval sedimentary rocks 19\ Jc Chinitna Formation 20\ Jkt Kotsina Conglomerate 20\ Jtx Tuxedni Group 20 Igneous rocks Jmu Mafic and ultramafic rocks 20\ Jtr Trondhjemite 21\ Ji Alaska-Aleutian Range and Chitina Valley batholiths, undifferentiated 21 Metamorphic rocks Jsch Greenschist and blueschist 21\ Jps Pelitic schist 22\ JPaur Uranatina metaplutonic complex 22 JURASSIC AND TRIASSIC\ Sedimentary rocks JT[r]{.smallcaps}lm Limestone and marble 22\ JT[r]{.smallcaps}mc McCarthy Formation 22 Igneous rocks JT[r]{.smallcaps}tk Talkeetna Formation 22 TRIASSIC\ Sedimentary rocks T[r]{.smallcaps}ls Chitistone and Nizina Limestones, undivided 22\ T[r]{.smallcaps}sl Spiculite and sandy limestone 22\ T[r]{.smallcaps}cs Calcareous sedimentary rocks 22\ T[r]{.smallcaps}cg Conglomerate and volcanic sandstone 23\ T[r]{.smallcaps}ps Phosphatic shale and limestone 23\ T[r]{.smallcaps}sc Black shale and chert 23 Igneous Rocks\ Volcanic rocks T[r]{.smallcaps}n Nikolai Greenstone and related rocks 23 Plutonic rocks T[r]{.smallcaps}c Carbonatite 23\ T[r]{.smallcaps}gb Gabbro, diabase, and metagabbro 24 Metamorphic rocks T[r]{.smallcaps}nm Metavolcanic and associated metasedimentary rocks 24 MESOZOIC AND PALEOZOIC\ Assemblages and Sequences Chulitna sequence \-- introduction 24\ JT[r]{.smallcaps}su Red and brown sedimentary rocks and basalt 24\ JT[r]{.smallcaps}ct Crystal tuff, argillite, chert, graywacke, and limestone 24\ T[r]{.smallcaps}lb Limestone and basalt sequence 24\ T[r]{.smallcaps}r Red beds 25\ T[r]{.smallcaps}Dv Volcanic and sedimentary rocks 25\ Dsb Serpentinite, basalt, chert and gabbro 25 Oceanic rocks of the Seventymile, Angayucham, Tozitna, and Innoko\ assemblages \-- introduction 25\ \ Seventymile assemblage\ JPsu Ultramafic rocks 25\ JPzsgs Greenstone and chert 25 Angayucham assemblage\ Jaum Ultramafic rocks 25\ JMab Basalt and chert 26 Tozitna assemblage north of the Kaltag Fault\ JMtru Greenstone, chert, and ultramafic rocks, undivided 26\ JT[r]{.smallcaps}tmu Mafic and ultramafic rocks 26\ T[r]{.smallcaps}Mts Sedimentary rocks 26 Tozitna assemblage south of the Kaltag Fault\ JMtu Mafic, ultramafic, and sedimentary rocks, undivided 27\ Jtu Ultramafic rocks, undivided 27\ JPztm Mafic and ultramafic rocks, undivided 27\ T[r]{.smallcaps}Mtqp Quartzite and phyllite 27\ T[r]{.smallcaps}Mtsu Sedimentary rocks, undivided 27 Innoko assemblage\ Jium Ultramafic and mafic rocks, undivided 27\ JT[r]{.smallcaps}ta Cherty tuff, crystal and lithic tuffs,\ and volcanic breccia 27\ T[r]{.smallcaps}Mis Sandstone, grit, and argillite 28\ T[r]{.smallcaps}Mica Chert, argillite, and volcaniclastic rocks 28\ Pig Graywacke 28\ MDl Fine-grained limestone 28 Stratigraphic sequences Mystic sequence\ JDm Mystic stratigraphic sequence, undivided 29\ JT[r]{.smallcaps}tv Tatina River Volcanics and equivalent units 29\ PMl Younger limestone 29\ PDsc Sheep Creek Formation and correlative siliciclastic units 29\ Dsc Shale and chert 29\ Dml Older limestone 29 Mystic and Dillinger stratigraphic sequences, undivided\ JCmd Mystic and Dillinger stratigraphic sequences, undivided 30\ DSmdl Unnamed limestone 30 Sedimentary rocks T[r]{.smallcaps}Ps Sedimentary rocks, undivided 30\ T[r]{.smallcaps}Pas Flysch-like sedimentary rocks 30 Igneous rocks MzPzi Intrusive and volcanic rocks, undivided 31\ MzZum Ultramafic and mafic rocks, undivided 31 Metamorphic rocks JPzk Kakhonak Complex 31 PALEOZOIC\ Assemblages and Sequences Skolai Group \-- introduction 31\ Pe Eagle Creek Formation 32\ PPasc Station Creek and Slana Spur Formations, and equivalent rocks 32\ Pat Tetelna Volcanics 32\ Pmi Shallow stocks, dikes, and sills 32\ PPagi Ahtell pluton 32\ PPad Diorite complex 32\ Pagb Gabbro and orthogneiss 32\ PPast Strelna metamorphic complex 33\ PPaskm Marble 33 Dillinger and Nixon Fork sequences \-- introduction 33\ Dillinger sequence\ DCd Dillinger sequence, undivided 33\ Dsbr Barren Ridge Limestone and correlative units 34\ Stc Terra Cotta Mountains Sandstone and correlative units 34\ SCpl Post River Sandstone, Lyman Hills Formation, and\ correlative units 34 Nixon Fork sequence\ DZn Shallow-marine carbonate units of Holitna basin area, undivided 34\ DSwc Whirlwind Creek Formation and unnamed correlative units 34\ Spf Paradise Fork Formation and unnamed correlative rocks 34\ Ont Novi Mountain and Telsitna Formations, and unnamed\ correlative rocks 35\ CZds Unnamed dolostone, sandstone, siltstone 35 Sedimentary rocks Pzlc Limestone and chert 35\ Ps Argillite, siltstone, sandstone, and minor conglomerate 35\ PDms Sedimentary rocks 35\ Mgq Globe quartzite 35\ Dps Phyllite, slate, siliceous siltstone, and argillite 36\ Dcb Cascaden Ridge, Beaver Bend, and correlative rocks 36\ Dq Quail unit 36\ Dtr Troublesome unit and possibly correlative rocks 36\ Ds Schwatka limestone unit 36\ Dsv Volcanic part of Schwatka unit 36\ DSlc Lost Creek unit 37\ DSl Limestone 37\ DSt Tolovana Limestone 37\ SZa Amy Creek unit 37\ Oc Chert 38\ Ocl Limestone 38 Igneous rocks Pzvs Volcanic and sedimentary rocks 38\ Ofc Fossil Creek Volcanics 38 Metamorphic rocks PMpc Phyllite and chert 38\ Dy Yanert Fork sequence and correlative rocks 38\ Dys Fine-grained schistose sedimentary rocks 38\ Dyv Fine-grained schistose volcanic rocks 39\ Pzsc Spruce Creek sequence and correlative rocks 39\ Pzlsl Schist, phyllite, limestone, and greenstone 39 PALEOZOIC AND PRECAMBRIAN\ Sequences and Complexes Yukon-Tanana, Alaska Range, and Ruby metamorphic complexes \-- introduction 39\ Yukon-Tanana and northern Alaska Range metamorphic complex\ Pzydm Dolostone and marble 39\ Pze Eclogite-bearing schist 40\ MDyao Augen orthogneiss 40\ MDt Totatlanika Schist 40\ MDtm Mylonitic Totatlanika Schist 40\ Pzk Keevy Peak Formation 40\ Pzkcp Calcareous and phyllitic rocks 41\ PzZym Mafic schist 41\ PzZyqs Quartz- and pelitic schist of the Yukon-Tanana Upland 41\ PzZaqs Pelitic and quartzose schist of the Alaska Range 41\ PzZysa Schist and amphibolite 42\ PzZyg Gneiss 42\ PzZygs Gneiss, schist, and quartzite 42 Ruby metamorphic complex\ Pzrm Marble 42\ Pzrmi Metamorphosed mafic igneous rocks 42\ MDrao Augen orthogneiss 43\ Dm Marble 43\ PzZrqs Pelitic and quartzitic schist 43\ PzZrpg Quartzofeldspathic paragneiss and quartzite 43 Sedimentary rocks CZw Wickersham grit, undivided 43\ CZwl Wickersham limestone 44\ CZwa Argillaceous upper unit 44\ Zwg Gritty lower unit 44 PRECAMBRIAN\ Metamorphic rocks ZYnm Metamorphic basement rocks of the Nixon Fork\ sequence, undivided 44\ ZYns Pelitic schist 44\ ZYnc Calc-schist 44\ ZYnv Metavolcanic rocks 45\ Ynqd Meta-quartz diorite 45\ Xi Idono metamorphic complex 45 References cited 46\ List of map sources 56\ Anchorage 56\ Big Delta 56\ Circle 56\ Fairbanks 56\ Gulkana 56\ Healy 57\ Iditarod 57\ Kantishna River 57\ Kateel River 57\ Lime Hills 57\ Livengood 57\ McGrath 58\ Medfra 58\ Mount Hayes 58\ Mount McKinley 58\ Melozitna 59\ Nulato 59\ Ophir 59\ Ruby 59\ Sleetmute 59\ Talkeetna 60\ Talkeetna Mountains 60\ Tanana 60\ Tyonek 60\ Valdez 61 Index of map units 62 Appendix A. Exploratory drillholes in Central (Interior) Alaska A-1\ (after p. 63) Geologic Map of Central (Interior) Alaska compiled by > Frederic H. Wilson, James H. Dover, Dwight C. Bradley, Florence R. > Weber, Thomas K. Bundtzen, and Peter J. Haeussler Introduction This map and associated digital databases are the result of a compilation and reinterpretation of published and unpublished 1:250,000- and limited 1:125,000- and 1:63,360-scale mapping. The map area covers roughly 416,000 km2 (134,000 mi2) and encompasses 25 1:250,000-scale quadrangles in central Alaska. The compilation was done as part of the U.S. Geological Survey National Surveys and Analysis project, whose goal is nationwide assemble geologic, geochemical, geophysical, and other data. This map is an early product of an effort that will eventually encompass all of Alaska, and is the result of an agreement with the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil And Gas, to provide data on interior basins in Alaska. Two geophysical maps that cover the identical area have been published earlier: Bouguer gravity map of Interior Alaska (Meyer and others, 1996); and Merged aeromagnetic map of Interior Alaska (Meyer and Saltus, 1995). Compilation of this map began in September 1996, using published 1:250,000-scale mapping. As the project progressed, published maps at other scales and unpublished mapping were incorporated as we built an integrated map. Description and correlation of geologic units to produce map units was an iterative process that continued through technical review to publication. Digital files of the final compilation of each of the 25 1:250,000-scale quadrangles are provided on this CD-ROM. Cited in the text and on the map are the map sources we used; additional map sources are listed in Galloway and Laney (1994). It takes little imagination to realize that many compromises have been made in strongly held beliefs to allow construction of this compilation. Yet even our willingness to make interpretations and compromises does not allow us to resolve mapping conflicts in some areas. Therefore, there are a number of areas on the map where it was necessary to separate map units by \"quadrangle boundary faults.\" More time and fieldwork may allow resolution of these conflicts. We believe that this map and its problems present a very good argument to justify and support further work in this area and elsewhere in Alaska. Nonetheless, we hope that geologists who have mapped in central Alaska will recognize that in incorporating their work, our regional correlations have required generalizing and lumping of units. Lead efforts on the map compilation were as follows: Cenozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary rocks and igneous rocks, Frederic Wilson; Paleozoic sedimentary rocks, Dwight Bradley; metamorphic rocks, James Dover; with supporting efforts for all rock types in the northeast and central part of the map area by Florence Weber; the southwest part of the map area by Tom Bundtzen; and the Tyonek area by Peter Haeussler. Compiling this map was complicated because the original source maps were made by different generations of geologists, mapping with very different ideas. A few of the older maps were completed before the concepts of plate tectonics or accreted (suspect) terranes. On the other hand, some of the more recent maps were so governed by terrane analysis that conventional stratigraphic nomenclature was not used and is obscured. For the present compilation, we adopted a traditional stratigraphic approach and have avoided use of the controversial and inconsistently defined term \"terrane.\" Our decision to adopt a traditional approach is reflected in a map that emphasizes age and lithology of map units, rather than differences among fault-bounded packages of rocks. For a map of the present scope and scale, the traditional approach seems to have more to offer to a wider variety of users. It is far easier to construct a terrane map from a traditional geologic map than vice-versa. One conception of the map area from a terrane point of view is that of Silberling and others (1994), shown as figure 2 on sheet 3 of this compilation. Another can be found in Nokleberg and others (1994). It will be apparent from examination of figure 2 that our lumpings of units results in a map having divisions only loosely similar to Silberling and others (1994) Some of our groupings of map units use terms previously applied by other geologists to terranes. We instead use such terms as \"sequence\" \"assemblage,\" and \"complex\" for groups of rock units characterized by a common history or environment. Sequences, as used here, are groups of sedimentary rock units that display a coherent and consistent stratigraphy and association. Assemblages consist of a mixture of sedimentary, igneous, and(or) metamorphic rock units within a still recognizable stratigraphic framework that may be tectonically internally disrupted. Complexes are generally restricted to igneous or metamorphic rock assemblages and may have no apparent stratigraphic framework. An exception, however is the McHugh Complex, a tectonic melange in southern Alaska whose name is in common use. In general, where terminology for lithologic packages of rock units has come into common usage and where we could justify or support its continued usage, we have used that terminology. An example of such a lithologic association is the Nixon fork sequence. The ease with which this is done is in part dependent on our knowledge or perceived understanding of the rock units. This packaging occurs at either extreme of our spectrum of knowledge. Thus, packaging very old metamorphic rocks is relatively easy because we don\'t know any better. In other cases, such as the Nixon Fork sequence, we have reasonably good constraints on the nature of the rock units and can confidently package them. In the following descriptions, units are generally listed in chronological order from youngest to oldest. In the unit descriptions, the age of the units, rather than their apparent stratigraphic position is given after the unit label and name. In the text of the descriptions, lower and upper is used to denote stratigraphic position, whereas late and early indicate age. Within each major age category, sequences, assemblages, and complexes are listed first, followed by sedimentary, igneous, and metamorphic rock units, listed in order of increasing age. In general, metamorphic rock units are listed in increasing order of their inferred or interpreted protolith age, which in many cases is subject to significant uncertainty. In the limited number of cases for which we cannot interpret a protolith age the metamorphic rocks are listed by increasing age of metamorphism, either known or inferred. Acknowledgements There is no way that a compilation on this scale could be done without the assistance of many geologists, far more knowledgeable about the geology of various regions of Alaska than we are. We have benefited greatly from the opportunity to use unpublished mapping by and to consult with Grant Abbott, Robert M. Chapman, Julie A. Dumoulin, Cynthia Dusel-Bacon, Bruce M. Gamble, Anita Harris, Marti L. Miller, Madelyn Millholland, Warren J. Nokleberg, Donald H. Richter, William W. Patton, Jr., Gary R. Winkler, and Wesley K. Wallace. In addition, support and encouragement from many of our peers, including Donald Grybeck, Thomas D. Light, and Alison B. Till, have made what at times seemed an overwhelming task, seem more possible and desirable. The project to produce this map had short deadlines and would not have been possible without the able support of Nora Shew and her GIS support staff. Catherine G. Baxter, Kelly M. Brunt, Nathan S. Pannkuk, James D. Hall, S.M. Weems, Dolly Perea, and David Dempsey each made invaluable contributions to the project and helped us to meet our deadlines. The Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil and Gas provided strong encouragement and financial support to help with the preparation of this map; its assistance was invaluable in seeing to it that the map was completed. In addition, organizational support from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys is greatly appreciated. Particularly, support and unpublished data made available by Ellie E. Harris and Rocky R. Reifenstuhl have helped to improve the map significantly. Technical and editorial review of all or part of the manuscript by John C. Reed, Jr. and Henry C. Berg were greatly appreciated and have helped to improve the text and map. DESCRIPTION OF MAP UNITS \[Note: Quadrangles are 1:250,000 scale unless otherwise noted.\] GENERAL UNITS bu Bedrock of unknown type or age\-- Includes rubble of metasiltstone and chert in the Kantishna River quadrangle and other areas of unknown bedrock throughout map area \[symbol 10\] unit 99 QUATERNARY AND LATE TERTIARY ROCKS AND DEPOSITS Qs Surficial deposits, undifferentiated (Quaternary)\-- Unconsolidated silt, sand, and gravel of fluvial, glacial, colluvial, and other origins \[symbol 21\] 100 Qv Volcanic rocks, undivided (Quaternary)\-- Basalt to rhyolite flows, pyroclastic deposits, lahar deposits, and other volcanic deposits. Located in the south central part of map area. Largely associated with the Wrangell group of volcanoes in the Gulkana quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, in press), but also includes the northernmost of the Cook Inlet volcanoes in the Tyonek quadrangle (Miller and Smith, 1976; Magoon and others, 1976) \[symbol 12\] 300 305 QTv Volcanic rocks, undivided (Quaternary and Late Tertiary)\-- Includes the Wrangell Lava consisting chiefly of basalt and andesite in the southeastern part of the map area and olivine basalt and vesicular andesite in the northern part of the map area (Nokleberg and others, in press) \[symbol 410\] QTi Intrusive rocks, undivided (Quaternary and Late Tertiary)\-- Rhyolitic to andesite domes, dikes swarms and plugs and other intrusive rocks exposed chiefly in the Wrangell Mountains (Nokleberg and others, in press) \[symbol 78\] TERTIARY ROCKS\ Sedimentary rocks Tsu Sedimentary rocks, undivided (Tertiary)\-- Includes a number of different units mapped in various areas throughout the map area:\ In the Healy quadrangle, unit Ts (Csejtey and others, 1992) consists of a sequence of poorly consolidated fluviatile dark-gray shale, yellowish-gray sandstone, siltstone, and pebble conglomerate of possible Eocene to Miocene age that may be in part correlative with the Tertiary coal-bearing sequence (unit Tcb).\ In the Mount Hayes quadrangle, units Ts and Tsc of (Nokleberg and others, 1992a), consist of (unit Ts) brown sandstone and graywacke and interbedded conglomerate and argillite of possible Oligocene to Pliocene age and (unit Tsc) light-colored, fine-grained, poorly sorted sandstone, of Eocene to Miocene age, locally containing interbedded siltstone, pebbly sandstone, pebble to cobble conglomerate, and sparse, thin coal layers. Unit Tc of Nokleberg and others (1992a) consists of poorly sorted, crudely bedded to massive, polymictic conglomerate and subordinate sandstone. Assigned age of unit Tc is Eocene? because unit locally overlies volcanic rocks of Eocene age.\ In the Circle quadrangle (Foster and others, 1983), unit Tcs consists of gray or tan conglomerate that grades into gray, tan, or iron-oxide stained sandstone.\ In the Big Delta quadrangle (Weber and others, 1978), consists of light-gray poorly consolidated, poorly bedded fine to very coarse conglomerate, olive-gray, brown, or orange-brown coarse- to fine-grained sandstone and olive-gray siltstone.\ In the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle, unit Tsu, consists of fluviatile conglomerate, sandstone, and claystone which contain a few interbeds of lignitic coal and which may be correlative with the Chickaloon Formation (Csejtey and others, 1978)\ In the McGrath quadrangle, consists of thick- to thin-bedded moderately indurated sandstone interbedded with poorly indurated, laminated, fissile, carbonaceous shale and fine-grained sandstone (Bundtzen and others, 1997a). Also included in map unit is limestone conglomerate of the McGrath quadrangle, unit Tcl of Bundtzen and others (1997a). Assigned age is pre-middle Eocene for the sandstone and shale unit as unit is intruded by a middle Eocene dike, whereas the limestone conglomerate unit is assigned an age of late Paleocene? to Oligocene \[symbol 88\] 500 unit Ts, HE002; GU002; units Ts, Tc, and Tsc, MH002; unit Tcs, CI002; BD002; unit Tsu, TK002; units Ts, Tcl, MG002; unit Tclg, MG003 Tk Kenai Group, undivided (Pliocene to Oligocene)\-- Poorly to moderately indurated pebble to cobble conglomerate, cross-bedded medium-grained sandstone to granule conglomerate, clay layers, and coal seams as much as 5 m thick (Solie and others, 1991). Consists of rocks assigned to the Beluga, Sterling, and Tyonek Formations and other unassigned fluvatile sedimentary rocks of Pliocene to Oligocene age. Units are typically estuarine and nonmarine clastic sedimentary rocks. Tertiary formations assigned to Kenai Group in the Cook Inlet basin by Calderwood and Fackler (1972). Locally subdivided into: \[symbol 85\] 560 Tsf Sterling Formation (Pliocene)\-- Orange, light-tan, or light-gray, massive-bedded, coarse conglomerate \[symbol 85+13\] 540 Tkb Beluga Formation (Miocene)\-- Sandstone, siltstone, and coal \[symbol 85+14\] 545 Tty Tyonek Formation (Miocene)\-- Carbonaceous sandstone, siltstone, shale, and claystone. Locally divided into two members, a sandstone member consisting of about 80 percent tan to light-gray sandstone, 20 percent light- to medium-gray siltstone and claystone, and less than 1 percent conglomerate, coal, and volcanic ash. Conglomerate member consists of 40 percent conglomerate, 20 percent sandstone, and less than 40 percent siltstone, claystone, and coal. Also includes the Hemlock Conglomerate of Oligocene age where units are undivided \[symbol 85+15\] 600 Tn Nenana Gravel (Pliocene and late(?) Miocene)\-- Yellowish-gray to reddish-brown well-sorted, poorly to moderately consolidated conglomerate and coarse-grained sandstone having interbedded mudflow deposits, thin claystone layers, and local thin lignite beds widely distributed on the north side of the Alaska Range. Unit is more than 1,300-m-thick and moderately deformed (Csejtey and others, 1992; Bela Csejtey, written commun., 1993) \[symbol 37\] 570 Tcb Coal-bearing rocks (Miocene? to Paleocene?)\-- Healy Creek, Sanctuary, Suntrana, Lignite Creek, and Grubstake Formations of the Nenana coal field, the sedimentary rocks of the Jarvis Creek coal field of Nokleberg and others (1992a), which have been divided into three members, and similar units in other Tertiary basins; located largely north of the Alaska Range. \"The coal-bearing rocks comprise terrestrial cyclic sequences, in varying proportions, of siltstone, claystone, mudstone, shale, generally cross-bedded and pebbly sandstone, both arkosic and quartz-rich, subbituminous coal and lignite, and minor amounts of dominantly quartz- and chert-pebble conglomerate (Csejtey and others, 1992)\" \[symbol 30\] 640, 910 unit Tcb HE002; TL002; FB002; BD002; unit Ts TN002; TN003; KH003; UL002; unit Tscg, MZ002; units Tjc, Tjcl, Tjcm, Tjcu, Tcf, and Tcg, MH002; unit Tcg, MG003 Ttw Tsadaka, West Foreland, and Wishbone Formations, undivided (Tertiary)\-- Also includes unnamed fluvatile conglomerate and coal-bearing sandstone of the eastern Talkeetna Mountains. Locally subdivided into: \[symbol 35\] 790 Tts Tsadaka Formation (Miocene or Oligocene)\-- Poorly sorted cobble to boulder conglomerate, interbedded with lenses of feldspathic sandstone, siltstone, and shale. Unit is of terrestrial origin, deposited on alluvial fans and in braided streams from a northerly source. Clasts in the conglomerate are largely plutonic in contrast to the underlying Wishbone Formation. Age considered Oligocene on the Anchorage quadrangle geologic map (Winkler, 1992) and Miocene on the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle geologic map (Csejtey and others, 1978) \[symbol 35+13\] 670 Twf West Foreland Formation (Eocene)\-- Conglomerate, sandstone, and siltstone; mostly tuffaceous (Magoon and others, 1976) (TY002) \[symbol 35+14\] 855 Tw Wishbone Formation (Eocene)\-- Fluviatile conglomerate having thick interbeds of sandstone, siltstone, and claystone and containing local partings of volcanic ash. Deposited in a similar environment as the overlying Tsadaka Formation; however source terrain was largely volcanic, most likely the Talkeetna Formation (AN002, TY002) \[symbol 35+15\] 870 Tvs Volcanic and sedimentary rocks, undivided (Oligocene and Eocene)\-- Light to medium greenish-gray to gray conglomerate, graywacke, siltstone, lignitic shale and bituminous coal (Weber and others, 1992). Also includes greenstone, basalt, and tuff interlayered with medium- to medium-dark-olive-gray graywacke and conglomerate grading upward to siltstone in the northern part of the Livengood quadrangle. Isom Creek section is overturned to the north. Unit may be in part correlative with units Tcb and Tfv of this map \[symbol 85+13\] 795, Tvs, LG002 Tfv Fluviatile sedimentary rocks and subordinate volcanic rocks (early Eocene?)\-- Intercalated fluviatile sequence of conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone, and mudstone, and a few thin, interlayered flows of basaltic andesite found in the Healy quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1992). Finer grained parts contain carbonized plant fragments. Csejtey, (comment in Csejtey and others, 1992) suggests possible correlation with the Cantwell Formation. Other possible correlations are with units Tvs (preferred) and Tcb of this map. Unit as shown on map also includes similar units in the McGrath (Bundtzen and others, 1997a) and Mount Hayes (Nokleberg and others, 1992a) quadrangles \[symbol 85+15\] 880 Tch Chickaloon Formation (Eocene and Paleocene)\-- Predominantly fluviatile and alluvial carbonaceous mudstone, siltstone, conglomeratic sandstone, and polymictic conglomerate (Winkler, 1992). Locally, upper and middle parts of unit contain numerous beds of bituminous coal. Lower part of unit largely conglomerate and lithic sandstone derived from erosion of the Talkeetna Formation. Thickness is more than 1,500m \[symbol 91\] 900 Tar Arkose Ridge Formation (Eocene, Paleocene, and Late Cretaceous?)\-- Fluviatile and alluvial feldspathic and biotitic sandstone, conglomerate, siltstone, and shale containing abundant plant fragments. Deposition in a coarsening upward sequence was on alluvial fans and by overloaded braided streams carrying sediment derived from rapid erosion of uplifted mountains to the north. Thickness is as much as 700m. Age control is largely based on late Paleocene fossil plants and radiometric ages on locally associated volcanic flows and dikes. A pre-Tertiary age has been suggested for the part of the unit based on a questionable K-Ar age determination on biotite from a metamorphosed part of the unit (Csejtey and others, 1977; 1978); otherwise the age is considered broadly coeval with the Chickaloon Formation (Winkler, 1992) \[symbol 136\] 890 Tovs Orca Group, undivided (Eocene and Paleocene)\-- Thick complexly deformed accretionary sequence of flysch and tholeiitic volcanic rocks (Winkler, 1992). Consists of basaltic flows, pillow breccia, and tuff interbedded with flyschoid siltstone and sandstone. Outcrops within the Valdez and Anchorage quadrangles. Locally sub-divided into: \[symbol 40\] 951 Tos Sedimentary rocks of the Orca Group\-- Monotonous sequence of thin- to thick-bedded sandstone, siltstone, and mudstone. Primary sedimentary features indicate deposition by turbidity currents (Winkler, 1992) \[symbol 40+15\] 950 Toc Conglomerate of the Orca Group\-- Massive, clast-supported pebble, cobble, and boulder conglomerate grading to matrix-supported pebbly mudstone and sandstone (Winkler, 1992) \[symbol 40+16\] 952 Tov Volcanic rocks of the Orca Group, undivided (Eocene? and Paleocene)\-- Tholeiitic pillow basalt, pillow breccia, and minor aquagene tuff. Volcanic rocks are conformable with enclosing flyschoid sedimentary rocks and on a regional scale the tholeiitic rocks are lenticular in form (Winkler and others, 1981) \[symbol 416\] 1135 Igneous rocks\ Volcanic and hypabyssal rocks Tvu Volcanic rocks, undivided (Tertiary)\-- Includes unit Tvv of the Healy quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1992), consisting of volcanic flows ranging from basalt to rhyolite in composition, pyroclastic rocks and subordinate subvolcanic intrusive rocks. Similar volcanic rocks occur as unit Tv in the Anchorage and Talkeetna Mountains quadrangles, where they also include small lenses of fluviatile conglomerate. A crude stratification is described (Csejtey and others 1978; Winkler, 1992), where felsic rocks and pyroclastic rocks occur stratigraphically lower and basaltic and andesitic flows occur in the upper part of the section. In the Lime Hills quadrangle (Gamble and Reed, 1996), small \"volcanic intrusive\" centers of unit Tvi are included in this unit. Age control is sparse and unit is generally considered to range throughout the Tertiary; however most K-Ar age determinations are Eocene and older. In the Nulato quadrangle, this unit includes Patton\'s (written commun., 1997) unit Tr, rhyolite and dacite flows and shallow intrusive bodies and unit Ta, andesite and basalt flows, both of Eocene and Paleocene age \[symbol 413\] 1000 Trs Rhyolitic volcanic and sedimentary rocks (Tertiary?)\-- Rhyolitic volcanic and minor(?) associated sedimentary rocks are mapped in a small area in the Tanana quadrangle (Chapman and others, 1982; Dover, unpublished data, 1997). Rhyolitic rocks consist of light- to very light-yellow and yellowish-gray to cream and white flows and breccia. Tuff and probable welded tuff, generally devitrified, are common and similar in color to the lavas. Sedimentary rocks include minor light- to medium-gray cherty rocks and very light-yellow to tan and light-olive- to medium-gray, generally thin-bedded to laminated siltstone and shale, grading to argillite \[symbol 413+14\] 1001 Tb Basalt (early Tertiary?)\-- Brownish black olivine basalt. Vesicular in part, locally displays columnar jointing and possibly pillow structures in the Sleetmute quadrangle (Miller and others, 1989); also includes olivine basalt in the Livengood, Fairbanks and Lime Hills quadrangles \[symbol 413+13\] 1004 (Tb, SM002; LG002; FB002; LH004) Thf Hypabyssal felsic and intermediate intrusive rocks (Miocene to Paleocene, mostly Early Tertiary or Eocene?)\-- Includes unit Ti in the Anchorage (Winkler, 1992) and unit Tif, both of apparent Eocene age, in the Valdez (Winkler and others, 1980) and Talkeetna Mountains (Csejtey and others, 1978) quadrangles. Consists of small stocks, dikes, and sills of rhyolite to dacite. Also includes similar rocks in the Healy (Csejtey and others, 1992), Mount McKinley (Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993) and Big Delta (Weber and others, 1978) quadrangles. In the McGrath quadrangle (Bundtzen and others, 1997) unit includes units Tid, Tif, and Tia, dikes and sills of a wide range of compositions but largely felsic to intermediate composition \[symbol 237+13\] 1010 1011 Thm Hypabyssal mafic intrusive rocks (Miocene to Paleocene, mostly Early Tertiary or Eocene?)\-- Widely exposed small stocks and irregular-shaped dikes and sills of diorite porphyry, diabase, basalt and lamprophyre. Includes unit Tim, of apparent Eocene age, in the Anchorage (Winkler, 1992) and Talkeetna Mountains (Csejtey and others, 1978) quadrangles. Also includes similar rocks in the Healy (unit Tvim, Csejtey and others, 1992) and Mount McKinley (unit Tvim, Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993) quadrangles, and unit Td, porphyritic to equigranular andesite and basalt dikes in the Lime Hills quadrangle (Reed and Gamble, 1988). Unit also tentatively includes unit TJds of the Anchorage quadrangle (Winkler, 1992) consisting of mafic to intermediate dikes, sills, stocks, for which Tertiary to Jurassic age was assigned Winkler (1992) \[symbol 345\] 1012 Tim, TJds (AN002); Tvim (HE002, MM002); Td (LH002) Pliocene Thd Hornblende dacite\-- Subvolcanic intrusive hornblende dacite of Jumbo dome in the Healy quadrangle. K-Ar age 2.79 +/- 0.25 Ma age (Csejtey and others, 1992) \[symbol 76\] 1022 Miocene Tba Basaltic andesite\-- Very fine-grained to aphanitic, dark- to medium-gray, locally vesicular basaltic andesite. K-Ar ages 6.9 +/- 0.2 and 13.0 +/- 0.5 Ma (Miller and Bundtzen, 1994) \[symbol 420\] 1052 Oligocene and Eocene Tvr Crystal and crystal-lithic ash-flow tuff (early Oligocene to late Eocene)\-- Tuff and subordinate flows and hypabyssal intrusive rocks of apparently felsic composition in small exposures in the eastern Lime Hills and the Melozitna quadrangles. Also includes local accumulations of volcaniclastic sedimentary rocks. In some areas of the Lime Hills quadrangle, rocks range from andesite to dacite in composition, in general the composition was not reported (Gamble and Reed, 1996). Units included here consist of the informally defined Seabee, Lime Hills A-2, Snowcap, North Volcanic Center, and Styx River Volcanics of Gamble and Reed (1996). In the Melozitna quadrangle, includes rocks formerly mapped by Patton and others (1978) in their unit TKv, now know to be of Tertiary age. Exposures are found in the Indian River, Takhakhdona Hills, and Dulbi River areas of the Melozitna quadrangle \[symbol 365\] 1070 Tvb Andesite and basalt (Oligocene and Eocene)\-- Andesite breccia and tuff called the Mount Galen Volcanics (Gilbert, 1979) that is the eruptive equivalent of the Mount Eielson pluton. K-Ar age of 38 Ma (Gilbert, 1979). Includes a variety of volcanic rocks assigned to the Sheep Creek, Windy Fork, and Terra Cotta volcanic fields by Bundtzen and others (1997a). Also includes the Roundabout Mountain volcanic field (see description of unit KJv, Patton, 1966), composed of mildly deformed vesicular basalt and pyroclastic rocks in the Kateel River quadrangle. According Moll-Stalcup and others (1994), the Roundabout Mountain volcanic field is andesite of 30-45 Ma age. W.W. Patton, Jr. (oral commun., 1997) explained that the age range of the volcanic field was assigned by inference from the Takhakhdona and Indian Mountain volcanic fields to the east (Moll-Stalcup and others, 1994) \[symbol 365\] 1081 Paleocene Tcv Volcanic rocks of the Cantwell Formation\-- Intercalated, moderately deformed, sequence of andesite, altered basalt, rhyolite, and dacite flows, felsic pyroclastic rocks and minor sandstone and carbonaceous mudstone largely in the Healy quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1992). K-Ar ages are typically Paleocene, although some are as young as Eocene. The Teklanika Formation is sometimes used in the literature as a synonym for this unit. Herein includes, unit Tv of Nokleberg and others (1992a), which consists chiefly ash-flow tuff, breccia, agglomerate, flows, dikes, and sills in the Mount Hayes quadrangle. Also includes minor volcanic sandstone, conglomerate, and fossiliferous limestone. Nokleberg and others (1992a) refer this unit to the Eocene on the basis of a single whole-rock 49 Ma K-Ar age determination on a rhyodacite tuff \[symbol 416\] 1140 Plutonic rocks Tiv Granitic and volcanic rocks, undivided (Oligocene to Paleocene)\-- Extensive border zone between a Tertiary granitic batholith (unit Tgr of this map) and slightly younger felsic dikes and small subvolcanic intrusive bodies that cut the pluton. Also includes erosional remnants of rhyolitic flows overlying the pluton (unit Tgrv, Csejtey and others, 1992) in the south central Healy quadrangle \[symbol 279\] 1210 Oligocene Togr Granite\-- Biotite-bearing peralkaline alkali-feldspar granite and biotite-plagioclase granite of 29 to 31 Ma age and biotite or biotite-amphibole granite of 25 to 27 Ma age in the Lime Hills (units Twf, Tnep, Gamble and Reed, 1996), McGrath (unit Twg, Bundtzen and others, 1997a) and Tyonek quadrangles. Unit also includes biotite granite of 32 Ma age in the Anchorage quadrangle (unit Tmg, Winkler, 1992) \[symbol 270\] 1270 Oligocene or Eocene Toegr Granitic rocks (early Oligocene or late Eocene)\-- Includes a wide variety of granitic rocks exposed throughout much of the southern part of the map area. Rocks range from alkali-feldspar granite, through biotite or biotite-hornblende granite to granodiorite and minor quartz monzonite. Locally, the rocks are porphyritic and hypabyssal. Rocks of the unit are exposed in the Lime Hills quadrangle (Gamble and Reed, 1996) as well as the Mount Hayes (Nokleberg and others, 1992a), and Anchorage (Winkler, 1992) quadrangles. Also included are small quartz monzonite plutons of the southeastern Sleetmute quadrangle (Miller and others, 1989). Radiometric ages on these plutons range from about 34 Ma to as much as 45 Ma, however most of the plutons yield ages of about 38 Ma \[symbol 180\] 1290 Toem Granodiorite to tonalite (early Oligocene or late Eocene)\-- Biotite, biotite-hornblende, and hornblende granodiorite, quartz diorite, and quartz monzodiorite. Rocks of the unit are exposed in the Lime Hills (Gamble and Reed, 1996), Mount McKinley (Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993), Talkeetna (Reed and Nelson, 1980), and Anchorage quadrangles (Winkler, 1992) \[symbol 423\] 1292 Eocene Tegr Granite and granodiorite\-- Undated biotite-hornblende granite and granodiorite and altered biotite and hornblende tonalite yielding ages about 45 Ma in the Valdez quadrangle (units Tg and Tt, Winkler and others, 1980); biotite-hornblende granodiorite dated at 44 and 48 Ma in the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle (unit Tgd, Csejtey and others, 1978); and porphyritic hornblende granodiorite dated at 52.8 Ma in the Iditarod quadrangle (unit Tp, Miller and Bundtzen, 1994) \[symbol 177\] 1300, 1310 Td Felsic intrusive rocks\-- Widely distributed leucocratic dikes, sills, and small stocks south of Border Ranges fault in the Anchorage quadrangle (Winkler, 1992). Bodies are generally thin, but some have lateral extents of several kilometers; some can be traced as far as 30 km across the strike of the enclosing Valdez Group. Dacite is the most common composition, rhyolite is also present. Radiometric ages fall in two clusters, one at 55-48 Ma and another at 44-43 Ma. However, a dike near Anchorage crosscutting the Valdez Group (unit Kvs) and McHugh Complex (unit KT[r]{.smallcaps}m) yielded a 34.8 Ma age \[symbol 177+13\] Paleocene Tpgr Granitic rocks\-- Widely distributed biotite-muscovite granite to quartz monzonite. Granitic rocks of this unit in the southern part of the map area are part of the informally defined McKinley Sequence (Gamble and Reed, 1996) in the Lime Hills quadrangle (Gamble and Reed, 1996) yielding radiometric ages between 57 and 65 Ma and in the Talkeetna quadrangle dated at 56 to 52 Ma and 65 to 64 Ma (Reed and Nelson, 1980) are also part of the unit. Farther north, 60 million-year-old quartz monzonite plutons in the Livengood quadrangle (Weber and others, 1992), 62 to 65 million-year-old plutons in the Tanana quadrangle (Chapman and others, 1982), and a 55 Ma granite pluton in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (unit grgr, Nokleberg and others, 1992a) are all part of this unit \[symbol 361\] Thgd Granodiorite and other intermediate plutonic rocks\-- Consists of biotite and biotite-hornblende granodiorite, largely in the southern part of the map area. Includes an unnamed quartz diorite pluton (58 Ma) and the Mount Estelle pluton of the Lime Hills (Gamble and Reed, 1996) and Talkeetna (Reed and Nelson, 1980) quadrangles, plutons in the western and northern parts of the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1978), all generally yielding ages between 61 and 66 Ma. Also includes a number of small monzonite or monzodiorite bodies in the Livengood quadrangle (unit Tm, Weber and others, 1992) \[symbol 273\] Tgl Gabbro (Paleocene)\-- Dark-colored, fine- to medium-grained hornblende and pyroxene-hornblende gabbro (62 Ma) in the Lime Hills A-2 1:63,360-scale quadrangle (Gamble and Reed, 1996) \[symbol 372\] TERTIARY AND/OR CRETACEOUS\ Sedimentary rocks TKcg Conglomerate, sandstone, and lignite (Tertiary(?) and Cretaceous)\-- Rocks exposed in a 25-m-thick section along the Sethkokna River in the Medfra quadrangle (Patton and others, 1980). Conglomerate contains clasts of quartz, chert, felsic volcanic rocks, and talc-schist. Unit is overlain by rhyolite and dacite flows of the Volcanic rocks of the Sischu Mountains unit (included in unit TKvr here). Provisionally assigned a Latest Cretaceous age (Campanian-Maestrichtian) on the basis of pollen in the lignite beds. \[symbol 749\] Igneous rocks\ Volcanic and hypabyssal rocks TKv Flows, tuff, and breccia, undivided\-- Basaltic, andesitic, and rhyolitic flows, tuff, and breccia and a few dacite flows, minor interbedded sandstone and shale. Exposed primarily in the Ruby and Ophir quadrangles (Cass, 1959; Chapman and Patton, 1979; Chapman and others, 1985). Unit also includes unit TKvd, dacite flows and dikes; and unit TKvt, intermediate composition tuff of the Veleska Lake volcanic field of Bundtzen and others (1997a) in the McGrath quadrangle and felsic tuff of the Tyonek quadrangle (Solie and others, 1991) (unit TKe, RB002; unit TKv, RB003; OP002; unit TKvt, MG002; unit TKft, TY004, TY005; unit TKir, SM002) \[symbol 126\] 1600 1615 TKd Dikes and subvolcanic rocks of intermediate composition\-- Exposed in widely scattered areas throughout map area. Includes pilotaxitic dacite-andesite plugs in the Iditarod quadrangle (Miller and Bundtzen, 1994) \[symbol 126+15\] 1620, 1601 TKgp Hypabyssal granite porphyry dikes and rhyolitic sills, and plugs\-- Exposed in widely scattered areas \[symbol 126+16\] 1602 TKvr Rhyolite and related rocks\-- Consists of light gray to pink rhyolitic volcanic rocks and minor dacite, including flows, tuff, welded(?) tuff and breccia. Exposures of this unit include the volcanic rocks of the Big Creek \-- Tokatjikh Creek area of the Melozitna quadrangle (mapped as unit TKv by Patton and others, 1978), the northwestern part of the Tanana quadrangle, the Nowitna River and Nixon Fork-Upper Sulukna River areas, and the Sischu Mountains and northeast in the Medfra (Patton and others, 1980), Ruby (Cass, 1959), Mount McKinley (Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993), Tanana (Chapman and others, 1982), and Kantishna River quadrangles (Chapman and others, 1975). Also includes felsic volcanic rocks associated with volcano-plutonic complexes of the Sleetmute quadrangle, as mapped by Miller and others (1989) and rhyolitic tuff and dacite dikes of the Veleska Lake volcanic field of Bundtzen and others (1997a). Where determined, age ranges between approximately 70 and 50 Ma \[symbol 126+13\] 1603, 1604, and 1625 TKvi Andesite and related rocks\-- Largely andesite but includes minor dacite and basalt flows, tuff, and breccia. Consists of that part of the Iditarod Volcanics that overlie the sedimentary rocks of the Kuskokwim Group (unit Kk) in the Iditarod quadrangle. Also includes the \"Volcanic rocks of the Yetna River,\" also in the Iditarod quadrangle (Miller and Bundtzen, 1994), and the \"Volcanic rocks of the Nowitna River\" area of the Medfra quadrangle (Patton and others, 1980), basaltic andesite of Veleska Lake volcanic field of Bundtzen and others (1997a) (ID002; unit TKa, KH002) \[symbol 126+14\] 1605 TKiv Mafic to intermediate volcano-plutonic complexes\-- Chiefly altered basaltic andesite and trachyandesite porphyry flows and hypabyssal intrusive bodies. Mostly in the southwestern part of the map area, in the Iditarod, Sleetmute, and Medfra quadrangles. Ages range between approximately 71 and 65 Ma \[symbol 129\] 1630 Intrusive rocks TKi Intrusive rocks, undivided\-- Composition ranges from granite to diorite. Radiometric ages not available for most bodies. Largely in the southwestern and western part of the map area \[symbol 241\] 1650 TKg Granitic rocks\-- Widely distributed and exposed granitic intrusive rocks, chiefly biotite and biotite-hornblende granite. Includes lesser granodiorite, quartz monzonite and alkali granite \[symbol 244\] 1655 TKgd Granodiorite, tonalite, and monzonite dikes, and stocks\-- Limited to the southeastern part of the map area, except for the monzonite bodies, which tend to occur farther west and north. Available K-Ar radiometric ages range from 59 to 75 Ma \[symbol 362\] 1660 TKqd Quartz diorite and diorite dikes and stocks\-- Fine- to medium-grained, hypautomorphic granular quartz diorite and diorite dikes and stocks. Mapped only in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992a) \[symbol 666\] 1665 TKl Lamprophyre, alkali gabbro, and alkali diorite\-- Mapped in the Mount Hayes quadrangle \[symbol 644\] 1690 TKgb Gabbro and leucogabbro\-- Fine- to medium-grained hypidiomorphic granular textured gabbro and leucogabbro, typically in small plutons. Mapped in the Lime Hills (Gamble and Reed, 1996) and Talkeetna Mountains (Csejtey and others, 1978) quadrangles. Age is poorly constrained \[symbol 667\] 1670 TDg Gabbro (Tertiary? to Devonian?)\-- Medium- to coarse-grained gabbro with minor diorite and basalt which intrude(?) rocks of inferred Triassic to Mississippian age and locally, Cretaceous age. Contact relations are uncertain due to poor exposure but Chapman and others (1985) indicate at least one gabbro body is clearly intrusive and has a hornfels aureole. A similar unit of gabbroic sills, dikes, and small plugs in the adjoining Medfra quadrangle was given a provisional Tertiary to Devonian age. Includes unit TMg the Ophir quadrangle (Chapman and others, 1985) and unit TDg in the Medfra quadrangle (Patton and others, 1980) \[symbol 667\] 1680 unit TMg, OP002; unit TDg, MD002 Metamorphic rocks TKc Melange or cataclastite of the Orca Group (Tertiary and Cretaceous)\-- Extensive serpentinized ultramafic rocks, including dike-like bodies of rodingite, blocks of layered gabbro, crossite schist, pillow basalt, marble, chert and diverse other rock types. Conglomerate clasts within unit resemble lithologies in the Chickaloon Formation (Winkler and others, 1980; Winkler, 1992). Chert clasts are of probable Late Triassic or Early Jurassic age. Emplacement of the melange or cataclastite is inferred to have been during Cretaceous or Tertiary time. Outcrops within the Valdez and Anchorage quadrangles \[symbol 736\] 1710 TKgg Gneissose granitic rocks (early Tertiary to Early? Cretaceous)\-- Chiefly gneissose granodiorite, quartz diorite, and minor granite referred to as the East Susitna batholith in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). In the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle, Csejtey and others (1978), mapped an early Tertiary andalusite and(or) sillimanite-bearing pelitic schist, lit-par-lit migmatite, and granite unit we have included here. In the Healy quadrangle, Csejtey and others (1992) mapped similar rocks as part of their unit Kgr, which is in part correlative with the East Susitna batholith of Nokleberg and others (1992a). The granitic bodies show moderately to well-developed flow foliation and all internal contacts between phases are gradational as well as the contact with unit Mzpca. Unit has pervasive schistosity generally striking northeast to southwest and dipping moderately to steeply west, is locally blastomylonitic and contains relict porphyritic textures. Metamorphic grade is middle to upper amphibolite facies. Radiometric ages, including U-Pb zircon and sphene and K-Ar mica and hornblende ages have a wide range, between about 70 and 29 Ma (Nokleberg and others, 1992a; Csejtey and others, 1978; 1992). Youngest ages are close to and may be related to unroofing along the Denali fault system. In the Healy quadrangle, rocks of this unit are included in unit Kgr, Cretaceous granitic rocks. South of the Susitna Glacier, these rocks are described as migmatitic and thought to reflect lit-par-lit intrusion of Tertiary magma into Cretaceous plutons. The youngest ages for this unit tend to occur in close proximity to the Denali Fault. In the Lime Hills and Tyonek quadrangles, unit TKgs, gneiss is included in this unit. An orthogneiss as above, its texture appears mylonitic. Composition is primarily granodiorite, however up to 5 percent garnet was noted locally in contrast to the gneiss of the Mount Hayes and Healy quadrangles. Structural grain strikes northeast to southwest and tends to be vertical or dip steeply (80°) to the northwest \[symbol 209\] 1720 TPza Amphibolite facies metamorphic rocks (Earliest Tertiary to Paleozoic)\-- Dominantly medium- to medium-dark-gray garnetiferous quartz-mica schist and amphibolite, but includes slate and shale in the Livengood quadrangle. Locally has gneissic texture. Minor marble and very minor quartzite occur in unit in the Tanana quadrangle. Unit outcrops as large fault slivers or \"lozenges\" along a strand of the Tintina-Kaltag fault system in the Livengood (Weber and others, 1992) and Tanana quadrangles (Reifenstuhl and others, 1997). In the Tanana quadrangle, geophysical interpretation cited in Reifenstuhl and others (1997) and outcrop patterns suggest a steep northwest contact with rocks of the Tozitna assemblage and a moderately southeast dipping southeast contact. Protolith age is unknown and although Reifenstuhl and others (1997) and Dusel-Bacon and others (1989) suggest a Ruby or Yukon-Tanana metamorphic complex origin, Weber and others (1992) suggest a possible protolith of Tozitna sedimentary rocks. Includes the Raven Creek Hill unit of Weber and others (1992) and units pTam, pTas, pTaq of Reifenstuhl and others (1997) (unit MzPzr, LG002; unit Pzsr?, TN002; KH003; unit Pzs (Pzqs), TN003) \[symbol 81\] 5208 UNDIVIDED MESOZOIC ROCKS\ Sedimentary rocks KT[r]{.smallcaps}g Gemuk Group (Early Cretaceous to Late Jurassic and Triassic to Mississippian?)\-- Chiefly massive and thin-bedded, fine-grained, siliceous rocks, includes some volcanic rocks, calcareous siltstone, and limestone. Miller and others (1989) described Gemuk Group in the Sleetmute quadrangle as chiefly siltstone interbedded with lesser chert and volcanic rocks and minor limestone, graywacke and breccia. Only Early Cretaceous and Cretaceous fossils are known from the Sleetmute quadrangle. Early Cretaceous, Late Jurassic, and Triassic to Mississippian(?) fossils have been collected from the Gemuk Group (Hoare and Coonrad (1959a) elsewhere. Originally defined by Cady and others (1955), Hoare and Coonrad (1959a, b) subdivided the unit in the Bethel and Russian Mission quadrangles. Box and others (1993) described rocks of this unit in the Bethel and southern Russian Mission area as a series of distinct terranes and further subdivided it \[symbol 973\] 4710 Igneous rocks Mzi Intrusive rocks (Mesozoic?)\-- Undated parts of the Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith in the Tyonek quadrangle. Chiefly quartz diorite, diorite, and gabbro (Reed and Elliott, 1970) \[symbol 375\] 4800, 4880 Mzum Ultramafic and associated rocks (Mesozoic?)\-- Chiefly variably serpentinized pyroxenite, peridotite, dunite, schistose amphibolite and hornblende-plagioclase gneiss derived from gabbro (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). Exposed close to the Denali Fault and along the Broxson Gulch thrust in the Mount Hayes quadrangle. Protolith thought Paleozoic, metamorphosed in the Early Cretaceous. K-Ar analysis of biotite and hornblende from pyroxenite yielded nearly concordant ages of 123 and 126 Ma (Nokleberg and others, 1992a) \[symbol 674\] 4890, 4891 Metamorphic rocks Mzsa Schist and amphibolite (Late Cretaceous or older?)\-- Dominantly fine- to medium-grained garnet-bearing schist and hornblende amphibolite, with subordinate calc-silicate schist and quartzite, and intercalated gneissose granitic to gabbroic metaigneous rocks. Includes migmatitic rocks of the MacLaren metamorphic belt (Smith, 1981) near East Susitna batholith (unit TKgg). Metamorphic grade increases gradationally eastward and northward toward the East Susitna batholith (unit TKgg). Underwent amphibolite facies and local greenschist facies retrogressive metamorphism. K-Ar hornblende and biotite ages range from 65.9 to 31.9 Ma, with biotite yielding the consistently youngest ages. Includes the sa, mig, and mgsh units in the MacLaren terrane of Nokleberg and others (1992a) in the Mount Hayes quadrangle. We interpret rocks originally mapped as the Kahiltna flysch sequence by Csejtey and others (1992) in the southeastern part of the adjacent Healy quadrangle to the west, had the same protolith as these units. We have therefore placed those rocks in this unit \[symbol 793+14\] 5205 \[see 2850\] Mzpca Phyllite, pelitic schist, calc-schist, and amphibolite of the MacLaren metamorphic belt (Mesozoic)\-- Mainly phyllite, quartz-mica schist, calc-schist, amphibolite, and subordinate marble and meta-andesite, derived from siltstone, graywacke, marl, andesite, and gabbro. Underwent amphibolite facies metamorphism and local greenschist retrograde metamorphism, and at least two phases of folding having opposite vergence. Metamorphic grade appears to increase gradationally eastward from the Healy to Mount Hayes quadrangles, and from south to north across a series of thrust faults mapped within the Mount Hayes quadrangle, toward the gneissose granitic rocks of unit TKgg. K-Ar mica ages range from 48.0 to 30.6 Ma and an amphibole age was 69.6 Ma (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). Separated from unit Mzsa, schist and amphibolite, by the Meteor Peak fault, and distinguished lithologically from unit Mzsa by its calcareous component. Includes the msh, mph, and ma units of Nokleberg and others (1992a) in the MacLaren metamorphic belt of the Mount Hayes quadrangle. A lithologically similar part of the Kahiltna flysch sequence (KJf) of Csejtey and others (1992) in the southeastern part of the Healy quadrangle has been correlated on this compilation with the above units of Nokleberg on the basis of mapping in the Healy A-1 (Smith, 1981) and A-2 (Smith and others, 1984) quadrangles. This correlation includes units Ks, Kp, pJa, pJt, and pJcg of Smith (1981) and Smith and others (1984). Rocks of this unit are considered by most workers as part of the MacLaren metamorphic belt (Smith, 1981; Smith and others, 1984; Csejtey and others, 1992; Nokleberg and others, 1992a) \[5206, 5210, 5215, change colors to 793+15\] Added 7 polygons in HECOMP and 1 in TKCOMP to 5210 from 2850. CRETACEOUS ROCKS\ Sedimentary rocks Kcs Cantwell Formation, sedimentary rocks subunit (Paleocene(?) and Late Cretaceous)\-- Unit consists of a fluviatile, intercalated sequence, in various proportions, of dominantly polymictic conglomerate, sandstone (including arkose), siltstone, argillite, shale, and a few thin coal beds Csejtey and others (1992). Locally thin volcanic flows and thin tuff layers are present. Conglomerate clast lithology varies greatly within the outcrop area, indicating different geologic source areas and deposition by a number of river systems. Plant fossils suggest a Paleocene age; however some K-Ar ages suggest the unit might locally contain strata of Cretaceous age (Csejtey and others, 1992) and recent palynological analyses reported by Ridgeway and others (1994) suggest an early Campanian to late Maestrichtian age for the Cantwell and a thickness of as much as 4,000 m. As mapped here, unit also includes continental sedimentary rocks that crop out in the Talkeetna quadrangle. These consist of chiefly medium- to dark-gray phyllitic shale, sandstone, grit, and conglomerate containing minor carbonaceous shale and tuffaceous sandstone \[symbol 749\] 1920 Kms Minto unit (Late Cretaceous(?)\-- Interbedded yellowish-gray, iron-stained siltstone, light-gray to light-yellowish-gray mudstone locally containing pyritized plant fragments, light- to medium-olive-gray, very fine- to medium-grained graywacke, hard quartzo-feldspathic sandstone, light-yellowish-gray shale, and medium-dark-gray clay shale. Grain size fines and bedding thins upsection. Load casts, bioturbation and burrows occur locally. Unit reflects deltaic to continental shelf depositional conditions. Age control is imprecise, unit thought post-Albian \[symbol 940\] 1980 Tiny unit Km Matanuska Formation (Late Cretaceous (Maestrichtian) to late Early Cretaceous (Albian)\-- Well-indurated, thinly-bedded, dark-gray fossiliferous shallow marine shale containing conspicuous calcareous concretions, volcanic-lithic siltstone, sandstone, graywacke, and subordinate conglomerate. Diverse shallow to deep marine (in part, turbiditic) deposits derived from a northern source, either an unidentified mid-Cretaceous magmatic arc or the Jurassic arc represented in part by the Talkeetna Formation (Winkler, 1992). Upper part of unit is coeval with the flysch of the Valdez Group to the south. Rests with pronounced angular unconformity on Early Cretaceous and older strata (Csejtey and others, 1978) \[symbol 800\] 2010 Kuskokwim Group\-- Divided into: Kk Kuskokwim Group, deep marine rocks (Late Cretaceous and late Early Cretaceous)\-- Sandstone, siltstone, shale, and conglomerate. Includes fine- to coarse-grained, greenish-gray to gray, thinly cross-bedded sandstone and quartz-chert pebble conglomerate having poorly exposed interbeds of dark shale and siltstone. Locally, light- to medium-gray, fine- to coarse-grained, resistant turbiditic sandstone and medium to dark-gray shale and siltstone displaying graded bedding, cross-bedding, flute clasts, and ripple marks. Includes 15 to 40 percent shale and siltstone. Bouma ABCD and BCDE intervals are present. Also includes well-indurated volcaniclastic sandstone containing as much as 40 percent volcanic clasts; locally siliceous, and very resistant in outcrop. May be lateral equivalent of agglomerate, chert, tuff, and sandstone unit herein included in the Kuskokwim Group volcanic rocks (mapped here as unit Kvl). Flysch trace fossil Paleodictyon abundant locally. Woody fragments, plant stems, dicotyledon leaf fragments, and Inoceramus prisms locally abundant (Bundtzen and Laird, 1980, 1982; cited in Chapman and others, 1985). Unit is widely distributed in southwestern Alaska (see Decker and others, 1994). Mapped as units Ksu and Ksc in Medfra (Patton and others, 1980), unit Kks in Iditarod (Miller and Bundtzen, 1994), unit Kk in Sleetmute (Miller and others, 1989), unit Kku in Lime Hills (T.K. Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1998), units Ku, Kss, and Kls in Ophir (Chapman and others, 1985), and units Kcs, Kss, Kls, Kus, and Ksh in McGrath (T.K. Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1998) quadrangles. In the Lime Hills quadrangle, distinction between the Kuskokwim Group and the Kahiltna flysch sequence (unit KJf) is difficult and placement of the boundary is controversial Kkn Kuskokwim Group, non-marine and shallow-marine rocks (early Late Cretaceous)\-- Predominantly very fine- to medium-grained, medium- to medium-dark-gray and greenish-gray, in part calcareous, graywacke and sandstone(?), medium-dark gray siltstone and shale, and minor granule to pebble polymictic conglomerate. Unit is the non-marine facies of the Kuskokwim Group and is recognized in the Ophir (Chapman and others, 1985), Iditarod (Miller and Bundtzen, 1994), Medfra (Patton and others, 1980), McGrath, and Sleetmute (T.K. Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1998) quadrangles. Commonly thin-bedded; weathers to various shades of yellow, brown, and red. Largely shallow marine to nonmarine and unfossiliferous (Chapman and others, 1985) Sedimentary rocks of the Yukon-Koyukuk region (late Early Cretaceous to Late Cretaceous)\-- Thick packages of very similar sedimentary rocks are found rimming the Yukon-Koyukuk region which in the past were called the Bergman or Shaktolik Group. However, both names have since been abandoned (Patton, 1973). These rocks consist of turbiditic basin fill covered by deltaic marine and nonmarine sedimentary rocks that prograded over the turbidites largely from the east in the map area, but also from the west, west of the map area. Right lateral offset along the Kaltag Fault has juxtaposed rocks of the eastern Kobuk-Koyukuk sub-basin against rocks of the western Lower Yukon sub-basin (Patton and others, 1994a). This map shows the rocks of the two sub-basins as different units, informally called the Melozitna and Norton Bay sequences in order to clearly show the distinction. The deltaic rocks of the Melozitna sequence, from the Kobuk-Koyukuk sub-basin are proportionally thicker and as a result this group contains a higher percentage of conglomerate, which in itself contains a higher proportion of metamorphic and granitic clasts. Kme Melozitna sequence (Late Cretaceous to late Early Cretaceous)\-- Graywacke, shale, grit, and conglomerate. Lower part consists of shallow marine sandstone and shale that grades upward into nonmarine dark-gray to green sandstone, siltstone, shale, and quartz-chert pebble conglomerate. Locally, coal beds are reported (Martin, 1926, p. 407). Similar, unnamed unit, has been described in the Unalakleet (Patton and Moll-Stalcup, 1996), Nulato (W.W. Patton, Jr., written commun., 1997), and Ophir quadrangles (Chapman and others, 1985). Cretaceous sedimentary rocks of unit Ksu of Patton (written commun., 1997) south of the Kaltag Fault or east of the Koyukuk Flats in the Nulato quadrangle are here mapped as part of this unit, but rocks of unit Ksu north of the Kaltag Fault are mapped as unit Knbg. This distinction is made because descriptions from the source maps suggest a mixed granitic and metamorphic source for rocks south of the Kaltag Fault and a volcanic rock dominated source north of the Fault. Many of the rocks in this unit were originally included in the now abandoned Shaktolik Group (Patton, 1973). Locally subdivided into: \[symbol 848\] 2020 unit Ks, ID002; and others Kss Nonmarine sandstone, quartz conglomerate, shale, and siltstone (Late(?) Cretaceous)\-- Olive-green, fine- to coarse-grained, cross-bedded, quartzose sandstone and grit; quartz-pebble conglomerate, and dark micaceous shale and siltstone. Interbedded fine-grained to gritty, dark-gray to green graywacke and mudstone. Abundant plant debris. Probably correlative with Upper Cretaceous nonmarine strata in Kateel River quadrangle (Patton and others, 1978; Patton, 1966) \[symbol 848+16\] 1941 \[Melo\] Kqc Quartz-pebble conglomerate (early Late Cretaceous)\-- Light-gray quartz-pebble conglomerate and quartzose sandstone containing minor intercalated ashy tuff. Intruded by granodiorite of Late Cretaceous (\~82 Ma) age. Limited areal extent in the northeast quadrant of the Melozitna quadrangle \[symbol 848+14\] 1990 \[Melo if you want to\] Kcg Igneous pebble-cobble conglomerate (Late Cretaceous? and Albian)\-- Massive, poorly sorted conglomerate having pebble- to cobble-sized clasts chiefly of mafic intrusive and extrusive rocks and chert of various colors. Locally clasts of quartz, quartzite, granitic rocks, schist, and limestone are abundant but otherwise only occur in minor amounts. Interbedded fine-grained to gritty, dark-gray to green graywacke and mudstone. Grades upward into unit Kss and in part overlies and in part laterally gradational with unit Kvgm (Patton and others, 1978). Unit thought largely Albian but may include beds as young as Late Cretaceous (Patton and others, 1978) \[symbol 848+15\] 2030 probable Melo, also see unit Kvm below Kvm Volcanic graywacke and conglomerate (early Late or late Early Cretaceous?)\-- Poorly sorted, fine- to coarse-grained graywacke, sandstone, grit, and pebble- to cobble conglomerate composed chiefly of volcanic rock and chert detritus in the Medfra and Ophir quadrangles (Patton and others, 1980; Chapman and others, 1985)). Contains locally abundant large Inoceramus, brachiopods, and worm tubes. Includes massive volcanic conglomerate mapped as part of unit Kgs of Patton (1966) in the northwesternmost Kateel River quadrangle. This conglomerate is probably gradational with coarse breccia and agglomerate of unit Kve \[symbol 983\] (KT002, shown as part of unit Kgs; unit Kvg, MD002; OP002 \[According to Patton, oral commun., 1997\]) 2180, 2181 Knb Norton Bay sequence (Late Cretaceous to late Early Cretaceous)\-- Marine and nonmarine deltaic shale, siltstone, and sandstone. Northwestern part of the map area; locally subdivided here as nonmarine Kshn and marine Ksse. Also includes units Kgw and Km described below. In the Kateel River quadrangle, the juxtaposition of the various rock units of the Norton Bay sequence is probably due to thrusting, followed by normal faulting (W.W. Patton, Jr., oral commun, 1998) (unit Ksu, NL003; unit Knm, KT002 \[see also 2115\]) \[symbol 797\] 1805 Kshn Nonmarine shale, siltstone, and sandstone (Late Cretaceous)\-- Dark-gray to olive-gray micaceous shale and siltstone, and light-olive-gray to yellowish-orange, fine- to coarse-grained cross-bedded sandstone. Massive sandstone beds near base of units forms resistant ridges. North of the Kateel River, sandstone contains pyroclastic debris. White quartz and dark chert pebble conglomerate lenses near base of unit. Bituminous coal beds as much as 6 inches \[10 to 15 cm\] thick are present in unit as are abundant plant fossils. Unit has an estimated thickness of 5,000 feet \[1,500 m\] (Patton, 1966) (unit Kn, KT002) \[symbol 797+16\] 1943 \[Shak\] Ksse Marine sandstone and siltstone (Early Cretaceous, Albian)\-- Littoral and offshore marine deposits of dark-gray shale and siltstone interbedded with subordinate dark-greenish-gray fine-grained sandstone in lower part and light-olive fine- to coarse-grained sandstone in upper part. Local volcanic conglomerate at contact with unit Kve, andesitic volcanic rocks. Sandstone better sorted and more quartzose than unit Km, below. Albian age assigned on the basis of abundant molluscan fauna, particularly the occurrence of Inoceramus altifluminis McLearn (Patton, 1966) (unit Km, KT002; unit Km, NL003) \[symbol 803\] 2101 \[Both Melozitna and Norton Bay sequences\] Kmm Marine mudstone and sandstone (Early Cretaceous, Albian)\-- Chiefly medium- to dark-gray mudstone and medium-gray to dark-greenish-gray moderately to highly calcareous fine-grained sandstone. Sandstone is composed largely of mafic and intermediate volcanic detritus, including some pyroclastic material, but locally contains lenses of feldspar and chert grit. Mudstone commonly banded and finely cross-bedded. Age assignment based on the occurrence of Gastropilites. Unit interpreted as prodelta turbidite (W.W. Patton, Jr., oral commun., 1998) (unit Kgm, KT002; unit Kcs, NL003 \[303\]) \[symbol 803+13\] 2152 Kgw Graywacke sandstone and mudstone (Cretaceous, Albian{?} in part)\-- Chiefly dark-greenish-gray to pale-olive tuffaceous and feldspathic fine- to very coarse-grained sandstone and subordinate dark-gray mudstone. Abundant lenses of feldspar and chert grit. Sandstone composed largely of mafic and intermediate volcanic detritus, including some pyroclastic material. Unit interpreted as submarine fan turbidite (W.W. Patton, Jr., oral commun., 1998) (unit Kgs, KT002) \[symbol 797+15\] 2117 Kwcf Wilber Creek flysch (Albian)\-- Interlayered siltstone, shale, sandstone, and conglomerate originally subdivided into coarse- and fine-grained units (Weber and others, 1992). Siltstone and sandstone are medium- to medium-dark-gray and greenish-gray, moderately sorted and very fine- to medium-grained. Conglomerate is dark-olive-gray to medium-dark-gray, iron-stained, polymictic, unsorted, subangular to well-rounded, ranges in grain size from granules to cobbles. Clasts are of local derivation and consist of quartzite, limestone, mafic and felsic igneous rocks, greenstone, diorite and other intrusive rocks, sandstone, siltstone, phyllite, chert, rare grit, shale rip-ups, and very rare carbonatite. Beds are typically internally massive, large- to medium-scale, graded and amalgamated, having planar tops and bases. Local small-scale trough-crossbeds internally fill large-scale troughs and fining upward cycles are common. Conglomeratic graywacke occurs within lenses in unit. Minor small-scale scour-fills locally fine upward into ripple-laminated medium-gray to black siltstone, and dark-gray to black shale. Albian age based on presence of Paragastroplites flexicostatus. Graywacke rich in volcanic detritus is locally characteristic and may correlate with the Kathul Graywacke in the Charley River quadrangle east of the map area (Dover and Miyaoka, 1988) (units Kwcc, Kwcs, LG002; unit Kwc, TN003; unit KJgs, KH002; unit KJcs, KH003) \[symbol 752\] 2115 Kvgm Volcanic graywacke and mudstone (Albian)\-- Chiefly dark-greenish-gray, fine-grained to gritty, poorly sorted turbiditic graywacke composed largely of first- and second-cycle volcanic debris, but locally containing abundant granitic and metamorphic rock debris. Dark-gray mudstone interbeds. Graded bedding common. Contains some intercalated crystal tuff. Age assignment based on correlation with similar unit in Hughes quadrangle to north of map area (Patton and others, 1978). Unit stratigraphically underlies Norton Bay and Melozitna sequence sedimentary rocks and is thickest in Lower Yukon sub-basin (Patton and others, 1994a) on west. Unit interpreted as submarine fan turbidite (W.W. Patton, Jr., oral commun., 1998) \[symbol 983\] 2105 \[See also unit Kvm, 1825, 2180, 2181\] unit Kgm, MZ002; unit Knm, eastern part KT003; unit KJcs, northeastern TN003; unit Kg, NL003) Ksm Quartz-carbonate sandstone and pebbly mudstone (Valanginian-Aptian)\-- Fine- to coarse-grained quartz-carbonate sandstone and conglomerate, quartzose limestone, and dark-gray pebbly mudstone and siltstone. Clast lithologies consist of quartz, carbonate, and quartz-mica schist. Fossil age control extensive; Buchia subleavis, B. crassicolis, and Cylindroteuthis in the lower beds, indicate a Valanginian age, Inoceramus and Arcoteuthis in middle beds indicate a Hauterivian and Barremian age, and rare cephalopods including Tropaeum indicate an Aptian age for the upmost beds (Patton and others, 1980). Unit limited to small areas of outcrop in the Medfra quadrangle (unit Kqc, MD002) \[symbol 745+13\] 2125 Knl Nelchina Limestone (Hauterivian and Barremian)\-- Shallow water marine sequence of thinly bedded calcareous sandstone, siltstone, claystone, minor conglomerate, and thick-bedded to massive clastic limestone, as mapped by Grantz (1960) in the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle. The Nelchina Limestone rests with slight angular conformity on the Late Jurassic Naknek Formation (unit Ksu, TK002) \[symbol 745+13\] 2100 Kb Berg Creek Formation (Early Cretaceous?)\-- Marine sandstone, siltstone, mudstone containing many interbeds of pebble- and cobble-conglomerate. Greenish-gray sandstone, in many places calcareous and cross-stratified, is predominant in lower part of the sequence. Framework grains in the sandstone and conglomerate clasts indicate largely volcanic source terrain. Dark-greenish-gray siltstone and mudstone are predominate in the upper part of the section; uppermost strata include rusty-weathering calcareous siltstone interbeds and concretions. Originally mapped as unit Js on the Valdez map (Winkler and others, 1980), according to George Plafker (G.R. Winkler, written commun., 1998), unit is now considered the lower part of the Berg Creek Formation (VA002) \[symbol 971\] 2110 (was 3020) Melange KT[r]{.smallcaps}m McHugh Complex (Cretaceous to Triassic?)\-- Tectonic melange consisting largely of Triassic through mid-Cretaceous protoliths of oceanic affinity. Blocks are boudins and fault slices of relatively competent rocks: basalt, chert, graywacke, and conglomerate, plus rare blueschist, gabbro, ultramafic rocks, and limestone. Matrix consists of relatively incompetent argillite, and locally, light-green tuff. Intermixing of blocks in the matrix occurs at scales ranging from that of a thin section to that of a 1:250,000-scale quadrangle. Gabbro, basalt, chert, argillite, and graywacke are interpreted as an oceanic-plate succession conveyed by plate motions into a subduction zone and deformed into a tectonic melange. Triassic through mid-Cretaceous radiolaria date the chert, and by inference, abyssal-plain sedimentation. Limestones, possibly originating on seamounts, have yielded Permian fusilinids and conodonts of tropical, Tethyan affinities. The time during which the various protoliths were intermixed to form a melange is not well constrained, but most likely spanned the Jurassic and Cretaceous {McHugh Complex of Valdez Group, melange (unit Mzm, AN002; unit KJm, VA002; unit KJm, TY002) \[symbol 458\] 2190} Kmar Melanges of the Alaska Range (Silurian to Cretaceous protoliths; Cretaceous melange formation). Consists of four rock suites, intensely deformed and intricately intermixed by tectonic and perhaps also sedimentary processes. Suites are: 1) cherty tuff, chert, argillite, and volcaniclastic sandstone. Radiolaria and conodont fragments from the Healy quadrangle indicate a Mississippian to Late(?) Devonian age (Csejtey and others, 1992); 2) flysch-like assemblage of dark-gray to black argillite, slate, shale, graywacke, and subordinate chert, chert-pebble conglomerate, and polymict conglomerate. It has yielded Buchia sp. of Late Cretaceous to Late Jurassic age in the Healy quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1992), and a Cretaceous ammonite in the Mt. Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992b). In the Mt. Hayes quadrangle, minor andesite and dacite are associated with the flysch-like assemblage; 3) limestone, of Silurian, Devonian, and Triassic ages, is mapped and described separately as unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Sl in the Healy quadrangle; in the Mt. Hayes quadrangle, limestone is present but not differentiated from the main body of melange (Nokleberg and others, 1992a); and (4) ultramafic rocks, of unknown age, mapped and described separately as unit mlu. This melange unit crops out in two belts in the Healy quadrangle, and two belts in the Mt. Hayes quadrangle. South of the Denali fault in the Healy quadrangle, Csejtey and others (1992) mapped the main body of melange as unit Kms, and limestone blocks within it as unit msl. This southerly belt of melange corresponds to the Broad Pass terrane of Jones and others (1982; see fig. 2, herein). Farther north in Healy quadrangle, Csejtey and others (1992) assigned a narrow belt of melange between two strands of the Denali fault to their unit Kmn; associated limestone blocks in this northerly belt were mapped as unit mnl (shown here as unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Sl), and associated ultramafic rocks were mapped as unit mno. The northerly belt of melange corresponds to the Windy terrane of Jones and others (1982). The two belts of melange in Healy quadrangle are similar in that both contain large proportions of intensely deformed Kahiltna-like flysch (unit KJf, herein) enclosing blocks of Devonian shallow-marine limestone; they differ, however, in that ultramafic rocks and Triassic limestones occur only in the northerly belt, whereas Paleozoic cherty rocks occur only in the southerly belt. In the Mt. Hayes quadrangle, Nokleberg and others (1992a) mapped two belts of melange between strands of the Denali fault system, and correlated these with the Windy terrane of Jones and others (1982) \[symbol 458\] 2192 2195 T[r]{.smallcaps}Sl Limestone blocks (Silurian to Triassic)\-- Lenses and elongate blocks, up to several kilometers long, of medium-bedded to rarely massive, fine- to medium-grained, gray, fossiliferous limestone. Occurs in two outcrop belts in the Healy quadrangle, one south of the Denali fault, the other between strands of the Denali fault (Csejtey and others, 1992). Megafossils and conodonts from the southerly belt range from Silurian to Middle Devonian; megafossils and conodonts from the northerly belt are of Middle Devonian and Late Triassic ages (Csejtey and others, 1992). Comparable carbonate blocks occur in two outcrop belts of melange in Mt. Hayes quadrangle (unit Kmar of present map; unit wm of Nokleberg and others, 1992a) but were not mapped separately. The most closely dated of these has yielded a Middle Devonian (Givetian) age based on megafossils (Nokleberg and others, 1992b) \[symbol 172\] 2193 2196 mlu Ultramafic and associated rocks (Unknown age, assigned to melange)\-- Serpentinized ultramafic rock, altered baslat, green and maroon tuff and recrystallized chert. Unit occurs in a small fault sliver within the Denali Fault system in the Healy quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1992). Jones and others (1982) suggested these rocks might comprise an ophiolite assemblage \[symbol 416\] 2197 (unit (mno)Kmn, HE002) Igneous rocks\ Volcanic and hypabyssal rocks Kvl Volcanic rocks (Late Cretaceous)\-- Largely dacite, andesite, and basalt and subordinate andesitic to basaltic subvolcanic rocks. Ranges from flows, including agglomerate, to tuff and also dikes and sills; all are variably hydrothermally(?) altered. Subvolcanic rocks are chiefly found in the southwestern part of the map area, but are also sparsely distributed in the Healy quadrangle. In the Iditarod quadrangle these rocks were mapped as part of two units, the Kuskokwim Group and part of the Iditarod Volcanics. Distinction between unit TKvi of this map, which also includes the Iditarod Volcanics, is on the basis of the contact relation between these rocks and the underlying or interfingering Kuskokwim Group sedimentary rocks. This map unit consists of those rocks where the interfingering relationship is most apparent \[symbol 124+14\] 2255, 2256, 2260, 2261, 2270 Ktg Volcaniclastic rocks (Early Cretaceous)\-- Largely andesitic and dacitic crystal-lithic tuff and lithic tuff, volcanic graywacke, and mudstone. Rare andesite flows. Mapped only along northern edge of Melozitna quadrangle and in the adjoining Hughes quadrangle outside of the map area. Overlies unit Kve and may grade laterally into unit Kvgm \[symbol 124+15\] 2320 Kve Andesite and related rocks (Early Cretaceous, Neocomian and Albian?)\-- Chiefly porphyritic pyroxene andesite and trachyandesite flows, pillow basalt, andesitic and dacitic tuff, volcanic conglomerate, and breccia, tuffaceous graywacke, chert and fine-grained cherty tuff, and limestone, generally restricted to the northwest part of the map area. In the vicinity of the Koyukuk River these rocks are widely altered to a hard dark green hornfels near granitic intrusions. Elsewhere, the volcanic rocks are altered and pale green. Limestone is in part coquina composed largely of Buchia and in part impure limestone containing Buchia. Mildly deformed and unaltered vesicular basalt and associated pyroclastic rocks along the Koyukuk River near Roundabout Mt. originally mapped by Patton (1966) as part of this unit may be Tertiary (Patton, oral commun., 1997) and are shown on this map as part of unit Tvu. In the Tyonek quadrangle, small areas of basaltic rocks of probable early Cretaceous age are interbedded within Cretaceous(?) sedimentary rocks. While included here for display convenience, we do not mean to imply these Tyonek flows and those near the Koyukuk River are related \[symbol 124+16\] 2330, 2210 (no overprint), 2230 (no overprint) Intrusive rocks Kg Granitic rocks\-- Largely granitic, but range from tourmaline-bearing granite to diorite. Intrusions range from dikes and sills, to small and large plutons. Widely distributed includes granite plutons in the Mount Hayes quadrangle, and quartz monzonite and granodiorite plutons in the Anchorage, Fairbanks, Livengood, Tanana, and Melozitna quadrangles. Radiometric ages are as old as 120 Ma and as young as 70 to 65 Ma, but typically range between 105 and 90 Ma. Plutons yielding ages of 110 Ma or greater than are shown with a vertical crosshatch pattern, whereas those yielding ages of 85 Ma or less are shown with a horizontal crosshatch pattern \[symbol 251\] 2400, 2410, 2411, 2475, 2480, \[+overprint 13\]: 2450, 2460, 2465, 2470, \[+overprint 14\]: 2520, 2525, 2530, 2540, \[+overprint 238\]: 2420 Kmum Mafic and ultramafic rocks\-- Gabbro, diorite, serpentinite, and mafic volcaniclastic rocks. Ranges from small, structurally bounded, pervasively sheared, discordant bodies of serpentinized ultramafic rocks wholly enclosed in pelitic schist in the Anchorage quadrangle (Winkler (1992) to dikes and lense-like masses of dark-greenish gray, medium- to coarse-grained gabbro and massive, medium-gray, medium-grained diorite, including the gabbro of Mount Moffit of the Mount Hayes quadrangle and a correlative unit of gabbro, diorite, metagabbro, metadiabase, and amphibolite dikes sills and small plutons (units gbm and mgb, Nokleberg and others, 1992a). Restricted to bands through the central part of the map area in the Tanana and Kantishna River, Anchorage, and the Big Delta and Mount Hayes quadrangles (units gbm, mgb, MH002; unit Kd, BD002; unit Km?, TN002; unit Km, KH003) \[symbol 672\] 2440, 2445, 2510, 2670 Ktt Leucotonalite and trondhjemite (Early Cretaceous)\-- Plugs and sills of leucocratic medium-grained plutonic rocks in a zone about 5 km wide along the Border Ranges fault in the Anchorage quadrangle. Generally foliated; apparently syntectonically emplaced during ductile and then brittle thrusting on the Border Ranges fault system. K-Ar, Rb-Sr, and U-Pb age determinations range between 103 and 133 Ma, overlapping ages of large Jurassic trondhjemite plutons (unit Jtr, this map) to the north of the Border Ranges fault system (Winkler, 1992) (AN002; unit Knt, NB002) \[symbol 291\] 2570 Metamorphic rocks Rocks of unknown protolith age metamorphosed during Cretaceous and possibly Early Tertiary time. Kvs Metasedimentary rocks of the Valdez Group (Late Cretaceous)\-- Drab, rhythmically alternating, deformed turbidites, including meta-sandstone, meta-siltstone, argillite, slate, phyllite, and pebble- to cobble conglomerate. Beds are typically a few centimeters to a few meters thick. Locally, massive meta-sandstone and less abundant matrix-supported pebble- to cobble-conglomerate occurs in channel sequences many tens of meters thick. In some places, turbiditic sedimentary structures, including graded bedding, current-ripple cross-lamination, convolute lamination, and sole marks have been preserved (Winkler, 1992). Adjacent to the thrust contact with McHugh Complex melange, includes a tectonic melange consisting of blocks of Valdez Group meta-sandstone enclosed in a phacoidally cleaved matrix of Valdez Group argillite; this monomict melange is quite distinct from the polymict melange of the McHugh Complex. Assigned a Late Cretaceous (Campanian? to Maestrichtian) age on the basis of scattered occurrences of Inoceramus. Mapped in Anchorage and Valdez quadrangles. Metamorphic grade ranges from prehnite-pumpellyite to lower greenschist facies \[symbol 745\] 2700 Kvv Metavolcanic rocks of Valdez Group (Late Cretaceous)\-- Mafic metatuff and minor massive or weakly foliated greenstone with rare pillows (Winkler and others, 1981). Mapped in Valdez and Anchorage quadrangles. Dated by association with the sedimentary part of the Valdez Group, with which it is interbedded. Metamorphic grade ranges from prehnite-pumpellyite to lower greenschist facies \[symbol 311\] 2705 CRETACEOUS AND/OR JURASSIC\ Sedimentary rocks KJw Wolverine quartzite (Early Cretaceous or Late Jurassic)\-- Light- to dark-gray, very fine- to medium-grained, well-sorted, quartzite containing interbedded black to dark-gray shale and medium-light- to medium-gray siltstone. Rare coquina-like beds contain poorly preserved fragments of Buchia and other fossils that provide limited age control. Unit exposed in the Livengood, western Circle, and eastern Tanana quadrangles. In the Tanana quadrangle, the Wolverine quartzite includes rocks mapped as the Vrain unit (KJvr) elsewhere (F.R. Weber, unpublished data, 1998) (LG002; unit KJcs, TN002; TN003; unit KJw, TN003; unit KJqa, CI002) \[symbol 909\] 2815, 2816, 2817 KJwc Wilber Creek flysch and Wolverine quartzite, undivided (Early Cretaceous or Late Jurassic)\-- Locally mapped unit consisting of units KJwc and Kwcf in the Tanana quadrangle (TN003 modified, shown as southern T[r]{.smallcaps}Ps) \[symbol 909+13\] 2812 KJs Argillite, chert, sandstone, and limestone (Early Cretaceous to Late Jurassic)\-- Dark-gray argillite, dark-gray to greenish-gray bedded chert, thin-bedded gray sandstone, and rare thin-beds of shelly limestone in thrust slivers, sandwiched between Triassic and Jurassic strata in the southwest Healy quadrangle. Late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous radiolaria occur in the chert; Inoceramus sp. of Hauterivian to Barremian age and Buchia subleavis of Valanginian age occur in the limestone. Csejtey and others (1992) suggest these rocks may be tectonically emplaced distal facies of unit KJf. Metamorphic grade in these rocks is no higher than prehnite-pumpellyite facies, significantly lower metamorphic grade than rocks of unit KJf (as mapped by Csejtey and others, 1992) to the east (unit KJa, HE002) \[symbol 909+14\] 2810. KJf Kahiltna flysch sequence (earliest Late Cretaceous to Late Jurassic?)\-- Monotonous sequence of intensely deformed and locally highly metamorphosed turbidites described by Csejtey and others (1992) and Reed and Nelson (1980). Includes dark-gray to black argillite, fine- to coarse-grained, generally dark-gray graywacke, dark-gray polymictic pebble conglomerate, subordinate black chert pebble conglomerate, a few thin layers of dark-gray to black radiolarian chert and thin, dark-gray impure limestone interbeds. Locally includes distinctively reddish brown weathering feldspathic wacke having interbeds of siltstone. Tightly isoclinally folded and complexly faulted. Highly indurated, many are sheared and pervasively cleaved. Fossils in this broadly defined unit range from Early Jurassic ammonites to Early Cretaceous (late Hauterivian to early Barremian) Inoceramus to indeterminate broadleaf plant fossils. In the Tyonek quadrangle, a Valanginian Buchia sublaevis Keyserling was identified from coquina beds along the lower Chickak River (William P. Elder, USGS, unpublished data; fossil collection by Madelyn Millholland, Cominco Alaska Exploration). A middle Turonian Inoceramus hobetsensis Nagao and Matsumoto was also found within this unit 1 km east of the Skwentna River 3 km north of its confluence with Emerald Creek (William P. Elder, USGS, unpublished data, 1989). Reported plant fossils occur in rocks lithologically similar to the largely Late Cretaceous Matanuska Formation (unit Km, this map). Previously unpublished 40Ar/39Ar age determinations on hornblende in igneous clasts in conglomerate range from 94.6+/-1.5 Ma to 101.0+/-0.7 Ma (Paul Layer, written commun., Sept., 1997; see also Layer and Solie, 1991). In the Talkeetna quadrangle, unit is mapped as Jurassic and Cretaceous. However, the only fossil localities having Jurassic ages are at the northwestern extent of the outcrop area and all other ages were considered Cretaceous. This unit, widespread in southern Alaska, is often the repository for miscellaneous dark-colored sedimentary rock units and as such may not represent a coherent package of rocks. In the southwest part of the map area, the nature of the transition from this unit to the Kuskokwim Group is undefined. Both units are of similar lithology and character and available mapping is not sufficient to either distinguish the units or to indicate that they should be mapped as the same unit. Locally, the presence of interbedded light tuffaceous deposits indicates contemporaneous volcanism; in these same areas, extremely angular grains of oscillatory zoned plagioclase, volcanic rock fragments, hornblende, epidote, and calcite, suggest derivation from the now buried Jurassic magmatic arc to the south (Reed and Nelson, 1980). Unit as mapped in the Tyonek quadrangle includes rocks mapped by Reed and Elliott (1970) as units Km, Kw, Mzu, and Mzs. In the southeastern part of the Healy quadrangle, east of the Susitna lineament of Smith and others (1984) this unit is highly metamorphosed and included within rocks mapped as part of the Maclaren metamorphic belt (units Mzsa and Mzpca), of mid-Cretaceous age (Csejtey and others, 1992) or Tertiary age (Smith, 1981). The Kahiltna flysch unit is sub-divided on this map into three sections. The two sub-divisions off the main part of the unit consist of unit KJfn, occurring north of the main strand of the Denali fault system, and unit KJfk, which is found in a klippe south of the Denali fault system. Locally subdivided into: (unit KJfk, HE002) \[symbol 793+13\] 2851 KJfk Flysch sequence (Early Cretaceous and Late Jurassic)\-- Rocks identical in lithology and age to unit KJf, found in a large folded klippe or thrust sliver that may be as large as 30 by 60 km, perhaps a remnant of a much larger thrust sheet (Csejtey and others, 1992). There are three fossil localities within this unit, two of which have yielded Valanginian Buchia fossils and one yielding Jurassic or Cretaceous radiolaria KJfn Flysch sequence (Late Cretaceous and Late Jurassic)\-- Rocks identical in lithology and age to unit KJf, found north of the main strand of the Denali fault system. Reed and Nelson (1980) were uncertain about assigning a Jurassic age as no Jurassic age fossils have been found in the unit in the Talkeetna quadrangle. In general, these rocks are not adjacent to those of unit KJf south of the fault system. May represent a separate part of the flysch depositional basin or a separate fault-juxtaposed basin KJfm Metasedimentary rocks (Early Cretaceous and Late Jurassic)\-- Principally deep-marine turbidite deposits consisting of graded beds of metamorphosed dark-gray to gray argillite, siltstone, and graywacke that locally alternate with beds of massive graywacke, pebbly graywacke, pebble to cobble conglomerate and sparse andesite flows(?) or sills(?) in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). Unit is thought to constitute a part of the Gravina-Nuzotin belt (Berg and others, 1972, cited in Nokleberg and others, 1992a) which extends to the southeast KJcg Conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone, shale, and volcanic rocks (Early Cretaceous and Late Jurassic)\-- Intercalated polymictic pebble and cobble conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone, shale, and flows and dikes of andesitic and latitic feldspar porphyry (Csejtey and others, 1992). In two thrust slivers along the Talkeetna thrust fault in the southeastern part of the Healy quadrangle and the northeastern part of the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle. Locally strongly sheared, displaying shear planes that cut conglomerate clasts. Age based on collections of Buchia spp. of Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous age in the Healy quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1992) and Buchia Rugosa, suggesting a Kimmeridgian age in the adjacent Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1978). Csejtey and others (1992) suggest these rocks were probably deposited at the base of the continental slope as part of submarine fan sequence and that they may constitute the westernmost outcrops of the Gravina-Nuzotin belt of Berg and others (1972) (HE002) \[symbol 793+15\] 2821 KJvr Vrain unit (Early Cretaceous and (or) Jurassic)\-- Dark-gray to black, pyritiferous shaly slate, or black fissile shale and minor medium- to dark-gray, olive- or greenish-gray siltstone. Closely resembles upper part of the Glenn Shale in the Nation River area in the eastern Charley River quadrangle (east of the map area). Crops out in northeast and southwest parts of the Livengood quadrangle (Weber and others, 1992) and northwestern part of the Circle quadrangle (F.R. Weber, unpublished data, 1998). Unit is thought to continue into the Tanana quadrangle, however mapping there did not separate it from the Wolverine quartzite. As shown here, also includes unit MzPzp of the Livengood quadrangle (Weber and others, 1992), possibly a more highly metamorphosed and tectonically disrupted equivalent unit (unit KJv, LG002; part of unit MzPzat, CI002) \[symbol 909+16\] 2860, 5216 Intrusive rocks KJg Granitic rocks (Early Cretaceous or Jurassic)\-- Consists of granitic rocks ranging from granite to quartz diorite and including minor monzonite and diorite. Restricted to the Mount Hayes and Gulkana quadrangles south of the Denali fault system, although widely distributed in these quadrangles. Generally in small stocks, dikes, and sills. Granite porphyry of Caribou Lake (unit grcl, Nokleberg and others, 1992a) has outcrop exposures as much as 5 km in area. The age of many of these intrusive bodies is inferred, however several of the plutons have been dated as Early Cretaceous and Late Jurassic (Nokleberg and others, 1992a) (unit grcl, grs1, grs2, grs3, MH002; units Kgd, hbqd, hbqm, hbgd, GU002) \[symbol 248\] 2900 Metamorphic rocks KJhc Haley Creek metaplutonic and metasedimentary rocks (Early Cretaceous to Late Jurassic)\-- Metaplutonic rocks predominantly diorite and quartz diorite, but range from trondjemite to hornblende gabbro and hornblendite; metasedimentary rocks include schistose marble, pelite, and meta-arenite. Plutonic and sedimentary protoliths vary in relative abundance from place to place. Subjected to two metamorphic events, an earlier epidote-amphibolite event and a pervasive greenschist event that produced the predominant metamorphic and cataclastic fabrics. Four K-Ar ages of hornblende from metaplutonic rocks range from 148 to 122 Ma; K-Ar ages of biotite from metasedimentary rocks are 123, 110, and 50 Ma (Winkler and others, 1980). Protolith previously correlated with the Skolai Group by MacKevett and Plafker (1974), but the unit is fault-bounded and may be unrelated to juxtaposed units. Includes the Khc and Kag units of MacKevett and Plafker (1974) (unit Khc, VA002) \[symbol 455\] 2601, 2600 (unit ag, MH002; unit Kag, Haley Creek terrane, metaplutonic rocks VA002) \[symbol 455\] 2600 JURASSIC\ Sedimentary rocks Jn Naknek Formation (Late Jurassic)\-- Thin- to thick-bedded, intercalated fossiliferous gray siltstone, shale, sandstone, and conglomerate more than 1,400-m-thick (Csejtey and others, 1978). Originally named Naknek Series by Spurr (1900, p. 169-171, 179, 181) for exposures at Naknek Lake on the Alaska Peninsula. Megafossils, particularly the pelecypod Buchia (Detterman and Reed, 1980, p. B-38; J.W. Miller, written commun., 1982-88), are common, and the fauna, which also includes ammonites, indicates age range of Oxfordian to late Tithonian. The Jurassic Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith was a major sediment source for the Naknek Formation; hence, uplift and erosion of the batholith occurred shortly after emplacement. The unit mapped here is probably correlative with the Indecision Creek and possibly Katolinat Conglomerate Members on the Alaska Peninsula (see Detterman and others, 1996) and therefore represents the upper part of the unit. Correlation has been suggested with the Root Glacier Formation of the Wrangell Mountains, east of the map area (E.M. MacKevett, in Csejtey and others, 1978) (B-1969A; AN002; TK002) \[symbol 844\] 3010 Jct Chinitna Formation, Tuxedni Group, and coeval sedimentary rocks (Late and Middle Jurassic)\-- Largely shallow-marine clastic rocks ranging from shale and siltstone to conglomerate. All rock units contain a mixture of plutonic and volcanic detritus and clasts that are presumed to have been derived from erosion of the Talkeetna Formation and related plutonic rocks of the early Jurassic magmatic arc. Overlies the Talkeetna Formation with angular uniformity. Internal contacts between stratigraphic units in this package are disconformities or slight angular unconformities. The uppermost part of this map unit, the Chinitna Formation, is disconformably or with slight angular unconformity overlain by the Naknek Formation. Restricted to the southern tier of quadrangles in the map area; widely distributed in the Valdez, Anchorage, Talkeetna Mountains, and Tyonek quadrangles. The same and correlative rock units are especially well-exposed on the Alaska Peninsula to the southwest (Detterman and others, 1996). Locally sub-divided into: (unit Jct, TK002; units Jc, Jt, AN002; units Js, Jkt, VA002) \[symbol 841\] 3140 Jc Chinitna Formation (Middle Jurassic, late Bathonian(?) and early and middle Callovian)\-- Shallow-marine shale, siltstone, and subordinate sandstone containing numerous large limestone concretions. Contains mixture of plutonic and volcanic detritus presumed to have been derived from erosion of the Talkeetna Formation and related plutonic rocks of the early Jurassic magmatic arc. Correlative with Shelikof Formation of the Alaska Peninsula (Detterman and others, 1996). Unit mapped only in the Anchorage quadrangle, south of the Castle Mountain fault system (AN002) \[symbol 971\] 3030 Jkt Kotsina Conglomerate (Middle and/or Late Jurassic?)\-- Thin- to thick-bedded, well-indurated conglomerate containing locally derived pebbles and cobbles and subordinate sandstone and shale. Reflects rapid local marine deposition in response to Middle Jurassic orogenesis. Restricted to the Valdez and adjacent McCarthy quadrangles; correlative rocks occur in the upper part of the Tuxedni Group and the Bowser Formation to the west. No fossils are known; age inferred from K-Ar age determinations on dikes that cut the unit (VA002; unit Jk, MC002) \[symbol 841\] 3110 Jtx Tuxedni Group (Middle Jurassic, Bajocian-Bathonian)\-- Fossiliferous shallow-marine siltstone, shale, and sandstone. Upper part is thin- to thick-bedded dark siltstone and shale; lower part consists of thin- to thick-bedded sandstone and local pebbly sandstone. Unconformably overlies the Talkeetna Formation and is disconformably overlain by the Chinitna Formation. Unit crops out only in the Anchorage quadrangle (Winkler, 1992), where it is much thinner than in areas to the southwest, where divided into three Formations (unit Jt, AN002) \[symbol 971\] 3180 Igneous rocks Jmu Mafic and ultramafic rocks (Jurassic?)\-- Various mafic and ultramafic rocks, widely distributed chiefly in the southern part of the map area:\ \ In the Valdez quadrangle (Winkler and others, 1980), dunite, harzburgitic dunite, wehrlite, websterite, and clinopyroxenite outcrop in a discontinuous belt 25 km long, locally called the Tonsina ultramafic complex. A complex largely of layered hornblende-pyroxene gabbro, leucogabbro, gabbronorite as much as 120 km long and 10 km wide also occurs in the Valdez quadrangle and in the adjacent Anchorage quadrangle north of or within the Border Ranges fault zone. Radiometric age determinations (Winkler and others, 1980; Winkler, 1992) suggest an Early and Middle Jurassic age.\ \ In the Anchorage quadrangle, fault-bounded cumulate ultramafic and mafic rocks of the Wolverine and Eklutna complexes of Winkler (1992) have an inferred age of Middle and Early Jurassic based on correlation with the Tonsina complex of the adjacent Valdez quadrangle and intrusion by Middle and Early Jurassic dikes (Winkler, 1992).\ \ In the southeastern Healy quadrangle, a small discordant pluton of alkali gabbro (monzogabbro) and similar rocks have an inferred age of Late Jurassic (Csejtey and others, 1992). In addition, a small body of dark greenish- or brownish-gray, coarse- to medium-grained ultramafic rock containing olivine and abundant phlogopite, limited to an area between the Denali and Hines Creek strands of the Denali fault system was inferred by Csejtey and others (1992) to be Early Cretaceous or Jurassic in age. It appears to intrude late Triassic calcareous rocks of unit T[r]{.smallcaps}cs and been metamorphosed a middle Cretaceous regional event which affected rocks in the eastern Healy quadrangle.\ \ In the McGrath quadrangle, a series of gabbro and diorite sills intrudes late Paleozoic chert and volcaniclastic rocks and late Triassic limestone and have an inferred Early Cretaceous or Jurassic age.\ \ Found throughout the northwestern Gulkana quadrangle, schistose hornblende and clinopyroxene gabbro (Nokleberg and others, in press, units scgb and shgb), even though metamorphosed to greenschist facies is included in this unit (units Ju, Jmp, Jgl, Jum, Jtu, VA002; units Jmip, Jg, Jgs, Jum, AN002; unit Jm, TY002; unit Jgb, HE002; units shgb, scgb, GU002; unit Jpmu, TK002) \[symbol 633\] 3340, 3345, 3346, 3350, 3390, 3405, 3490, 3491, 3495, 3540, 3545 \[symbol 365\] 2920, 2945 \[Consider lumping with units 4320, 4321, unit Trgb in MH quad.\] Jtr Trondhjemite (latest Jurassic)\-- Altered, sheared, and locally faintly foliated trondhjemite in large, structurally discordant, northeast-trending plutons intruding Jurassic quartz-diorite and amphibolite (Winkler, 1992). Plutons crop out in the Talkeetna Mountains and Anchorage quadrangles. K-Ar age determinations range from 129 to 149 Ma, which overlap ages of Cretaceous trondhjemite (unit Ktt) to the south (AN002; TK002) \[symbol 291+13\] 3380 Ji Alaska-Aleutian Range and Chitina Valley batholiths, undifferentiated (Late and Middle Jurassic)\-- Includes Jurassic phase of the Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith (Reed and Lanphere, 1972) and the Jurassic Chitina Valley batholith in the Valdez quadrangle (Winkler and others (1980). Ranges from granite through granodiorite to quartz diorite and tonalite. Widely distributed in southern Alaska. Probably the plutonic equivalent of volcanic rocks of Talkeetna Formation, usually found in close proximity to the Talkeetna Formation. The Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith has been best described and dated by Reed and Lanphere (1969, 1972, 1973) \[symbol 312\] 3400, 3401, 3402, 3403, 3404 (units Ji, Jgd, VA002; units Jg, Jgd, TY002; units Jgd, Jqd, TK002; units Jgd, Jqd, Jqt, AN002) Metamorphic rocks (All ages quoted for these units are metamorphic ages\ and do not necessary reflect the protolith) Jsch Greenschist and blueschist (Jurassic)\-- Diverse well-foliated, multiply-deformed metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks of greenschist and transitional blueschist facies diverse mafic metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks. Sedimentary protoliths are shale, chert, tuffaceous arenite, and limestone; volcanic protoliths are probably mostly basalt (Winkler, 1992). Outcrop along the northern flank of the Chugach Mountains in the Anchorage and Valdez quadrangles, closely associated with the Border Ranges fault system. In the Valdez quadrangle, includes the schist of Liberty Creek (G.R. Winkler, written commun., 1998). In the Anchorage quadrangle, includes the Knik River schist (unit JPzm of Winkler, 1992 or Knik River terrane of Pavlis, 1983; Pavlis and others, 1988) and is correlative with the other schistose units along the Border Ranges Fault system to the southwest, including the Raspberry Schist of Roeske and others (1989) of the Kodiak Islands and the Seldovia Schist of Roeske (1986, see also Cowan and Boss, 1978). Age control is limited, isotopic ages from metamorphic minerals indicate an Early Jurassic age of metamorphism (see Winkler, 1992; Carden and others, 1977) and Clark (1972, cited in Winkler, 1992) reports a single Permian fossil collection from limestone. The correlative Raspberry Schist of Roeske and others (1989) is intruded by the Triassic Afognak pluton. By analogy with the lithologically similar Strelna (unit PPast, this map), Winkler (1992) suggested some parts of this unit may be as old as middle Paleozoic. Locally, these rocks are included in the McHugh Complex melange. Winkler (1992) suggested that the diverse of protolith lithologies may indicate tectonic mixing prior to metamorphism Change label to Jbm at some point (was unit Klc, now Jlc, also unit Jgb, VA002) \[symbol 963\] 3610 5200 Jps Pelitic schist (Jurassic?)\-- Quartz-muscovite-albite-chlorite schist. Schist remarkably uniform in lithology and has no known correlative rocks (Winkler, 1992). Mineralogy indicates greenschist metamorphism, which Winkler (1992) interpreted probably was retrograded from amphibolite facies metamorphism. Jurassic age inferred for prograde metamorphism based on the age of adjacent amphibolite of unit Jma. K-Ar muscovite ages of 66 to 51 Ma from schist are thought to reflect intrusion of adjacent tonalite and quartz monzonite. Corresponds to unit Jps of Winkler (1992) in Anchorage quadrangle, and unit MzPzs, schist at Willow Creek, of Magoon and others (1976) \[symbol 772\] 3700 JPaur Uranatina metaplutonic complex (Jurassic and Pennsylvanian)\-- Schistose quartz diorite, quartz monzonite, granodiorite, hornblende diorite, amphibolite, and orthogneiss forming a belt across the northeastern Valdez, Gulkana and northeastern Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle in the southern part of the map area. Unit also forms the core of a tectonic inclusion in the McHugh Complex in the east-central part of the Valdez quadrangle. Mainly of upper greenschist facies metamorphic grade, some parts of unit reach amphibolite facies. Nokleberg and others (in press) report numerous Jurassic K-Ar ages for these metaplutonic rocks and interpret these to indicate the time of metamorphism. In the Valdez quadrangle (Plafker and others, 1992) report a Pennsylvanian U-Pb zircon age of 309+/-11 Ma on blastomylonitic granodiorite, interpreted as an emplacement age for at least part of the complex. However metadiorite yielded a Late Jurassic U-Pb zircon age of 153+/-4 Ma, also thought to indicate emplacement. Includes units sqd, sgd, sqm, and ag in the Gulkana quadrangle of the Metamorphic complex of Gulkana River (Nokleberg and others, in press) and units Jlg and Jag in the Valdez quadrangle (Winkler and others, 1980; G.R. Winkler, written commun., 1998) \[symbol 573\] 5245 units Jlg, Jag, VA002 \[Changed per Winkler, 1998; units sqm, sqd, sgd, shd, and ag GU002 JURASSIC AND TRIASSIC\ Sedimentary rocks JT[r]{.smallcaps}lm Limestone and marble (Early Jurassic or Late Triassic?)\-- Light- to dark-gray, fine to medium-grained, massive to poorly bedded, unfossiliferous limestone in discontinuous lenticular bodies within the Talkeetna Formation. Individual lenses as much as 30 m thick. Near intrusions, recrystallized to marble (see unit Jmb) (unit Jls, TK002; unit Trl, AN002) \[symbol 977\] 4031 JT[r]{.smallcaps}mc McCarthy Formation (Early Jurassic and Late Triassic)\-- Upper member dominantly thin-bedded, very fine-grained spiculite, impure chert, impure limestone, and shale; lower member characteristically thin-bedded impure limestone, calcareous carbonaceous shale and impure, locally spiculitic chert (MacKevett, 1978). Fossils in upper member indicate an Early Jurassic age, from Hettangian to Plensbachian, by inference, the lower unfossiliferous parts of the upper member may be as old as latest Triassic. Fossils, Monotis sp., from the lower part of the lower member indicate a Late Triassic, mainly late Norian, age and MacKevett (1978) suggested that post-Norian Late Triassic and Early Jurassic rocks might be present also. Unit as a whole is marine and the depositional character indicates a restricted environment and possibly starved basin (unit JTrm, MH002; MC002; unit JTrm, VA002) \[symbol 912\] 3820, 3821 Igneous rocks JT[r]{.smallcaps}tk Talkeetna Formation (Early Jurassic, Late Triassic?)\-- Greenstone and tuff first described by Paige and Knopf (1907); the name Talkeetna Formation introduced by Martin (1926), recognized as widespread and an important marker horizon in southern Alaska. Varies from volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks consisting of lava, agglomerate, breccia, tuff, and interbedded sandstone and shale in the Cook Inlet region to volcanic-sourced sedimentary rocks more distal from volcanic sources. Unit is the extrusive product of an early Jurassic island arc, of which the Jurassic phase of the Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith (unit Ji) is the plutonic core. Shallow marine and subaerial deposition for much of the unit is apparent from its fossil content and sedimentary facies (Winkler, 1992). An early Jurassic age is well accepted for the unit, however based on correlation with the Pogibshi unit of Kelley (1984) on the southern Kenai Peninsula, Winkler (1992) inferred a Late Triassic age for the basal part of the unit. Lenticular limestone and marble bodies are interstratified with the volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks and are mapped separately as unit JT[r]{.smallcaps}lm and part of Jmb (TK002; unit JTrt, AN002; unit Jtk, VA002; TY002; unit Mzv, TY003; TY005; units Jta, Jts, Jtrd, GU002) \[symbol 790\] 3250 TRIASSIC\ Sedimentary rocks T[r]{.smallcaps}ls Chitistone and Nizina Limestones, undivided (Late Triassic, Norian to Karnian)\-- Carbonate rocks that overlie the Nikolai Greenstone (unit Trn) are generally assigned to these two units (MacKevett, 1978). The Chitistone Limestone at the base is up to 600-m-thick and has a lower part consisting of abundant dolostone, algal-mat chips, stromatolites, and relicts of evaporites, whereas the upper part consists of diverse types of limestone including lime mudstone, wackestone, packstone, and grainstone. The overlying Nizina Limestone is as much as 500-m-thick and consists of various types of limestone that generally contain subordinate chert as nodules, lenses, and coalescing masses; it is gradational lithologically into the overlying McCarthy Formation. Along with the Nikolai Greenstone, these limestone units are critical parts of the Wrangellia terrane as defined (Jones and others, 1977). These limestones, correlative unnamed units in the Mount Hayes and Healy quadrangles, and the Kamishak Formation to the southwest are widespread in southern Alaska (unit Trcn, HE002; MC002; unit Trl, VA002; unit Trl, MH002; NB002; unit Trm, MC002 \[symbol 977\] 4030 T[r]{.smallcaps}sl Spiculite and sandy limestone (Late Triassic, Norian)\-- Dark-gray banded spiculite and chert, yellowish-orange-weathering sandy fossiliferous limestone and conglomerate and dark-gray shale in the Medfra quadrangle (Patton and others, 1980). Lithologically similar to and correlative with the lower part of the McCarthy Formation (unit JT[r]{.smallcaps}mc) in the southeast part of the map area, however it is unlikely that these units were deposited in the same basin (unit Trs, MD002) \[symbol 841\] 4032 T[r]{.smallcaps}cs Calcareous sedimentary rocks (Late Triassic, middle? Norian and Late Karnian)\-- Thin-bedded, dark- to medium-gray commonly cross-bedded, and carbonaceous intercalated calcareous shale, argillite, sandstone, siltstone, and sandy to silty and argillaceous limestone; generally intensely deformed. Basal beds predominantly fine-grained, gray sandstone and siltstone and subordinate cherty limestone containing black chert clasts (Bundtzen and others, 1997a). Age established by conodonts Negondolella polynathiformis and Epigondolella primitia and the occurrence of the pelecypod Monotis cf. M. subcircularis as reported in Csejtey and others (1992) and Bundtzen and others (1997a). Extensively exposed both north and south of the McKinley strand of the Denali fault system. Distinguished from other Late Triassic carbonate units, such as the Chitistone and Nizina Limestone by turbiditic depositional character, lack of evaporitic or sahbka facies rocks, inclusion of clastic debris, and intense deformation. Rocks in eastern and southern exposures are metamorphosed to greenschist and amphibolite facies in the MacLaren metamorphic belt of Smith (1974) and we tentatively include unit sq of the MacLaren terrane of Nokleberg and others (1992a) in this unit. Metamorphosed sedimentary rocks in the Mount Hayes quadrangle of the Aurora Peak terrane of Nokleberg and others (1992a, unit as) were tentatively correlated with these rocks and are shown as such here. Associated with this unit are large dikes, sills, and plugs of altered diabase and gabbro (HE002; MM002; unit as, sq, MH002; unit Trls, MG002) \[symbol 937\] 4033, 5201, 5207 T[r]{.smallcaps}cg Conglomerate and volcanic sandstone (Late Triassic, Norian)\-- Mapped only in a fault bounded(?) exposure at Broad Pass, just south of the Denali fault zone (Csejtey and others, 1992) in the Healy quadrangle. The lower part of this section consists of cobble to boulder conglomerate containing clasts of green volcanic rocks and red radiolarian chert. The chert clasts have yielded Permian radiolaria. Finer grained volcanogenic conglomerate, higher in the section locally contains abundant Heterastridium sp., indicating a Late Triassic, late Norian age. The uppermost part of the section is massive volcanic sandstone. No Permian source area is known for the chert of this unit and its overall lithologic character is unique for the Healy quadrangle (HE002; unit Trs, MG002) \[symbol 937+13\] 4050 T[r]{.smallcaps}ps Phosphatic shale and limestone (Triassic?)\-- Thinly bedded, medium- to dark-gray, locally calcareous, phyllitic, and graphitic, phosphatic shale, medium-gray micritic limestone, and medium-dark- to dark-gray packstone having sand- or silt-sized quartz and sparite. These lithologies grade into medium-gray calcareous sandstone and medium-light-gray phosphatic granule conglomerate (Weber and others, 1992). Triassic to Permian microfossils constrain the age and Weber and others (1992) infer a Triassic age because of similarities to the Glenn Shale (Brabb, 1969) of the Charley River quadrangle to the northeast of the map area (unit Trs, LG002) \[symbol 973\] 4080 T[r]{.smallcaps}sc Black shale and chert (Triassic)\-- Interlayered black shale or slate, light, olive-greenish-gray thinly bedded to massive and thickly bedded radiolarian-bearing chert, and light greenish-gray tuff (Weber and others, 1992). Mapped only in Livengood quadrangle. In Tanana quadrangle, equivalent rocks are part of undivided unit TrPs (unit Trc, LG002) \[symbol 841\] 4110 Igneous rocks\ Volcanic rocks T[r]{.smallcaps}n Nikolai Greenstone and related rocks (Late and/or Middle Triassic)\-- Massive, dark-gray-green, dark-gray-brown, and maroon-gray subaerial and submarine basalt flows and minor interbedded volcaniclastic sedimentary rocks, aquagene and epiclastic tuff, breccia, argillite, and radiolarian chert (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). Widely distributed and several thousands of meters thick. Commonly associated with Late Triassic carbonate and cherty carbonate rocks. Together with the Chitistone and Nizina Limestones, this unit is one of the diagnostic units of the Wrangellia terrane (Jones and others, 1977). Commonly metamorphosed to lower greenschist facies. Similar or correlative units include the Cottonwood Bay Greenstone of the Lime Hills quadrangle (Reed and Gamble, 1988; Gamble and Reed, 1996) and unnamed Triassic greenstone units in the Talkeetna Mountains (Csejtey and others, 1978), Healy (Csejtey and others, 1992), and Mount McKinley quadrangles (Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993) and the Livengood (Weber and others, 1992) and Kantishna River (Chapman and others, 1975) quadrangles (HE002; VA002; MH002; GU002; units Trnf; Trnp, MH002) (unit Trbd, HE002; MM002) (unit MzPzg, LH002; unit Trm, TY002) (unit Trv, TK002) (unit Trm, LG002; KH002; unit Trb, LH003) \[symbol 375\] 4420, 4421, 4422, 4423, 4425, 4430, 4210 Plutonic rocks Trc Carbonatite (Triassic)\-- Intensely magnetic dolomite-calcite-magnetite-apatite-rich rock in two sill-like bodies in the southeastern Tanana quadrangle. 40Ar/39Ar age of about 200 Ma reported on contact metamorphic mica reported by Reifenstuhl and others (1998) and interpreted as an intrusion age (units ga and cu, MH002; unit Trg, MC002; unit Trum, MG002; units Trg, Trcg, GU002) \[symbol 640\] 4320, 4321 T[r]{.smallcaps}gb Gabbro, diabase, and metagabbro (Late Triassic?)\-- Chiefly hornblende-, clinopyroxene-, and hornblende-clinopyroxene-gabbro and sparse quartz gabbro and quartz diorite, along with other mafic and ultramafic rocks. Possible source of flows in the Nikolai Greenstone and related units Metamorphic rocks T[r]{.smallcaps}nm Metavolcanic and associated metasedimentary rocks (Late Triassic)\-- Dominantly metabasalt, slate, and other low-grade metasedimentary and metavolcaniclastic rocks; probably derived from the Nikolai Greenstone (Trn unit) of contiguous areas. Corresponds to the T[r]{.smallcaps}vs unit of Csejtey and others (1992) in the Healy quadrangle, the T[r]{.smallcaps}vs unit of Csejtey and others (1978) in the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle, and the csv unit of Nokleberg and others (1992a) in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (unit csv, MH002; unit JTrs, NB002; unit Trvs, HE002; unit Trvs, TK002) \[symbol 372\] 4410, 4450, 4440 MESOZOIC AND PALEOZOIC\ Assemblages and Sequences The Chulitna sequence, consists of disparate thrust-imbricated sequences or assemblages ranging in age from Cretaceous to Devonian (Csejtey and others, 1992). Gravity measurements by R.L. Morin (Csejtey and others, 1992, p. 31) indicate that these are rootless thrust sheets. The Chulitna sequence crops out in the southwestern part of the Healy quadrangle, southeastern Mount McKinley quadrangle, and the northeastern extreme of the Talkeetna quadrangle. Csejtey and others (1992) indicate that these rocks are dissimilar in lithology, depositional environment, and age from surrounding units and suggest that they are tectonically emplaced remnants of deep oceanic sedimentary units. Units of the Chulitna sequence include the following: JT[r]{.smallcaps}su Red and brown sedimentary rocks and basalt (Early Jurassic and Late Triassic)\-- Red-bed sequence of sandstone, siltstone, argillite, and conglomerate grading upward into highly fossiliferous brown sandstone and brownish-gray siltstone. Thickness more than 2,000 m. Red-bed sequence contains a few thin interbeds of brown fossiliferous sandstone, pink to light-gray dense limestone, and intercalated basalt flows. Clasts in the red-beds are dominantly basalt cobbles and pebbles derived from underlying basalt and from flows within the sequence. Quartzite pebbles and flakes of white mica and red radiolarian chert pebbles and grains are present in subordinate amounts. Fossils indicate a Late Triassic and Early Jurassic age. Mapped only in the Healy quadrangle; on strike southwest of Eldridge Glacier in the Talkeetna quadrangle is replaced by light-green to maroon volcaniclastic rocks of Late Triassic age (see unit JT[r]{.smallcaps}ct, below) \[symbol 838\] 3830 (unit JTrrs, HE002) JT[r]{.smallcaps}ct Crystal tuff, argillite, chert, graywacke, and limestone (Late Jurassic to Late Triassic?)\-- Moderately deep to deep marine sequence of tightly folded and internally faulted tuff and other rocks at least several thousand meters thick; tuff constitutes about 80 percent of the sequence. Mapped in southwest Healy and northwest Talkeetna Mountains quadrangles. Csejtey and others (1992) indicate that the argillite, chert, graywacke, and limestone occur only in a narrow belt along the western part of the outcrop area and that the boundary between these rocks and the dominant tuff portion may be tectonic. In the Healy quadrangle, a thin interbed of volcaniclastic sandstone in the tuff yielded fossils of late Sinemurian age (R.W. Imlay, cited in Csejtey and others, 1992). Csejtey and others (1992) indicate that because these fossils were from near the top of the tuffaceous section, that the section may be as old as Late Triassic. Some chert beds in other parts of the unit have yielded Late Jurassic (Callovian to early Tithonian) radiolaria and the calcareous rocks yielded early Sinemurian fossils at several localities (Csejtey and others, 1992) \[symbol 905\] 3850 (unit JTrta, HE002) Also (5010 and 4235, units JTrsv and Trvs, TL002) T[r]{.smallcaps}lb Limestone and basalt sequence (Late Triassic, Norian)\-- Interlayered limestone and amygdaloidal basalt flows. Limestone is medium-gray, massive to thick-bedded and locally altered to fine- to medium-grained marble. Fossils including Monotis subcircularis, indicate age. Basalt is dark-to greenish-gray, aphanitic and contains numerous amygdules. Character of the unit suggests shallow-water deposition and chemistry of the basalts suggests an ocean island shield volcano (Csejtey and others, 1992). Occurs as thrust slivers in the Chulitna sequence in the Healy quadrangle and extends a short distance into the Talkeetna quadrangle (unit T[r]{.smallcaps}lb, HE002; MM002; TL002) \[symbol 838+15\] 4021 T[r]{.smallcaps}r Red beds (Late Triassic?)\-- Red sandstone, siltstone, argillite and conglomerate similar to unit JT[r]{.smallcaps}su, distinct from it because of the occurrence of clasts of gabbro, serpentinite, and fossiliferous Permian(?) limestone (Csejtey and others, 1992). Found only in thrust slivers in the southwestern Healy quadrangle. Unconformably overlies volcanogenic and sedimentary rocks of Triassic to Devonian age (unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Dv) (HE002; unit JTrrs, MM002) \[symbol 838+16\] 4060 T[r]{.smallcaps}Dv Volcanic and sedimentary rocks (early Triassic to late Devonian)\-- Intercalated greenish-gray to black tuffaceous chert, volcanic conglomerate and lesser maroon volcanic mudstone, basaltic breccia, laminated flysch-like graywacke and shale, large lenses of light-gray thick-bedded limestone, and poorly exposed beds of ammonite-bearing limestone (Csejtey and others, 1992) mapped only in the Healy quadrangle. Fossils include Devonian and Carboniferous fossils in the chert, Permian fossils including brachiopods in the thick-bedded limestone and Early Triassic ammonites and conodonts from the limestone. Probably greenschist facies (Csejtey and others, 1992). Considered one of the stratigraphically lower parts of the Chulitna sequence (unit TrDv, HE002) \[symbol 838+14\] 5110 Dsb Serpentinite, basalt, chert and gabbro (Late Devonian)\-- Sheared serpentinite tectonically intermixed with chert and pillow basalt which form lenticular and podiform tectonic blocks (Csejtey and others, 1992). Radiolaria from the chert are Late Devonian (Fammennian). Probably a dismembered ophiolite assemblage, unit is lowest part of the Chulitna sequence. Mapped in the Healy and Mount McKinley quadrangles (unit Dsb, HE002; MM002) \[symbol 678\] 7325 End of Chulitna Sequence Oceanic rocks of the Seventymile, Angayucham, Tozitna, and Innoko assemblages. Possibly correlative assemblages of mafic, ultramafic, and associated, typically chert-rich sedimentary rocks (including the Rampart Group of Brosge and others, 1969, in the Tanana quadrangle) have been assigned to the Tozitna, Angayucham, Innoko, and Seventymile assemblages in the northern part of the compilation area. These assemblages are similar in lithology, age, and allochthonous occurrence. It is well accepted that these are oceanic rock packages (Patton and others, 1994a; Dover, 1994). There is less agreement on the exact nature and original site of deposition, and amount and direction of transport of these sequences. On this map, three lithologic subdivisions are shown in similar colors: 1) ultramafic or dominantly mafic/ultramafic rocks, 2) dominantly sedimentary rocks (with or without greenstone), and 3) mafic, ultramafic, and associated sedimentary rocks, undivided. Seventymile assemblage JPsu Ultramafic rocks (Jurassic? and/or Permian)\-- Serpentinized peridotite, harzburgite, and dunite. Not directly dated but age inferred from association with mafic and low-grade metasedimentary rocks of the greenstone and chert unit (JPzsgs). Unit restricted to small areas of outcrop in the Big Delta, Fairbanks, and Circle quadrangles and more extensive exposures to the east of the map area in the Eagle and Tanacross quadrangles (Foster and others, 1994). Corresponds to unit Pu in the Big Delta quadrangle (Weber and others, 1978), unit Dmu in the Fairbanks quadrangle (Pewe and others, 1996) and unit Pzp in the Circle quadrangle (Foster and others, 1983). Unit is structurally infolded with mafic and pelitic schists of unit PzZysa \[symbol 468\] 5980, 7090 unit Pu, BD002; unit Pzp, CI002; unit Dmu, FB002 JPzsgs Greenstone and chert (Jurassic? to middle? Paleozoic)\-- Massive greenstone, amygdaloidal pillow basalt and metatuff and associated metachert, quartzite, phyllite, silica-carbonate lenses, and other low metamorphic grade sedimentary rocks. Glaucophane-bearing rock associated with greenstone in the northern Eagle quadrangle, east of the map area, yielded a Permian Ar-Ar age (Foster and others, 1992, p. 9). Elsewhere the greenstone is intercalated with chert that yields radiolaria and rare shelly fossils of Mississippian through Triassic age. Mafic rocks locally contain glaucophane. Includes the Pgc and Pq units of Weber and others (1978) in the Big Delta quadrangle, and the Pzg unit of Foster and other (1983) in the Circle quadrangle \[symbol 461\] 5830, 5960 units MzPzgc, Pq BD002; 5640 unit Pzg, CI002 Angayucham assemblage Jaum Ultramafic rocks (Jurassic?)\-- Serpentinized peridotite, dunite, and harzburgite, having associated layered gabbro and anorthosite, and locally garnet-amphibolite tectonite, possibly derived from eclogite at the base. Forms the upper part of the Angayucham assemblage along the southeast margin of the Yukon-Koyukuk basin and the northwest flack of the Ruby metamorphic complex. Primary igneous minerals and textures are preserved, yet most contacts strongly to cryptically deformed, especially at the structural base of the unit. K-Ar hornblende ages from hornblende gabbro and hornblende-bearing dikes range from 172 to 138 Ma and dates from garnet-amphibolite range from 172 to 155 (Patton and others, 1977; Patton and others, 1994a). All are considered cooling ages related to tectonic emplacement of the ultramafic and mafic rocks. Considered part of a dismembered ophiolite derived from the root of a volcanic arc, rather than a mid-ocean ridge setting (Loney and Himmelberg, 1985; Patton and others, 1994a; see also Patton and others, 1994b). Includes unit JPu in the Melozitna (Patton and others, 1978) and Tanana quadrangles (Chapman and others, 1982), unit Juu in the Nulato quadrangle (W.W. Patton, Jr., written commun., 1977), and unit Ju of Dover (1994) \[symbol 468\], 5150 (MZ002; NL003; TN002; RB004; unit Jmu, TN003) JMab Basalt and chert (Jurassic? to Mississippian)\-- Dominantly basalt, greenstone, gabbro, diabase, and chert. Minor basaltic tuff, volcanic breccia, and carbonate rocks. Basalt and greenstone include pillow basalt and metamorphosed spilitic basalt. Unit consists of discontinuous and large unsheared blocks and lenses of incipiently recystallized mafic rocks in a low metamorphic grade, blastomylonitic, metasedimentary matrix. Matrix is bedded chert of Triassic age, argillite, slate, limestone of Mississippian age, and andesitic and basaltic tuff. Locally, the metamorphic minerals glaucophane, prehnite, and pumpellyite are present. Unit is thermally metamorphosed along contact with middle Cretaceous (110-120 Ma, unit Kg) plutons in the Melozitna and Tanana quadrangles. Includes unit JPb in the Melozitna (Patton and others, 1978) and Ruby quadrangles (Chapman and Patton, 1978), unit JMms (Chapman and others, 1982) and JMbc (Dover, 1994) in the Tanana quadrangle, and the westernmost part of unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Mb in the Nulato quadrangle (W.W. Patton, written commun., 1997) \[symbol 464\] 5140 (unit JPb, MZ002; RB004; unit TrPv, KH003; unit JMbc, TN003) Tozitna assemblage north of the Kaltag Fault JMtru Greenstone, chert, and ultramafic rocks, undivided (Jurassic? to Mississippian?)\-- Poorly dated spilitic basalt and diabase largely altered to greenstone. Locally, includes minor sedimentary rocks, generally low metamorphic grade cataclastic assemblage of generally dark gray chert and siliceous argillite. Also includes subordinate volcaniclastic rocks and minor Mississippian limestone. Mafic, ultramafic, and associated metasedimentary rocks of the Tozitna terrane of Silberling and Jones (1984; see fig.2, herein) in the Tanana and Circle quadrangles are part of this unit. Similar rocks occur on strike to the northeast in the Bettles quadrangle (Patton and Miller, 1973). Includes unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Pv in the Tanana (Chapman and others, 1975) quadrangle, unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Mru in the Tanana quadrangle (Reifenstuhl and others, 1997), and unit MzPzc, the Circle Volcanics, in the Circle quadrangle (Foster and others, 1983). The origin, original setting, and tectonic emplacement of these rocks are discussed by Churkin and others (1982), Coney and Jones (1985), Gemuts and others (1983), Dover (1994), Foster and others, 1994, and Patton and others, 1994a \[symbol 464\] 5132, RB003; RB004; new TN003 unit assigned JT[r]{.smallcaps}tmu Mafic and ultramafic rocks (Jurassic? to Triassic)\-- Diabase, gabbro, leucogabbro, and greenstone; ultramafic rocks include serpentinized peridotite, harzburgite, and werhlite. Locally, may include minor associated sedimentary rocks. Tentative age range based on K-Ar age of 210+/-6 Ma reported by Brosge and others (1969; age recalculated using constants of Steiger and Jager, 1977) on gabbro in Rampart Group, and stratigraphic and/or intrusive relationship with rocks as young as Triassic. Includes unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Mrg in the Tanana B-1 quadrangle (Reifenstuhl and others, 1997), unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Mrv in the Livengood quadrangle (Weber and others, 1992) (Foster and others, 1983) \[symbol 468+16\] 5130, unit TrMrv, LG002; unknown label in TN003 T[r]{.smallcaps}Mts Sedimentary rocks (Triassic to Mississippian)\-- Chert, metachert, metatuff, quartzite, phyllite, and other associated incipiently metamorphosed sedimentary rocks; includes basalt and amygdaloidal pillow basalt in places. Corresponds to the Rampart Group of Brosge and others (1969) in the Tanana quadrangle, the T[r]{.smallcaps}Mra, T[r]{.smallcaps}Mrb, T[r]{.smallcaps}Mrs, and T[r]{.smallcaps}Mrl units of Reifenstuhl and others (1997) in the Tanana B-1 quadrangle, and the T[r]{.smallcaps}Mrs unit of Weber and others (1992) in the Livengood quadrangle and unit PaMc of Foster and others in the Circle quadrangle \[symbol 461\] 5020 unit TrMrs, LG002; unit JMms, TN002; unit PaMc, CI002; unit JMr, TN003 Tozitna assemblage south of the Kaltag Fault JMtu Mafic, ultramafic, and sedimentary rocks, undivided (Jurassic to Mississippian)\-- Basalt, gabbro, diabase, basaltic tuff, and chert. May include minor ultramafic rocks and other associated low metamorphic grade metasedimentary rocks in the Nulato, Ophir, and Ruby quadrangles that resemble the Tozitna assemblage north of the Kaltag fault interpreted as an offset equivalent. Poorly dated. Corresponds to the eastern parts of unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Mb of Patton (written commun., 1997) in the Nulato quadrangle, unit TrMb in the Ophir quadrangle (Chapman and others, 1985), and parts of units mc and mi in the Ruby quadrangle (Cass, 1959). A large area in the northwest part of the Ruby quadrangle is shown as this unit; however, we believe on the basis of information from R.M. Chapman (oral commun., 1998) that unit JMtu primarily occurs capping ridges and that rocks of the Ruby metamorphic complex occur at lower elevations. Further mapping will be necessary to resolve the geology of this area \[symbol 464\] 5133 unit TrMb, OP002; NL003; part of units mc, mi, RB002, parts of unit mi, NL002; Puchner units, unknown, RB004? Jtu Ultramafic rocks, undivided (Jurassic)\-- Cumulate ultramafic rocks, harzburgite tectonite, and other ultramafic rocks, undivided; K-Ar ages on hornblende of 151+/-4.5, 172+/-5.2 and 269+/-8 Ma reported by Patton and others (1984), the Permian age is considered spurious. Corresponds to unit Ju of Patton and others (1984) and the informal Jcu, Jht, and Juu units of Patton (written commun., 1997) in the Nulato quadrangle \[symbol 468\] 3496, 3497, 3498 units Jcu, Jht, Juu, NL003 JPztm Mafic and ultramafic rocks, undivided (Jurassic? and/or Paleozoic?)\-- Gabbro sills and subordinate quartz diorite, quartz monzonite, and pyroxenite. Undated; age and assignment to the Tozitna assemblage based on lithologic associations and regional comparisons. Corresponds to informal Pzmi unit of Puchner (1984) in western Ruby quadrangle \[symbol 468\] 5113 unit Pzmi of (Puchner), RB005 T[r]{.smallcaps}Mtqp Quartzite and phyllite (Triassic? to Mississippian?)\-- Quartzite, phyllitic quartzite, phyllite, and subordinate limestone. Occupies a position structurally between the Tozitna assemblage and the Ruby metamorphic complex south of the Kaltag fault. Originally assigned to the Slate Creek thrust panel of the Angayucham terrane (see fig. 2) by Patton and others (1994a) and to the Ruby metamorphic complex by Puchner (1984), we have provisionally assigned it to the Tozitna assemblage herein based on lithologic compatibility, map distribution and its distinctly lower metamorphic grade than the underlying Ruby metamorphic complex. Poorly dated and of controversial age; Dillon and others (1986) assigned similar rocks in the Wiseman quadrangle a Triassic to Mississippian age on the basis of radiolaria from intercalated chert layers whereas Patton and others (1994a) prefer a Devonian age, based on palynflora also in the Wiseman and, additionally, the Christian quadrangles. Corresponds to the T[r]{.smallcaps}Mq unit of Patton (written commun., 1997) in the Nulato quadrangle and unit Pzrp of Puchner (1984) in the western Ruby quadrangle. A similar, but more highly metamorphosed quartzite unit in the Melozitna quadrangle (unit PzpCq, Patton and others, 1978) is here shown within unit PzZrpg of the Ruby metamorphic complex; W.W. Patton, Jr. (personal commun., 1998) suggest these may represent the same unit \[symbol 461+16\] 5542 unit Pzc, KH003 (is this unit part of this?; unit TrMq, NL003; unit PzpCq, MZ002; unit Pzrp {Ruby phyllite}, RB005 T[r]{.smallcaps}Mtsu Sedimentary rocks, undivided (Triassic? to Mississippian?)\-- Rocks tentatively correlated with the Rampart Group of the Tanana quadrangle, including chert, slate, siltstone, meta-graywacke, basalt, greenstone, and minor limestone. Corresponds to informal Pzrg unit and its\' subdivisions of Puchner (1984) in western Ruby quadrangle \[symbol 461\] 5131 (no such code) units Pzrgmsv, Pzrgs, RB005 Innoko assemblage Jium Ultramafic and mafic rocks, undivided (Jurassic to Mississippian?)\-- Peridotite, dunite, serpentinite, harzburgite tectonite, and cumulate ultramafic rocks of the Mt Hurst area, and subordinate gabbro, diorite, and basalt. Age based on dating of correlative rocks in the Tozitna sequence of the Nulato quadrangle. Includes ph and pc units of Chapman and others (1985) in the Ophir quadrangle. In the Iditarod quadrangle, gabbronorite, gabbro and diabase and associated serpentinized harzburgite, minor dunite and rare pyroxenite of the Dishna River mafic and ultramafic rocks (Miller and Bundtzen, 1994) occur as fault-bounded slivers along the Dishna River fault zone \[symbol 468\] 5191, units ph, pc, OP002; unit Jdr, ID002 JT[r]{.smallcaps}ta Cherty tuff, crystal and lithic tuffs, and volcanic breccia (Early Jurassic? and Triassic)\-- Dark greenish, very fine-grained cherty tuff grading into greenish-gray radiolarian chert. Also fine- to coarse-grained crystal and lithic tuffs. Volcanic breccia and conglomerate composed of poorly sorted clasts of mafic volcanic rocks and cherty tuff in a crystal and lithic tuff matrix. Age assignment is from widespread radiolaria and conodonts from the cherty beds. Mapped only in the Medfra quadrangle (unit JT[r]{.smallcaps}t, Patton and others, 1980). Unit assigned to the Innoko terrane (see fig. 2, herein) by Patton and others (1980); however unit is unique in the Rampart Group related terranes (Innoko, Tozitna, and Angayucham) because of its young age relative to other units and its tuffaceous character. Unit outcrops in a distinctive band east of the more typical Innoko terrane rocks. Very similar in age and lithology to unit JT[r]{.smallcaps}ct of the Chulitna sequence, but there is little reason to believe that these are the same unit \[symbol 464\] 3851 unit JTrt, MD002 \[thought largely Triassic in age, Jim Dover would put in Rampart Group equivalent\] T[r]{.smallcaps}Mis Sandstone, grit, and argillite (Triassic to Mississippian)\-- Calcareous graywacke, grit, chert-argillite-clast pebble conglomerate, and subordinate interbedded argillite, tuff, and volcaniclastic rocks. Poorly dated but may overlie T[r]{.smallcaps}Mica unit. Corresponds to the T[r]{.smallcaps}Ms unit of Chapman and others (1985) in the Ophir quadrangle \[symbol 461+13\] 5021 (unit TrMs, OP002) T[r]{.smallcaps}Mica Chert, argillite, and volcaniclastic rocks (Triassic to Mississippian)\-- Dominantly medium-dark- to dark-gray, thin-banded, bedded radiolarian-bearing chert having thin interbeds of slaty argillaceous rocks, including argillite, slate, and phyllite. Also includes subordinate intermediate to basaltic volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks including lithic and waterlaid tuff, fossiliferous shallow-water limestone, grit, and arkosic sandstone lenses. Age range based on radiolaria of Mississippian age, conodonts, and foraminifera of Mississippian age collected from unit in the Ruby and Medfra quadrangles (Chapman and Patton, 1979). Latest Devonian radiolaria were collected in two localities in the southwestern Ruby quadrangle (Chapman and Patton, 1979) and are the only Devonian fossils known from unequivocal Innoko assemblage rocks; however Patton and others (1994a) report Devonian palynflora from the Wiseman and Christian quadrangles in the similar Angayucham assemblage. A K-Ar age of 302+/-9 Ma on amphibole from tuff indicates a Pennsylvanian age (Miller and Bundtzen, 1994). This unit originally described by Chapman and Patton (1979) and redefines part of the Cretaceous chert and argillite unit of Cass (1959, unit Kc). Corresponds to the T[r]{.smallcaps}Mc unit of Chapman and others (1985) in the Ophir quadrangle and Miller and Bundtzen (1994) in the Iditarod quadrangle. Includes the PaMc unit of Patton and others (1980) in the Medfra quadrangle. Corresponds to the informal MDc unit of Puchner (1984) in the western Ruby quadrangle \[symbol 461\] 5025, unit TrMc 5021?, 5111, 5112, 6080, 6390 unit PzpCs or T[r]{.smallcaps}Mc, OP002; unit TrMc, ID002; units PaMc, MD002; unit MDc, RB003; RB005 Pig Graywacke (Permian)\-- Fine- to medium-grained, medium-gray to dark-greenish-gray, locally calcareous, graywacke and grit to small-pebble graywacke conglomerate, and greenish-gray to medium-dark gray mudstone and shale. Originally described by Chapman and Patton (1978); unit redefines part of the Cretaceous chert and argillite unit of Cass (1959, unit Kc). Probable Permian microfossils and bryozoan and echinoderm fragments were collected from the northern of two localities (Chapman and Patton, 1978) are basis of unit age. Mertie and Harrington (1924) reported a possible ammonite fragment of indeterminate age in the southern outcrop area, which Cass (1959) used to infer a Cretaceous age. Known only from the Ruby quadrangle, mapped as unit Pg of Chapman and Patton (1978) and Puchner (1984) in southwestern Ruby quadrangle, which Chapman and Patton (1978) correlated with the Rampart Group \[symbol 461+14\] 5745, 1810, part of unit Kc, RB002; unit Pg, RB003; RB005 MDl Fine-grained limestone (Mississippian? to Devonian?)\-- Light- to medium-dark-gray, fine-grained, slightly recrystallized, conodont-bearing limestone containing minor calcite veinlets and lenses. Includes minor chert granules and mafic rock fragments, chiefly concentrated in thin layers, and rare thin layers containing poorly preserved stromatoporoids, crinoid fragments, and shelly debris including an unidentified brachiopod. Found in small outcrop exposures and lenses within unit TrMica of this map in the Ophir (unit MDl, Chapman and others, 1985) and Medfra (unit PaMcl, Patton and others, 1980) quadrangles Includes the PaMc and PaMcl units of Patton and others (1980) in the Medfra quadrangle and MDl unit of Chapman and others in the Ophir quadrangle. \[symbol 704\] 6320, 6380 unit MDl, OP002; unit PaMcl, MD002 End of Oceanic rocks group Stratigraphic sequences\ Mystic sequence JDm Mystic stratigraphic sequence, undivided (Jurassic to Devonian)\-- Mapped only in reconnaissance, but presumed to consist of some of the rock types listed below under descriptions of the Tatina River Volcanics, Sheep Creek, and St. John Hill Formations: basalt, limestone, siltstone, sandstone, and various other minor rock types. Locally sub-divided into: \[symbol 458\] 5375 unit Pzmu, LH004 JT[r]{.smallcaps}tv Tatina River Volcanic and equivalent units (Early Jurassic, Sinemurian? and Triassic)\-- Where best studied in the McGrath quadrangle (Bundtzen and others, 1997a), consist of three members.\ \ Upper member (unit lJs of Bundtzen and others, 1997a) consists chiefly of green medium-grained, concretion-rich volcaniclastic sandstone, subordinate medium- to very dark-gray, phosphatic shale, and minor tan chert-pebble conglomerate. Lower Jurassic ammonite-bearing phosphatic shale beds in the western Talkeetna quadrangle, which Reed and Nelson (1980) assigned to their unit KJs are reassigned to this member.\ \ A lower volcanic member (unit T[r]{.smallcaps}ab of Bundtzen and others, 1997a) consists of dark-greenish-gray elongate bodies of pillow basalt. Includes interbeds and lenses of mudstone, shale, and siltstone. Locally, gabbro bodies, interpreted as feeders to the pillow basalt flows are included in the unit. In the western Talkeetna quadrangle, includes basaltic rocks mapped by Reed and Nelson (1980) as units KJb and Pzbs. Each of these units has similar reported major element oxide contents and also show similar copper content between 200 to 500 ppm. Age control is lacking; assignment based on association with other members. Laterally gradational with the volcanic member is a volcaniclastic member (unit T[r]{.smallcaps}s of Bundtzen and others, 1997a), which consists of brown silty shale and light-gray, green, and black chert associated with coarse volcanic sandstone and conglomerate. Bundtzen and others (1997a) reported the occurrence of Monotis subcircularis, indicating a Late Triassic (Norian) age (unit KJb, TL002; units lJs, Trab, Trs, MG002; unit Trb, MG003; unit Pzbs, TL002) \[symbol 420\] 2890, 3210, 4215, 5450, Mystic PMl Younger limestone (Permian to Mississippian)\-- Brown to gray, layered to nodular limestone, calcareous siltstone, varicolored chert, and limestone-chert conglomerate. Conglomerate contains rounded clasts of silty sandstone, chert, and limestone. Conodonts indicate a Late Mississippian age (Bundtzen and others, 1994). Shown separately only in western Lime Hills quadrangle \[symbol 458\] 6335 unit PPl, LH00? PDsc Sheep Creek Formation and correlative siliciclastic units (Permian to Devonian)\-- Clastic-dominated, but heterogeneous, middle third of the Mystic stratigraphic sequence. Consists of sandstone, conglomerate, siltstone, and argillite, and lesser chert and limestone. Age control is provided by conodonts, fusilinids, brachiopods, corals, and plants. Depositional environments are dominantly fluvial, but carbonate-platform and deep marine environments are also represented by the subordinate rock types in this grouping of units. Includes Sheep Creek Formation of eastern and western McGrath and western Lime Hills quadrangles, units Pacg and uPzac of eastern McGrath quadrangle (Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1997; 1998; Bundtzen and others, 1997a), the conglomerate of Mt. Dall (unit Pag) in the Talkeetna quadrangle (Reed and Nelson, 1980), and unit Ps of Medfra quadrangle (Patton and others, 1980). The Conglomerate of Mt. Dall, which has yielded a Permian plant assemblage of Siberian affinity (Mamay and Reed, 1984), contains clasts of Devonian limestone of the Mystic stratigraphic sequence, and chert, chert-pebble conglomerate, and graded sandstone, presumably derived from the Dillinger stratigraphic succession. Conglomerate of unit Ps in Medfra quadrangle (Patton and others, 1980) contains clasts of limestone of the subjacent Nixon Fork sequence \[symbol 458+15\] 6010 unit Pad, TL002; unit PDs, MG002; units PDs, uPzs, uPzac, MG003; unit Ps, MD002 Dsc Shale and chert (Devonian)\-- Occurs in limited area in eastern Lime Hills quadrangle. Important because unit hosts Gargaryah bedded-barite deposit. Age Middle to Late Devonian (Givetian to Frasnian) \[symbol 458+14\] 6911 unit Dsc, LH004 Dml Older limestone (Devonian)\-- Chiefly algal-laminated limestone and dolostone of shallow-marine origin. In eastern McGrath quadrangle, includes members Dls (consisting of limestone, mudstone, siltstone, and lithic sandstone) and uDl of the St. John Hill Formation, and members lDl and lDd of the Sheep Creek Formation (Bundtzen and others, 1997a). In the western McGrath and western Lime Hills quadrangles, includes unit uDl. Age, constrained by conodonts, corals, and brachiopods, is chiefly Late Devonian (Frasnian) \[symbol 458+708\] 6931, 6932 units uDl, lDd, lDl, MG002; unit uDl, MG003; units lDl, uDl, LH004 End of Mystic sequence Mystic and Dillinger stratigraphic sequences, undivided JCmd Mystic and Dillinger stratigraphic sequences, undivided (Jurassic to Cambrian)\-- Includes rocks in the Healy, Mount McKinley, and Talkeetna quadrangles, which appear to correlate with the Dillinger and Mystic sequences of the eastern McGrath quadrangle, but which have only been studied in reconnaissance. Jurassic to Cambrian quoted encompasses the entire age range of the Mystic and Dillinger sequences where they are better studied; fossils within the area mapped as undivided Mystic and Dillinger range from Permian to Silurian. In the Talkeetna quadrangle (Reed and Nelson, 1980), unit Pzus (the original Mystic terrane of Jones and Siberling (1979) consists of a structurally complex assemblage of deep marine facies (siliciclastic turbidites, cherty pelagite, pillow basalt, and wildflysch), slope and shelf facies (chert, shale, and reefoid limestone), and nonmarine facies (conglomerate and sandstone). Fossil ages range from Early Devonian to Permian; strata below the Devonian limestone in this belt belong to the Dillinger sequence. In the Healy quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1992) and Mount McKinley quadrangle (Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993), units DOs and DOls, respectively, consist of a complexly folded assemblage of (1) fine-grained, calcareous, siliceous, and siliciclastic strata, (2) calcareous siliciclastic turbidites containing a Late Silurian to possibly Early Devonian conodont fauna (corresponding to the Terra Cotta Mountains Sandstone of Bundtzen and others, 1997a), and (3) calcareous turbidites and debris flows that have yielded Early Silurian conodonts (Dumoulin and others, in press). Separately mapped carbonate bodies within the outcrop belt of undivided Dillinger and Mystic strata are here assigned to unit DSmdl: \[symbol 458+13\] 5370 unit DOs, HE002; MM002; units DOs?, MM002; unit Pzus, TL002 DSmdl Unnamed limestone (Devonian and Silurian)\-- Limestone bodies within the outcrop area of the undivided Dillinger and Mystic stratigraphic sequences. In the Talkeetna quadrangle, includes Silurian and Devonian limestones that were mapped as separate units by Reed and Nelson (1980). Silurian unit (unit Sl, Reed and Nelson, 1980) consists of light-gray to light-brown massive-weathering meta-limestone and local thin-bedded to laminated limestone; age based on graptolites, dasclydacean algae, and corals. Fossil content suggests, at face value, both shallow and deep marine environments. Devonian limestone (unit Dl, Reed and Nelson, 1980) contains locally abundant corals and stromatoporoids, and brachiopods (of Siberian affinity, Blodgett and Brease, 1997), indicative of shallow marine deposition. Corals, brachiopods, and conodonts indicate Early to Late Devonian (Emsian to Frasnian) age. In the Mount McKinley and Healy quadrangles, includes limestone bodies within units DOs and DOls (Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993; Csejtey and others, 1992), respectively. Recent work by Dumoulin and others (in press) using conodonts for age control showed that the previously mapped limestone unit \[(ls)DOs\] in the Healy quadrangle includes both Silurian deep-water limestone and Late Devonian shallow-water limestone \[symbol 836\] 6615 units Dls, MG002; units Sl, Dl, TL002; unit (ls)DOs, HE002; MM002 End of Dillinger and Mystic sequences, undivided Sedimentary rocks T[r]{.smallcaps}Ps Sedimentary rocks, undivided (Triassic to Permian)\-- Dominantly dark gray, typically phyllitic, siliceous to carbonaceous argillite and shale, with subordinate but characteristic clast-supported chert-rich conglomerate, greenish-gray chert, tuffaceous volcaniclastic rocks, yellowish- to reddish-brown highly calcareous argillite or limestone, and minor intrusive rocks; locally may include older (Mississippian? or Devonian?) or younger (Cretaceous) rocks (Dover, unpublished data, 1997). Mapped in Tanana quadrangle. In Livengood quadrangle, equivalent rocks have been subdivided into two units, Trsc and Ps (unit Trsc, TN003; unit Trc and Ps, LG002) \[symbol 841\] 5012, 4110 T[r]{.smallcaps}Pas Flysch-like sedimentary rocks (Late Triassic to Pennsylvanian)\-- Intensely folded sequence of dark-gray to black, massive to thin-bedded marine flysch-like rocks including conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone, and argillite, a few thin interbeds of limestone, and thin interbeds of chert in the upper part (Csejtey and others, 1992). Age based on Triassic radiolaria and conodonts from cherts and calcareous units and on a reported collection of Pennsylvanian brachiopods (see Csejtey and others, 1992, p. 28). Thought at least several hundred meters thick. Overlain by and locally interbedded with late Triassic pillow basalt, herein assigned to the Nikolai Greenstone (unit T[r]{.smallcaps}n) of this map. However, Csejtey and others (1992) did not assign either of these units to known packages or assemblages because of the discontinuous and fault-bounded nature of their occurrence (HE002; MM002) \[symbol 902\] 5040 Igneous rocks MzPzi Intrusive and volcanic rocks, undivided (Mesozoic or Paleozoic)\-- Granodiorite of Rainbow Mountain in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (unit grrm, Nokleberg and others, 1992a), diorite in the Circle and Bid Delta quadrangles (unit MzPzd, Foster and others, 1983; unit Pzd, Weber and others, 1978), and gabbro and quartz diorite in the Talkeetna, Tyonek, and McGrath quadrangles (unit MzPzg, Reed and Nelson, 1980; unit MzPzm, Magoon and others, 1976; unit MzPzi, Bundtzen and others, 1997a, T.K. Bundtzen, written commun., 1997). Also dark-gray to greenish-gray dikes ranging from basalt to granodiorite in the Talkeetna quadrangle (unit MzPzi, Reed and Nelson, 1980) and volcanic rocks of unknown age in the Nulato and the Lime Hills quadrangles (unit vr, W.W. Patton, Jr., written commun., 1997; unit MzPzi, Reed and Gamble, 1988) \[symbol 347\] 5160, 5120, 5170, 5175, 5180, 5440 (unit grrm, MH002; unit MzPzd, CI002; unit Pzd, BD002; unit MzPzg, TL002; unit MzPzm, TY002; unit MzPzi, MG002; MG003; unit, MzPzi, TL002; unit vr, NL002; unit MzPzi, LH003) MzZum Ultramafic and mafic rocks, undivided (Mesozoic?, Paleozoic?, and (or) Late Proterozoic?)\-- Serpentinite, peridotite, dunite, gabbro, diorite, metabasite, and minor talc schist and roddingite are widespread throughout map area. These exhibit a broad range of intrusive and (or) metamorphic textures and fabrics. Age control is generally poor and inferred ages range from Mesozoic to late Proterozoic. 40Ar/39Ar dating of hornblende from gabbro in the Tanana quadrangle yielded an apparent 540 Ma age and similar dates in the Livengood quadrangle yielded ages ranging from 465 to 536+/-2.6 Ma (Reifenstuhl and others, 1998). In the Talkeetna quadrangle, includes serpentinite and minor talc schist that Reed and Nelson (unit MzPzu, 1980) interpreted was derived from peridotite. Includes unit MzPzum in the Tyonek quadrangle (Magoon and others, 1976), units Pzd and Pzu in the Big Delta quadrangle (Weber and others, 1978), units PzZm and CZum in the Livengood quadrangle (Weber and others, 1992), unit PzpCm in the Nulato quadrangle (Patton, written commun., 1997), and unit Pzum of Reifenstuhl and others (in press) in the Tanana A-1 (1:63,360-scale) quadrangle. In the Healy quadrangle, includes two metagabbro intrusions north of the Denali fault system of inferred Devonian age (unit Dmg, Csejtey and others, 1992) \[symbol 640\] 5190, 5290, 5440, 5690, 7330, 8250, 8450 (unit MzPzd, TL002; unit Dmg, HE002; unit MzPzum, TY002; unit Pzu, Pzd, BD002; units CZum, PzZm, LG002; unit Pzug, CI002; unit PzpCm, NL003; serpentinite part of unit Jsc, TN003) \[TL002 = Chulitna?\] Metamorphic rocks JPzk Kakhonak Complex (Jurassic, Triassic and older?)\-- Within map area, consists of poorly described metasedimentary, and metavolcanic rocks tentatively correlated with the Kakhonak Complex. Best described by Detterman and Reed (1980) in the Iliamna quadrangle to the south of the map area, the unit is a heterogeneous assemblage of largely greenschist facies metamorphic rocks. However, the rocks are most commonly exposed as roof pendants within the Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith (Reed and Lanphere, 1969; 1972; 1973) and therefore locally display contact metamorphic effects. Lithologies listed by Detterman and Reed include argillite and slaty argillite, marble, quartz- mica schist, and quartzite and there is mention but no description of metavolcanic and metaplutonic rocks. In our map area, we have included a variety of metamorphic rocks exposed in associated with the Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith in the Tyonek and Lime Hills quadrangle within this unit. The rocks include units Mzs, Mzv, and Mzu of Reed and Elliott (1970) in the Tyonek and Lime Hills quadrangles, JPu of Magoon and others (1976) and MzPzs of Gamble and Reed (1996) \[symbol 488\] 5220, unit JPu, TY002; unit MzPzs, LH002, tentative; 4905, unit Mzs, TY003; 4910, unit Mzv, TY003; 4920, unit Mzu, TY003 PALEOZOIC\ Assemblages and sequences\ Skolai Group This assemblage of rocks comprises a lower(?) unit of gabbro and gneiss (Pennsylvanian?), a middle volcanic and volcaniclastic sequence (Permian and Pennsylvanian) and a carbonate unit (Permian). The upper units are known under various names such as the Skolai arc, Skolai Group, Mankomen Group, Strelna metamorphic assemblage, and the Metamorphic Complex of Gulkana River and are regarded by many workers, as the basement of the Wrangellia terrane of Jones and others (1977). Although not originally defined as part of Wrangellia, they are now commonly included in it. Rock units and assemblages similar to these are widespread in southern Alaska, ranging from Puale Bay on the Alaska Peninsula (Wilson and others, in press) to southeast Alaska. Pe Eagle Creek Formation (Early Permian)\-- Alternating marine argillite and limestone disconformably overlying the Slana Spur Formation (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). Limestone is fine- to medium-grained, thin- to medium-bedded and was deposited in shallow water at or near wave base. Abundant fossils include a heterogeneous assemblage of coral, bryozoan, brachiopod, echinoid, crinoid, fusulinid, and algal(?) fragments. Argillite member is chiefly thin-bedded and dark-gray and has thin lenses and laminae of gray siltstone and minor bioclastic limestone, calcareous siltstone and pyritic sandstone. Thin units of radiolarian chert, shale, and limestone occur within the Formation. May be as much as 1,000-m-thick. Disconformably overlain by the Nikolai Greenstone (unit T[r]{.smallcaps}n) and conformably overlies the Slana Spur Formation (equivalent to Station Creek Formation, in part). Stratigraphically and lithologically correlative with the Hasen Creek Formation of the McCarthy quadrangle (MacKevett, 1978). Metamorphosed to lower greenschist facies \[symbol 506\] 5630 PPasc Station Creek and Slana Spur Formations, and equivalent rocks (Early Permian and Pennsylvanian)\-- Divided into two informal units: Lower volcanic member consists chiefly of submarine andesite and basalt flows, locally pillowed and brecciated; upper volcaniclastic member generally grades upward from coarse volcanic breccia, to abundant volcanic graywacke, and finally to volcanilutite. No fossils are known in the type area. Age assignment is relative to overlying Hasen Creek Formation (Early Permian, MacKevett, 1978) and stratigraphic and lithologic correlation with the Slana Spur Formation (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). As here mapped, includes unit Pzt of Nokleberg and others (1992a) consisting of aquagene tuff, argillite, limestone, chert, andesitic tuff, and greenstone which have yielded fragments of late Paleozoic bryozoans. In the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle, Early through Late Permian conodonts were collected from unit Pzv (Csejtey and others, 1978) (unit Pzt, MH002; Early Permian and Pennsylvanian(?), unit Pzv, TK002; unit PPsc, Station Creek Fm., MC002) Slana Spur Formation (unit PaPsl, MH002; unit Ps, NB002; unit PPs, GU002) Pat Tetelna Volcanics (Pennsylvanian)\-- Chiefly greenish volcanic flows, mud and debris avalanches, and lapilli-pumice tuff interbedded with fine- to coarse-grained volcaniclastic rocks (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). Flows are mainly andesitic and are correlative with volcanic flows member of the Station Creek Formation. Metamorphosed to lower greenschist facies. As here mapped, unit also includes greenstone of the Skolai Group in the Valdez quadrangle (Winkler and others, 1980) and Early Permian(?) and Pennsylvanian andesitic volcanic rocks in the Healy quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1992) \[symbol 506+14\] 5620, 5621, 6120, 6220 (units PaPs, PaPsl, PaPsu, MH002; units Pzv, PPt, NB002; unit Pt, GU002) Greenstone, Skolai Group (unit Pzs, VA002; unit PPav, HE002) Pmi Shallow stocks, dikes, and sills (Early Permian?)\-- Sparse to locally abundant andesite, and subordinate dacite and rhyolite stocks, dikes, and sills (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). Intrudes Slana Formation and Tetelna Volcanics but not the Eagle Creek Formation (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). Age inferred from intrusive relations. Metamorphosed to lower greenschist facies. Locally intense hydrothermal alteration and associated sulfide mineralization (unit Pi, MH002) \[symbol 177\] 5860 PPagi Ahtell pluton (Permian and Pennsylvanian)\-- Fine- to coarse-grained granite, quartz monzonite, granodiorite, tonalite, and minor quartz diorite. Crops out in the northeastern Gulkana quadrangle. Intrudes Tetelna Volcanics. U-Pb age of 311 Ma (Nokleberg and others, in press). Locally metamorphosed to lower greenschist facies. Consists of units PPaf, PPap, and PPag of the Gulkana quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, in press) and unit PPag of Mount Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992a) (unit Pm, MC002; units PPf, PPp, PPg, GU002; unit Pag, MH002) \[symbol 177+13\] 5870, 6110 PPad Diorite complex (Permian to Pennsylvanian)\-- Diorite, granodiorite, and altered diabase and gabbronorite. Crops out in the northeastern Gulkana quadrangle. Intrudes Tetelna Volcanics. U-Pb ages of 295 to 319 Ma (Nokleberg and others, in press). Locally metamorphosed to greenschist facies. Units PPaa, and PPad of the Gulkana quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, in press) (units PPd, PPa, GU002 \[symbol 177+14\] 5880 Pagb Gabbro and orthogneiss (Pennsylvanian?)\-- Thick complex of layered gabbro or locally, interlayered gneiss and gabbro conformably overlain by the Skolai Group in the Valdez quadrangle (Winkler and others, 1980). Gabbroic parts of the unit are interpreted as part of the oceanic crust that underlies the Skolai arc; the significance and origin of the gneiss is uncertain, it has affinities to members of the charnokite series (unit Pzg, VA002; unit Pago, MC002; unit Pzg, NB002) \[symbol 177+15\] 5460 PPast Strelna metamorphic complex (Early Permian to Middle Pennsylvanian)\-- Variably metamorphosed but largely lower greenschist facies metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks of the Skolai Group. Includes quartzofeldspathic and quartz-mica schist, locally having compositional layering reflecting original bedding, greenstone derived from mafic to intermediate volcanic rocks, and locally abundant marble interbeds and tectonic lenses and metachert and orthogneiss. Metamorphic grade generally increases to amphibolite facies near contacts with the Uranatina River metaplutonic complex (unit JPaur, herein). Tightly folded and pervasively faulted in most localities. Generally undated, the Strelna metamorphic complex is on trend with similar strata containing age-diagnostic conodonts in marble (Plafker and others, 1985). Included here is the Strelna metamorphic assemblage of the Valdez quadrangle (G.R. Winkler, written commun., 1998) and the metamorphic complex of Gulkana River units ds, mmp, am, mha, mcb of the Gulkana quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, in press), the nonplutonic older part of the Haley Creek terrane of Winkler and others (1980), units Jgs and Jam of Csejtey and others (1978) in the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle, and unit Jma in the Anchorage quadrangle (Winkler, 1992). Also includes migmatitic border rocks (unit Jpmu) of the Jurassic plutons and undifferentiated metamorphic and plutonic rocks (unit Jgdm) in the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1978) (unit PPsm, MC002) Strelna (units Ja, Psm, VA002; units ds, mmp, mha, qmfs, mcb, GU002; units Jpmu \[3600\], Jgdm \[3621\], Jgs \[5641\], Jam \[5550\], jmrb and jmb \[5955\], TK002; unit Jma \[5550\], AN002) \[symbol 506+348\] 5550, 5625, 5641, 5680, 5920, 5203, 5204, 5209 PPaskm Marble (Early Permian? and Pennsylvanian?)\-- White, medium- to coarse-grained marble occurring as massive lenticular interbeds, as much as 30-m-thick in the Strelna metamorphic complex in the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle (units Jmrb, Jmb, and Pls Csejtey and others, 1978) and marble within the Skolai Group in the Valdez quadrangle (unit Pzm, Winkler and others, 1980; unit ma, G.R. Winkler, written commun., 1998). In the Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle, the protolith may have been limestone within the Talkeetna Formation (unit Jtk) or within the Late Paleozoic volcanogenic rocks (unit PPasc) (units Khcm, Pzm, VA002; units Jmrb, Jmb, Pls, TK002) \[In Valdez, now labeled ma\] \[symbol 506+13\] 5955 (unit M, VA002) 2720 End of Skolai Group Dillinger and Nixon Fork sequences The term Dillinger has been widely used in Alaska for a Cambrian to Devonian succession of mostly deep-marine strata, which outcrop in the southwestern part of the present map area. These rocks have been assigned to the Dillinger terrane (Silberling and others, 1994; see fig. 2, herein), Dillinger subterrane of the Farewell terrane (Bundtzen and others, 1997), and Dillinger sequence of the present compilation. On the present map, the Dillinger sequence is broken out into constituent formations in parts of its outcrop belt, but is left undivided in the Sleetmute, Lime Hills, and Talkeetna quadrangles. The term Nixon Fork has been widely used in Alaska for a late Proterozoic to Devonian succession of mostly shallow-marine carbonate rocks, which also outcrop in the southwestern part of the present map area. These rocks have been assigned to the Nixon Fork terrane (Silberling and others, 1994; see fig. 2, herein), Nixon Fork subterrane of the Farewell terrane (Bundtzen and others, 1997), and Nixon Fork sequence of the present compilation. On the present map, the Nixon Fork sequence is broken out into constituent formations in most of its outcrop belt, but is left undivided where mapped in reconnaissance in the Sleetmute and Lime Hills quadrangles and in a limited part of the Medfra quadrangle. Decker and others (1994) showed that the Nixon Fork and Dillinger sequences are laterally equivalent shallow- and deep-water facies of what they termed the White Mountain sequence. Dillinger sequence DCd Dillinger sequence, undivided (Devonian to Cambrian)\-- Consists of the rock types listed below under descriptions of Post River and Lyman Hills Formations, Terra Cotta Mountains Sandstone, and Barren Ridge Limestone \-- all interpreted as slope or basinal deposits. Age control is from conodonts and graptolites. Includes units Pzd in Talkeetna quadrangle (Reed and Nelson, 1980), Pzu in eastern Lime Hills quadrangle (Gamble and Reed, 1996), Pzdu in western Lime Hills quadrangle (T.K. Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1998), East Fork Hills Formation (Dutro and Patton, 1982) DOsl (age extended by conodonts to include Cambrian, Dumoulin and others, in press) in Medfra quadrangle (Patton and others, 1980, now East Fork Hills Formation of Dutro and Patton, 1982). In the northwestern Mount McKinley quadrangle, includes unit Pzc, which consists of chert and slate that has yielded Ordovician graptolites, quartz-rich turbiditic sandstones and minor interbedded limestone yielding Early Silurian (Llandoverian) conodonts (Dumoulin and others, in press), and quartzite that has yielded Silurian to Devonian corals (W. Oliver, written commun., 1997). Where subdivided, includes the following units: \[symbol 10\] 5310 unit Pzd, TL002; unit Pzc, MM002; unit Pzu, LH002; LH003; unit Pzdu, LH004, part of unit Pzl, SM002; unit DOsl, MD002 Dsbr Barren Ridge Limestone and correlative units (Late Devonian to Late Silurian)\-- Thin- to thick-bedded, buff to orange-weathered, light- to medium-gray, phyllitic calcarenite, thin-bedded orange to buff siltstone, and light-gray silty limestone. Age based on conodonts. Deposited in a basinal and (or) slope setting. Includes Barren Ridge Limestone in eastern McGrath and western Lime Hills quadrangles Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1997; 1998). Is the upper third of the Dillinger stratigraphic succession \[symbol 10+708\] 6952 unit DSl, MG002; MG003; LH004 Stc Terra Cotta Mountains Sandstone and correlative units (Late and middle Silurian)\-- Chiefly calcareous sandstone and interbedded graptolitic shale. Mappable members include silty limestone, volcaniclastic sandstone, micaceous calc-sandstone, chert, and argillaceous graptolitic limestone. Sedimentary structures such as graded bedding, flute casts, and cross-lamination indicate deposition by turbidity currents in a deep-marine setting. Age based on graptolites. Includes various subdivisions of the Terra Cotta Mountains Sandstone of Bundtzen and others (1997a) (units mSs, mSl, mSvs, uSsl) in the eastern McGrath quadrangle (Bundtzen and others, 1997a), unit mSs in western McGrath (Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1997), and unit mSs in western Lime Hills quadrangles (Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1998). Is the middle third of the Dillinger stratigraphic succession \[symbol 7\] 6660, units uSsl, mSl, mSvs, mSs, MG002; unit mSs, MG003; unit mSm, LH004 SCpl Post River Sandstone, Lyman Hills Formation, and correlative units (middle Silurian (Wenlockian) to Late Cambrian)\-- Post River Formation (Churkin and Carter, 1996) consists of graptolitic shale, siltstone, and chert; Lyman Hills Formation of Bundtzen and others (1997a) consists of silty limestone and shale, commonly cross-laminated, locally containing Bouma \'cde\' intervals. Age constrained by uppermost Cambrian conodonts and Ordovician and Silurian graptolites. Deposited in a basinal and(or) slope setting, in part by turbidity currents. Includes the Lyman Hills and Post River Formations in their type areas in the eastern McGrath quadrangle (Bundtzen and others, 1997a; Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1997), unit OCls, which intertongues with the Nixon Fork sequence in the western McGrath quadrangle (Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1997), unit Oc in the Talkeetna quadrangle (Reed and Nelson, 1980), and part of unit mcb in the Ruby quadrangle (Cass, 1959). This combined unit forms the lower third of the Dillinger stratigraphic sequence \[symbol 10+15\] 7580 units lSl, SOsh, OCls, MG002; part of unit mcb, RB002; units SOsh, OCls, Clm MG003; unit Pzc, MD002; unit Oc, TL002; units OCls, SOsh, LH004 End of Dillinger sequence Nixon Fork sequence DZn Shallow-marine carbonate units of Holitna basin area, undivided (Devonian to Late Proterozoic)\-- shallow-marine limestone and dolostone facies having reported algal reefs. Middle Devonian to Middle Cambrian age range indicated by trilobites, conodonts, corals, stromatoporoids, and brachiopods; an unfossiliferous dolostone unit below Middle Cambrian strata has been assigned to Late Proterozoic (St. John and Babcock, 1997). Map distribution compiled from Miller and others (1989), Bundtzen (unpublished data, 1998), and Decker and others (1994). Locally includes the following units: \[symbol 900+708\] 8340, 8345 part of unit Pzh, MG003; part of unit Pzl, SM002 DSwc Whirlwind Creek Formation and unnamed correlative units (Late Devonian, Frasnian through middle Silurian, Wenlockian)\-- Shallow-marine limestone and dolostone comprises the upper third of the Nixon Fork stratigraphic sequence in its type area in the Medfra quadrangle. Age range is based on conodonts, stromatoporoids, corals, and ostracodes. Depositional setting interpreted as shallow marine. Includes Whirlwind Creek Formation in Medfra quadrangle (Patton and others, 1980; Dutro and Patton, 1982), unit DSl in the Mt. McKinley quadrangle (Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993), units lDl, lDd, mDl, SLa, and SDlw in the western McGrath quadrangle (Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1997), and unit SDlw(h) in the western Lime Hills quadrangle (Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1998) \[symbol 900+14\] 6960 unit DSl, MD002; MM002; units lDl, lDd, mDl, Sla, SDlw, MG003; unit SDlw(h), LH004 Spf Paradise Fork Formation and unnamed correlative rocks (middle Silurian, late Llandoverian to Wenlockian)\-- Dark, platy limestone and limy shale. Is the middle third of the Nixon Fork sequence in its type area in the Medfra quadrangle. Age based on conodonts and graptolites. Depositional setting interpreted as deeper water, off-platform. Includes the type Paradise Fork Formation in Medfra quadrangle (Patton and others, 1980; Dutro and Patton, 1982) and unit Ssh in the western McGrath quadrangle (Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1997) \[symbol 900\] 6620, 6660 unit Sls MD002; unit Ssh, MG003 Ont Novi Mountain and Telsitna Formations, and unnamed correlative rocks (Ordovician and late Cambrian?)\-- Novi Mountain Formation consists of variably argillaceous limestone, distinctively orange weathering in places, and locally oolitic. The overlying Telsitna Formation is mainly peloidal lime micrite and lesser dolostone. Age is based on conodonts, corals, and brachiopods. Depositional setting interpreted as shelf, locally very shallow. Unnamed units in the western McGrath quadrangle include breccia, argillite, laminated limestone, and mudstone, some of which may have been deposited in deeper-water settings. Includes Novi Mountain Formation (unit Od of Patton and others, 1980; Dutro and Patton, 1982) and Telsitna Formation (unit Osl of Patton and others, 1980; Dutro and Patton, 1982) in their type areas in the Medfra quadrangle (Dutro and Patton, 1982). Also includes unit Ol in the Ruby quadrangle (Cass, 1959), and units Ol, lOlb, mOl, uOl, uOll, and Om in western McGrath quadrangle (Gilbert, 1981; Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1997). Also includes somewhat problematic dolostones that rest on crystalline basement in the northernmost Medfra quadrangle, which Dutro and Patton (1982) assigned to the Telsitna Formation. These strata have yielded the gastropod steinkerns that allow the possibility of an age as old as Late Cambrian \[symbol 900+16\] 7520 unit Od, Osl(Novi Mountain.), MD002; unit Ol, RB; units mOl, uOl, uOll, Ol, lOlb, OCm MG003 CZds Unnamed dolostone, sandstone, siltstone (Early Cambrian to Proterozoic)\-- Alternating intervals of 1) yellow, brown, and maroon siltstone and cross-bedded quartzose sandstone, and 2) dolostone, consisting of packstone and grainstone having coated grains and fenestral fabric. The siliciclastic rocks probably accumulated in a marginal-marine environment; the dolostone in a shallow marine shelf or platform. Devoid of fossils, unit is assigned a pre-Middle Cambrian age because similar strata underlie Middle Cambrian trilobite-bearing rocks in the Sleetmute quadrangle (Miller and others, 1989). Includes units Xmso, Xcd, and Xcl in western McGrath quadrangle (T.K. Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1997) \[symbol 900+238\] 8350 unit Xmso, XCd, XCl, MG003 End of Nixon Fork sequence Sedimentary rocks Pzlc Limestone and chert (Paleozoic)\-- Light- to dark-gray lime mudstone, locally argillaceous in eastern exposures and interbedded with chert in western exposures. Occurs only between strands of the Tintina fault in the Circle quadrangle in the so-called \"Preacher Block\" of Foster and others (1983). No fossils are known from unit and Foster and others (1983) suggest rocks in the eastern and western exposures may be of significantly different ages. Unit is at least 350 m thick \[symbol 573+708\] 5330 unit Pzl, CI002 Ps Argillite, siltstone, sandstone, and minor conglomerate (Permian)\-- Thinly and rhythmically interbedded dark-gray argillite and platy, laminated, gray siltstone. Very fine- to fine-grained, gray, chert-rich, turbiditic sandstone. Quartz- and chert-bearing granule- to pebble conglomerate, locally calcareous and fossiliferous. Foraminifera, conodonts, and brachiopods indicate a Permian age (Weber and others, 1992). Mapped in the Livengood quadrangle. In the Tanana quadrangle, equivalent rocks are part of unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Ps (unit Ps, LG002; unit TrPs, TN003) \[symbol 841+15\] 5740 PDms Sedimentary rocks (Permian? to Devonian?)\-- Indeterminate or poorly identified units in Livengood quadrangle. Black and greenish-gray siliceous slate, thinly interbedded gray chert, shaly chert, and minor breccia, siliceous, locally sandy siltstone displaying turbiditic sedimentary structures, red and greenish-gray, or dark-gray, locally calcareous shale, phyllite, minor quartz- sandstone, argillite, greenstone, lime mudstone to packstone, and limestone debris flows. Conodonts from a limestone clast in one debris flow indicate a Late Devonian (Famennian) age (Weber and others, 1992). Includes units PDms and Pzs in the Livengood quadrangle (Weber and others, 1992) \[symbol 841+14\] 5600, 5615 Mgq Globe quartzite (Mississippian)\-- Light gray, massive or thinly laminated quartzite and medium- to dark-gray slate, phyllite, and laminated claystone. Unfossiliferous; age inferred on the basis of intrusion by Triassic rocks and by lithologic and stratigraphic similarity with the Keno Hill quartzite of Yukon Territory, Canada (Dover, 1994). Associated with gabbroic dikes and sills. Occurs in the White Mountains and Schwatka stratigraphic belts in Livengood and Tanana quadrangles and has limited exposure in the Circle quadrangle (F.R. Weber, unpublished mapping, 1998) \[symbol 516+238\] 6530 unit Mg, LG002; Vitreous quartzite unit of MzPzaq, CI002; unit Mg, TN003 Dps Phyllite, slate, siliceous siltstone, and argillite (Devonian)\-- Light- and medium-gray to silvery gray phyllite, slate, siliceous siltstone, and argillite. Includes some thin limestone and calcareous siltstone. Unfossiliferous; Devonian age assigned on the basis of two equivocal observations: 1) unit Dps appears to overlie limestone (unit DSl of the present compilation) which locally has yielded Late Devonian (Frasnian) corals, but 2), unit Dps is also possibly gradational with unit DSl (Chapman and others, 1975). Mapped only in the Kantishna River quadrangle \[symbol 573\] 6902 KH002 Dps, Pzcs, DOs Dcb Cascaden Ridge, Beaver Bend, and correlative rocks (Devonian?)\-- Various Devonian siliciclastic units in the Livengood and Circle quadrangles. Cascaden Ridge unit of Weber and others (1992), exposed in Livengood quadrangle, is chiefly rhythmically interbedded gray and olive-gray shale, gray siltstone, and graywacke. Less abundant components are gray limestone and polymictic granule- and pebble conglomerate having a graywacke matrix. Conglomerate clasts include mafic/ultramafic rocks, chert, dolomite, and shale (Weber and others, 1992). Limestone contains Middle Devonian conodonts, brachiopods, and corals. Beaver Bend unit of Weber and others (1992), is conglomerate, graywacke, siltstone, and slate in the Livengood quadrangle. Conglomerate is polymictic, clast-supported granule- to pebble-sized and has clasts that include chert, quartz, quartzite, mafic and felsic volcanic rocks, argillite, slate, siltstone, and sandstone. Graywacke is fine- to medium-grained; framework grains are mostly chert and quartz, and subordinate slate. Unit has yielded unidentifiable plant fragments; however, it is assigned a probable Devonian age. In the western Circle quadrangle, unfossiliferous chert-pebble conglomerate mapped as unit part of MzPzat by Foster and others (1983) is assigned to Beaver Bend unit (F.R. Weber, unpublished mapping, 1998). In north-central Circle quadrangle, north of the Tintina fault, two units mapped by Foster and others (1983) are included here: unit Pzcg, chert-pebble conglomerate; and unit Pzcc, chert, chert-pebble conglomerate, and minor limestone. Limestone of unit Pzcc yielded Late Devonian (Famennian) conodonts. Combined unit correlates with the Nation River Formation of the Charley River quadrangle (Brabb and Churkin, 1969) \[symbol 573\] 6940, 6941 (unit Dc, LG002; unit Pzcc, Pzcg, and part of unit MzPzat, CI002 Dq Quail unit (Devonian)\-- Gray and green phyllite interlaminated with calcareous siltstone, quartzose sandstone, graywacke, and granule- to boulder conglomerate constitute the Quail unit of Weber and others (1992). Clasts in conglomerate include chert, dolostone, serpentinite, intermediate and mafic igneous rocks, quartzite, argillite, phyllite, slate, volcanic rocks, sandstone, and white quartz. At base are localized carbonate buildups of coral-bearing lime-mudstone and wackestone of Late Devonian (Frasnian) age (Weber and others, 1992). Slightly higher metamorphic grade than age and lithologically similar Cascaden Ridge unit of Weber and others (1992), here mapped as part of unit Dcb. Correlates with the Nation River Formation of the Charley River quadrangle (Brabb and Churkin, 1969) \[symbol 570\] 6920 unit Dq, LG002 Dtr Troublesome unit and possibly correlative rocks (Devonian?)\-- Rhythmically interbedded dark-gray to black cherty argillite to chert, and thin beds of black to gray, siliceous slate as mapped in the Livengood quadrangle. Associated with extensive mafic intrusive and extrusive rocks. Unidentified radiolaria are only reported fossils (Weber and others, 1992). Depositionally overlain by Frasnian carbonate buildups at base of Quail unit, hence Middle Devonian or older. Also includes unit Pzc in the Circle quadrangle, which consists of chert interlayered with argillite, and rare marble and quartzite, intruded by diorite and gabbro (Foster and others, 1983). Radiolaria from unit Pzc are not age-diagnostic but reported as \"possibly of Mississippian age (Foster and others, 1983)\"; this constraint is, however, less compelling than the pre-Frasnian age for the Troublesome unit in its type area. May correlate with the McCann Hill Chert of the Charley River quadrangle (Brabb and Churkin, 1969) \[symbol 573\] 6910 unit Dt, LG002; unit Pzc, CI002 Ds Schwatka limestone unit (Middle to Early Devonian)\-- Slightly recrystallized, dark-gray, sparsely fossiliferous, medium-bedded to massive, lime mudstone or wackestone. Conodonts and two-holed crinoid ossicles constrain age to Emsian to Eifelian (Weber and others, 1992). Interfingers with volcanic rocks of unit Dsv. Mapped only in northeastern Livengood and northwestern Circle quadrangles. Depositional environment interpreted as shallow marine \[symbol 900\] 6945 (Unit Dls, LG002, CINEW \-- was 6966 on CI002) Dsv Volcanic part of Schwatka unit (Middle to Early Devonian)\-- Massive basalt flows, agglomerate, tuff, fine-grained volcaniclastic rocks, minor thin lenses of laminated platy impure limestone, and local lenticular bodies of calcite-cemented conglomerate (Weber and others, 1992) interbedded with limestone of unit Ds. Metamorphosed to greenschist facies. Mapped in Livengood and Circle quadrangles \[symbol 900+348\] 7010 unit Dsv, LG002; CI003 DSlc Lost Creek unit (Devonian and Silurian?)\-- Light-gray, massively bedded, lime mudstone and wackestone. Limestone occurs as debris flows that pinch out laterally and contain rip-up clasts of shale, chert, and other sedimentary rocks. Basal part of unit contains channels of graywacke and chert pebble and cobble conglomerate incised into the underlying Livengood Dome Chert (mapped here within unit Oc). Channels and debris flows together indicate a deep-water depositional setting. Brachiopods, corals, and trilobites indicate a Late to middle Silurian age (Wenlockian to Ludlovian). A separate band of micritic limestone, flanked by chert and assigned a possibly Silurian or Devonian age, was included in this unit by Weber and others (1992) \[symbol 602\] 6955 DSl Limestone (Late Devonian to middle Silurian)\-- Various shallow-marine, carbonate-dominated rocks of Silurian to Devonian age in the Circle, Tanana, Kantishna River, and Livengood quadrangles, except the Tolovana and Schwatka units, which are shown by their own symbols. In the Circle quadrangle, includes unit Dl of Foster and others (1983), medium-gray, generally massive, locally recrystallized limestone which is found in scattered outcrop belts north of the Tintina fault. It has yielded Early Devonian conodonts from several localities (Foster and others, 1983). In the Tanana quadrangle, includes the following units of Dover (unpublished mapping, 1997): 1) unit Dld, which consists of light- to medium-gray or tan sandy, platy limestone and massive-bedded silicified limestone and dolostone, of Late Devonian (Famennian) age; 2) \"unit Ml\", gray, bioclastic limestone of Famennian in age; and 3) the limestone of Raven Ridge, which consists of gray micritic limestone and brecciated limestone, of Late Devonian(?) age. In the Kantishna River quadrangle, includes unit Dls of Chapman and others (1975), which is chiefly medium- to dark-gray limestone, dolomitic in part, and medium-gray shaly to phyllitic siltstone. This unit has yielded Late Devonian (Frasnian) corals from one locality (Chapman and others, 1975). In the Livengood quadrangle, consists of light- to medium-gray lime mudstone or wackestone. Locally corals and stromatoporoids are common and conodonts at several localities suggest a Frasnian (Late Devonian) age (A.G. Harris, written commun., 1984-1988; cited in Weber and others, 1992). \"These bodies, as thick as 30 m have a lateral extent of several hundred meters in the basal Quail unit, were deposited as local biogenic buildups on the Troublesome unit (Weber and others, 1992)\" \[symbol 900\] 6944, 6930 unit Dls, KH002, unit Dl, KH004; units Dlr, Dld, Ml, TN003; unit Dl, CI002; unit Dql, LG002 DSt Tolovana Limestone (Middle Devonian to Early Silurian)\-- Lower part of alternating green and maroon lime mudstone, succeeded by yellowish-brown weathering, silty to shaly lime mudstone and wackestone, and a main, upper part of light-weathering peloid- and ooid-rich lime packstone and grainstone and rare dolostone in the White Mountains of east-central Livengood quadrangle. Conodonts, brachiopods, and corals indicate an Early Silurian age. In the same strike belt in southeastern Livengood quadrangle, a somewhat younger (Middle Devonian) unit of lime mudstone and wackestone has also been assigned to the Tolovana Limestone; this subunit continues into the Fairbanks and Kantishna River quadrangles. Rocks formerly assigned to the Tolovana Limestone in northwesternmost Circle quadrangle are herein assigned to the Schwatka unit (unit Ds); rocks formerly assigned to the Tolovana Limestone in north-central and northeastern Circle quadrangle are herein to unit DSl. Depositional environment interpreted as shallow marine \[symbol 900\] 6965 (unit DSt, FB002; LG002; unit Dst, KH003, KH004) SZa Amy Creek unit (Silurian to Late Proterozoic)\-- In Livengood quadrangle were described by Weber and others (1992), consists chiefly of medium-grained gray dolostone, and light-gray, yellow-gray, or buff dolomitic mudstone, packstone, and wackestone. Coarser-grained rocks show abundant peloids and crossbedding; laminations present in mudstone; solution breccia and algal coatings present. Other interbedded rock types include chert, black argillite, lime mudstone, basaltic greenstone, tuff, tuffaceous siltstone, shale, and minor volcaniclastic graywacke (Weber and others, 1992). In the Tanana quadrangle, consists of white, massive, locally laminated cherty dolostone having gray limestone at top and bottom of section (Dover, unpublished mapping, 1997). In the Circle quadrangle, consists of yellow-gray dolomite and gray to dark-gray and black argillite, shale, and siltstone, interlayered with light- and dark-gray chert, gray marble, and gray, fine-grained quartzite (Foster and others, 1983). Age poorly constrained; age range given here is from Weber and others (1992). Must be older than the fossiliferous Middle Devonian strata that overlie it, and at least in part Cambrian or younger because it has yielded sponge spicules and unidentifiable radiolaria \[symbol 788\] 6680 unit SZa, LG002; unit PzpCb, CI002; unit Za, TN003; 6681 unit DSd, CI002 Oc Chert (Ordovician)\-- Dark gray and black chert, siliceous slate, argillite, and less abundant greenstone, impure limestone, and dolostone. Age assigned on basis of graptolites. Includes the Livengood Dome Chert in the Livengood, Circle, and Tanana quadrangles, unit Pzlc in Tanana quadrangle (Dover, unpublished mapping, 1997), the Nilkoka Group in Fairbanks quadrangle (Pewe and others, 1966), and unit DOc in Mount McKinley and Kantishna River quadrangles (Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993; Chapman and others, 1975) \[symbol 10+15\] 7710 unit Old, LG002; unit nc, FB002; unit Oc, TN002; KH002; KH003; unit DOc, KH004; unit Old, CI002; unit Olc, TN003; unit DOc, MM002 Ocl Limestone (Paleozoic?)\-- Distinctive marker bed of lime mudstone within chert unit, locally characterized by coated ooids. Thickness varies from 10 to several ten\'s of meters, probably in part due structural thickening and repetition. Only mapped locally. Corresponds to unit Pzl, in part, of Chapman and others (1982) in the Tanana quadrangle \[symbol 616\] 7711 (unit Pzl (part), TN002; unit Pzll, TN003) Igneous rocks Pzvs Volcanic and sedimentary rocks (late or middle Paleozoic)\-- Dark-greenish-gray mafic volcanic rocks and interbeds of black phyllite, chert-pebble conglomerate, light-green tuff, and graywacke (Reed and Nelson, 1980). Volcanic rocks include pillow basalt, breccia agglomerate, tuff, and massive basalt flows. Distinguished from unit Trpb (this map, unit Pzbs, Reed and Nelson, 1980) by presence of massive basalt flows (unit Pzv, TL002; unit Pzvs, KH003) \[symbol 403+13\] 5410 Ofc Fossil Creek Volcanics (Ordovician)\-- Two members, one largely volcanic, one largely sedimentary. Volcanic member consists of alkali basalt, agglomerate, and volcaniclastic conglomerate. Agglomerate and conglomerate contain well-rounded clasts of basalt, granite, quartzite, limestone, chert, and phyllite. Sedimentary member consists of shale, chert, and limestone which are intruded by gabbro. Late Ordovician brachiopods, trilobites, gastropods, and conodonts have been recovered from sedimentary rocks in the volcanic member; Early Ordovician conodonts and trilobites have been recovered from the sedimentary member (Weber and others, 1992). Mapped in the White Mountains stratigraphic belt of Livengood, Circle, and Tanana quadrangles (Dover, 1994). Laterally equivalent to Livengood Dome Chert \[symbol 10+348\] 7610 (unit Ofv, Ofs, LG002; unit SOs, CI002, CINEW; unit Ofc, TN003) Metamorphic rocks PMpc Phyllite and chert (Permian to Mississippian)\-- Two map units of Bundtzen and others (1997a) in eastern McGrath quadrangle are included in this unit: (1) unit uPzs, composed of dark gray-green to distinctly maroon, pyrite-rich volcanogenic phyllite, and (2) unit uPzc, white-weathered, gray-green, banded phyllitic ribbon chert. The latter has yielded Permian through Pennsylvanian radiolaria and Permian through Mississippian conodonts (Bundtzen and others, 1997a). Assigned by Bundtzen and others (1997a) to Yukon-Tanana terrane \[symbol 461\] 5545 Dy Yanert Fork sequence and correlative rocks (Devonian and older)\-- Metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks having variable degrees of penetrative fabric and metamorphic grade, found between the Hines Creek strand and main Denali faults, in the Healy, Mount McKinley, and Mount Hayes quadrangles. Includes argillite, slate, phyllite, phyllonite, semischist, impure quartzite, schistose stretched-pebble conglomerate, banded metachert, felsic metatuff, and metabasalt, all intruded by Mesozoic(?) diabase and gabbro. Sedimentary textures and pillow structure preserved in places. Grade dominantly greenschist facies but ranges to amphibolite facies eastward into the Mount Hayes quadrangle. Conodonts from a marble interbed indicate a Late Devonian age (Csejtey and others, 1992). Protolith interpreted to represent a volcanic-bearing continentally derived turbiditic marine sequence deposits on the continental slope. Considered part of the Yukon-Tanana terrane by Csejtey and others (1992) and depositionally overlain by the T[r]{.smallcaps}cs unit; tentatively correlated with rocks of similar age and lithology (units hgs and hgv) in the Hayes Glacier subterrane of Nokleberg and others (1992a) in the Mount Hayes quadrangle, which they also consider part of the Yukon-Tanana terrane. Includes unit Dy in the Healy quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1992) and is correlated with units hgs and hgv of the Hayes Glacier sub-terrane in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). Subdivided in the Mount Hayes quadrangle as: \[symbol 509\] 7242, unit Dy HE002; units hgs, hgv, MH002 Dys Fine-grained schistose sedimentary rocks (Devonian and older)\-- Fine-grained schistose sedimentary rocks of unit hgs of the Hayes Glacier sub-terrane in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992a) \[symbol 509+14\] 7402 unit hgs, MH002 Dyv Fine-grained schistose volcanic rocks (Devonian and older)\-- Chiefly fine-grained metavolcanic and metasedimentary phyllonites and blastomylonites of unit hgv of the Hayes Glacier sub-terrane in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992a) \[symbol 509+15\] 7240 unit hgv, MH002 Pzsc Spruce Creek sequence and correlative rocks (Paleozoic)\-- Mainly mafic to felsic metavolcanic rocks and minor greenstone sills, mappable as separate metavolcanic units in most places. Consists of two mappable units, a mafic metavolcanic and a felsic metavolcanic unit. Mafic unit consists predominantly of dark, massive to schistose metabasalt, metamorphosed andesite, and amphibolite, containing intercalated quartz- to mafic schist, pelitic schist, phyllite, metasiltstone, metatuff, and minor chert and marble. Distinctive felsic unit consists mostly of blastoporphyritic metarhyolite and felsic schist. Agglomeratic and pillow structures, and relict phenocrysts of quartz, orthoclase, and plagioclase are preserved locally. Underwent amphibolite facies metamorphism and later greenschist facies retrogression. Metarhyolite from the northeast Mount McKinley quadrangle yields U-Pb zircon dates of 368 and 371 Ma (T.K. Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1998) and metarhyolite in the vicinity of Fairbanks yields a U-Pb zircon age of 369 Ma (Aleinikoff and Nokleberg, 1989). U-Pb zircon ages of 364, 372, and 375 Ma on metavolcanic layers in unit jcv in the Mount Hayes quadrangle are interpreted to date extrusion of the now metamorphosed volcanic rocks (Nokleberg and others, 1992a). In the Healy quadrangle, conodonts of Late Devonian age have been collected (Csejtey and others, 1992). Unit consists of the Spruce Creek sequence of Bundtzen (1981) in the northeast Mount McKinley quadrangle, the Muskox sequence of Newberry and others (1996) in the Fairbanks Mining District, and units Dmf, Dmb, and Dms in the Healy quadrangle (Csejtey and others, 1992), unit jcv in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992a), and tentatively, unit DSu in the eastern Mount McKinley quadrangle (Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993). May be correlative with the Yanert Fork sequence of Csejtey and others (1992) \[symbol 699+13\] 5666, 7243, 7290, 7291, 7300, 7320, units Pzsc, DSu, DSu?, MM002; units Dmb, Dmf, Dms, HE002; Muskox, FB004; unit jcv, MH002 Pzlsl Schist, phyllite, limestone, and greenstone (Early Paleozoic)\-- Light- to medium-green chloritic schist, light- to medium-gray with silvery sheen phyllite, light- to medium-gray and greenish-gray, sandy in part, largely recrystallized limestone, and light- to medium-green greenstone. Schist and phyllite are partly calcareous, intensely folded and interbedded with thin limestone beds. Greenstone is basaltic, less common than other rock types. Unfossiliferous; probably older than the adjacent Frasnian limestone (unit DSl). Mapped only in the western Kantishna River quadrangle (Chapman and others, 1975) \[symbol 788\] Was 5665 KH002, now 6956, DSls? PALEOZOIC AND PRECAMBRIAN\ Sequences and Complexes Yukon-Tanana, Alaska Range, and Ruby metamorphic complexes Metamorphic rocks of the Yukon-Tanana Upland, Alaska Range, and Ruby Geanticline (for areas, see figure 2, sheet 3) areas have complex histories of polyphase deformation and crystallization. Differences in details of metamorphic, thermal, uplift, and plutonic histories between the Yukon-Tanana and Ruby areas are discussed in regional studies (Dusel-Bacon, 1994; Mortensen, 1992; Foster and others, 1994; Dover, 1994; Roeske and others, 1995) prevent confident correlation of the metamorphic sequences between them. On the other hand, gross similarities in the composition, lithic content, and inferred protoliths of these two complexes, and local similarities in at least some aspects of their crystallization-deformation histories, are consistent with the possible development of both complexes in a continental arc setting along the Late Proterozoic to Middle Paleozoic North American continental margin (Nokleberg and others, 1992a, p. 7; Dover, 1994; Roeske and others, 1995). This compilation attempts to accommodate contrasting interpretations by assigning the same or similar map colors to similar crystalline packages in all areas north of the Denali fault, while preserving differences previously recognized in local studies by use of patterns that in part reflect original unit assignments. Yukon-Tanana and northern Alaska Range metamorphic complex Pzydm Dolostone and marble (Paleozoic)\-- Represents two discrete units. In the western Circle quadrangle, an isolated mass consists of massive gray to cream-colored dolostone and gray to greenish-gray marble interlayered with calcareous greenish-gray and gray quartzite, phyllite, and calc-silicate. Unit is in fault contact with unit PzZyqs. In the southeastern Circle, white or cream-colored marble interbeds(?) as much as 20-m-thick occur in unit PzZysa (Foster and others, 1983) \[symbol 900+13\] 8430 \[se\] 8615 \[w\], ls in PzpCs and unit PzpCd, CI002 Pze Eclogite-bearing schist (Paleozoic)\-- Garnet and omphacite bearing biotite-muscovite schist, micaceous marble, black quartzite, and amphibolite. Protolith predominantly quartz- and pelitic to calcareous pelitic sediments, impure limestone, and associated mafic volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks. Mapped as a distinct allochthon by previous workers cited below However, the high-pressure eclogite facies mineral assemblage is restricted to thin interlayers within a metamorphic sequence that has at least some lithologic similarities with the structurally underlying quartz- and pelitic schist unit (PzZyqs). P/T conditions of 11 Kb and 600 to 700°C cited by Newberry and others (1996) for the eclogite facies assemblage. A Mississippian to Devonian protolith age inferred from Ar-Ar, K-Ar, and Pb-Pb studies cited in Newberry and others (1996); a questionable K-Ar Ordovician protolith age of 478+/-35 Ma on low-K amphibole and K-Ar mica ages ranging from 166.+=/-2.2 to 103.5+/-3.4 Ma attributed to Mesozoic metamorphism were reported by Forbes (1982). Includes units Pce and Pcu of the Chatanika assemblage of Robinson and others (1990), unit PDe of Newberry and others (1996), unit Pzc in the Livengood quadrangle (Weber and others, 1992), and unit PzpCms in the Circle quadrangle (Foster and others, 1983) \[symbol 311\] 5475, 5510 (unit Pze, LG002; PzpCms, CI002; Pzs, BD002) MDyao Augen orthogneiss (Mississippian and(or) Devonian?)\-- Peraluminous granitic gneiss containing augen of potassium feldspar generally interpreted to represent a blastoporphyritic texture. U-Pb zircon data indicate a 341+/-3 Ma crystallization age for augen gneiss in the Big Delta quadrangle (Aleinikoff and others, 1986); similar augen gneiss in the Tanacross quadrangle east of map area yielded U-Pb ages of 353+/-4 and 356+/-2 Ma (Dusel-Bacon and Aleinikoff, 1996). Comprised of unit PzpCa in the Big Delta quadrangle (Weber and others, 1978), and unit Da in the Circle quadrangle (Foster and others, 1983), and tentatively includes units lga, lgr, mg, and jcg assigned by Nokleberg and others (1992a) to the Lake George, Macomb, and Jarvis Creek Glacier subterranes of the Yukon-Tanana terrane in the Mount Hayes quadrangle. Rb-Sr biotite, K-feldspar, plagioclase, and whole-rock isochron ages of about 110 Ma on some of these rocks are interpreted by Wilson and others (1985) and Nokleberg and others (1992a) as the age of metamorphism \[symbol 184+16\] 6521, 7250, (units lga, lgr, mg, jcg, MH002; PzpCa, BD002; Da, CI002) MDt Totatlanika Schist (Early Mississippian to Middle Devonian)\-- Low-grade, multiply-deformed, locally mylonitic assemblage of gritty semischist containing clear to bluish gray quartz \"eyes\", chloritic quartzo-feldspathic schist and augen gneiss, phyllitic schist and semischist, phyllite, metavolcanic rocks, quartzite, marble, and greenstone. Porphyritic volcanic and sedimentary textures preserved in places; metavolcanic compositions range from mafic to felsic. Age poorly defined, from one marble interbed Middle Devonian to Early Mississippian conodonts, and less precisely dated crinoids, corals, and gastropods were collected (Wahrhaftig, 1968). Meta-andesite from the northeastern Big Delta quadrangle yields a U-Pb zircon age of 375 Ma that is interpreted as an extrusive age of protolith (Dusel-Bacon and others, 1993, p. C-14). Comprised of the Totatlanika Schist of the Fairbanks (Pewe and others, 1966) and Healy quadrangles (Csejtey and others, 1992), various units of the Totatlanika Schist in the Chena River area (Smith and others, 1994), and the Pzsg unit of Weber and others (1978) in the Big Delta quadrangle \[symbol 700\] 6510, 6511 (unit MDt, HE002, MM002, FB002, unit Pzsg, BD002) MDtm Mylonitic Totatlanika Schist (middle Paleozoic?)\-- Blastomylonitic quartzofeldspathic schist, gneiss, and augen gneiss. Probably derived from the Totatlanika Schist (MDt). Mapped only in the Big Delta quadrangle where shown as unit Pzc by Weber and others (1978) \[symbol 700+238\] 5605 (unit Pzc, BD002) Pzk Keevy Peak Formation (Early Mississippian? to Devonian?)\-- Siliceous and carbonaceous assemblage of phyllite, meta-argillite, quartzite, metachert(?), and lesser amounts of interlayered calcareous phyllite, marble, and mafic and felsic metavolcanic rocks. Contains minor stretched pebble conglomerate in the Healy and Mount McKinley quadrangles. Locally, calcareous phyllite and semischist at the base of the unit it is mapped separately and shown as unit Pzkcp. Multiply deformed; metamorphic grade ranges from lower to upper greenschist facies. In the Big Delta quadrangle, a 346+/-1 Ma U-Pb zircon age from a felsic metatuff interlayer indicates an early Mississippian extrusion age and therefore a depositional age for at least part of the sequence; Pb-isotope data for syngenetic galena in carbonaceous phyllite-hosted stratiform zinc-lead deposit also indicates a Mississippian or Devonian age for mineralization (Dusel-Bacon and others, 1998). Late and Middle Devonian fossils have been reported in the Mount McKinley quadrangle (Gilbert and Redman, 1977). Unit appears to occupy regional stratigraphic position between the Totatlanika Schist and unit PzZyqs of this map. As mapped, includes the Keevy Peak as originally defined by Wahrhaftig (1968) in the Healy and Mount McKinley quadrangles; new age data support extension of the unit to the Big Delta, Circle, and Fairbanks quadrangles, and correlation with the Nasina assemblage in Yukon Territory proposed by Weber and others (1978). Includes unit Pzq in the Big Delta (Weber and others, 1978) and quadrangles (Foster and others, 1983), unit Pzk in the Healy (Csejtey and others, 1992) and Mount McKinley (Bela Csejtey, written commun., 1993) quadrangles, and the upper part of the Birch Hill Sequence (unit Dbs, Newberry and others, 1996) in the Fairbanks Mining District of the southeastern Livengood and northeastern Fairbanks quadrangles \[symbol 699\] 5660, 5661 (units Pzk, HE002, MM002; unit Pzq, BD002, unit Pzq, CI002) Pzkcp Calcareous and phyllitic rocks (Devonian or older)\-- Calc-phyllite, marble, and phyllite; lower to upper greenschist facies. Age unknown. Distributed discontinuously along the basal contact of the Keevy Peak Formation, and interpreted here as a calcareous, basal part of the Keevy Peak. Corresponds to the lower part of the Birch Hill Sequence (Dbcs unit) of Newberry and others (1996) in the southeastern Livengood and northeastern Fairbanks quadrangles, and unit Pzm in the Big Delta (Weber and others, 1978) and in the Circle quadrangles (Foster and others, 1983) \[symbol 699+16\] 5662 (unit Pzm, BD002; CI002) PzZym Mafic schist (Paleozoic and(or) Late? Proterozoic)\-- Green, quartz-chlorite-carbonate schist, commonly having abundant plagioclase porphyroblasts. Associated with amphibolitic schist and minor marble, quartzite, and pelitic schist. Thought to represent metamorphosed mafic pyroclastic rocks interbedded with schists of unit PzZyqs. Outside of the map extent shown, these rocks also occur as interbeds in unit PzZyqs in the Circle quadrangle. Includes unit PzpCm of Foster and others (1983) and unit Pzcl of Wiltse and others (1995) \[symbol 132+14\] 8660, unit PzpCm, CI002 PzZyqs Quartz- and pelitic schist of the Yukon-Tanana Upland (middle to early Paleozoic and(or) Late? Proterozoic)\-- Dominantly polymetamorphic quartzite, schistose quartzite, and quartz-mica schist, containing subordinate gritty quartzite, chlorite schist, calc-silicate schist, marble, magnetite-biotite schist, amphibolite, and greenstone. Ranges from amphibolite to greenschist facies. Protolith age at least as old as the augen gneiss unit (MDyao) that intrudes it; U-Pb zircon age of 365 Ma reported from an interlayer interpreted as meta-tuff in the Big Delta quadrangle (Aleinikoff and others, 1986). K-Ar dating in much of the Yukon-Tanana Upland has shown that Cretaceous pluton yield ages distinctly younger than metamorphic ages, that in general there is no indication of thermal resetting by these plutons, and that therefore many of the K-Ar ages, typically between 105 and 120 Ma indicate the timing of metamorphism (Wilson and others, 1985). To the south in the Mount Hayes quadrangle, Nokleberg and others (1992a) interpreted K-Ar white mica ages between 106 and 118 Ma on their unit jcs as metamorphic crystallization rather than cooling ages. Unit PzZyqs corresponds to the Fairbanks Schist of the Fairbanks Mining District and surrounding areas of the southeastern Livengood and northeastern Fairbanks quadrangles of Robinson and others (1990, unit PzPfs) and Newberry and others (1996, units Zf, Zfa, Zfm, Zfc, Zfg, and Zfw), units Zf and Zfc in the Livengood quadrangle (Weber and others, 1992), units Pzs, PzpCs, and PzpCsq (Weber and others, 1978) in the Big Delta quadrangle, unit PzpCq in the Circle quadrangle (Foster and others, 1983), and pCcq, pCu, pCcm, and pCm units of the quartz- \"basement\" of Smith and others (1994) in the Chena River area. Also includes some rocks distinguished by Robinson and others (1990) in the Fairbanks Mining district as the Chena River Sequence based on inferred differences in grade, but reassigned to the Fairbanks Schist by Newberry and others (1996) because their study shows the Chena River rocks formed under similar T/P conditions and contain chemically identical amphiboles as the Fairbanks Schist. Devonian metavolcanic rocks of the Cleary sequence, originally included in the Fairbanks Schist of Robinson and others (1990), were reassigned by Newberry and others (1996) to their distinctly younger Muskox Sequence, which is herein assigned to unit Pzsc \[symbol 132\] 9320, 9321, 9323, 9324, 9326, 9327 PzZaqs Pelitic and quartzose schist of the Alaska Range\-- Dominantly pelitic and quartz-rich schist in the Healy and Mount McKinley quadrangles; includes subordinate calc-schist and feldspathic schist. Generally underwent greenschist to amphibolite facies metamorphism, with or without greenschist facies retrogression. Corresponds to unit PzpCp in the Healy (Csejtey and others, 1992) and Mount McKinley quadrangles (Bela Csejtey, Jr., written commun., 1993), the PzpCq unit in the southeast Medfra quadrangle (Patton and others, 1980) and unit Pzsv in the Talkeetna quadrangle (Reed and Nelson, 1980). Also, for this compilation, tentatively includes the jcs unit of the Jarvis Creek Glacier subterrane of the Yukon-Tanana terrane in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992a) \[symbol 132+996\] 8633, 8641, 9322, unit jcs, MH002 {part 9320, part 7400}; unit Pzsv, TL002; unit PzpCp, HE002, MM002; unit PzpCq, MD002 PzZysa Schist and amphibolite (middle to early Paleozoic and(or) Late? Proterozoic)\-- Medium- to high-grade pelitic schist containing subordinate quartzite, quartz- schist, calc-silicate rocks and calc-schist, marble, amphibolite, graphitic schist, and augen gneiss interbeds. Contains less quartzite and quartz- schist, and more marble interbeds, and is of generally higher grade than the PzZyqs unit. May grade in lithology, polymetamorphic history, and metamorphic grade with the Fairbanks Schist in the Fairbanks Mining District (Newberry and others, 1996) of the southeastern Livengood and northeastern Fairbanks quadrangles. The contact with our unit PzZyqs is interpreted as a thrust by Foster and others (1983) in the Circle quadrangle. The augen gneiss in the Chena River area was interpreted by Smith and others (1994) to have a felsic volcanic protolith, and yields K-Ar ages of 76.7+/-1.5 Ma on biotite, and 82.3+/-3.5 Ma on muscovite (DuBois and others, 1986) which are considered reset by nearby Latest Cretaceous or Earliest Tertiary plutonism (Wilson and others, 1984). Foster and others (1992) inferred the augen gneiss is of Mississippian age by correlation with augen gneiss of plutonic origin in the adjoining Big Delta quadrangle. One gneiss body in this area has yielded a concordant Cretaceous (110 Ma) U-Pb zircon age (Dusel-Bacon and others, 1998), however, we do not have the data at hand to determine the impact this date has on the unit as a whole. Corresponds to the PzpCs unit (including the sillimanite gneiss subunit) of Foster and others (1983) in the Circle quadrangle, and rocks included in the Chena River Sequence of Robinson and others (1990) and includes the lgs, and ms units of the Lake George and Macomb subterranes of the Yukon-Tanana terrane in the Mount Hayes quadrangle (Nokleberg and others, 1992a) \[symbol 136\] 8630, 8632, unit PzpCs, PzpCs(gneiss), CI002; units lgs, ms, MH002 PzZyg Gneiss (Early Paleozoic to Proterozoic)\-- Gray, medium-grained, mylonitic, quartzofeldspathic biotite-sillimanite gneiss; associated with unit PzZygs, gneiss, schist, and quartzite. Forms core of a gneiss dome in the central Big Delta quadrangle (Dusel-Bacon and Foster, 1983). Age uncertain. Corresponds with Pzg unit of Weber and others (1978) in the Big Delta quadrangle \[symbol 337\] 5670 PzZygs Gneiss, schist, and quartzite (Early Paleozoic to Proterozoic)\-- Quartzofeldspathic orthogneiss, pelitic schist and paragneiss, quartzite, and marble. Corresponds to PzpCg unit of Weber and others (1978) in the Big Delta quadrangle, the quartzite subunit of unit PzpCs of Foster and others (1983) in the Circle quadrangle, and includes the pCwo, pCwp, and pCwm units of Smith and others (1994) in their West Point complex of the Chena River area. Granitic orthogneiss mapped as part of this unit by Smith and others (1994) yielded and inferred preCambrian age on the basis of multi-grain U-Pb zircon dating. However, resampling and redating by Dusel-Bacon and others (1998) using single grain ion microprobe analysis of zircon from this orthogneiss yielded a mid-Cretaceous (110 Ma) concordant U-Pb zircon age, interpreted as an igneous crystallization age synchronous with high-grade metamorphism, extensional deformation, and exhumation in a gneiss dome. It is not clear how this new date may impact the inferred age of the other parts of this unit \[symbol 136+13\] 8802 (new NSAclass) End of Yukon-Tanana and northern Alaska Range metamorphic complex Ruby metamorphic complex Pzrm Marble (Paleozoic)\-- Massive light- to dark-gray marble and recrystallized limestone, having sedimentary structures preserved locally. Age inferred as Devonian and(or) Ordovician by Cass (1959). Includes the mcl unit of Cass (1959) and the Pzrm and Pztbl units of Puchner (1984) in the Ruby quadrangle. In the Nulato quadrangle, drill core at the Illinois Creek prospect yielded Ordovician conodonts (Steve Teller and Anita Harris, written commun., 1984). Tentatively includes unit Pzc of Chapman and others (1985) in the Ophir quadrangle which overlies or maybe gradationally interbedded with quartzite and phyllite here assigned to unit PzZrqs \[symbol 900+13\] 5340, 8620, unit Pzc, OP002; unit mcl RB002; unit PzpCc, NL003; unit Pztbl, Pzrm, RB005 Pzrmi Metamorphosed mafic igneous rocks (Paleozoic?)\-- Metamorphosed mafic igneous rocks, ranging from metagabbro and metadiabase to greenstone, amphibolite, and garnet amphibolite. Variable intensity of sheared within unit. Unit Pzm of Dover (unpublished mapping, 1997), not mapped separately by Chapman and others (1982) \[symbol 132+13\] 5285 (new NSAclass) MDrao Augen orthogneiss (Mississippian and(or) Devonian?)\-- Peraluminous granitic gneiss containing augen of potassium feldspar generally interpreted to represent blastoporphyritic texture. U-Pb zircon age of 390+/-12 Ma reported from Ray Mountains area of the (north-central) Tanana quadrangle (Patton and others, 1987); Dillon and others (1979; 1980 report Middle Devonian to Early Mississippian Rb/Sr whole-rock and U-Pb zircon ages on similar rocks elsewhere in the Ruby metamorphic complex. Corresponds to unit MDao of Dover (1994) in the Tanana quadrangle and some rocks that were included in unit Km of Patton and others (1978) in the Melozitna quadrangle, which have since been recognized as augen orthogneiss and included in unit Pzgn of Roeske and others (1995) \[symbol 184+16\] 6522 (unit Dao, TN003) Dm Marble (Late Devonian)\-- Calcitic to dolomitic marble in distinctive marker beds intercalated with greenschist and amphibolite facies rocks of the pelitic and quartz- schist unit (PzZrqs). Age assignment based on conodonts (Anita Harris, written commun., 1984). Corresponds to unit Dl of Dover (1994) in the Tanana quadrangle and unit Pzm of Patton and others (1978) in the Melozitna quadrangle \[symbol 900+14\] 5525, units Dlr, Dld, Ml, TN003; unit Pzm, MZ002 PzZrqs Pelitic and quartzitic schist (middle to early Paleozoic and(or) Late? Proterozoic)\-- Mainly muscovite- and quartz-rich schist, and subordinate calc-schist, quartzofeldspathic schist, gneiss, amphibolite, and quartzite. Locally mappable marble interbeds are shown as unit Dm north of the Kaltag fault and unit Pzrm south of the Kaltag fault. In the Ray Mountains of the north-central Tanana quadrangle, underwent polymetamorphic history of synkinematic greenschist, local blueschist, and amphibolite facies metamorphism that varies depending on depth of exposure, and proximity to zones of ductile deformation and(or) buried plutons or other thermal hot spots (Miyaoka and Dover, 1990; Dover, 1994). Blueschist facies metamorphism largely obliterated by greenschist to granulite facies overprint in the Kokrines Hills (Roeske and others, 1995). Includes the Pzs and associated Pzm and MzPzm units of Dover (1994) in the Tanana quadrangle, the unit PzpCs of Patton and others (1978), the PzpCm unit of Chapman and Patton (1978), and the Pzs unit of Roeske and others (1995), in the Melozitna quadrangle. South of the Kaltag fault, these rocks are even more poorly exposed and especially little studied rocks. Corresponds to the mc and mca units of Cass (1959), and the informal PzpCsg and PzpCs units of Puchner (1984) in the Ruby quadrangle, the PzpCs and PzpCc units of Patton (written commun., 1997) in the Nulato quadrangle, and the PzpCs unit of Chapman and others (1986) in the Ophir quadrangle. Unit shown using a vertical line overprint pattern north of the Kaltag fault and horizontal line pattern south of the Kaltag fault \[symbol 132+997n, 998s\] 9325 unit Pzs (Pzqs), TN003; units PzpCs, MZ002; unit PzpCm, RB003; RB004 \[symbol 132+998\] 8650, 8625, 8601, unit PzpCc, PzpCs, NL003; unit PzpCs OP002; units mc, mca, RB002; unit PzpCsg, PzpCs, RB005, PzZrpg Quartzofeldspathic paragneiss and quartzite (Early Paleozoic to Proterozoic)\-- Dominantly quartz-rich and quartzofeldspathic paragneiss, quartzite, and subordinate thinly interlayered quartz-mica schist, but also contains lenses and layers of augen orthogneiss. In the Ray Mountains area of the north-central Tanana quadrangle, the unit is typically well-foliated, and texture ranges from compositionally banded to massive, depending on composition and grainsize of the protolith (Dover, 1994). Metamorphosed to amphibolite facies. Undated; appears to stratigraphically and/or structurally underlie schistose units inferred as Paleozoic to Late Proterozoic in age. Corresponds to the CZg unit of Dover (1994) in the Ray Mountains area, part of the PzpCsq unit of Chapman and others (1982) in the Tanana quadrangle, the PzpCn and PzpCq units of Patton and others (1978) in the Melozitna quadrangle, and tentatively, unit Pzpgn of Roeske and others (1995) in the Melozitna quadrangle and unit PzpCg of Chapman and Patton (1978) in the northwest Ruby quadrangle. Also tentatively included here, from the western Ruby quadrangle, Puchner (1984) mapped a pelitic schist and gneiss unit (PzpCsg) consisting of quartz-muscovite-chlorite-biotite-graphite-garnet-staurolite schist, quartzofeldspathic orthogneiss, and foliated greenstone all retrograded from amphibolite facies. Unit PzpCq of Patton and others (1978) can alternatively be correlated with unit T[r]{.smallcaps}Mtqp of this map \[symbol 136\] 8801, 8803 unit PzpCn, MZ002; unit PzZqg, TN003; unit PzpCg, RB004; unit PzpCsg, RB005 End of Ruby metamorphic complex Sedimentary rocks CZw Wickersham grit, undivided (Cambrian? and Late Proterozoic)\-- Dominantly clastic sequence of poorly sorted quartzite, feldspathic quartzite, grit, calcareous siltstone and fine-grained sandstone, and subordinate dark limestone and chert. Variable cataclasis and generally low-grade recrystallization, and locally structurally dismembered and imbricated. Age poorly constrained. Interpreted by F.R. Weber as protolith of at least part of the quartz- and pelitic schist (PzZyqs) and schist and amphibolite (PzZysa) units. Includes the CZwg unit of Weber and others (1992) in the Livengood quadrangle, some rocks of the PzpCa? and PzpCgq units of Foster and others (1983) in the Circle quadrangle, the PzPws and PzPwg units of Reifenstuhl and others (1997) in the Tanana B-1 quadrangle, and rocks tentatively assigned to this unit in the Kantishna River, Mount McKinley, McGrath, and Medfra quadrangles (F.R. Weber and T.K. Bundtzen, unpublished data, 1998). Locally divided into: \[symbol 306\] 8300 unit CZw LG002; unit PzpCa, CI002; unit Pzw, TN003; unit PzpCs, MG002 CZwl Wickersham limestone\-- Medium- to very dark-gray, dense to very finely crystalline, nonfossiliferous limestone and medium-gray, fine-grained, non-siliceous dolostone. Dolostone contains nondiagnostic stromatolites. Interbedded in Wickersham unit. Consists of units Cwl, CZwl, and CZwad of Weber and others (1992) in the Livengood quadrangle \[symbol 301+708\] 8000 (unit Cwl, CZwl, CZwad?, LG002) CZwa Argillaceous upper unit\-- Dominantly argillaceous, containing distinctive tan-weathering gray calcareous siltstone and fine-grained sandstone, subordinate quartzite and chert, and locally, a few black clastic limestone interbeds. Corresponds to the CZwa unit of Weber and others (1992) in the Livengood quadrangle, unit ng of Pewe and others (1966) in the Fairbanks quadrangle, and the PzpCa unit of Foster and others (1983) in the Circle quadrangle \[symbol 301\] 8310 unit CZwa, LG002; unit ng, FB002; unit Cal, TN002 Zwg Gritty lower unit (Late Proterozoic?)\-- Dominantly poorly sorted to bimodal quartzite and gritty quartzite, and granule conglomerate characteristically containing sparse, single-crystal milky white to blue quartz granules (\"eyes\") in a slightly cherty quartzofeldspathic-wacke matrix. Lithologically gradational with argillaceous upper unit (Czwa). Corresponds to the Zwg unit of Weber and others (1992) in the Livengood quadrangle, and the PzpCqg unit of Foster and others (1983) in the Circle quadrangle \[symbol 306+16\] 8410 unit Zwg, LG002, unit PzpCgq, CI002; unit Cqs KH002 PRECAMBRIAN\ Metamorphic rocks ZYnm Metamorphic basement rocks of the Nixon Fork sequence, undivided (Late and(or) Middle Proterozoic)\-- Dominantly greenschist facies quartz- and pelitic schist, with subordinate calc-schist, quartzofeldspathic schist, marble, schistose felsic metavolcanic rocks, greenstone, and gneissic and schistose plutonic rocks. Depositionally overlain by unmetamorphosed Ordovician and latest Cambrian carbonate rocks of the Nixon Fork sequence in the Medfra quadrangle (Eakins, 1918; Patton and others, 1980; J.A. Dumoulin and D.C. Bradley, unpublished data, 1998) and by Permian conglomerate elsewhere (Patton and Dutro, 1979). Kyanite has been reported locally (Grant Abbott and T.K. Bundtzen, written commun., 1997). Resembles quartz- and pelitic units (PzZyqs, PzZaqs, and PzZrqs) in the Yukon-Tanana and Ruby crystalline complexes in the predominance of quartz-mica schist and micaceous quartzite, but differs from those units in lacking evidence of Cretaceous or Jurassic metamorphism and in its clear evidence of pre-Ordovician metamorphism and probable Proterozoic protolith age (Dillon and others, 1985). K-Ar mica ages ranging from 296-921 Ma are reported by Silberman and others (1979). Discordant U-Pb zircon ages from metaplutonic rocks having upper intercepts as old as 1,250+/-50 Ma and additional K-Ar ages are reported Dillon and others (1985). Corresponds to one area of the mca unit and the mcb unit of Cass (1959) in the Ruby quadrangle and a slight extension into the Medfra quadrangle based on mapping of Eakin (1918). Locally (primarily the Medfra quadrangle), subdivided into: \[symbol 133+995\] 8600 unit mcb, RB002 (and slight extension into Medfra) ZYns Pelitic schist\-- Chiefly greenschist facies pelitic schist and quartzose metasedimentary rocks, with subordinate calc-schist, marble, and locally, greenstone (Patton and others, 1980). Includes a small granitic gneiss body in the Medfra quadrangle. Stratigraphic evidence indicates a pre-Ordovician age; K-Ar mica minimum ages range between 274 and 514 Ma (Silberman and others, 1979). Corresponds to unit PzpCp of Patton and others (1980) \[symbol 133+15\] 8640 unit PzpCp, MD002 ZYnc Calc-schist\-- Dominantly light- to medium-gray calc-schist and thin-bedded schistose marble, and subordinate quartz-mica schist. Gradational into pelitic schist unit (ZYns). Distinguished from pelitic schist in poorly exposed areas by relatively smooth aeromagnetic signature in contrast to rugged, steep-gradient profiles over pelitic schist unit (Patton and others, 1980). Corresponds to PzpCc unit of Patton and others (1980) \[symbol 133+708\] 8610 unit PzpCc, MD002 ZYnv Metavolcanic rocks\-- Tan, light-gray, pink, and green banded fine-grained blastoporphyritic felsic metavolcanic rocks having a well-developed foliation. Subordinate quartzofeldspathic rocks thought to represent recrystallized felsic flows and tuffs (Patton and others, 1980). Corresponds to the PzpCv unit of Patton and others (1980) \[symbol 133+16\] 8700 unit PzpCv, MD002 Ynqd Meta-quartz diorite (middle Proterozoic?)\-- Sheared metamorphosed porphyritic quartz diorite. Contains biotite phenocrysts as large as 1 cm and numerous micro-veinlets of quartz (Silberman and others, 1979). K-Ar age on biotite yielded an age of 921+/-25 Ma and muscovite from mylonite along border yielded 663+/-20 Ma (Silberman and others, 1979). Intrudes quartz-mica schist of unit ZYnm in the southwest Ruby quadrangle. Corresponds to unit pCm of Silberman and others (1979) \[symbol 133+348\] unit 8710 (new nsaclass) unit pCm, RB007 Xi Idono metamorphic complex (Early Proterozoic)\-- Foliated augen gneiss, amphibolite, and minor metasedimentary rocks, all of amphibolite facies. Protolith age 2.06 Ga based on U-Pb zircon and Sm-Nd isotopic dating of Miller and others (1991); K-Ar ages range from 120 to 1230 Ma. Corresponds to unit Xi of Miller and Bundtzen (1994) \[symbol 187\] 9400 References cited Aleinikoff, J.N., Dusel-Bacon, C., and Foster, H.L.., 1986, Geochronology of augen gneiss and related rocks, Yukon-Tanana terrane, east-central Alaska: Geological Society of America Bulletin v. 97, p. 626-637. Aleinikoff, J.N., Moore, T.E., Nokleberg, W.J., and Koch, R.D., 1995, Preliminary U-Pb ages from detrital zircons from the Arctic Alaska and Yukon-Tanana terranes, Alaska: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs v 27, p. 2 Aleinikoff, J.N., and Nokleberg, W.J., 1989, Age of deposition and provenance of the Fairbanks Schist unit, Yukon-Tanana terrane, east-central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1903, p. 75-83. Berg, H.C., Jones, D.L., and Richter, D.H., 1972, Gravina-Notzutin belt \-- Tectonic significance of an upper Mesozoic sedimentary and volcanic sequence in southern and southeastern Alaska, in Geological Survey research 1972: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 800-D, p. D1-D24. Blodgett, R.B., and Brease, P.F., 1997, Essian (late Early Devonian) brachiopods from Shellabarger Pass, Talkeetna C-6 quadrangle, Denali National Park, Alaska indicate Siberian origin for Farewell terrane \[abs.\]: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Program, v. 29, no. 5, p. 5. Box, S.E., Moll-Stalcup, E.J., Frost, T.P., and Murphy, J.M., 1993, Preliminary geologic map of the Bethel and southern Russian Mission quadrangles, southwestern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2226-A, scale 1:250,000. Brabb, E.E., 1969, Six new Paleozoic and Mesozoic Formations in east-central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1274-I, p. I1-I26. Brabb, E.E., and Churkin, Michael, Jr., 1969, Geologic map of the Charley River quadrangle, east-central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Geologic Investigations Map I-573, scale 1:250,000. Brosge, W.P., Lanphere, M.A., Reiser, H.N., and Chapman, R.M., 1969, Probable Permian age of the Rampart Group, central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1294-B, 18 p. Bundtzen, T.K., 1981, Geology and mineral deposits of the Kantishna Hills, Mount McKinley quadrangle, Alaska: Fairbanks, University of Alaska, M.S. Thesis, 237 p., 1 sheet, scale 1:63,360. Bundtzen, T.K., and Laird, G.M., 1980, Preliminary geology of the McGrath-upper Innoko River area, western Interior Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, Open-File Report 134, 36 p., 3 plates. Bundtzen, T.K., and Laird, G.M., 1982, Geologic map of the Iditarod D-2 and western D-3 quadrangles, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, Professional Report 72, 1 plate. Bundtzen, T.K., Harris, E.E., and Gilbert, W.G., 1997a, Geologic map of the eastern half of the McGrath quadrangle, Alaska: Alaska Division Geological and Geophysical Surveys Report of Investigations 97-14a, scale 1:125,000, 34 p. Bundtzen, T.K., Pinney, D.S., and Laird, G.M., 1997b, Preliminary geologic map and data table from the Ophir C-1 and western Medfra C-6 quadrangles, Alaska: Alaska Division Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 97-46, scale 1:63,360, 10 p. Bundtzen, T.K., Laird, G.M., Clautice, K.H., and Harris, E.E., 1994, Geologic map of the Gagaryah River area, Lime Hills C-5 and C-6 quadrangles, southwest Alaska: Alaska Division Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 94-40, scale 1:63,360. Calderwood, K.W., and Fackler, W.C., 1972, Proposed stratigraphic nomenclature for Kenai Group, Cook Inlet basin, Alaska, American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 56, no. 4, p. 739-754. Carden, J.R., Connelly, W., Forbes, R.B., and Turner, D.L., 1977, Blueschists of the Kodiak Islands, Alaska: An extension of the Seldovia schist terrane: Geology, v. 5, p. 529-533. Cass, J.T., 1959, Reconnaissance geologic map of the Ruby quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigation Map I-289, 1 sheet, scale 1:250:000. Chapman, R.M., and Patton, W.W., Jr., 1978, Preliminary summary of the geology in the northwest part of the Ruby quadrangle, in Johnson, K.M., ed., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1977: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 772-B, p. B39-B41. Chapman, R.M., and Patton, W.W., Jr., 1979, Two upper Paleozoic rock units identified in southwestern part of the Ruby quadrangle, in Johnson, K.M., and Williams, J.R., eds., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1978: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 804-B, p. B59-B61. Chapman, R.M., Patton, W.W., Jr., and Moll, E.J., 1985, Reconnaissance geology of the Ophir quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-203, 17 p., 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000. Chapman, R.M., Yeend, W.E., Brosge, W.P, and Reiser, H.N., 1975, Preliminary geologic map of the Tanana and northeast part of the Kantishna River quadrangles, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 75-337, scale 1:250,000. Chapman, R. M., Patton, W. W. Jr., and Moll, E. J., 1985, Reconnaissance geologic map of the Ophir quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-203, 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000. Chapman, R.M., Yeend, W.E., Patton, W.W., Jr., 1975, Preliminary reconnaissance geologic map of the western half of Kantishna River quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 75-351, scale 1:250,000. Chapman, R.M., Yeend, Warren, Brosge, W.P., and Reiser, H.N., 1982, Reconnaissance geologic map of the Tanana quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 82-734, scale 1:250,000, 18 p. Churkin, Michael, Jr., and Carter, Claire, 1996, Stratigraphy, structure, and graptolites of an Ordovician and Silurian sequence in the Terra Cotta Mountains, Alaska Range, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1555, 84 p. Churkin, M., Jr., Foster, H.L., Chapman, R.M., and Weber, F.R., 1982, Terranes and suture zones in east-central Alaska: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 87, no. B5, p. 3718-3730. Clark, S.H.B., 1972, Reconnaissance bedrock geologic map of the Chugach Mountain near Anchorage, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-350, 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000. Coney, P.J., and Jones, D.L., 1985, Accretion tectonics and crustal structure in Alaska: Tectonophysics, v. 119, p. 265-283. Cowan, D.S., and Boss, R.F., 1978, Tectonic framework of the southwestern Kenai Peninsula, Alaska: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 89, p. 155-158. Csejtey, Bela, Jr., Mullen, M.W., Cox, D.P., and Stricker, G.D., 1992, Geology and geochronology of the Healy quadrangle, south-central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-1961, scale 1:250,000, 63 p. Csejtey, Bela, Jr., Nelson, W.H., Eberlein, G.D., Lanphere, M.A., and Smith, J.G., 1977, New data concerning age of the Arkose Ridge Formation, south-central Alaska in Blean, K.M., ed., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1976: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 751-B, p. B62-B64. Csejtey, Bela, Jr., Nelson, W.H., Jones, D.L., Silberling, N.J., Dean, R.M., Morris, M.S., Lanphere, M.A., Smith, J.G., and Silberman, M.L., 1978, Reconnaissance geologic map and geochronology, Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle, northern part of Anchorage quadrangle, and southwest corner Healy quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 78-558A, scale 1:250,000, 60 p. Decker, John, Bergman, S.C., Blodgett, R.B., Box, S.E., Bundtzen, T.K., Clough, J.G., Coonrad, W.L., Gilbert, W.G., Miller, M.L., Murphy, J.M., Robinson, M.S., and Wallace, W.K., 1994, Geology of southwestern Alaska, in Plafker, George and Berg, H.C., eds., The Geology of Alaska, volume G-1, The Geology of North America: Geological Society of America, Decade of North American Geology, p. 285-310. Detterman, R.L., and Reed, B.L., 1980, Stratigraphy, structure, and economic geology of the Iliamna quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1368-B, 86 p., 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000. Detterman, R.L., Case, J.E., Miller, J.W., Wilson, F.H., and Yount, M.E., 1996, Stratigraphic Framework of the Alaska Peninsula, in Geologic Studies on the Alaska Peninsula: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1969-A, 74 p. Dillon, J.T., Pessel, G.H., Chen, J.H., and Veach, N.C., 1979, Tectonic and economic significance of Late Devonian and late Proterozoic U-Pb zircon ages from the Brooks Range, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Geologic Report 61, p. 36-43. Dillon, J.T., Pessel, G.H., Chen, J.H., and Veach, N.C., 1980, Middle Paleozoic magmatism and orogenesis in the Brooks Range, Alaska: Geology, v. 8, p. 338-343. Dillon, J.T., Patton, W.W., Jr., Mukasa, S.B., Tilton, J.B., and Moll, E.J., 1985, New radiometric evidence for the age and thermal history of the metamorphic rocks of the Ruby and Nixon Fork terranes, west-central Alaska, in Bartsch-Winkler, S., and Reed, K.M., eds., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1983: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 945, p. 13-18. Dillon, J.T., Brosge, W.P., and Dutro, J.T., Jr., 1986, Generalized geologic map of the Wiseman quadrangle, Akaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 86-219, scale 1:250,000. Dover, J.H., 1994, Geology of part of east-central Alaska, in Plafker, George and Berg, H.C., eds., The Geology of Alaska, volume G-1, The Geology of North America: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Decade of North American Geology, p. 153-204. Dover, J.H., and Miyaoka, R.T., 1988, Reinterpreted geologic map and fossil data, Charley River quadrangle, east-central, Alaska:: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2004, scale 1:250,000. DuBois, G.D., Wilson, F.H., and Shew, Nora, 1986, Map and table showing potassium-argon age determinations and selected major-element chemical analyses from the Circle quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 86-392, scale 1:250,000. Dumoulin, J.A., Bradley, D.C., and Harris, A.G., in press, Sedimentology, conodonts, structure, and correlation of Silurian and Devonian metasedimentary rocks in Denali National Park, Alaska in Gray, J. and Riehle, J.R. , eds., Geologic studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1996, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper, 50 MS pp, 12 figs. Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, 1994, Metamorphic history of Alaska, in Plafker, G., and Berg, H.C., eds., The Geology of Alaska: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America v G-1, p. 495-533. Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, and Aleinikoff, J.N., 1985, Petrology and tectonic significance of augen gneiss from a belt of Mississippian granitoids in the Yukon-Tanana terrane, east-central Alaska: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 96, p. 411-425. Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, and Aleinikoff, J.N., 1996, U-Pb zircon and titanite ages for augen gneiss from the Divide Mountain area, eastern Yukon-Tanana upland, Alaska, and evidence for the composite nature of the Fiftymile batholith, in Moore, T.E., and Dumoulin, J.A., eds. Geologic Studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey during 1994: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2152, p. 131-141. Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, and Foster, H.L., 1983, A sillimanite gneiss dome in the Yukon crystalline terrane, east-central Alaska; petrography and garnet-biotite thermometry: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1179-E, 25 p. Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, Brosge, W.P., Till, A.B., Doyle, E.O., Mayfield, C.F., Reiser, H.N., and Miller, T.P., 1989, Distribution, facies, ages, and proposed tectonic associations of regionally metamorphosed rocks in northern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1497-A, 44 p., 2 plates., 1:1,000,000-scale. Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, Csejtey, B., Jr., Foster, H.L., Doyle, E.O., Nokleberg, W.J., and Plafker, George, 1993, Distribution, facies, ages, and proposed tectonic associations of regionally metamorphosed rocks in east- and south-central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1497-C, 73 p., 2 plates., 1:1,000,000-scale. Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, Wooden, J.L., Mortensen, J.K., Bressler, J.R., Takaoka, Hidetoshi, Oliver, D.H., Newberry, Rainer, and Bundtzen, T.K., 1998, Metamorphic-hosted mineralization in the Yukon-Tanana Upland, Alaska \[extended abs.\]: Alaska Miners Association, Extended abstracts of the 16th Biennial Conference on Alaskan Mining, \"Second Rush of 98\", p. 16-18. Dutro, J.T., Jr., and Patton, W.W., Jr., 1982, New Paleozoic formations in the northern Kuskokwim Mountains, west-central Alaska, in Stratigraphic notes, 1980-1982: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1529-H, p. H13-H22. Eakin, H.M., 1918, The Cosna-Nowitna region, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 667, map, scale 1:250,000, 54 p. Forbes, R.B., 1982, with contributions from F.R. Weber, R.C. Swainbank, J.M. Britton, and J.M. Brown, Bedrock geology and petrology of the Fairbanks Mining District: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Open-file Report AOF-169, 68 p. Foster, H.L., Laird, Jo, Keith, T.E.C., Cushing, G.W., and Menzie, W.D., 1983, Preliminary geologic map of the Circle quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 83-170-A, scale 1:250,000. Foster, H.L., Keith, T.E.C., and Menzie, W.D., 1994, Geology of the Yukon-Tanana area of east-central Alaska, in Plafker, G., and Berg, H.C., eds., The Geology of Alaska: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Survey of America, The Geology of North America, v. G-1, p. 205-240. Galloway, J.P., and Laney, Jim, 1994, Status of geologic mapping in Alaska \-- A digital bibliography: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report OFR 94-675-A, 96 p., 4 plates, scale 1:7,500,000. Gamble, B.M., and Reed, B.L., 1996, Preliminary geologic map of the eastern half of the Lime Hills quadrangle, Alaska: unpublished U.S. Geological Survey map compilation, scale 1:250,000. Gemuts, I., Puchner, C.C., and Steffel, C.I., 1983, Regional geology and tectonic history of western Alaska in Proceedings of the 1982 Symposium on Western Alaska Geology and Resource Potential: Journal of the Alaska Geological Society v. 3, p. 67-85. Gilbert, W.G., 1979, A geologic guide to Mount McKinley National Park: Alaska Natural History Association, in cooperation with the National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 52 p., 1 plate, scale 1:250,000. Gilbert, W.G., 1981, Preliminary geologic map of Cheeneetuk River area, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Survey Open File Report AOF-153, scale 1:63,360. Gilbert, W.G., and Redman, E.R., 1977, Metamorphic rocks of the Toklat-Teklanika River area, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Geologic Report 50, 30 p., 1 sheet, scale 1:63,360. Grantz, Arthur, 1960, Geologic map of the Talkeetna A-2 quadrangle, Alaska and contiguous area to the north and northwest: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-313, scale 1:48,000. Hoare, J.M., and Coonrad, W.L., 1959a, Geology of the Bethel quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-285, scale 1:250,000. Hoare, J.M., and Coonrad, W.L., 1959b, Geology of the Russian Mission quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-292, scale 1:250,000. Imlay, R.W., and Reeside, J.B., Jr., 1954, Correlation of the Cretaceous formations of Greenland and Alaska: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 65, p. 223-246. Jones, D.L., and Silberling, N.J., 1979, Mesozoic stratigraphy: The key to tectonic analysis of southern and central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 79-2100, 41 p. Jones, D.L., Silberling, N.J., and Hillhouse, John, 1977, Wrangellia \-- a displaced terrane in northwestern North America: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 14, no. 11, p. 2565-2577. Jones, D.L., Silberling, N.J., Gilbert, W.G., and Coney, P.J.,, 1982, Character, distribution, and tectonic significance of accretionary terranes in the central Alaska Range: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 87, no. B5, p. 3709-3717. Kelley, J.S., 1984, Geologic map and sections of the southwestern Kenai Peninsula west of the Port Graham fault: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 84-152, scale 1:63,360. Layer, P.W. and Solie, D.N., 1991, Timing of igneous activity and basin formation, southern Alaska Range, as constrained by 40Ar/39Ar dating: EOS, v. 72, no. 44, p. 503. Loney, R.A., and Himmelberg, G.R., 1985, Distribution and character of the peridotite-layered gabbro complex of the southeastern Yukon-Koyukuk ophiolite belt, Alaska, in Bartsch-Winkler, S., and Reed, K.M., eds., U.S. Geological Survey in Alaska; Accomplishments during 1983: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 945, p. 46-48 MacKevett, Jr., E.M., 1978, Geologic map of the McCarthy quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-1032, scale 1:250,000. MacKevett, E.M., Jr., and Plafker, George, 1974, The Border Ranges fault in south-central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Journal of Research, v. 2, no. 3, p. 323-329. Magoon, L.B. Adkison, W.L., and Egbert, R.M, 1976, Map showing geology, wildcat wells, Tertiary plant localities, K/Ar age dates, and petroleum operations, Cook Inlet area, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-1019, scale 1:250,000, 3 sheets. Mamay, S.H., and Reed, B.L., 1984, Permian plant megafossils from the conglomerate of Mt. Dall, central Alaska Range, in Coonrad, W.L., and Elliott, R.L., eds., United States Geological Survey in Alaska; Accomplishments during 1981: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 868, p. 98-102. Martin, G.C., 1926, The Mesozoic stratigraphy of Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 776, 493 p. Mertie, J.B., Jr., and Harrington, G.L., 1924, The Ruby-Kuskokwim region, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 754, 129 p. Meyer, J.F., Jr., and Saltus, R.W., 1995, Merged aeromagnetic map of Interior Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Geophysical Investigations Map GP-1014, 2 sheets, scale 1:500,000. Meyer, J.F., Jr., Saltus, R.W., Barnes, D.F., and Morin, R.F., 1996, Bouguer gravity map of Interior Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Geophysical Investigations Map GP-1016, 2 sheets, scale 1:500,000. Miller, M.L, and Bundtzen, T.K., 1994, Generalized geologic map of the Iditarod quadrangle, Alaska, showing potassium-argon, major-oxide, trace-element, fossil, paleocurrent, and archaeological sample localities: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2219A, scale 1:250,000, 48 p. Miller, M.L., Belkin, H.E., Blodgett, R.B., Bundtzen, T.K., Cady, J.W., Goldfarb, R.J., Gray, J.E., McGimsey, R.G., and Simpson, S.L., 1989, Pre-field study and mineral resource assessment of the Sleetmute quadrangle, southwestern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-363, 115 p., 1 map, scale 1:250,000. Miller, M.L., Bradshaw, J.Y., Kimbrough, D.L., Stern, T.W., and Bundtzen, T.K., 1991, Isotopic evidence for Early Proterozoic age of the Idono Complex, west-central Alaska: Journal of Geology, v. 99, no. 2, p. 209-223. Miller, T.P., and Smith, R.L., 1976, \"New\" volcanoes in the Aleutian volcanic arc, in Cobb, E.H., ed., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1975: U.S. Geological survey Circular 733, p. 11. Miyaoka, R.T., and Dover, J.H., 1990, Shear sense in mylonites, and implications for transport of the Rampart assemblage (Tozitna terrane), Tanana quadrangle, east-central Alaska, in Dover, J.H., and Galloway, J.P., eds., Geologic studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey, 1989: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1946, p. 51-64. Moll-Stalcup, Elizabeth, Brew, D.A., and Vallier, T.L., 1994, Latest Cretaceous and Cenozoic magmatic rocks of Alaska, Plate 5, in Plafker, George and Berg, H.C., eds., The Geology of Alaska, The Geology of North America, Volume G-1: Geological Society of America Decade of North America Geology Project, 1 sheet, scale 1:2,500,000. Mortensen, J.K., 1992, Pre-mid-Mesozoic tectonic evolution of the Yukon-Tanana terrane, Yukon and Alaska: Tectonics v. 11, p. 836-853. Newberry, R.J., Bundtzen, T.K, Clautice, K.H., Combellick, R.A., Douglas, T., Laird, G.M., Liss, S.A., Pinney, D.S., Reifenstuhl, R.R., and Solie, D.N., 1996, Preliminary geologic map of the Fairbanks Mining District, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 96-16, scale ?, ? p. Nokleberg, W.J., Aleinikoff, J.N., Lange, I.M., Silva, S.R., Miyaoka, R.T., Schwab, C.E., and Zehner, R.E., with contribution for selected areas from Bond, G.C., Richter, D.H., Smith, T.E., and Stout, J.H., 1992a, Preliminary geologic map of the Mount Hayes quadrangle, eastern Alaska Range, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 92-594, scale 1:250,000. Nokleberg, W.J., Aleinikoff, J.N., Dutro, J.T., Jr., Lanphere, M.A., Silberling, N.J., Silva, S.R., Smith, T.E., and Turner, D.L., 1992b, Map, tables, and summary of fossil and isotopic age data, Mount Hayes quadrangle, eastern Alaska Range, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Map MF-1996-D, scale 1:250,000, 43 p. Nokleberg, W.J., Moll-Stalcup, E.J., Miller, T.P., Brew, D.A., Grantz, Arthur, Reed, J.C., Jr., Plafker, George, Moore, T.E., Silva, S.R., and Patton, W.W., Jr., 1994, Tectonostratigraphic terrane and overlap assemblage map of Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-194, 45 p., scale 1:2,500,000. Nokleberg, W.J., Richter, D.H., Ferrians, O.J., Lange, I.M., Campbell, D.L., Aleinikoff, J.N., Smith, T.E., and Koch, R.D., in press, Introduction, previous studies, acknowledgements, detailed description of map units, geologic and tectonic summary, and references cited for preliminary geologic map of the Gulkana quadrangle, eastern Alaska Range and northern Copper River Basin, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, scale 1:250,000, text 32 p. Paige, Sidney, and Knopf, Adolph, 1907, Stratigraphic succession in the region northeast of Cook Inlet, Alaska: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 18, p. 327-328. Patton, W.W., Jr., 1966, Regional geology of the Kateel River quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Geologic Investigations Map I-437, scale 1:250,000. Patton, W.W., Jr., 1973, Reconnaissance geology of the northern Yukon-Koyukuk province, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 774-A, p. A1-A17. Patton, W.W., Jr., and Dutro, J.T., Jr., 1979, Age of the metamorphic complex in the northern Kuskokwim Mountains, west-central Alaska, in Johnson, K.M., and Williams, J.R., eds., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1978: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 804-B, p. B61-B63 Patton, W.W., Jr., and Miller, T.P., 1973, Bedrock geologic map of Bettles and southern part of Wiseman quadrangles, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-492, scale 1:250,000. Patton, W.W., Jr., and Moll-Stalcup, E.J., 1996, Geologic map of the Unalakleet quadrangle, west-central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-2559, scale 1:250,000, 39 p. Patton, W.W., Jr., Box, S.E., Moll-Stalcup, E.J., and Miller, T.P., 1994a, Geology of west-central Alaska in Plafker, George, and Berg, H.C., eds., The Geology of Alaska: Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America, Boulder, Colorado, v. G-1, p. 241-269. Patton, W.W., Jr., Box, S.E., and Grybeck, D.J.,, 1994b, Ophiolites and other mafic-ultramafic complexes in Alaska in Plafker, George, and Berg, H.C., eds., The Geology of Alaska: Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America, Boulder, Colorado, v. G-1, p. 671-686. Patton, W.W., Miller, T.P., Chapman, R.M., and Yeend, Warren, 1978, Geologic map of the Melozitna quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Geologic Investigations Map I-1071, scale 1:250,000. Patton, W.W., Jr., Moll, E.J., Dutro, J.T., Jr., Silberman, M.L., and Chapman, R.M., 1980, Preliminary geologic map of the Medfra quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 80-811A, 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000. Patton, W.W., Jr., Stern, T.W., Arth, J.G., and Carlson, C., 1987, New U/Pb ages from granite and granite gneiss in the Ruby geanticline and southern Brooks Range, Alaska: Journal of Geology v. 95, p. 118-126. Patton, W.W., Jr., Tailleur, I.L., Brosge, W.P., and Lanphere, M.A., 1977, Preliminary report on the ophiolites of northern and western Alaska, in Coleman, R.G., and Irwin, W.P., North American Ophiolites: Oregon Department of Geology and mineral Industries, Bulletin 95, p. 51-57. Patton, W.W., Jr., Moll, E.J., Lanphere, M.A., and Jones, D.L., 1984, New age data for the Kaiyuh Mountains, west-central Alaska, in Coonrad, W.L., and Elliott, R.L., eds., United States Geological Survey in Alaska; Accomplishments during 1981: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 868, p. 30-32. Pewe, T.L., Wahrhaftig, C., and Weber, F., 1966, Geologic map of the Fairbanks quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Investigations I-455, 5 pages, 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000. Plafker, George, Lull, J.S., Nokleberg, W.J., Pessel, G.H., Wallace, W.K., and Winkler, G.R., 1992, Geologic map of the Valdez A-4, B-3, B-4, C-3, C-4, D-4 quadrangles, northern Chugach Mountains and southern Copper River basin: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-2164, 1 sheet, scale 1:125,000. Puchner, C.C., 1984, Geologic map of the Ruby/Poorman area: Unpublished Anaconda Mining Company Report, scale 1:250,000 Reed, B.L., and Gamble, B.M., 1988, Preliminary geologic map of the Lime Hills quadrangle, Alaska, in Gamble, B.M., Allen, M.S., McCammon, R.B., Root, D.H., Scott, W.A., Griscom, Andrew, Krohn, M.D., Ehmann, W.J., and Southworth, S.C., Lime Hills quadrangle, Alaska \-- An AMRAP planning document: U.S. Geological Survey Administrative report, 167 p., 22 plates. Reed, B.L, and Elliott, R.L., 1970, Reconnaissance geologic map, analyses of bedrock and stream sediment samples, and an aeromagnetic map of parts of the southern Alaska Range: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 70-271, scale 1:63,360, 24 p. Reed, B.L., and Lanphere, M.A., 1969, Age and chemistry of Mesozoic and Tertiary plutonic rocks in south-central Alaska: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 80, p. 23-44. Reed, B.L., and Lanphere, M.A., 1972, Generalized geologic map of the Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith showing potassium-argon age of the plutonic rocks: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-372, 2 sheets, scale 1:1,000,000. Reed, B.L., and Lanphere, M.A., 1973, Alaska-Aleutian Range batholith \-- Geochronology, chemistry, and relation to circum-Pacific plutonism: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 84, p. 2583-2610. Reed, B.L., and Nelson, S.W., 1980, Geologic map of the Talkeetna quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Investigation Series Map I-1174, 15 pages, 1 plate, scale 1:250,000. Reifenstuhl, R.R., Dover, J.H., Pinney, D.S., Newberry, R.J., Clautice, K.H., Liss, S.A., Blodgett, R.B., Bundtzen, T.K., and Weber, F.R., 1997, Geologic map of the Tanana B-1 quadrangle, central Alaska: Alaska Department of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Report of Investigations 97-15a, scale 1:63,360, 17 p. Reifenstuhl, R.R., Dover, J.H., Newberry, R.J., Clautice, K.H., Liss, S.A., Blodgett, R.B., and Weber, F.R., 1998, Geologic map of the Tanana A-1 and A-2, central Alaska: Alaska Department of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 98-37a, scale 1:63,360. Ridgeway, K.D, Trop, J.M., and Sweet, A.R., 1994, Depositional systems, age, and provenance of the Cantwell Formation, Cantwell basin, Alaska Range \[abs\]: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 26, p. 492. Riehle, J.R., Fleming, M.D., Molnia, B.F., Dover, J.H., Kelley, J.S., Miller, M.L., Nokleberg, W.J., Plafker, George, and Till, A.B., 1997, Digital shaded-relief image of Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-2585, scale 1:2,500,000. Robinson, M.S., Smith, T.E., and Metz, P.A., 1990, Bedrock geology of the Fairbanks Mining District: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 106, scale 1:63,360. Roeske, S.M., 1986, Field relations and metamorphism of the Raspberry Schist, Kodiak Island, Alaska, in Evans, B.W., and Brown, E.H., eds., Blueschist and ecologites: Geological Society of America Memoir 164, p. 169-184. Roeske, S.M., Mattinson, J.M., and Armstrong, R.L., 1989, Isotopic ages of glaucophane schists on the Kodiak Islands, southern Alaska, and their implications for Mesozoic tectonic history of the Border Ranges Fault system: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 101, p. 1021-1037. Roeske, S.M., Dusel-Bacon , C., Aleinikoff, J.N., Snee, L.W., and Lanphere, M.A., 1995, Metamorphic and structural history of continental crust at a Mesozoic collisional margin, the Ruby terrane, central Alaska: Journal of Metamorphic Geology v. 13, p. 25-40. St. John, J.M., and Babcock, L.E., 1997, Middle Cambrian trilobites of Siberian aspect from the Farewell terrane, southwestern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1574, p. 269-281. Silberling, N.J., and Jones, D.L., eds., 1984, Lithotectonic terrane maps of the North American Cordillera: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 84-523, Scale 1:2,500,000 Silberling, N.J., Jones, D.L., Monger, J.W.H., Coney, P.J., Berg, H.C., and Plafker, George, 1994, Lithotectonic terrane map of Alaska and adjacent parts of Canada, in Plafker, George, and Berg, H.C., eds., The Geology of Alaska: Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America, Boulder, Colorado, plate 3, scale 1:2,500,000. Silberman, M.L., Moll, E.J., Patton, W.W., Jr., Chapman, R.M., and Conner, C.L., 1979, PreCambrian age of metamorphic rocks from the Ruby province, Medfra and Ruby quadrangles\--preliminary evidence from radiometric age data, in Johnson, K.M., and Williams, J.R., eds., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1978: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 804-B, p. B64, B66-B68. Solie, D.N., Gilbert, W.G., Harris, E.E., Kline, J.T., Liss, S.A., and Robinson, M.S., 1991, Preliminary geologic map of Tyonek D-6 and eastern Tyonek D-7 quadrangles, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public-data File 91-10, scale 1:63,360, 15 p., not paginated. Smith, T.E., 1981, Geology of the Clearwater Mountains, south-central Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Geologic Report 60, 1 sheet, scale 1:63,360, 73 p. Smith, T.E., Albanese, M.D., and Kline, G.L., 1984, Geologic map of the Healy A-2 quadrangle, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 95, 1 sheet, scale 1:63,360. Smith, T.E., Robinson, M.S., Weber, F.R., Waythomas, C.W., and Reifenstuhl, R.R., 1994, Geologic map of the Upper Chena River area, eastern interior Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 115, scale 1:63,360, 19 p. Spurr, J.E., 1900, A reconnaissance in southwestern Alaska in 1898: U.S. Geological Survey 20th Annual Report, Part 7, p. 31-264. Steiger, R.H., and Jager, E., 1977, Subcommission on Geochronology: Convention on the use of decay constants in geo- and cosmochronology: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 36, p. 359-362. Turner, D.L., and Smith, T.E., 1974, Geochronology and generalized geology of the central Alaska Range, Clearwater Mountains, and northern Talkeetna Mountains: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Open-File Report AOF-72, 11 p., 1 sheet. Wahrhaftig, Clyde, 1968, Schists of the central Alaska Range: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1254- E, p. E1-E22. Weber, F.R., Foster, H.L., Keith, T.E.C., and Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, 1978, Preliminary geologic map of the Big Delta quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 78-529A, scale 1:250,000. Weber, F.R., Wheeler, K.L., Rinehart, C.D., Chapman, R.M., and Blodgett, R.B., 1992, Geologic map of the Livengood quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 92-562, scale 1:250,000, 19 p. Wilson, F.H., Smith, J.G., and Shew, Nora, 1985, Review of radiometric data from the Yukon Crystalline terrane, Alaska and Yukon Territory: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 22, no. 4, p. 525-537. Wilson, F.H., Weber, F.R., and Angeloni, Linda, 1984, Late Cretaceous thermal overprint and metamorphism, southeast Circle quadrangle, Alaska \[abs.\]: Geological society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 16, no. 5, p. 340. Wiltse, M.A., Reger, R.D., Newberry, R.J., Pessel, G.H., Pinney, D.S., Robinson, M.S., and Solie, D.N., 1995, Geologic map of the Circle Mining District, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Report of Investigations 95-2a, scale 1:63,360. Winkler, G.R., Silberman, M.L., Grantz, Arthur, Miller, R.J., and MacKevett, E.M., Jr., 1980, Geologic map and summary geochronology of the Valdez quadrangle, southern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 80-892-A, scale 1:250,000, 2 sheets. Winkler, G.R., compiler, 1992, Geologic map and summary geochronology of the Anchorage 1° x 3° quadrangle, southern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-2283, scale 1:250,000. List of Map Sources Anchorage: AN1: Winkler, G.R., compiler, 1992, Geologic map and summary geochronology of the Anchorage 1° x 3° quadrangle, southern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-2283,, scale 1:250,000. Big Delta: BD1: Weber, F.R., Foster, H.L., Keith, T.E.C., and Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, 1978, Preliminary geologic map of the Big Delta quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 78-529A, scale 1:250,000. BDCI1: Smith, T.E., Robinson, M.S., Weber, F.R., Waythomas, C.W., and Reifenstuhl, R.R., 1994, Geologic map of the Upper Chena River area, eastern interior Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 115, scale 1:63,360, 19 p. Circle: CI1: Foster, H.L., Laird, Jo, Keith, T.E.C., Cushing, G.W., and Menzie, D.W., 1983, Preliminary geologic map of the Circle quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 83-170-A, scale 1:250,000. CI2: Wiltse, M.A., Reger, R.D., Newberry, R.J., Pessel, G.H., Pinney, D.S., Robinson, M.S., and Solie, D.N., 1995, Geologic map of the Circle Mining District, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Report of Investigations 95-2a, scale 1:63,360. CI3: Weber, F.R, Unpublished mapping, 1997, scale 1:250,000. BDCI1: Smith, T.E., Robinson, M.S., Weber, F.R., Waythomas, C.W., and Reifenstuhl, R.R., 1994, Geologic map of the Upper Chena River area, eastern interior Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 115, scale 1:63,360, 19 p. FMD1: Robinson, M.S., Smith, T.E., and Metz, P.A., 1990, Bedrock geology of the Fairbanks Mining District: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 106, scale 1:63,360. FMD1: Newberry, R.J., Bundtzen, T.K, Clautice, K.H., Combellick, R.A., Douglas, T., Laird, G.M., Liss, S.A., Pinney, D.S., Reifenstuhl, R.R., and Solie, D.N., 1996, Preliminary geologic map of the Fairbanks Mining District, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 96-16, scale 1:63,360. Fairbanks: FB1: Pewe, T.L., Wahrhaftig, C., and Weber, F., 1966, Geologic map of the Fairbanks quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Investigations I-455, scale 1:250,000, 5 p. FMD1: Newberry, R.J., Bundtzen, T.K, Clautice, K.H., Combellick, R.A., Douglas, T., Laird, G.M., Liss, S.A., Pinney, D.S., Reifenstuhl, R.R., and Solie, D.N., 1996, Preliminary geologic map of the Fairbanks Mining District, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 96-16, scale 1:63,360. FMD1: Robinson, M.S., Smith, T.E., and Metz, P.A., 1990, Bedrock geology of the Fairbanks Mining District: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 106, scale 1:63,360. Gulkana: GU1: Nokleberg, W.J., Richter, D.H., Ferrians, O.J., Lange, I.M., Campbell, D.L., Aleinikoff, J.N., Smith, T.E., and Koch, R.D., in press, Introduction, previous studies, acknowledgements, detailed description of map units, geologic and tectonic summary, and references cited for preliminary geologic map of the Gulkana quadrangle, eastern Alaska Range and northern Copper River basin, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, in press \[CAD coverage 1997\] Healy: HE1: Csejtey, Bela, Jr., Mullen, M.W., Cox, D.P., and Stricker, G.D., 1992, Geology and geochronology of the Healy quadrangle, south-central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-1961, scale 1:250,000, 63 p. HE2: Smith, T.E., 1981, Geology of the Clearwater Mountains, south-central Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Geologic Report 60, 1 sheet, scale 1:63,360, 73 p. HE3: Smith, T.E., Albanese, M.D., and Kline, G.L., 1984, Geologic map of the Healy A-2 quadrangle, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 95, 1 sheet, scale 1:63,360. Iditarod: ID1: Miller, M.L, and Bundtzen, T.K., 1994, Generalized geologic map of the Iditarod quadrangle, Alaska, showing potassium-argon, major-oxide, trace-element, fossil, paleocurrent, and archaeological sample localities: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2219A, scale 1:250,000, 48 p. (With revisions from unpublished data, M.L. Miller and T.K. Bundtzen, 1997) Kantishna River: KH1: Chapman, R.M., Yeend, W.E., Patton, W.W., Jr., 1975, Preliminary reconnaissance geologic map of the western half of Kantishna River quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 75-351, scale 1:250,000. KH2: Chapman, R.M., and Yeend, Warren, 1981, Geologic reconnaissance of the east half of Kantishna River quadrangle and adjacent areas, in Albert, N.R.D., and Hudson, Travis, ed., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1979: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 823-B, p. B30-B32. KH3: Weber, F.R, Unpublished mapping, 1997, scale 1:250,000. Kateel River: KT1: Patton, W.W., Jr., 1966, Regional geology of the Kateel River quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Map I-437, 1 sheet, 1:250,000. (With revisions from unpublished data, W.W. Patton, Jr., 1997) Lime Hills: LH1: Gamble, B.M., and Reed, B.L., 1996, Preliminary geologic map of the eastern half of the Lime Hills quadrangle, Alaska: unpublished U.S. Geological Survey map compilation, scale 1:250,000. LH2: Bundtzen, T.K., West half of the Lime Hills quadrangle, Alaska: Unpublished mapping, 1997. LH2: Reed, B.L., and Gamble, B.M., 1988, Preliminary geologic map of the Lime Hills quadrangle, Alaska, in Gamble, B.M., Allen, M.S., McCammon, R.B., Root, D.H., Scott, W.A., Griscom, Andrew, Krohn, M.D., Ehmann, W.J., and Southworth, S.C., Lime Hills quadrangle, Alaska \-- An AMRAP planning document: U.S. Geological Survey Administrative report, 167 p., 22 plates. (Used only the west half of this map, see above.) Livengood: LG1: Weber, F.R., Wheeler, K.L., Rinehart, C.D., Chapman, R.M., and Blodgett, R.B., 1992, Geologic map of the Livengood quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 92-562, 19 p., scale 1:250,000. (With revisions from unpublished data, F.R. Weber, 1997) FMD1: Newberry, R.J., Bundtzen, T.K, Clautice, K.H., Combellick, R.A., Douglas, T., Laird, G.M., Liss, S.A., Pinney, D.S., Reifenstuhl, R.R., and Solie, D.N., 1996, Preliminary geologic map of the Fairbanks Mining District, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 96-16, scale 1:63,360. FMD1: Robinson, M.S., Smith, T.E., and Metz, P.A., 1990, Bedrock geology of the Fairbanks Mining District: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 106, scale 1:63,360. McGrath: MG1: Bundtzen, T.K., Harris, E.E., and Gilbert, W.G., 1997, Geologic map of the eastern half of the McGrath quadrangle, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Report of Investigations 97-14a, scale 1:125,000, 34 p. MG2: Bundtzen, T.K., 1997, Unpublished draft compilation of the western half of the McGrath quadrangle, Alaska, Cited references include:\ \ Babcock, L.E., Blodgett, R.B., and St. John, J., 1994, New Late(?) Proterozoic age formations in the vicinity of Lone Mountain, McGrath quadrangle, west-central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2107, p. 143-156.\ \ Blodgett, R.B. and Gilbert, W.G., The Cheeneetuk Limestone \-- a new Early(?) to Middle Devonian Formation in the McGrath A-4 and A-5 quadrangles, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 85, 6 p., 1 sheet, scale 1:63,360.\ \ Bundtzen, T.K., 1986, Geology and prospect examination of the Vinasale Mt.-Alder Creek area, McGrath C-6 quadrangle, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data 86-15, 10 p., 1 figure, scale 1:63,360.\ \ Bundtzen, T.K., and Laird, G.M., 1983, Geologic map of the McGrath D-6 quadrangle, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Geologic Report 79, scale 1:63,360.\ \ Dutro, J.T., Jr., and Patton, W.W., Jr., 1982, New Paleozoic formations in the northern Kuskokwim Mountains, west-central Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1529-H, p. H13-H22. Medfra: MD1: Patton, W.W., Jr., Moll, E.J., Dutro, J.T., Jr., Silberman, M.L., and Chapman, R.M., 1980, Preliminary geologic map of the Medfra quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 80-811A, 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000. OPMD1: Bundtzen, T.K., Pinney, D.S., and Laird, G.M., 1997b, Preliminary geologic map and data table from the Ophir C-1 and western Medfra C-6 quadrangles, Alaska: Alaska Division Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 97-46, scale 1:63,360, 10 p. Mount Hayes: MH1: Nokleberg, W.J., Aleinikoff, J.N., Lange, I.M., Silva, S.R., Miyaoka, R.T., Schwab, C.E., and Zehner, R.E., with contribution for selected areas from Bond, G.C., Richter, D.H., Smith, T.E., and Stout, J.H., 1992, Preliminary geologic map of the Mount Hayes quadrangle, eastern Alaska Range, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 92-594, scale 1:250,000. Mount McKinley: MM1: Csejtey, Bela, Jr., 1993, Unpublished draft compilation of the Mount McKinley quadrangle, Alaska MM1: Gilbert, W.G., 1979, A geologic guide to Mount McKinley National Park: Alaska Natural History Association, in cooperation with the National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 52 p., 1 plate, scale 1:250,000. MM1: Reed, J.C., Jr., 1961, Geology of the Mount McKinley quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1108-A, 36 p., 1 map, scale 1:250,000. Melozitna: MZ1: Patton, W.W., Miller, T.P., Chapman, R.M., and Yeend, Warren, 1978, Geologic map of the Melozitna quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Geologic Investigations Map I-1071, scale 1:250,000. MZ2: Roeske, S.M., Dusel-Bacon , C., Aleinikoff, J.N., Snee, L.W., and Lanphere, M.A., 1995, Metamorphic and structural history of continental crust at a Mesozoic collisional margin, the Ruby terrane, central Alaska: Journal of Metamorphic Geology v. 13, p. 25-40. Nulato: NL1: Patton, W.W., Jr., 1994, Unpublished draft compilation of the Nulato quadrangle, Alaska. Ophir: OP1: Chapman, R. M., Patton, W. W. Jr., and Moll, E. J., 1985, Reconnaissance geologic map of the Ophir quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-203, 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000. OP1: Chapman, R.M., Patton, W.W. Jr., and Moll, E.J., 1982, Preliminary summary of geology in eastern part of Ophir quadrangle, in Coonrad, W.L., ed., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1980: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 844, p. 70-73. OPMD1: Bundtzen, T.K., Pinney, D.S., and Laird, G.M., 1997b, Preliminary geologic map and data table from the Ophir C-1 and western Medfra C-6 quadrangles, Alaska: Alaska Division Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 97-46, scale 1:63,360, 10 p. Ruby: RB1: Cass, J.T., 1959, Reconnaissance geologic map of the Ruby quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigation Map I-289, 1 sheet, scale 1:250:000 \[Geologic linework transcribed by David Dempsey, 1996, to fit modern topographic base\]. RB2: Chapman, R.M., and Patton, W.W., Jr., 1978, Preliminary summary of the geology in the northwest part of the Ruby quadrangle, in Johnson, K.M., ed., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1977: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 772-B, p. B39-B41. RB3: Chapman, R.M., and Patton, W.W., Jr., 1979, Two upper Paleozoic rock units identified in southwestern part of the Ruby quadrangle, in Johnson, K.M., and Williams, J.R., eds., The United States Geological Survey in Alaska: Accomplishments during 1978: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 804-B, p. B59-B61. RB4: Puchner, C.C., 1984, Geologic map of the Ruby/Poorman area: Unpublished Anaconda Mining Company Report, scale 1:250,000, written commun., 1997. RB5: Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, Brosge, W.P., Till, A.B., Doyle, E.O., Mayfield, C.F., Reiser, H.N., and Miller, T.P., 1989, Distribution, facies, ages, and proposed tectonic associations of regionally metamorphosed rocks in northern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1497-A, 44 p., 2 plates., 1:1,000,000-scale. Sleetmute: SM1: Miller, M.L., Belkin, H.E., Blodgett, R.B., Bundtzen, T.K., Cady, J.W., Goldfarb, R.J., Gray, J.E., McGimsey, R.G., and Simpson, S.L., 1989, Pre-field study and mineral resource assessment of the Sleetmute quadrangle, southwestern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-363, 115 p., 1 map, scale 1:250,000. SM2: Bundtzen, T.K., Laird, G.M., Harris, E.E., Kline, J.T., and Miller, M.L., 1993, Geologic map of the Sleetmute C-7, D-7, C-8, and D-8 Quadrangles, Horn Mountains area, southwest Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public-Data File 93-47, 15 p., 2 sheets, scale 1:63,360. Talkeetna: TL1: Reed, B.L., and Nelson, S.W., 1980, Geologic map of the Talkeetna quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Investigation Series Map I-1174, 15 pages, 1 plate, scale 1:250,000. Talkeetna Mountains: TK1: Csejtey, Bela, Jr., Nelson, W.H., Jones, D.L., Silberling, N.J., Dean, R.M., Morris, M.S., Lanphere, M.A., Smith, J.G., and Silberman, M.L., 1978, Reconnaissance geologic map and geochronology, Talkeetna Mountains quadrangle, northern part of Anchorage quadrangle, and southwest corner Healy quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 78-558A, scale 1:250,000, 60 p. TK2: Kline, J.T., Bundtzen, T.K., and Smith, T.E., 1990, Preliminary bedrock geologic map of the Talkeetna Mountains D-2 quadrangle, Alaska: Alaska Division Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 90-24, scale 1:63,360, not paginated. Tanana: TN1: Dover, J.H., 1997, Unpublished draft compilation of the Tanana quadrangle, Alaska, scale 1:250,000. TN1: Chapman, R.M., Yeend, Warren, Brosge, W.P., and Reiser, H.N., 1982, Reconnaissance geologic map of the Tanana quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 82-734, scale 1:250,000, 18 p. TN2: Reifenstuhl, R.R., Dover, J.H., Pinney, D.S., Newberry, R.J., Clautice, K.H., Liss, S.A., Blodgett, R.B., Bundtzen, T.K., and Weber, F.R., 1997, Geologic map of the Tanana B-1 quadrangle, central Alaska: Alaska Department of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Report of Investigations 97-15a, scale 1:63,360, 17 p. TN3: Reifenstuhl, R.R., Dover, J.H., Newberry, R.J., Clautice, K.H., Liss, S.A., Blodgett, R.B., and Weber, F.R., 1998, Geologic map of the Tanana A-1 and A-2, central Alaska: Alaska Department of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public Data File 98-37a, scale 1:63,360. Tyonek: TY1: Haeussler, P.J., 1997, Unpublished draft compilation of the Tyonek quadrangle, Alaska, scale 1:250,000. TY1: Magoon, L.B. Adkison, W.L., and Egbert, R.M, 1976, Map showing geology, wildcat wells, Tertiary plant localities, K/Ar age dates, and petroleum operations, Cook Inlet area, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-1019, scale 1:250,000, 3 sheets. TY2: Reed, B.L, and Elliott, R.L., 1970, Reconnaissance geologic map, analyses of bedrock and stream sediment samples, and an aeromagnetic map of parts of the southern Alaska Range: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 70-271, scale 1:63,360, 24 p. TY3: Solie, D.N., Gilbert, W.G., Harris, E.E., Kline, J.T., Liss, S.A., and Robinson, M.S., 1991, Preliminary geologic map of Tyonek D-6 and eastern Tyonek D-7 quadrangles, Alaska: Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Public-data File 91-10, scale 1:63,360, 15 p., not paginated. Valdez: VA1: Winkler, G.R., Silberman, M.L., Grantz, Arthur, Miller, R.J., and MacKevett, E.M., Jr., 1980, Geologic map and summary geochronology of the Valdez quadrangle, southern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 80-892-A, scale 1:250,000, 2 sheets. (With revisions from unpublished data, G.R. Winkler, 1997) VA2: Plafker, George, Lull, J.S., Nokleberg, W.J., Pessel, G.A., Wallace, W.K., and Winkler, G.R., 1992, Geologic map of the Valdez A-4, B-3, B-4, C-3, C-4, D-4 quadrangles, northern Chugach Mountains and southern Copper River basin, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-2164. Index of map units bu Bedrock of unknown type or age 3 CZds Unnamed dolostone, sandstone, siltstone 35 CZw Wickersham grit, undivided 43 CZwa Argillaceous upper unit 44 CZwl Wickersham limestone 44 Dcb Cascaden Ridge, Beaver Bend, and\ correlative rocks 36 DCd Dillinger sequence, undivided 33 Dm Marble 43 Dml Older limestone 29 Dps Phyllite, slate, siliceous siltstone, and\ argillite 36 Dq Quail unit 36 Ds Schwatka limestone unit 36 Dsb Serpentinite, basalt, chert and gabbro 25 DSbr Barren Ridge Limestone and correlative\ units 34 Dsc Shale and chert 29 DSl Limestone 37 DSlc Lost Creek unit 37 DSmdl Unnamed limestone 30 DSt Tolovana Limestone 37 Dsv Volcanic part of Schwatka unit 36 DSwc Whirlwind Creek Formation and\ unnamed correlative units 34 Dtr Troublesome unit and possibly\ correlative rocks 36 Dy Yanert Fork sequence and correlative\ rocks 38 Dys Fine-grained schistose sedimentary rocks 38 Dyv Fine-grained schistose volcanic rocks 39 DZn Shallow-marine carbonate units of Holitna\ basin area, undivided 34 Jaum Ultramafic rocks (Jurassic?) 25 Jc Chinitna Formation 20 JCmd Mystic and Dillinger stratigraphic\ sequences, undivided 30 Jct Chinitna Formation, Tuxedni Group,\ and coeval sedimentary rocks 19 JDm Mystic stratigraphic sequence, undivided 29 Ji Alaska-Aleutian Range and Chitina\ Valley batholiths, undifferentiated 21 Jium Ultramafic and mafic\ rocks, undivided 27 Jkt Kotsina Conglomerate 20 JMab Basalt and chert 26 JMtru Greenstone, chert, and ultramafic\ rocks, undivided 26 JMtu Mafic, ultramafic, and sedimentary\ rocks, undivided 27 Jmu Mafic and ultramafic rocks 20 Jn Naknek Formation 19 JPaur Uranatina metaplutonic complex 21 Jps Pelitic schist 21 JPsu Ultramafic rocks 25 JPzk Kakhonak Complex 31 JPzsgs Greenstone and chert 25 JPztm Mafic and ultramafic rocks, undivided 27 Jsch Greenschist and blueschist 21 Jtr Trondhjemite 21 JT[r]{.smallcaps}ct Crystal tuff, argillite, chert, graywacke,\ and limestone 24 JT[r]{.smallcaps}lm Limestone and marble 22 JT[r]{.smallcaps}mc McCarthy Formation 22 JT[r]{.smallcaps}su Red and brown sedimentary rocks and\ basalt 24 JT[r]{.smallcaps}ta Cherty tuff, crystal and lithic tuffs,\ and volcanic breccia 27 JT[r]{.smallcaps}tk Talkeetna Formation 22 JT[r]{.smallcaps}tmu Mafic and ultramafic rocks 26 JT[r]{.smallcaps}tv Tatina River Volcanic and equivalent\ units 29 Jtu Ultramafic rocks, undivided 27 Jtx Tuxedni Group 20 Kb Berg Creek Formation 14 Kcg Igneous pebble-cobble conglomerate 13 Kcs Cantwell Formation, sedimentary\ rocks subunit 11 Kg Granitic rocks 16 Kgw Graywacke sandstone and mudstone 14 KJcg Conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone,\ shale, and volcanic rocks 18 KJf Kahiltna flysch sequence 17 KJfk Flysch sequence 18 KJfm Metasedimentary rocks 18 KJfn Flysch sequence 18 KJg Granitic rocks 19 KJhc Haley Creek metaplutonic and\ metasedimentary rocks 19 KJs Argillite, chert, sandstone, and limestone 17 KJvr Vrain unit 19 KJw Wolverine quartzite 17 KJwc Wilber Creek flysch and Wolverine\ quartzite, undivided 17 Kk Kuskokwim Group, deep marine rocks 12 Kkn Kuskokwim Group, non-marine and\ shallow-marine rocks 12 Km Matanuska Formation 11 Kmar Melanges of the Alaska Range 15 Kme Melozitna sequence 12 Kmm Marine mudstone and sandstone 13 Kms Minto unit 11 Kmum Mafic and ultramafic rocks 16 Knb Norton Bay sequence 13 Knl Nelchina Limestone 14 Kqc Quartz-pebble conglomerate 13 Kshn Nonmarine shale, siltstone, and\ sandstone 13 Ksm Quartz-carbonate sandstone and\ pebbly mudstone 14 Kss Nonmarine sandstone, quartz\ conglomerate, shale, and siltstone 13 Ksse Marine sandstone and siltstone 13 Ktg Volcaniclastic rocks 16 KT[r]{.smallcaps}g Gemuk Group 10 KT[r]{.smallcaps}m McHugh Complex 15 Ktt Leucotonalite and trondhjemite 16 Kve Andesite and related rocks 16 Kvgm Volcanic graywacke and mudstone 14 Kvl Volcanic rocks 16 Kvm Volcanic graywacke and conglomerate 13 Kvs Metasedimentary rocks of the Valdez\ Group 17 Kvv Metavolcanic rocks of Valdez Group 17 Kwcf Wilber Creek flysch 14 MDl Fine-grained limestone 28 MDrao Augen orthogneiss 43 MDt Totatlanika Schist 40 MDtm Mylonitic Totatlanika Schist 40 MDyao Augen orthogneiss 40 Mgq Globe quartzite 35 mlu Ultramafic and associated rocks 15 Mzi Intrusive rocks 10 Mzpca Phyllite, pelitic schist, calc-schist, and\ amphibolite of the MacLaren\ metamorphic belt 11 MzPzi Intrusive and volcanic rocks, undivided 31 Mzsa Schist and amphibolite 11 Mzum Ultramafic and associated rocks 10 MzZum Ultramafic and mafic rocks, undivided 31 Oc Chert 38 Ocl Limestone 38 Ofc Fossil Creek Volcanics 38 Ont Novi Mountain and Telsitna Formations,\ and unnamed correlative rocks 35 Pagb Gabbro and orthogneiss 32 Pat Tetelna Volcanics 32 PDms Sedimentary rocks 35 PDsc Sheep Creek Formation and correlative\ siliciclastic units 29 Pe Eagle Creek Formation 32 Pig Graywacke 28 Pmi Shallow stocks, dikes, and sills 32 PMl Younger limestone 29 PMpc Phyllite and chert 38 PPad Diorite complex 32 PPagi Ahtell pluton 32 PPasc Station Creek and Slana Spur\ Formations, and equivalent rocks 32 PPaskm Marble 33 PPast Strelna metamorphic complex 33 Ps Argillite, siltstone, sandstone, and\ minor conglomerate 35 Pze Eclogite-bearing schist 40 Pzk Keevy Peak Formation 40 Pzkcp Calcareous and phyllitic rocks 41 Pzlc Limestone and chert 35 Pzlsl Schist, phyllite, limestone, and\ greenstone 39 Pzrm Marble 42 Pzrmi Metamorphosed mafic igneous rocks 42 Pzsc Spruce Creek sequence and correlative\ rocks 39 Pzvs Volcanic and sedimentary rocks 38 Pzydm Dolostone and marble 39 PzZaqs Pelitic and quartzose schist of the Alaska\ Range 41 PzZrpg Quartzofeldspathic paragneiss and\ quartzite 43 PzZrqs Pelitic and quartzitic schist 43 PzZyg Gneiss 42 PzZygs Gneiss, schist, and quartzite 42 PzZym Mafic schist 41 PzZyqs Quartz- and pelitic schist of the Yukon-\ Tanana Upland 41 PzZysa Schist and amphibolite 42 Qs Surficial deposits, undifferentiated 3 QTi Intrusive rocks, undivided 3 QTv Volcanic rocks, undivided 3 Qv Volcanic rocks, undivided 3 SCpl Post River Sandstone, Lyman Hills\ Formation, and correlative units 34 Spf Paradise Fork Formation and unnamed\ correlative rocks 34 Stc Terra Cotta Mountains Sandstone and\ correlative units 34 SZa Amy Creek unit 37 Tar Arkose Ridge Formation 5 Tb Basalt 6 Tba Basaltic andesite 6 Tcb Coal-bearing rocks 4 Tch Chickaloon Formation 5 Tcv Volcanic rocks of the Cantwell Formation 7 Td Felsic intrusive rocks 7 TDg Gabbro 9 Tegr Granite and granodiorite 7 Tfv Fluviatile sedimentary rocks and\ subordinate volcanic rocks 5 Tgl Gabbro 8 Thd Hornblende dacite 6 Thf Hypabyssal felsic and intermediate\ intrusive rocks 6 Thgd Granodiorite and other intermediate\ plutonic rocks 8 Thm Hypabyssal mafic intrusive rocks 6 Tiv Granitic and volcanic rocks, undivided 7 Tk Kenai Group, undivided 3 Tkb Beluga Formation 4 TKc Melange or cataclastite of the Orca Group 9 TKcg Conglomerate, sandstone, and lignite 8 TKd Dikes and subvolcanic rocks of\ intermediate composition 8 TKg Granitic rocks 9 TKgb Gabbro and leucogabbro 9 TKgd Granodiorite, tonalite, and monzonite\ dikes, and stocks 9 TKgg Gneissose granitic rocks 9 TKgp Hypabyssal granite porphyry dikes and\ rhyolitic sills, and plugs 8 TKi Intrusive rocks, undivided 9 TKiv Mafic to intermediate volcano-plutonic\ complexes 9 TKl Lamprophyre, alkali gabbro, and\ alkali diorite 9 TKqd Quartz diorite and diorite dikes and stocks 9 TKv Flows, tuff, and breccia, undivided 8 TKvi Andesite and related rocks 9 TKvr Rhyolite and related rocks 8 Tn Nenana Gravel 4 Toc Conglomerate of the Orca Group 5 Toegr Granitic rocks 7 Toem Granodiorite to tonalite 7 Togr Granite 7 Tos Sedimentary rocks of the Orca Group 5 Tov Volcanic rocks of the Orca Group,\ undivided 5 Tovs Orca Group, undivided 5 Tpgr Granitic rocks 8 TPza Amphibolite facies metamorphic rocks 10 T[r]{.smallcaps}c Carbonatite 23 T[r]{.smallcaps}cg Conglomerate and volcanic sandstone 23 T[r]{.smallcaps}cs Calcareous sedimentary rocks 22 T[r]{.smallcaps}Dv Volcanic and sedimentary rocks 25 T[r]{.smallcaps}gb Gabbro, diabase, and metagabbro 24 T[r]{.smallcaps}lb Limestone and basalt sequence 24 T[r]{.smallcaps}ls Chitistone and Nizina Limestones,\ undivided 22 T[r]{.smallcaps}Mica Chert, argillite, and volcaniclastic rocks 28 T[r]{.smallcaps}Mis Sandstone, grit, and argillite 28 T[r]{.smallcaps}Mtqp Quartzite and phyllite 27 T[r]{.smallcaps}Mts Sedimentary rocks 26 T[r]{.smallcaps}Mtsu Sedimentary rocks, undivided 27 T[r]{.smallcaps}n Nikolai Greenstone and related rocks 23 T[r]{.smallcaps}nm Metavolcanic and associated\ metasedimentary rocks 24 T[r]{.smallcaps}Pas Flysch-like sedimentary rocks 30 T[r]{.smallcaps}ps Phosphatic shale and limestone 23 T[r]{.smallcaps}Ps Sedimentary rocks, undivided 30 T[r]{.smallcaps}r Red beds 25 Trs Rhyolitic volcanic and sedimentary rocks 5 T[r]{.smallcaps}sc Black shale and chert 23 T[r]{.smallcaps}Sl Limestone blocks 15 T[r]{.smallcaps}sl Spiculite and sandy limestone 22 Tsf Sterling Formation 4 Tsu Sedimentary rocks, undivided 3 Tts Tsadaka Formation 4 Ttw Tsadaka, West Foreland, and Wishbone Formations, undivided 4 Tty Tyonek Formation 4 Tvb Andesite and basalt 6 Tvr Crystal and crystal-lithic ash-flow tuff 6 Tvs Volcanic and sedimentary rocks,\ undivided 4 Tvu Volcanic rocks, undivided 5 Tw Wishbone Formation 4 Twf West Foreland Formation 4 Xi Idono metamorphic complex 45 Ynqd Meta-quartz diorite 45 Zwg Gritty lower unit 44 ZYnc Calc-schist 44 ZYnm Metamorphic basement rocks of the\ Nixon Fork sequence, undivided 44 ZYns Pelitic schist 44 ZYnv Metavolcanic rocks 45 Appendix A. Exploratory drillholes in Central (Interior) Alaska The data in the following table on exploratory drillholes in the map area was provided by the Alaska Division of Oil and Gas (DOG). A map showing the distribution of these wells in the map area is shown on sheet 3 as figures 5a and 5b. This data set has been abstracted from a database of drill holes in Alaska maintained by DOG. Explanation for coded entries in columns of the table is as below: Column Entries Map Number Shown on figures 5a and 5b , sheet 3 API number \-- Well name \-- Operator name \-- Status P&A, plugged and abandoned;\ P&A-G, plugged and abandoned, gas show(s);\ P&A-O, plugged and abandoned, oil show(s);\ P&A-OC, plugged and abandoned, \"significant\" oil show;\ P&A-OG, plugged and abandoned, oil and gas show(s);\ GAS, gas producer;\ SUSP-O, suspended, oil show(s);\ SUSP-G, suspended, gas show(s) Completion date \-- Permit number \-- Area KOYK - Koyukuk;\ MTAN - Middle Tanana;\ COPR - Copper River;\ SUSIT - Susitna;\ CI - Cook Inlet Latitude At surface, decimal degress, N Longitude At surface, decimal degrees, W Township Number and direction, at surface Range Number and direction, at surface Section Section number Meridian At surface Bottonhole latitude Decimal degrees Bottomhole longitude Decimal degrees Bottomhole township Number and direction Bottomhole range Number and direction Bottomhole section Section number Total depth Feet	en
converted_docs	387994	Required Report - public distribution Date: 10/13/2004 GAIN Report Number: KS4055 KS4055 Korea, Republic of Dairy and Products Annual 2004 Approved by: ![](media/image1.wmf)Marcus E. Lower, Director Agricultural Trade Office Prepared by: Oh, Young Sook and Susan Phillips Report Highlights: Korea imported \$178 million of dairy products in 2003. It is expected that total imports in 2004 will reach \$200 million. Even though the U.S. has only an 18 percent market share by value, cheese products accounted for slightly more than half of all dairy imports from the U.S. and are expected to continue showing strong growth in the future. Includes PSD Changes: Yes Includes Trade Matrix: Yes Annual Report Seoul ATO \[KS2\] \[KS\] *SECTION I. SITUATION AND OUTLOOK* Korea imported \$178 million of dairy products in 2003. It is expected that total imports in 2004 will reach \$200 million. Although the Korean economy is likely to remain one of the fastest growing economies among OECD nations, it is predicted that consumption will remain sluggish in the 2^nd^ half of 2004 and in 2005. Cheese imports from the U.S. reached \$13.8 million through the first eight months of 2004, an increase of 35 percent compared to last year. Even though the U.S. has only an 18 percent market share by value, cheese products accounted for slightly more than half of all dairy imports from the U.S. and are expected to continue showing strong growth in the future. U.S. cheese products are considered high quality compared to other competitors. Whey imports from the U.S. were \$6.6 million, a seven percent increase compared to the first eight months of last year. The U.S market share in 2004 is expected to remain steady. Imports of ice cream from the U.S. were \$1 million through the first eight months of 2004, a decrease of 53 percent. Imports from the U.S. took a major hit when Häagen Dazs started imported more French ice cream instead of U.S. ice cream. Korea does not import raw milk, as there is currently a surplus in domestic production. However, limited domestic production facilities and unreliable local supplies will likely result in continued growth in imports of other dairy products. # Table 1: Major Dairy Products Import to Korea (Metric Tons) +-------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+-----+ \| Products \| Current \| 2002 \| \| 2003 \| \| \% \| \| \| \| Tariff \| \| \| \| \| Ch \| \| \| (HS Code) \| \| \| \| \| \| ange \| \| +-------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+-----+ \| \| \| U.S. \| Total \| U.S. \| Total \| U.S. \| To \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| tal \| +-------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+-----+ \| Cheese \| 36% \| 3,910 \| 3 \| 4,559 \| 3 \| 17% \| 12% \| \| \| \| \| 1,984 \| \| 5,782 \| \| \| \| $0406$ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +-------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+-----+ \| NFDM \| (20% \| 0 \| 4,150 \| 0 \| 4,554 \| 0 \| 10% \| \| (0402.10) \| - \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 176%)^1^ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +-------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+-----+ \| Whole Fat \| (40% - \| 0 \| 1,071 \| 0 \| 1,660 \| 0 \| 55% \| \| DM \| 176%)^2^ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| (0402.21) \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +-------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+-----+ \| Mixed Milk \| 36% \| 0 \| 1 \| 1 \| 6,312 \| 1% \| - \| \| (0404.90) \| \| \| 3,946 \| \| \| \| 55% \| +-------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+-----+ \| Butter \| (40% \| 20 \| 1,000 \| 11 \| 1,255 \| -82% \| 26% \| \| (0405.10) \| -89%)^3^ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +-------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+-----+ \| Whey Powder \| (20% - \| 1 \| 2 \| 1 \| 2 \| 13% \| 10% \| \| ( \| 4 \| 5,754 \| 6,487 \| 7,819 \| 9,174 \| \| \| \| 0404.10.10) \| 9.5%)^4^ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +-------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+-----+ \| Ice Cream \| 54% \| 1,701 \| 2,785 \| 833 \| 2,091 \| -51% \| - \| \| (2105) \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 25% \| +-------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+-----+ Source: 2004 Korea Customs & Trade Institute Notes: 1: 20% tariff within the quota of 1,034 metric tons, 176% tariff out of the quota 2: 40% tariff with the quota of 573 metric tons, 176% tariff out of the quota 3: 40% tariff within the quota of 420 metric tons, 89% tariff out of the quota 4: 20% tariff within the quota of 54,233 metric tons, 49.5% tariff out of the quota Historically, Korea has produced a surplus of milk as consumption has relatively low. In order to assist the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF) with this problem, a subsidiary organization, the Korean Dairy Promotion Association (KDPA) was formed. Since 1999, dairy farmers have voluntarily paid one won (1,150~~W~~=1\$) per kilogram of production to promote milk consumption. KDPA administers this fund to pay for television and radio commercials and other similar types of public relations and educational campaigns encouraging domestic consumers to drink milk. In addition, KDPA played a role in negotiating production and price levels between dairy farmers and the dairy industry. However, the government and industry think that KDPA's role is not so relevant these days as the herd size has been sufficiently reduced and there has been a recent jump in dairy prices received by farmers. In addition, there is the Korean Dairy and Beef Farmers Association (KDBFA), which is also promoting dairy consumption. In the future, it is likely that KDPA will be dissolved and dairy farmers will work directly with the dairy industry in negotiating a price. ### Table 2: Dairy Herd Information +------------------+---------+--------+--------+----------+----------+ \| \| D \| March \| June \| S \| December \| \| \| ecember \| 2003 \| 2003 \| eptember \| 2003 \| \| \| 2002 \| \| \| 2003 \| \| +------------------+---------+--------+--------+----------+----------+ \| Total Dairy Cows \| 544,000 \| 5 \| 5 \| 526,000 \| 519,000 \| \| (% Change from \| \| 52,000 \| 41,000 \| \| \| \| 2002) \| \| \| \| \| (-4.6%) \| +------------------+---------+--------+--------+----------+----------+ \| Milking Cows (% \| 252,000 \| 2 \| 2 \| 244,000 \| 241,000 \| \| Change from \| \| 62,000 \| 54,000 \| \| \| \| 2002) \| \| \| \| \| (-4.4%) \| +------------------+---------+--------+--------+----------+----------+ \| Dairy Farms (% \| 11,700 \| 11,700 \| 11,300 \| 10,800 \| 10,500 \| \| Change from \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 2002) \| \| \| \| \| (-10.3%) \| +------------------+---------+--------+--------+----------+----------+ \| Dairy Cows Per \| 46.4 \| 47 \| 48 \| 49 \| 49 \| \| Farm \| \| \| \| \| \| +------------------+---------+--------+--------+----------+----------+ Source: 2004 Korea Livestock Yearbook The European Union (EU), Australia and New Zealand are the main foreign competitors for U.S. product in Korea. The EU is price competitive in milk powder preparations, while Australia is a competitive cheese provider. Australian cheese is mainly imported in bulk and then processed by local Korean processors. Furthermore, the current trend for "slow food" is benefiting European products, which are viewed as products produced with great care as compared to "fast food" which are thought to be unhealthy. Per capita consumption of dairy products decreased 3.4 percent in 2003 to 62.4 kilograms from 64.2 kilograms in 2002. However, the consumption of cheese and yogurt has shown positive growth in 2003, which is expected for the foreseeable future. The expanding younger generation (the under 20 crowd) and their penchant for western foods, such as pizzas, cheeseburgers and sandwiches, has been a boon to cheese sales. Koreans also believe drinking yogurt aids digestion problems, resulting in many people drinking yogurt, especially probiotic yogurt every day. The current "well-being" trend emphasizes the consumption of healthy foods or functional foods\--everyday items that can claim a health benefit, such as functional ice cream with ingredients such as aloe, black beans, black sesame or vitamins\--are being introduced. Green tea milk and black bean milk are other examples of popular functional dairy foods. Green tea is known to prevent hypertension, sclerosis of the arteries and diabeties. The popularity of soymilk has also grown dramatically as Korean consumers increasingly regard this drink as a health food and an alternative to dairy milk. Koreans believe milk made from soy is better than regular cows' milk because it contains less fat and provides other minerals not found in regular milk. In addition, many Koreans are lactose intolerant. 1. Fluid Milk In 2003, Korean raw milk production was 2.4 million metric tons, 6.7 percent down from the previous year, and is expected to steadily decline in the foreseeable future as the government begins to decrease support and the number of milking cows declines. However, drinkable (pasteurized) milk consumption increased by 10 percent, this category includes regular white milk and flavored milks. Regular white milk is becoming less popular than flavored milks and increased only 1.3 percent in the past year. In contrast, because of the popularity of flavored milks, such as black bean milk, overall processed fluid milk consumption has increased by 43 percent. Out of total production, 1.6 million metric tons (69 percent) is for drinking use and 654,000 metric tons (28 percent) was processed. The remaining surplus of 76,000 metric tons (3 percent) was used for the production of whole and nonfat dry milk, which is then stored. Despite this surplus, Korea still needs to import milk powder. The price for local raw milk is about double the price of imported milk powder. The following table shows the MAF's official estimates for milk production and consumption. ## Table 3: Overall Milk Supply and Demand (Thousand Metric Tons) --------- ------------ -------- -------- --------- ------------- ----------- Year Supply Demand Self NFDM Sufficiency Inventory Production Import Total 1998 2,027 282 2,309 2,299 88.2% 8.3 1999 2,244 456 2,700 2,752 81.5% 3.6 2000 2,253 640 2,893 2,807 80.2% 10.7 2001 2,339 653 2,992 3,046 76.8% 5.8 2002 2,537 646 3,183 3,060 82.9% 13.6 2003 2,366 604 2,970 3,037 77.9 7.9 --------- ------------ -------- -------- --------- ------------- ----------- Source: 2004 Korea Livestock Yearbook published by the Agriculture Fishery & Livestock Newspaper Note: All dairy products were converted into raw milk equivalent units. A growing niche market in Korea for beverages is that of specialty milk: milk with added nutrition, such as black beans, fruit flavored, soymilk, calcium, iron or vitamins. The consumption of these niche milk products has been growing at the rate of 10 percent per year. 2. Cheese Total imports of cheese products were \$94 million (35,782 metric tons) in 2003, a increase of 11 percent from the previous year. Imports of cheese products in 2005 are forecast to reach 45,000 metric tons. In 2004, total cheese imports are expected to increase 15 percent due to the lack of domestic production facilities and the increase in consumer demand for more and a wider variety of cheese products. The changing tastes of younger consumers and the continuing growth in fast food and "family style" restaurants, and the rapid growth of wine consumption, are expected to contribute to the increase in demand for a wide variety of cheese products. The Korean wine market increased by 60 percent in 2003, which is likely to result in increased consumption of new to market and high quality cheeses. Local cheese production is constrained by the lack of manufacturing facilities. In September 2004, however, one of the leading dairy companies, Maeil Dairy, established a new natural cheese manufacturing plant in a joint venture with German Alphma Company, using manufacturing techniques acquired from New Zealand and Japan. The purpose of this new plant is to utilize the surplus local raw milk to make cheese. It is not, however, expected to impact demand for imported cheese in the near future. While imports of U.S. cheese are benefiting from the general increase in cheese consumption, there is strong competition from Australia and New Zealand. The average price of imported U.S. cheese (\$3.75/kg) was \$1.13 higher than that for competitor products. Despite this difference, U.S. cheese has a good reputation among Korean consumers for taste and quality. 3. Nonfat Dry Milk (NFDM) Imports of NFDM are forecast to increase 10 percent in the latter half of 2004 and 2005 because there has been a 13 percent increase in the raw milk price since September 2004 and the amount of surplus raw milk for locally produced NFDM has decreased. The retail price of locally manufactured NFDM is \$3.50 - \$3.90 per kilogram, an increase of 75 percent over last year, due to the current shortage of NFDM. The manufacturing cost is \$6 per kilogram. There is an import quota of 1,034 metric tons for NFDM. The within quota tariff is 20 percent and the out of the quota tariff is 176 percent. From January to July 2004, imports of NFDM were 2,100 metric tons, an 11 percent decrease compared to last year. The average cost from the EU, Australia and New Zealand was \$1.86 per kilogram, CIF value. Local food processors import NFDM for the purpose of re-exporting to other countries, including Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, China and Bangladesh, after having processed it into infant formula. The Korea Customs Service reimburses the high out-of-quota tariff of 176 percent to importers when they have re-exported the processed dairy-based products made from the imported NFDM. Most NFDM is imported from Australia, New Zealand and the EU. There were no imports from the United States in 2003, nor to date in 2004. Importers complain that the U.S. price is too high. The continuing decline in Korea's birth rate and the increasing popularity of breast feeding is leading to a decline in local infant formula consumption. Domestic infant formula sales have remained the same over the past two years. Last year's birth rate was 1.17, with only 470,000 babies born per year for the past 2-3 years, which is the lowest birthrate in the world. The Korean infant formula market is static and the retail market price for domestic premium product is over \$16.50 (19,000 Korean Won) per 800 grams. 4. Other Dairy Products # Ice Cream In 2004, the ice cream market in Korea, including functional ice cream, is expected to grow 10 percent. Functional ice cream is low fat, low sugar and green tea ice cream, and targets adults as well as teenagers interested in health and beauty. In 2003, the ice cream market recorded \$715 million (858 billion Korean Won) in sales. The sales of functional ice cream accounted for \$7.2 million (8.6 billion Korean Won), about 1 percent of the total market. Because ice cream imports grew at an average annual rate of about 20 percent in the past six years, it was anticipated that the trend would continue at a rate of 10-20 percent in the next five years. However, the largest importer, Häagen Dazs, since 2002, has used ice cream manufactured in France, instead of the U.S., for export to Korea. This switch resulted in the U.S. market share dropping from 60 percent in 2002 to 34 percent in 2003. Additionally, the Dippin & Dots Ice Cream Company and the Mini Melts Company are now manufacturing their ice cream (starting in 2002) locally. Consequently, the U.S. market share has dropped further to 22 percent so far in 2004 (Jan-Aug) and it is expected to continue to decline. The Korean ice cream market is dominated by four Korean ice cream manufacturing companies, Lotte, Bingrae, Haitai, Samkang, which accounted for 90 percent of the whole ice cream market in 2003. Out of the remaining 10 percent, leading premium foreign ice cream companies such as, Baskin Robins and Dippin Dots (locally produced with imported ingredients) accounted for 7 percent. Other major premium imported brands include Blue Bunny, Ben & Jerry's and Aggie. The ice cream market has been slow this year, despite the warm summer weather, due to the sluggish economy. # Whey Powder Whey powder imports are forecast to increase 15 percent by volume in 2004 as there are not enough local facilities to produce the whey powder to meet local demand. Imported whey powder costs an average of \$0.42 per kilogram on a CIF basis. Imports of whey powder should continue to increase. Imports of whey powder (HS 0404-10-1010) were \$12 million (29,174 metric ton) in 2003, increased by 10 percent from 26,487 metric ton in 2002. Seventy percent of imported whey powder is utilized for animal feed. In 2003, \$7.6 million (17,819 metric ton) was imported from U.S. with a market share of 61 percent. The major foreign competitor for the U.S. is France. ## Table 4: Imports of Whey in 2003 +----------------+-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+ \| Products \| Volume \| \| Value \| \| \| \| (Metric \| \| (U.S. \| \| \| (HS Code) \| Tons) \| \| Dollars) \| \| +----------------+-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+ \| \| Total \| Imports \| Total \| Imports from \| \| \| Imports \| from U.S. \| Imports \| U.S. \| +----------------+-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+ \| Whey Powder \| 29,174 \| 17,819 \| 12,213,764 \| 7,624,726 \| \| (0404-10-1010) \| \| \| \| \| +----------------+-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+ \| Other \| 3 \| 0 \| 21,736 \| 0 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| (0404-10-1090) \| \| \| \| \| +----------------+-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+ \| Demineralized \| 5,422 \| 8 \| 5,685,828 \| 52,370 \| \| Whey \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| (0404-10-2120) \| \| \| \| \| +----------------+-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+ \| WPC \| 1,399 \| 731 \| 3,804,940 \| 1,933,994 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| (0404-10-2130) \| \| \| \| \| +----------------+-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+ \| Other \| 3,355 \| 2,286 \| 2,574,759 \| 1,129,656 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| (0404-10-2190) \| \| \| \| \| +----------------+-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+ \| Other Mixed \| 6,312 \| 1 \| 12,696,132 \| 63,119 \| \| Milk Powder \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| (0404-90-0000) \| \| \| \| \| +----------------+-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+ \| TOTAL (0404) \| 45,665 \| 20,845 \| 36,997,159 \| 10,803,865 \| +----------------+-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+ # # #### SECTION II. STATISTICAL TABLES	en
converted_docs	734175	PART IN-501 AUTHORIZATIONS SUBPART A -- REVIEW AND APPROVAL [IN-501.01 Scope.]{.underline} Indiana NRCS employees and Conservation Partnerships employees will be given job approval for practices or systems, according to Exhibit A, based on demonstrated knowledge, skills, and abilities to plan, design, and install that practice or system. In the case of employees of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Soil Conservation, this job approval will be assigned in cooperation with the Program Director(s) and Division Engineer. In the case of soil and water conservation district employees, this job approval will be assigned in cooperation with the soil and water district board. In either case, assignment of this job approval authority denotes acceptance of the Field Office Technical Guide as the quality assurance and design standard. Assignment also denotes acceptance of individual and agency responsibility for work performed or approved under this delegation of authority. [IN-501.03 Compliance of engineering work with laws and regulations.]{.underline} [IN-501.03(b) Sealing of engineering plans.]{.underline} Generally, engineering plans prepared by NRCS personnel will not be sealed. [IN-501.03(c) Policy and procedure for approving and sealing engineering plans]{.underline} $1$ All engineering work designed by NRCS, other than plans requiring the approval by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water, shall, before being furnished to the user, be approved by the qualified person closest to the job, whether an NRCS employee or not, see NEM 501.01(b)(3). $2$ All plans requiring approval by the Indiana Department of Resources, Division of Water, shall be approved by the state conservation engineer before the plans are furnished to the producer. The producer will submit the plans to the Indiana Department of Natural Resources with a request for approval and/or permit issuance. $3$ When a producer, a conservancy district, a drainage board, a regulatory agency, or other governmental agency requires that engineering plans prepared be signed or sealed by a registered engineer, the engineer who prepared or approved the plans may seal the plans if registered in the State of Indiana. If the engineer is not registered in Indiana, the plans shall be sent to the state conservation engineer for sealing. [IN-501.04 Engineering job approval authority.]{.underline} [IN-501.04(a) Engineering job approval authority.]{.underline} All engineering work by the Indiana Conservation Partnership agencies shall be reviewed and approved by the qualified person closest to the job, whether an NRCS employee or not (See NEM 501.01(b)(3). All individuals having inventory and evaluation (I&E), design or construction responsibility for engineering work will be assigned a job approval authority. [IN-501.04(b)(2) Policy and procedure for approval of engineering work]{.underline} $i$ The person approving the I&E report, plan, or construction is responsible to assure that it is complete and in accordance with policy and procedures. $ii$ All projects involving engineering assistance must have approved plans prior to beginning construction. Plans may be simple fill-in data sheets or be detailed drawings and specifications, as appropriate, to satisfactorily construct the work. $iii$ The responsible individual shall indicate approval by signature, title, and date on the engineering design report, drawings and specifications. $iv$ Each engineering plan should be checked by a person who has knowledge of the design and construction procedure for the practice prior to approval. The checker is responsible for the correctness of the plan details. (See NEM 511.05). It is the checker's responsibility to determine if calculations, dimensions, bill of materials, etc, are correct. The checker will indicate that the plan has been checked by placing his/her name and date in the appropriate space in the title block on each sheet of the plan. If qualified personnel are available, the person checking the plan should be someone other than the designer. All class II or higher level jobs prepared by personnel will be checked prior to approval by an individual who has an equal or higher approval authority for the job and is not the designer. $v$ When Service approval is required, plans prepared by private engineers and contractors shall be approved by an individual with proper approval authority. All conservation practices requiring assistance under state or federal cost-share programs are in this category. Part IN-501 and Part 505 shall be followed when working with private engineers and contractors. $vi$ Significant changes in the drawings or specifications shall be approved by a person with job approval authority for the original plan. Preferably, this should be the person who approved the original plan. When changes must be approved without delay, verbal approval may be obtained to expedite the work. However, the completed record must include written approval of the changes. $vii$ It is not the intent of this policy to limit the activity of any person with respect to gathering basic data, preparing I&E reports, preparing engineering plans, or providing construction assistance that may be beyond his/her approval authority. An individual with proper job approval authority must approve reports and plans and certify construction. $viii$ It is not the intent that job approval authority to restrict an individual from requesting assistance on jobs within his/her approval authority. There may be complicating features or situations where it is highly desirable to have advice from someone with more experience. $ix$ Personnel will not provide final cost estimates, commit assistance, or stake out any work of improvement until all required approvals, including any required local, state, or federal government approvals and permits, have been secured. [IN-501.04 (b)(3) Delegation of job approval authority based on employee skill and experience.]{.underline} $i$ Qualified persons are to be given engineering job approval authority for engineering work they can approve in accordance with the limitations shown for each practice on form IN-ENG-43 (see IN-501.10 Exhibit). An engineering job shall be approved only when limiting factors of the engineering practice are within that individual's approval authority. $ii$ Form IN-ENG-43 has been developed for recording the maximum approval authority assigned to an individual. IN-ENG-43 contains all the engineering practices normally installed in the state and will be used for all employees. These forms have been distributed in electronic form to the field and area engineers and may be tailored to individual needs. The maximum approval authority assigned to an individual will be entered for each category. [IN-501.04 (b)(4) Delegation of job approval authority (Classes IV and V).]{.underline} Care should be taken in assigning approval authority. Approval for class IV I&E and design work will generally be limited to GS-11 and above engineers. Approval for class V I&E and design work will generally be assigned by the state conservation engineer. Recommendations for delegation class V job approval authority for construction must have the concurrence of the state conservation engineer. [IN-501.04 (b)(5) Process and review for delegating job approval authority.]{.underline} $i$ Engineering job approval authority for qualified individuals shall be requested by the individual's supervisor or the employee. The responsible engineer giving engineering support to the supervisor shall prepare form IN-ENG-43 electronically showing the individual's approval authority by class for each factor in each practice. The engineer may not recommend a class in any limiting factor above the class he or she is authorized to approve. The responsible engineer shall electronically sign and date the cover sheet of the form IN-ENG-43 and email the entire form to the appropriate supervisor for electronic signature and date. The supervisor will then email the electronically signed form back to the engineer. For Partnership employees (SWCD & IDNR), the ASTC-FO within the appropriate area will be emailed the form to provide an electronic signature for concurrence once the district or agency supervisor has electronically signed. The engineer will then forward the electronically signed copy of the form to the employee who must acknowledge acceptance of their official job approval via a return email to the engineer. The area engineer will be responsible for keeping the official copies of the IN-ENG-43 form for each employee who performs engineering within their area as well as the acceptance emails from the employees. These forms may be kept electronically. $ii$ A copy of the electronically signed form shall be emailed to the employee with a carbon copy to the supervisor. The supervisor will also receive a copy of the email acceptance by the employee. For Partnership employees (SWCD & IDNR), the ASTC-FO will also receive a carbon copy. For engineers and civil engineering technicians, a copy shall be emailed to the state conservation engineer. For those individuals authorized to supervise construction for class V jobs, a copy shall be emailed to the state conservation engineer. $iii$ As a part of any engineering related quality control review, the responsible engineer shall review the individual engineering job approval authority for all personnel doing engineering work. Individual engineering job approval authority is to be reviewed annually for those in their present position for less than three years and updated as necessary, but at least every three years for all others. The responsible engineer shall either concur in continuing the current job approval authority by initialing and dating the individual's original form IN-ENG-43, or recommending revisions to the job approval authority by updating the electronic form and distributing using the process outlined above. $iv$ A supervisor may request that the responsible engineer make a reevaluation of the engineering approval authority for an employee at any time. Concurrence or revision of the engineering approval authority shall be carried out as stated above. $v$ An individual may request a reevaluation of his or her engineering approval authority at any time by making a written request to his or her supervisor. The supervisor, if he or she concurs in the need for a revaluation, will request the responsible engineer to make a reevaluation. Concurrence or revision of the engineering approval authority shall be carried out as stated above. $vi$ The state conservation engineer will have the authority to remove or revise job approval authority for any employee. Disputes over assignment of job approval classes for an employee will ultimately be decided by the state conservation engineer. [IN-501.04 (c)(3) Delegation of job approval authority (Classes VI-VIII)]{.underline} Class VI-VIII engineering jobs require the attention of various engineering specialists. The intensity of attention required of each specialist must be determined specially for each job based on the complexities of the job and of the site. The state conservation engineer shall prepare a work outline, identifying the involvement of each engineering specialist, at the beginning of work for each class VI - VIII job. This work outline shall be updated as the work progresses and a need for revision of the current work outline is indicated. [IN-501.10 Exhibits]{.underline} Exhibit A - IN-ENG-43 (For all personnel) Exhibit A -- IN-ENG-43 will be pages IN501-5 to IN501-9	en
converted_docs	516800	![](media/image1.png){width="0.7625in" height="0.7388888888888889in"}PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ News Media Information (202) 418-0500 Report N-222-A Internet http://www.fcc.gov Released: March 30, 2001 The COMMISSION granted the following Common Carrier Network Services applications filed under Rules Part 68 ‑ CONNECTION OF TERMINAL EQUIPMENT TO THE TELEPHONE NETWORK. GRANTS ARE EFFECTIVE 7 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THIS PUBLIC NOTICE. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\* PETITIONS FOR WAIVER FOR ADSL AND STUTTER DIAL TONE REGISTRATIONS Applications for equipment registration can NOT be approved until Petitions for Waiver are granted. There is no fee for a petition. Mail a signed original petition and two copies to: Diane Harmon, Chief Network Services Division, Suite 6-A207 Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 To expedite granting of waiver, please e-mail copy to Jamal Mazrui. His address is [email protected] \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\* INTERNET ACCESS TO REFERENCE AND CONTACT INFORMATION FCC NETWORK SERVICES DIVISION (NSD) HOME PAGE FOR PART 68 http://www.fcc.gov/ccb/nsd/documents/PART68.HTML REPORTS OF APPLICATIONS RECEIVED AND APPLICATIONS GRANTED \- Provides access to recent reports http://www.fcc.gov/ccb/nsd/documents/PART68PN.HTML REFERENCES AND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR PART 68 EQUIPMENT REGISTRATION \- Provides hypertext links to FCC Rules, Industry Guide, and Part 68 zipped database http://www.fcc.gov/ccb/nsd/documents/TERMEQUP.HTML INFORMATION FOR PART 68 APPLICANTS \- Provides current status, guidance and contact information for applicants http://www.fcc.gov/ccb/nsd/documents/APPLINFO.HTML The certificate for 707-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: ERICSSON INC, DATA BACKBONE & OPTICAL NETWORKS 70 CASTILLIAN RD SANTA BARBARA CA 93117 707-CX-2001 8145350-6 REGISTRANT: ERICSSON INC, DATA BACKBONE & OPTICAL NETWORKS MANUFACTURER: FLEXTRONICS INTERNATIONAL TYPE OF FILING: MODIFICATION REG. NO: 5L2-31918-DE-N REG. CLASS: TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: EQUIPMENT PROVIDING CSU FUNCTIONS AND NOT ENCODED ANALOG CONTENT EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: EQUIPMENT PROVIDING CSU FUNCTIONS AND NOT ENCODED ANALOG CONTENT TRADE NAME: ERICSSON CENTRAL MODEL: IAS (XX-SLOT) TRADE NAME: ERICSSON TIGRIS MODEL: AXC 706 (6-SLOT) TRADE NAME: NEWBRIDGE MAINSTREET XPRESS MODEL: 36100 (XX-SLOT) The certificate for 748-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: COMPLIANCE WORLDWIDE, INC.\--LARRY STILLINGS 357 MAIN STREET SANDOWN NH 03873 748-CX-2001 8145409-1 REGISTRANT: DICA TECHNOLOGIES, INC. MANUFACTURER: DICA TECHNOLOGIES, INC. TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: 6KLUSA-36079-XD-N REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: MULTIPLEXERS, CHANNEL BANKS, SWITCHING MATRICES CONNECTED TO REGISTERED CSUS EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: TWO PORT ISDN INTERFACE CONNECTING AT S/T REFERENCE POINT TRADE NAME: DICA TECHNOLOGIES MODEL: CYLINK 861S The certificate for 749-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC CORP. OF AMERICA ONE PANASONIC WAY, PANAZIP 4B-8 SECAUCUS NJ 07094 749-CX-2001 8145414-1 NOTICE OF CHANGE NOT AFFECTING COMPLIANCE HAS BEEN FILED FOR THE FOLLOWING REG. NO.: ACJMUL-35939-FA-E GRANTEE: MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO LTD NATURE OF APPLICATION: EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: FACSIMILE TRADE NAME: PANASONIC MODEL: FB HAC KX-FHD301(XX) The certificate for 750-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: BAY AREA COMPLIANCE LAB 230 COMMERCIAL ST, SUITE 2 SUNNYVALE CA 94086 750-CX-2001 8145413-1 REGISTRANT: ASKEY COMPUTER CORP. MANUFACTURER: ASKEY COMPUTER CORP TYPE OF FILING: MODIFICATION REG. NO: H8NTAI-35257-M5-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: 56KBPS MODEMS USING ANALOG UPLOAD/DIGITAL DOWNLOAD PROCESSING EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: PCI 56.0K DATA/14.4K FAX MODEM TRADE NAME: ACER, IMPRESSION, FIC, NEC, DELL MODEL: 1456VQH55E-2(INT) TRADE NAME: ASKEY, COMPAQ, DIGICOM SYSTEMS INC., DYNALINK MODEL: 1456VQH55E-2(INT) TRADE NAME: J-MARK, MITAC, PHOEBE MICRO, THUNDERLINK, IBM MODEL: 1456VQH55E-2(INT) TRADE NAME: MAGICXPRESS MODEL: MX5655E-2(INT) The certificate for 751-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: LILY TECHNOLOGY CO, LTD 2F, NO 18, ALLEY 5, LANE 217, CHENG HSIAO E. RD, SEC 3, TAIPEI TAIWAN 751-CX-2001 8145416-1 NOTICE OF CHANGE NOT AFFECTING COMPLIANCE HAS BEEN FILED FOR THE FOLLOWING REG. NO.: ACECHN-35813-TF-E GRANTEE: WALKER EQUIPMENT NATURE OF APPLICATION: EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: SINGLE LINE DESKTOP PHONE WITH SYSTEM FEATURES TRADE NAME: PLANTRONICS MODEL: HAC/VC SHI-350, SHI-1000 TRADE NAME: SIEMENS HEARING INSTRUMENTS INC. MODEL: HAC/VC SHI-350, SHI-1000 The certificate for 752-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: LILY TECHNOLOGY CO, LTD 2F, NO 18, ALLEY 5, LANE 217, CHENG HSIAO E. RD, SEC 3, TAIPEI TAIWAN 752-CX-2001 8145416-2 NOTICE OF CHANGE NOT AFFECTING COMPLIANCE HAS BEEN FILED FOR THE FOLLOWING REG. NO.: ACECHN-35812-TF-E GRANTEE: WALKER EQUIPMENT NATURE OF APPLICATION: EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: SINGLE LINE DESKTOP PHONE WITH SYSTEM FEATURES TRADE NAME: PLANTRONICS MODEL: HAC/VC SHI-450, SHI-1100 TRADE NAME: SIEMENS HEARING INSTRUMENTS INC. MODEL: HAC/VC SHI-450, SHI-1100 The certificate for 754-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: VTECH ENGINEERING CANADA LTD - JOSEPH P. 200 - 7671 ALDERBRIDGE WAY RICHMOND, BC CANADA V6X 1Z9 754-CX-2001 8145417-4 REGISTRANT: SONY CORPORATION MANUFACTURER: DONGGUAN VTECH ELECTRONICS TYPE OF FILING: MODIFICATION REG. NO: AK8CHN-27219-W9-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: 900 MHZ/2.4 GHZ CORDLESS PHONES USING ANALOG MODULATION EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: 900MHZ CORDLESS TELEPHONE\--ANALOG TRADE NAME: SONY MODEL: SPP-N1025 The certificate for 755-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: RADIOSHACK - DWAYNE CAMPBELL 100 THROCKMORTON ST., STE 1300 FORT WORTH TX 76102-2802 755-CX-2001 8145417-3 REGISTRANT: RADIOSHACK CORPORATION MANUFACTURER: DONG GUAN HUANG JIANG TAI MAO ELECTRIC COMPANY TYPE OF FILING: RE-REGISTRATION REG. NO: AAOCHN-28061-TE-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: SIMPLE ONE OR TWO-LINE TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: SINGLE LINE PHONES OTHER REG. AFFECTED: AAOCHN-35723-TE-E TRADE NAME: RADIOSHACK MODEL: HAC/VC 43-3227(XX) The certificate for 756-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: TRAINING RESEARCH CO., LTD - NO 2 LANE 194 HUAN-HO ST., HSICHIH TAIPEI HSIEN 221 TAIWAN ROC 756-CX-2001 8145410-2 REGISTRANT: TELEDEX CORP. MANUFACTURER: SINOCA ENTERPRISES (ZHONG-SHAN) CO LTD TYPE OF FILING: RE-REGISTRATION REG. NO: DXACHN-28062-W9-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: 900 MHZ/2.4 GHZ CORDLESS PHONES USING ANALOG MODULATION EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: 2-LINE 900MHZ CORDLESS SPEAKERPHONE TELEPHONE OTHER REG. AFFECTED: DXACHN-35498-W9-EI TRADE NAME: TELEDEX CORPORATION MODEL: CL2910 The certificate for 757-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: MET LABORATORIES, INC. 914 WEST PATAPSCO AVE. BALTIMORE MD 21230 757-CX-2001 8145415-1 REGISTRANT: CANON INC. MANUFACTURER: MANUFACTURED IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS TYPE OF FILING: RE-REGISTRATION REG. NO: AZDMUL-28063-FA-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: FACSIMILE MACHINES EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: COPYING MACHINE WITH G3 FACSIMILE TRANSCEIVER OTHER REG. AFFECTED: AZDJPN-25997-FA-E, AZDJPN-33928-FA-E TRADE NAME: CANON MODEL: F136600 The certificate for 759-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: RADIOSHACK - DWAYNE CAMPBELL 100 THROCKMORTON ST., STE. 1300 FORT WORTH TX 76102-2802 759-CX-2001 8145410-4 REGISTRANT: RADIOSHACK CORPORATION MANUFACTURER: G-TEK ELECTRONICS SDN. BHD. TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: AAOMLA-36080-ND-T REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: NAME AND/OR NUMBER DISPLAY (CALLER ID) DEVICES EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: CALLER ID WITH DIAL BACK TRADE NAME: RADIOSHACK MODEL: 43-2903(XX) The certificate for 760-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: ELECTRONIC TESTING CENTER,TAIWAN NO. 8, LANE 29 WEN-MING RD., LOSHAN TSUN TAOYUAN HSIEN, TAIWAN ROC 760-CX-2001 8145412-2 REGISTRANT: NUZON TECHNOLOGY, INC. MANUFACTURER: NUZON TECHNOLOGY, INC. TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: NUZTAI-36081-AL-T REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: ALARM DIALING SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: HOME SECURITY SYSTEM WITH WIRELESS CONTROL TRADE NAME: SONIC SAFETY MODEL: HG - 1500 The certificate for 761-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: TRAINING RESEARCH CO.,LTD. NO.2, LANE 194, HUAN-HO STREET HSICHIH, TAIPEI HSIEN 221 TAIWAN ROC 761-CX-2001 8145410-3 REGISTRANT: ABOCOM SYSTEMS, INC. MANUFACTURER: ABOCOM SYSTEM, INC. TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: WPETAI-36082-DL-N REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: XDSL MODEMS EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: USB ADSL MODEM TRADE NAME: ABOCOM MODEL: UA 600GS The certificate for 762-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: COMPATIBLE ELECTRONICS, INC.\--SCOTT MCCUTCHAN 114 OLINDA DRIVE BREA CA 92823 762-CX-2001 8145410-1 REGISTRANT: ADC DSL SYSTEMS, INC. MANUFACTURER: ADC DSL SYSTEMS, INC. TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: ADSUSA-36083-DL-N REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: XDSL MODEMS EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: ADSL MODEM TRADE NAME: ADC DSL SYSTEMS MODEL: MEGABIT MODEM 500L, MEGABIT MODEM 400F TRADE NAME: ADC DSL SYSTEMS MODEL: MEGABIT MODEM 700F, MEGABIT MODEM 600F The certificate for 763-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: ULTRATEC INC. - RON SCHULTZ 450 SCIENCE DR. MADISON WI 53711 763-CX-2001 8145412-1 REGISTRANT: ULTRATEC INC MANUFACTURER: ULTRATEC INC TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: D8KUSA-36084-RG-N REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: STANDALONE RINGERS, CHIMES, BELLS, RING RELAYS, RING DETECTORS, VISUAL INDICATOR EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: TELEPHONE RING SIGNALLER TRADE NAME: SIMPLICITY TELEPHONE RING SIGNALLER MODEL: L The certificate for 764-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: PCTEST ENGINEERING LABORATORY, INC. 6660-B DOBBIN ROAD COLUMBIA MD 21045 764-CX-2001 8145825-1 REGISTRANT: PEOPLE & TECHNOLOGY INC. MANUFACTURER: PEOPLE & TECHNOLOGY INC. TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: PPLKOR-36085-DT-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: DATA TERMINALS HAVING UNIQUE ONE-OF-A-KIND MODEM EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: VOIP ADAPTER TRADE NAME: IT FREEGATE MODEL: FG210 The certificate for 765-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: INTERTEK TESTING SERVICES TAIWAN LTD. 14F,27,CHUANG SAN N. RD.SEC.3 TAIPEI,TAIWAN 765-CX-2001 8145417-2 REGISTRANT: INVENTEC ELECTRONICS (NANJING) CO.,LTD. MANUFACTURER: INVENTEC ELECTRONICS (SHANGHAI)CO., LTD. TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: 1EBCHN-36086-DT-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: DATA TERMINALS HAVING UNIQUE ONE-OF-A-KIND MODEM EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: EMAIL TEMIANAL WITH 33.6K MODEM TRADE NAME: CIDCO MODEL: FB IWT1 The certificate for 766-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: PRECIDIA TECHNOLOGIES - SYLAVNO CARRASCO 10A HEARST WAY, KANATA ONTARIO, CANADA K2L 2P4 766-CX-2001 8145417-1 REGISTRANT: PRECIDIA TECHNOLOGIES MANUFACTURER: PRECIDIA TECHNOLOGIES TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: PCTCAN-36087-DT-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: DATA TERMINALS HAVING UNIQUE ONE-OF-A-KIND MODEM EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: DATA TO IP CONVERTER TRADE NAME: PRECIDIA TECHNOLOGIES MODEL: IP3201 The certificate for 767-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: MAX LIGHT TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. P.O. BOX 5-86, SHEN KENG TAIPEI HSIEN, TAIWAN ROC 767-CX-2001 8145418-3 REGISTRANT: GODOT TECHNOLOGY MANUFACTURER: ASION TECHNOLOGY INC. TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: GDTTAI-36088-M5-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: 56KBPS MODEMS USING ANALOG UPLOAD/DIGITAL DOWNLOAD PROCESSING EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: PCI 56.0K DATA/14.4K FAX/VOICE MODEM TRADE NAME: RIAS CORP.,GODOT TECHNOLOGY,ASION TECHNOLOGY INC. MODEL: FB I102DF,I102WDF,TFM-560PCIPLUS TRADE NAME: RIAS CORP.,GODOT TECHNOLOGY,ASION TECHNOLOGY INC. MODEL: FB MDM5614M3C,MDM5600M,I102,I102W The certificate for 768-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: MAX LIGHT TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. P.O. BOX 5-86, SHEN KENG TAIPEI HSIEN, TAIWAN ROC 768-CX-2001 8145418-2 REGISTRANT: EUMITCOM TECHNOLOGY INC. MANUFACTURER: EUMITCOM TECHNOLOGY INC. TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: ETYTAI-36089-M5-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: 56KBPS MODEMS USING ANALOG UPLOAD/DIGITAL DOWNLOAD PROCESSING EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: INTERNAL V.90 MDEM WITH IEEE 802.11WIRELESS LAN TRADE NAME: EUMITCOM TECHNOLOGY INC. MODEL: FB WL11000SA-N(GV90) The certificate for 769-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: KTL - SAXON WAY, PRIORY PARK WEST HULL HU13 9PH UNITED KINGDOM 769-CX-2001 8145828-1 REGISTRANT: GAI-TRONICS CORPORATION MANUFACTURER: GAI-TRONICS CORPORATION TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: ADGUSA-36090-TE-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: SIMPLE ONE OR TWO-LINE TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: SIMPLE TELEPHONE FOR INDUSTRIAL USE TRADE NAME: SMART TELEPHONES MODEL: HAC VC 226S, 227S, 246S, 247S, 256S, 257S, 276S, 277S The certificate for 770-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: KTL - SAXON WAY, PRIORY PARK WEST HULL HU13 9PH UNITED KINGDOM 770-CX-2001 8145827-1 REGISTRANT: LAKE COMMUNICATIONS, LTD. MANUFACTURER: LAKE COMMUNICATIONS, LTD. TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: LKCGTB-36091-CD-E REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: SMALL CALL DISTRIBUTORS EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: SMALL CALL DISTRIBUTER WITH LESS THAN 10 CO LINES TRADE NAME: ENCORE MODEL: 5500.05500 The certificate for 771-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: CORNING CABLE SYSTEMS, LLC. - FRANK FERNANDEZ 9275 DENTON HWY KELLER TX 76248 771-CX-2001 8145829-1 REGISTRANT: CORNING CABLE SYSTEMS, LLC. MANUFACTURER: MANUFACTURED IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: 6TMMUL-36092-OT-N REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: OTHER - MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: POTS SPLITTER TRADE NAME: CORNING CABLE SYSTEMS, LLC. MODEL: SPS-IF0-NL6, SPS-IF1-NL6 The certificate for 772-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: CORNING CABLE SYSTEMS, LLC. - FRANK FERNANDEZ 9275 DENTON HWY KELLER TX 76248 772-CX-2001 8145829-2 REGISTRANT: CORNING CABLE SYSTEMS, LLC. MANUFACTURER: MANUFACTURED IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: 6TMMUL-36093-OT-N REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: OTHER - MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: POTS SPLITTER TRADE NAME: CORNING CABLE SYSTEMS, LLC. MODEL: COSA16S7005 The certificate for 773-CX-2001 will be sent to the following address: CORNING CABLE SYSTEMS, LLC. - FRANK FERNANDEZ 9275 DENTON HWY KELLER TX 76248 773-CX-2001 8145829-3 REGISTRANT: CORNING CABLE SYSTEMS, LLC. MANUFACTURER: MANUFACTURED IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS TYPE OF FILING: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION REG. NO: 6TMMUL-36094-OT-N REG. CLASS: TERMINAL DEVICE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT: OTHER - MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: POTS SPLITTER TRADE NAME: CORNING CABLE SYSTEMS, LLC. MODEL: SPS-H70-NL6, SPS-IW0-NL6, SPS-IW1-NL6 - FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION -	en
all-txt-docs	056700	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ FOLKLIFE CENTER NEWS American Folklife Center The Library of Congress Fall 1994 Volume XVI, Number 4 ISSN 0149-6840 Catalog Card No. 77-649628 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The American Folklife Center was created in 1976 by the U.S. Congress to "preserve and present American folklife" through programs of research, documentation, archival preservation, reference service, live performance, exhibition, publication, and training. The Center incorporates the Archive of Folk Culture, which was established in the Music Division of the Library of Congress in 1928 and is now one of the largest collections of ethnographic material from the United States and around the world. Administration Alan Jabbour, Director Timothy Lloyd, Acting Deputy Director Doris Craig, Administrative Assistant Stephanie Parks, Clerk Camila Bryce-Laporte, Program Coordinator Jennifer A. Cutting, Program Coordinator Acquisitions Joseph C. Hickerson, Head Processing Stephanie A. Hall, Archivist Coordinator Catherine Hiebert Kerst, Archivist Programs Peter T. Bartis, Folklife Specialist Mary Hufford, Folklife Specialist David A. Taylor, Folklife Specialist Publications James Hardin, Editor Public Events Theadocia Austen, Coordinator Reference Gerald E. Parsons, Reference Librarian Judith A. Gray, Folklife Specialist Administrative Office Tel: 202 707-6590 Fax: 202 707-2076 Reference Service Tel: 202 707-5510 Federal Cylinder Project Tel: 202 707-1740 Board of Trustees Juris Ubans, Chair, Maine Robert Malir, Jr., Vice-chair, Kansas Nina Archabal, Minnesota Lindy Boggs, Louisiana; Washington, D.C. Carolyn Hecker, Maine Judith McCulloh, Illinois Ex Officio Members James H. Billington, Librarian of Congress Robert McCormick Adams, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution Jane Alexander, Chairman, National Endowment for the Arts Sheldon Hackney, Chairman, National Endowment for the Humanities Alan Jabbour, Director, American Folklife Center FOLKLIFE CENTER NEWS James Hardin, Editor David A. Taylor, Editorial Advisor Timothy Lloyd, Editorial Review John Biggs, Library of Congress Graphics Unit, Designer Folklife Center News publishes articles on the programs and activities of the American Folklife Center, as well as other articles on traditional expressive culture. It is available free of charge from the Library of Congress, American Folklife Center, Washington, D.C. 20540-8100. The text of issues of Folklife Center News from Spring 1992 to the present are available on LC MARVEL, the Library of Congress's Internet Gopher server. LC MARVEL is available through your local Gopher server. Or you may connect directly through Telnet to marvel.loc.gov, and then login as marvel. From the main menu, choose "Research and Reference," then "Reading Rooms," then "American Folklife Center," then "Publications," then "Folklife Center News." Folklife Center News does not publish announcements from other institutions or reviews of books from publishers other than the Library of Congress. Readers who would like to comment on Center activities or newsletter articles may address their remarks to the editor. FOLKLINE For timely information on the field of folklore and folklife, including training and professional opportunities and news items of national interest, a taped announcement is available around the clock, except during the hours of 9 A.M. until noon (eastern time) each Monday, when it is updated. Folkline is a joint project of the American Folklife Center and the American Folklore Society. Dial: 202 707-2000 ................................................................. Cover: Folklife Center archivist Stephanie Hall, Colorado College librarian Laura Hunt, San Luis rancher Corpus Gallegos, and oral historian Beverly Morris on the vega in San Luis, Colorado, July 1994. Photo by Miguel Gandert ................................................................. EDITOR'S NOTES Folklife Field School About a year ago, folklorist Mario Montano of Colorado College heard from his friend and colleague Doug DeNatale that the Center was interested in conducting a field training school for cultural documentation. DeNatale was at the McKissick Museum at the University of South Carolina at the time and had been discussing such a school with Folklife Specialist David Taylor. Thus Montano's invitation to the Center to conduct a field school in the summer of 1994 in conjuntion with Colorado College and the University of New Mexico was welcome. It allowed Center staffers Stephanie Hall, Timothy Lloyd, and David Taylor to test ideas and fieldwork instruction techniques they had only speculated about. It also helped to create a network of contacts for all involved. The Center was especially pleased to be working in the southern Colorado region and involved with members of Hispanic and Native American communities who participated as instructors and students. The Center plans to conduct a second field school with Colorado College and the University of New Mexico in the summer of 1995. Lloyd and Taylor traveled to Colorado in November for planning and fund-raising meetings with other project partners, and with public- sector folklore colleagues in the region. The 1995 field school will be held from July 9 to 29, and information for potential applicants will be available in March. For information, please contact David Taylor at the American Folklife Center. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Documenting Traditional Culture: A Colorado Field School By James Hardin ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Three hundred years ago, in 1694, Diego del Vargas, governor of Spanish New Mexico, led an expedition into the San Luis Valley in southern Colorado, just to the east of the Continental Divide, between the Rocky and the Sangre de Cristo Mountains. In July 1994, three folklorists from the American Folklife Center in the Library of Congress joined colleagues from Colorado College and the University of New Mexico for another expedition to the valley. They led a group of nine students on a cultural exploration of the little town of San Luis and the nearby farm owned by Corpus Aquino Gallegos and his family. San Luis, a few miles north of New Mexico on Route 159, is the oldest town in the state, and still reflects its Spanish heritage. The students carried cameras, tape recorders, and notebooks, and were there to practice the skills and techniques they had learned during a week of coursework at Colorado College called "Documenting Traditional Culture: An Introductory Field School." The course was designed for adult residents of Colorado and New Mexico who have a strong interest but little or no previous training in cultural documentation. The nine participants were natives or residents of the region between Albuquerque and Colorado Springs. One was a librarian from Colorado College, another a painter and director of an art school in Colorado Springs; there were several school teachers, several graduate students, and a professional videographer. Thus, each had a personal or professional reason for wanting to develop or hone his or her skills in cultural documentation. The Colorado field school came about at the invitation of Mario Montano, a professor in the anthropology department at Colorado College. Montao became acquainted with Center staff through graduate school friendships and as a member of the field team for the Center's Lowell [Massachusetts] Folklife Project. In October 1993, Montano met with the Folklife Center staff at the Eugene, Oregon, American Folklore Society meeting to discuss the possibility of cosponsorship of a field school with the college. He saw the Colorado field school as a way to provide "community scholars" with basic documentary skills they could apply in their work, and to develop partnerships and share resources among several institutions in his own region as well as with the American Folklife Center in Washington. For a number of years, Center staff have discussed (both among themselves and with other colleagues) the possibility of conducting a field documentation training school. Graduate-school training in field documentation for folklorists often stresses theory rather than practice. Yet, the number of jobs in the public sector calling for practical skills has increased (arts coordinator at the state and local level, for example). Such positions involve working with a cultural community to develop books, recordings, exhibits, and festivals, and there is a shortage of folklorists with the requisite training and experience. Montano enlisted the University of New Mexico as a project partner, through its department of communication and journalism, oral history program, and Center for Regional Studies. The university agreed to provide staff, equipment, and other services. Associate dean Victor Nelson-Cisneros, of Colorado College, and Tobias Duran, director of the Center for Regional Studies of the University of New Mexico provided support throughout the project. Working with Colorado College and the University of New Mexico, the Center produced an intensive, two-week-long field school that ran from July 10 to 23, 1994. The six faculty members--Stephanie Hall, Timothy Lloyd, and David Taylor from the Center, Mario Montao from Colorado College, and Miguel Gandert and Carlos Vasquez from the University of New Mexico--taught through a combination of lectures, workshops, discussions, slide presentations, fieldwork exercises, and curriculum materials. The primary purpose of the school was to instruct students in the methods of cultural documentation and the use of documentation equipment; the underlying purpose was to instill an understanding of folklife. The course began with a week on the Colorado College campus, training participants in project planning, interviewing, still photography, research ethics, ethnographic writing, computer applications, archiving, and the development of educational products. Mario Montano and Colorado College sociologist Devon Pea provided an introduction to the history and culture of Colorado's San Luis Valley, where the remainder of field school activities would take place. David Taylor told the students that success in any fieldwork project depends on the development of a plan of action, which includes a list of topics to be explored and goals for the investigation; timing (particularly if topics have a seasonal dimension); and the availability of people and equipment to do the job. If the goal of the project is to be a book or exhibit, the researcher must secure the photographs, recordings, artifacts, and permissions that will ensure the success of these products. Stephanie Hall taught a class on arranging and preserving fieldwork material. The work is vital, she said, if the material is to be of use (either for the researcher himself or for others). Photographs and negatives must be "housed" in acid-free protective sleeves and containers; they must be numbered and keyed to fieldnotes. If the researcher intends to place his material in an archive, museum, or library, he must consider the specific requirements of the institution regarding cataloging and organization. Tim Lloyd explained that success in fieldwork also depends in large part on the human interactions that are essential to such research. The fieldworker must be assertive enough, on the one hand, to enter a strange community and seek out the people who can provide the information he seeks; and careful enough, on the other, to treat the information so as not to violate the trust he must establish. The fieldworker must be focused on the purpose of his own scholarly investigation, alert to the sensitivities of the people he interviews, flexible enough in schedule to respond to opportunities that present themselves, and knowledgeable of the technical capabilities of his equipment--no mean feat, especially when the site for this effort may be a barnyard or a bar, a city street or a backyard garden. After five long days of classroom instruction, the school moved to the college's Baca campus, located in Crestone, Colorado, in the San Luis Valley. Baca facilities (named for one of the early pioneers in the region) included living quarters, restaurant, seminar room, and computer lab. It was base camp for three and a half days of fieldwork at several ranches near the town of San Luis, and at other important agricultural sites in the area (gravity-fed irrigation ditches called acequias and the San Luis common grazing area, called the vega). The students worked in teams of three, each devoted to interviewing, audio recording, taking photographs, and making fieldnotes on one aspect of local agriculture: crops, livestock, or water use. They considered the three topics from a cultural perspective, however, and thus studied a whole range of associated customs, beliefs, and artful expressions. The Corpus Aquina Gallegos Ranch, established in 1852 by Dario Gallegos, is possibly the oldest family agricultural business in continuous operation in the state of Colorado. Mario Montao had arranged with Corpus Gallegos to bring the field school students there for their investigations. Each day the students traveled to San Luis in vans and made the Gallegos homestead a central meeting place and departure point for their activities. Fieldnotes of three of the students provide an introduction to several areas of ethnographic interest (presented here unedited to give a flavor of the effort). Connie Romero records a detailed description of the Gallegos ranch site; Laura Hunt gives an account of an activity in the daily ranch life; and Roberto Venegas gathers a personal history from a key member of the local community. Connie Romero's fieldnotes describe the Corpus Gallegos ranch: The site is divided into two areas, the old original site of the settlement, which consists of kind of a core of the ranch established in 1863. The other, or newer site of the ranch may very well correlate with the transition from sheep herding in this valley to cattle ranching in the 1930s. The original site of the ranch, as well the newer extension, is built along the north edge of the acequia madre. The original house consisted of a small adobe farmhouse at the edge of the acequia with a site orchard approx. fifty yards to the north of the house adjacent to what is currently Hwy. 142. The site appears to extend to the north and south from this original settlement. The current livestock area extends approx. 80 yards south from the site of the original house, and the house that is presently occupied by Joe and Corpus Gallegos, his father, is located due north of the old house. . . . The house itself is a two- story, stucco frame house that has been added onto since its construction. The current garden of the house runs to the north and west of it, furthest away from its entrance and consists of several rows of garden vegetables, incl. corn, squash, and onions. The corn is planted in two rows and appears to be in about the middle of its growing cycle, late July. Joe Gallegos has apparently built but not occupied an additional house approx. 100 meters north of the present house. Its design and architecture seem to be consistent with contemporary rural affluent housing, using a great deal of wood, but shows few if any traditional elements incorporated into its design or construction. Its features, which may be consistent with energy saving element, may reelect Joe's interest in energy conservation, bio-diversity, and organic farming. Laura Hunt's fieldnotes provide a sense of a day spent by the team investigating issues of water use in the region. She both describes a particular activity of water management and explains the importance of it: 10:25 A.M.: Van arrived at the Gallegos Ranch. Spent an hour watching them prepare the horses for cattle run. Beverly began following Corpus with the audio equipment as we waited. 11:30 A.M.: Corpus drove Beverly, Laura, Roberto, Stephanie, and Miguel to the Diversion Point, where the People's Ditch branches off from the Culebra Creek. On the way he stopped at the point where the People's Ditch was unpaved on one side of the road, and paved on the other side. The upper portion of the People's Ditch was unpaved because the winter temperatures would be too harsh on the cement, and damage it regularly. The Diversion Point was located in the San Luis Common Grazing Grounds (vega), so we passed by many cattle and horses (and many colts and calves). Apparently most of the cattle on the Common Grazing Grounds belongs to a few small farmers above, in the high lands. Corpus adjusted the flow of water through the Diversion Dam, which feeds the San Luis People's Ditch. . . . . 12:25 P.M.: We crossed a creek on the way to the irrigation field where Corpus was to change the water. There were cattle grazing on this field, soon to be moved to another field (in a few days). To "change the water" means to rechannel the direction of the stream of irrigation water on the hay or rye grass patch. You do this by moving portable dams made from tarps attached to 4-5 foot log poles. You place the tarp over the ditch, shovel dirt onto the edges at the bottom of tarp. Then you remove a shovel or two of sod from a high rise or berm so the water will run in to the area desired. This is done at 3 or 4 spots on a 4 acre patch. Takes about 45 minutes. This irrigation is done 3 or 4 times a season. This chore can be done by one person but two make the job much easer. Stephanie Hall helped Corpus "change the water." Severo Serna is president of the People's Ditch Association, and one of his responsibilities is to adjudicate conflicting demands for water. He maintains a small ranch of his own and also has a junkyard business, both located about a mile from the Gallegos ranch. After stopping at his home to ask for an interview, the team investigating water use found him at a local cafe having breakfast. They used their first meeting both to schedule a later interview regarding his role in the community and to elicit background information from him. Roberto Venegas's fieldnotes recorded Serna's personal history: Mr. Serna mentioned that he had grown up in Durango, Colorado until age six, when his father decided to move to San Luis because of a lack of work during the Depression. He decided to volunteer for the army in order to get away from San Luis. He fought in World War II as an anti-aircraft gunner. He was stationed in the Philippines as well as New Guinea. After returning from the war, Mr. Serna moved to Pueblo to work in the CF&I steel mills. This job only lasted six months . . . so he returned to San Luis. Mr. Serna married a Japanese woman whose father owned a ranch in the San Luis Valley. His father-in-law grew cauliflower, cabbage, and spinach. We inquired if he had any relation to the Hayashida family farm in Ft. Garland. Mr. Serna responded that there was no connection. Severo only mentioned that his wife was from the Abiqui/Chama area of New Mexico. . . . Surprisingly, Mr. Serna mentioned that he had traveled to Japan three years ago and to Russia seven years ago. He spoke primarily of his trip to Russia. He first went to Estonia, then to St. Petersburg, and finally to Moscow. He seemed to enjoy the people in St. Petersburg more than those in Moscow, whom he found rude once they realized he was American. Mr. Serna was an extremely pleasant man who I and the group found very enjoyable. As a nice gesture, he paid for our coffee as we left the restaurant. The interview reveals a number of things regarding Serna's attitudes and international experience that go far beyond the initial desire for information about water. With a few introductory questions, the researchers soon found themselves in a complex web of history and personal experience. At this point they might have wished to reevaluate their investigation, either to reassert a focus on water use issues or to follow one or more of the several themes introduced by Serna. Furthermore, Serna's gesture in paying for the coffee reminds the researchers of another complication in the field research situation, that community members regard themselves as more than just subjects of research; in their minds, they are hosts to the visiting team. That duality of roles carries over into the substance of investigations. While the ostensible subject of the folklife interview may be agricultural practices, the folklorist is also concerned with associated cultural expressions. In attempting to establish rapport with Servero Serna, the students discovered a good storyteller. Seeking information on water use, they encountered a personal history. Such moments require patience and flexibility in order to balance the formalities of human interaction and the requirements and needs of the research plan. In a San Luis cafe, the researchers found themselves in exactly one of those complex field-documentation situations that had been described to them in the Colorado College classrooms. The van ride back to Baca headquarters provided a respite from the days activities but by no means brought them to an end. There was much to do before and after supper. Earlier, Stephanie Hall had warned students that "for every hour the folklorist spends in the field, he or she must spend two reviewing and rewriting his notes, and logging photographs." Computer technology is especially helpful if collected material is to be placed in an archive, because a numbering system for notes, recordings, and photographs can be established at once. David Taylor and Stephanie Hall worked together to develop a system for computer-assisted cataloging in the field during the Folklife Center's Maine Acadian Cultural Survey in 1991. The cook's rule of washing as you go can be applied to the folklife field project: catalog the data obtained each day, the photographs and fieldnotes, and much time will be saved later on. For Pam Duran, the training paid off. Shortly after the July field school, Duran began a documentary history for the fiftieth anniversary of a school in Albuquerque for the Center for Regional Studies after her summer training. For her, the field school provided a model, a frame within which to construct her project, a procedure for taking fieldnotes, and a "method to keep track of all the stuff." In the late afternoon, Stephanie Hall supervised students in the Baca computer lab, while other instructors reviewed their photographs. Again, technology facilitated the fieldwork experience. A Crestone photographer, J.D. Marston, developed the film, and instructors selected appropriate images for comment and mounted them for an evening presentation and critique. Instructor Miguel Gandert offered advice on: changing position for a better composition, ensuring that the face of the subject is in focus, avoiding overhead sunshine, omitting extraneous material, turning the camera for a vertical image, getting close to the subject to focus on important information, watching for the effect of bright white buildings on light meters, and much more. In many ways, one of Gandert's comments might serve as a motto for fieldwork in general: "Learn to anticipate action." Folklife will not always be still. The photograph or tape recording or fieldnote represents a moment in the process. On one occasion, Corpus Gallegos provided such a moment in telling a joke, recorded by field school student Mario Lozoya (to understand the joke, of course, the listener would have to know that fajitas are sometimes made with pork): As Corpus Gallegos sat in the rear of his truck, he said he wanted to tell us a joke and we all gathered around him to hear it. He started by saying, "Well there were three barn animals gathered together: a cow, a chicken, and a pig, and they were all talking about life and how hard life was for each of them. The cow complained how bad life was for a cow and said, "Yea, they pull at my titties all the time and poke me with a stick all the time when they want me to move." The chicken said, "You think you have it rough! They always shoo me aside and wring my neck and throw my food on the ground." The pig said, "I don't have any complaints. They feed me the food they eat and even put it in the trough for me. And I heard that for Christmas they're going to make fajitas." Folklorists study jokes in a number of ways, and might compare this one, for example, with other similar versions in this country and in agricultural communities throughout the world. Giving voice to animals (also a characteristic of the fable) is one of the oldest techniques of storytelling, creating a distance between humans and animals that makes the story's lesson less immediately threatening. Tim Lloyd says that folklore takes place at the "intersection of artfulness and everyday life." A joke provides a welcome interlude in the daily round of ranching duties for Mr. Gallegos (an artistic performance by a man whose chief occupation is ranching); ironically, it provides a similar break in the documentation efforts of the student folklorists (at the same time it provides material to document). Connie Romero's description of the Gallegos ranch; Laura Hunt's description of ranching activities; Roberto Venegas's account of Severno Serna's personal history; Mario Lozoya's example of humor and performance--with the accumulating documentation, the researchers began to see the integrated composite of expressive culture in the traditionally Hispanic town of San Luis, Colorado. Back at her job at the Tutt Library, Colorado College, following her field school training, reference librarian Laura Hunt has a new appreciation of how special collections materials are generated. "Archivists, special collections librarians, and others with ethnographic collections would find it valuable to see the process of fieldwork through from start to finish," she says. "It makes for quality reference work when the librarian or archivist knows how the collection is created and organized." Beverly Morris is an oral historian of Aleut descent, at the Institute of American Indian Art in Sante Fe, New Mexico, working on a project to document Indian language and esthetics. She will also be training other Native Americans in oral history techniques. The image that remains in her mind from the summer field school is Corpus Gallegos using his shovel and other simple tools to irrigate a large field, moving the water in the traditional way, a man in harmony with the surrounding elements. As she teaches others in her community, she will help them to have a voice they did not have in the past, introducing and giving access to people with ancient oral traditions the new technologies of recording machine and computer, showing them even how to get on- line, and how to document and speak for their own traditions. Of course, many of the folklife expressions Morris and the other field school participants learned to document are not specific to one group but touch on our common humanity, for folklife provides a redemptive creativity that is available to all human communities. .................................................................. Thanks to Judith Gray, Stephanie Hall, Timothy Lloyd, and David Taylor, who read this article and made helpful comments. A second field school will be conducted at Colorado College July 9 to 29 1995. .................................................................. Field School Captions: Folklife Center staffer Timothy Lloyd demonstrates the use of a Marantz tape recorder for Marilyn Banuelos (left) and Christe Esquibel (right), in a Colorado College classroom. Photo by Miguel Gandert University of New Mexico students Mario Lozoya and Connie Romero practice using a Marantz tape recorder. Photo by Stephanie Hall Stephanie Hall, Carlos Vasquez, Corpus Gallegos, and Mario Lozoya on the vega near the People's Ditch, where flood gates are used to control the flow of water. Photo by James Hardin Rancher and junkyard owner Severno Serna entertains Beverly Morris with a story in the driveway of the Corpus Gallegos farmyard. Photo by David Taylor Corpus Gallegos (right) instructs Roberto Venegas and Stephanie Hall in how the "change the water." Venegas makes a dam that blocks the water from flowing to the left-hand chanel, redirecting it to the right. Photo by Miguel Gandert In the Baca computer lab, Stephanie Hall checks a computer for Christe Esquibel while Pam Duran looks on. Photo by Miguel Gandert Roberto Venegas gives a talk on land and water use in San Luis for field school participants. Photo by James Hardin Back at the Colorado College campus for a wrap-up session, Mario Montano and Carlos Vasquez congratulates John Lawson for his fieldwork, while Tim Lloyd looks on. Photo by James Hardin ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Significant Acquisitions for the Archive of Folk Culture in Fiscal Year 1994 By Joseph C. Hickerson ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The following describes those collections acquired for the Archive of Folk Culture during October 1993--September 1994, that comprise especially large bodies of material, those of particular interest to folklore, ethnomusicology, and related areas of study, and those that exemplify the wide variety of formats and subject matters represented in the collections. The staff of the American Folklife Center hopes readers will be inspired by these diverse listings to consider the Archive of Folk Culture as a repository for their past, current, and future collections and publications. The Philadelphia Ceili Group, the oldest and largest American organization devoted to the preservation and promotion of Irish music, has donated a collection of 92 audiotapes, 213 audiocassettes, and 36 videocassettes documenting concerts, lectures, workshops, and festival events sponsored by them from 1977 to 1993. The array of Irish and Irish-American performers and lecturers represented here is comprehensive and reflects the resurgence of interest in Irish music and dance during the past twenty years. Musical performances by Altan, DeDannan, Joe Heaney, Mick Moloney, Christy Moore, and many others are included as well as lectures by such scholars as Dennis Clark, Brian Donnelly, Maggie Kreusi, and Turlough O'Faolin. The Center has obtained from Michael Seeger of Lexington, Virginia, 56 audiotapes containing approximately 112 hours of archival-quality duplications of his original reels numbered 164- 275 along with descriptive notes on computer diskettes. The collection encompasses a wide array of concerts, interviews, private musical performances, and recording sessions covering primarily the early periods of bluegrass and country music. Musicians interviewed with examples of their singing and playing include Dock Boggs, The Carter Family, Elizabeth Cotten, Cousin Emmy, Roscoe Holcomb, Grandpa and Ramona Jones, Leslie Riddle, Eck Robertson, John Kilby-Snow, and Ralph and Carter Stanley. Other performers include Bill Harrell, Mississippi John Hurt, The Kentucky Colonels, Jim Kweskin's Jug Band, The Lilly Brothers, Marcus Martin, Sam and Kirk McGee with both Fiddlin' Arthur Smith and Sid Harkreader, Bill Monroe, Charlie Moore, The New Lost City Ramblers (including their first public appearance with members John Cohen, Tom Paley, and Seeger), The Osborne Brothers, Don Reno, Hobart Smith, and Mac Wiseman. Henrietta Yurchenco, professor emerita of the City College of New York, has donated 56 audiotapes and 1 audiocassette of field recordings of Sephardic Jews made in Spain and Morocco in 1954 and 1956, respectively. Featured in the collection are traditional ballads, wedding songs, and stories. Sung only by women, many of the songs have been preserved since the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492. Yurchenco made these recordings in the central, southern, and western provinces of Spain, the Balearic Islands, and Tangier and Tetuan, Morocco. Rosemary N. Killam of North Texas State University has donated her field recordings of folk music made in north-central Texas in 1971, and southeast Missouri, 1983-85. The collection contains 112 audiocassettes accompanied by 650 manuscript pages and 504 file cards of field notes describing the recordings. Killam did the research to document folk music performance in these areas with particular attention to ensemble repertoire, modality, and harmonies. She recorded both music and interviews with performers at fiddlers' conventions, community gatherings, and jam sessions in private homes. Documentary filmmaker Patrick Mullins has donated a set of 79 copies of the production work tapes generated for his video documentary _From Shore To Shore: Irish Traditional Music in New York City_, which was sponsored by the Irish Arts Center of New York City. The gift also includes a copy of the published videotape released by Cherry Lane Productions in 1993. This documentary, filmed in 1988-90, examines continuity and change in Irish music and dance among Irish-Americans in and around New York City since the turn of the century, and surveys its antecedents in Ireland. The videocassettes contain unedited interviews with musicians such as Andy McGann, John Whelan, and Martin Wynne, and step-dancer Maureen Glynn Connolly. Interviews about long-dead master musicians Michael Coleman and Lad O'Beirne are conducted with progeny such as Mary Coleman Hannon and James O'Beirne, Jr. Also included are numerous musical performances in such venues as the Eagle Tavern, Irish Arts Center, Miltown Lounge, the New York Fleadh Cheoil, and the Traditional Irish Music Festival. The Seattle Folklore Society has donated 54 audiotapes containing portions of 33 concerts and 2 workshops sponsored and recorded by the society from 1965 to 1973. Many well-known bluegrass, blues, folk, and gospel artists are represented in the collection, including Elizabeth Cotten, Reverend Gary Davis, Ramblin' Jack Elliot, The Georgia Sea Island Singers, Sam Hinton, Roscoe Holcomb, John Lee Hooker, Sam "Lightning" Hopkins, Son House, Furry Lewis, Mance Lipscomb, Fred McDowell, Bill Monroe, New Lost City Ramblers, Fred Price, Mike Seeger, Kilby Snow, Ralph Stanley, Doc Watson, Booker White, Joe Williams, and Robert Pete Williams. George W. Tressel of Potomac, Maryland, has donated 10 audiotapes of Croatian and Serbian music that he recorded on several late- night occasions at a "Balkan cafe" in Chicago in 1954. These tapes contain two hours of performances by the Popovich (Popovic) Brothers and Martin Kapugi's (Kapudji) ensemble, whose repertories exemplify the music and instrumentation of post-World War I Serbian and Croatian immigrants to America. Their instruments include the bra (Croatian plucked lute), bugarij (long-necked lute), and "prime" (small lute made from a turtle shell). Adam Popovich, a recipient of a 1982 National Heritage Award, and the other artists, were also documented as part of the Folklife Center's Chicago Ethnic Arts Project in 1978. Judit Elek, a film director from Budapest, Hungary, has presented copies of Miksa Eizikovits's field documentation of approximately 155 Hungarian Chasidic songs and melodies collected, 1938-39, in Mramaros, a Hungarian district (presently in Romania) in Subcarpathian Transylvania. This collection takes on special significance in light of the almost complete destruction of Mramaros's Jewish population during the Nazi occupation of Hungary, 1944-45. On the eve of World War II, Eizikovits (1908- 1980), a Hungarian Jewish composer from Kolozsvr (Cluj), traveled to towns and villages in Mramaros in search of Chasidic niggun (religious folksongs in Yiddish) and melodies. Eizikovits notated the melodies and some song texts in four notebooks. Also included are typed transcriptions of 60 song texts in Yiddish with Hebrew translation and in transliterated Yiddish with Hungarian translation. In addition, his narrative account (ca. 1948) of his experiences in Mramaros has been provided, as well as an audiocassette of a recent performance based on ten of the transcriptions. The Brevard County Oral History Video Project recently began documenting and preserving the regional, occupational, and ethnic heritage of that Florida county. Copies of 29 videotapes, 321 pages of transcriptions on diskette, and a final report for the initial 1992 recording effort have been donated to the Center. The interviews are with ten individuals who through personal reminiscence bring life to the history of Brevard County, spanning a range of time and subject from "Old Florida to the Space Age." One of the interviewees was a friend of Zora Neale Hurston. Nancy Yasecko of Vanguard Productions of Merritt Island, Florida, transmitted the collection with a letter that states that "After hurricane Andrew, we are especially sensitive to the importance of a second repository" for this important and interesting collection. Dan C. McCurry of Chicago, Illinois, has donated 352 photocopied sheets of various songs, poems, and "hot doggerel" (humor) related to forestry, ranger work, and mountain life in the United States. McCurry discovered this material while compiling a collection of songs about Forest Service sites for the 50th anniversary of Smokey Bear. The following is a summary of additional acquisitions: 40 audiotapes and 1,501 manuscripts on folksong subjects from the Stanley Edgar Hyman papers transferred from the Library's Manuscript Division; 106 audiocassettes and numerous slides, photographs, and manuscripts on the folklore of Georgia, Rhode Island, and the Blue Ridge from Geraldine Johnson; 14 pamphlets of U.S. Geological Survey facetiae and satire from Mort D. Turner; 3 audiocassettes of the 1994 International Ballad and Folksong Seminar in County Donegal, Ireland, from Sara Grey; a videocassette of Pete Seeger on "Bill Moyers' Journal;" an audiotape of a radio tribute to Ralph Rinzler from Larry Applebaum; an audiocassette of his grandfather's early twentieth-century piano styles from Eric Larson; a videotape of quilting in Massachusetts from Jeanne LaPierre; 198 LPs of folk music from Bea and Don Epstein; 29 78-rpm recordings of Polish, Russian, and Ukrainian music from Father Taras Lonchyne; a diskette containing 501 bawdy songs and related material from Paul Woodword; a manuscript on "Devil's Foot Rock" in Rhode Island from Michael E. Bell; a manuscript of 102 light bulb jokes received via E-Mail from Lani Herrmann; a Master's thesis on the Newport Folk Festival and Foundation from Cheryl Anne Brauner LaBerge; and a Master's thesis on "Sacred Harp Traditions in Texas" from Lisa Carol Hardaway. In addition, the following runs of periodicals have been donated by their publishers: 109 issues of CABOMA News (Capitol Area Bluegrass and Old Time Music Association); 199 of Bluegrass Strings (South Florida Bluegrass Association): 109 of Three Quarter Times (Vancouver Folk Song Society); 45 of the Association for Chinese Music Research Newsletter; 26 of Folk News (World Folk Music Association); 8 of The Living Tradition (Pete Heywood of Kilmarnock, Ayrshire, Scotland); twelve of Bitterroot Foxfire News (Worley, Idaho); and 12 of Away Here in Texas, "a regional Sacred Harp newsletter for Oklahoma and Texas." Lee Gold of Los Angeles has also contributed a number of recent issues of the filkzine Xenofilkia. On November 10, 1993, author Elizabeth Anne Scarborough of Port Townsend, Washington, visited the Folklife Reading Room and later donated two sets of her three-volume "Songkiller Saga" series (New York: Bantam Books, 1991-92). The plots of these fantasy fiction novels revolve around the attempts by the devils of the universe to undermine the well-being of humankind by eliminating all folk music, beginning with the total destruction of the Library of Congress "Folk Music Archives" and its director. Toward the end of the third volume, one professional folksinger exhorts his fellows to donate the equivalent of song writer's royalties for their public domain folksongs to the Library to help reestablish the folk music archive! The author of this article is beholden to a number of individuals who assist in a variety of acquisitions-related tasks as interns and volunteers. I would like to acknowledge the following who have done so in the past year: Irene Barabasz, Maria Brubeck, Jean Crandall, Angie Delcambre, Carolyn DeLuca, Wm. Maxwell Derrickson, Qali Farrah, Robert Garber, Deborah Hanselman, Peter Harrington, Hubert King, Jack Manischewitz, Nolyn Mason, Melinda Messore, Debby McClatchy, Carol Moran, Daria Nebesh, Emily Parsons, Elsa Sagasti, Jeffrey Schlosberg, Andrew Schmidt, David Schott, Toni N. Smart, Steven Weiss, and Harris Wray. Acquisitions Report Captions: Becky and Dolf Schroeder of Columbia, Missouri, have donated an audiocassette containing a tribute to and musical performance in memory of R. P. Christeson, a renowned fiddler and collector of old-time fiddling, who died on April 9, 1992. The tribute was presented at the September 26, 1992, annual meeting of the Missouri Folklore Society in Hermann, Missouri. The Archive of Folk Culture has copies of many of Christeson's recordings of fiddlers and dance events. This memorial cassette is supplemented by six photographs. This one shows Christeson (bottom of picture) recording on a wire recording machine a square dance in Nebraska in the early 1950s. Bobby Fulcher, co-director of the Tennessee Banjo Institute, has donated five brochures, two program books, and three panoramic photographs documenting that organization's conventions held in 1988, 1990, and 1992 at Cedars of Lebanon State Park in Lebanon, Tennessee. These documents are significant for their historical material and numerous biographies and photographs of workshop instructors, which include the majority of the best banjoists extant. Here we see the right-hand portion of a panoramic photograph of the 1992 participants. Since it takes a number of seconds for the camera to pan the group arrayed in an extended semi-circle around it, it is possible (and traditional) for one or two persons (in this case Bela Fleck and Pete Seeger) on the extreme left to dash behind the camera and appear again on the extreme right (see the photograph on page 13). A group of Irish musicians, one of several groups featured in eighty videotapes on Irish music in New York City recently donated by filmmaker Patrick Mullins of Cherry Lane Productions. Depicted here is the Irish Music and Social Club of Greater New York, Inc., on March 23, 1947. The young boy in the picture is James Obeirn, Jr., who is interviewed on his recollections of musical activities of that period. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ New Publications Highlight Archive Collections ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Folklife Resources in the Library of Congress, by Timothy Lloyd and Hillary Glatt. 52 pages. Single copies are free from the Library of Congress, American Folklife Center, Washington, D.C. 20540-8100. Describes more than sixteen locations in the Library of Congress for finding folk cultural material. This booklet introduces the Library of Congress from the perspective of the user of folklife resources, points out some of the relevant materials in various divisions, and suggests routes of access to those materials. By familiarizing folklorists and others with the quantity, quality, and diversity of folklife resources in the Library, the authors hope to encourage productive and creative use of the institution. Music for the Gods: The Fahnestock South Sea Expedition: Indonesia, produced by Alan Jabbour and Mickey Hart. Rykodisc (RCD 10315: $13.98. RAC 10315: $9.98) Available in music stores nationwide. Second issue in the Library of Congress Endangered Music Project, a joint effort of the American Folklife Center and Grateful Dead percussionist Mickey Hart. A selection of primarily gamelan music from the Center's Fahnestock South Sea Collection, which was gathered by Bruce and Sheridan Fahnestock in 1941, just before World War II changed the cultural landscape of the Pacific Islands. Gamelan orchestras and ensembles, slit drums, quartets, and vocalists singing dance chants and poetry. Includes 24-page booklet with extensive historical liner notes. Caption: Legong dancers perform to a gamelan ensemble, Bali, 1941. From the Fahnestock South Sea Collections. Photo by Howard Kincheloe Back cover: Colorado Field School Class of 1994, from left to right: Roberto Venegas, Mario Montano, Laura Hunt (with Mario's son Armando), Mario Lozoya, Stephanie Hall, Miguel Gandert, Connie Romero, Marilyn Banuelos, Pam Duran, Timothy Lloyd, Christe Esquibel, John Lawson, Carlos Vasquez, Beverly Morris, and David Taylor. Photo by Miguel Gandert --------------------------END TEXT-------------------------------- Note: This text has been prepared in ascii for Internet distribution. Fonts and diacritics have been removed. For a free printed copy please write to The American Folklife Center, Library of Congress, Washington, DC 20540-8100.	en
markdown	785252	# Presentation: 785252 ## Vegetation Mapping ProjectsWhat works...What doesn’t ? *More than just a map* Notes: I am here to talk about the National Park Vegetation Mapping Program ## NPS/USGS Vegetation Mapping Projects Background Approach Big Mistakes Recommendations Available data/Web site ## Background - Early projects were centrally managed - Additional funding drew local interest - More funding drew network and regional interest - i.e. management is now more localized Notes: Why am I talking about a Park Service Program at a Forest Service Meeting? Because of the items listed here. Like the Park Service, you have national responsibilities, you manage a wide range of ecosystems, you have specific management responsibilities that require information to implement. This is a program in its 5th year that has leasons that may be benefical to you. The lessons learned from this program could assist you in your vegetation classification and mapping efforts. I will come back to that later. The Inventory Monitoring Program of the NPS is responsiblefor creating many base layers of information for parks including DOQQ’s, species lists, base cartographic data, and includes vegetation. Short Term Applications Resource Mangement - what is out there and what do we need to do with it to meet our goals? Research - what bird species are associated with what vegetaion types? - what is the distribution of a particular vegetation type across a Park? Planning and Compliance - Are there invasive species, what do we need to do about them? Interpretation - which is a big issue with the Park Service and may not be so important to you now, but may become more important in the future. Operations - How do we accomplish our management goals in specific vegetation types? ## Background - These are not “common” projects - Contractors/cooperators need to be carefully selected and supervised - Projects require a lot of supervision and review. ## Big Mistake #1 - Underestimating the amount of involvement required to manage a project - Examples of doing it right - Northeast Region (Beth Johnson) - Northern Colorado Plateau Network (A. Evenden) - SEKI (Sylvia Haultain) ## Big Mistake #2 - Just give the money to someone else, they will know what to do... - Yeah.. But will they do what you want? - Need to provide very specific requirement - Coordinate with the national office ## Big Mistake #3 - Assume that the cooperators/contractors know what they are doing. - Plant ecology and NVC - Mapping - GPS - Accuracy assessment ## Yet another mistake - Spend available funds on imagery without consulting your mapping contractor. - Imagery may not reflect current conditions - Assume DOQQs or digital imagery is “best” - Not necessarily so - Need to consider season, scale, emulsion, etc ## What should you do? - Recognize and use the standards - Use the accepted protocols - Use detailed specifications - Review the project at each step - STAY INVOLVED ## Requirements - Meet NPS overall management policies, standards and guidelines - Conform to Federal Geographic Data Committee standards - metadata, transfer, classification etc. - Has a nationally consistent, hierarchical, classification scheme - Meet National Map Accuracy Standards - Thematic accuracy >80% per class - Scale of 1:24,000 - Minimum mapping unit of 0.5 hectare Notes: The program has to meet Park Service requirements and FGDC requirements National Map Accuracy standards Project specific requirements are: 80% accurate for each class MMU of 0.5 ha Meet NPS overall management policies, standards and guidelines Conform to Federal Geographic Data Committee standards Metadata, Transfer, Classification etc. Uniformity in classification methodology Meet National Map Accuracy Standards Thematic Accuracy >80% per class Minimum Mapping Unit of 0.5 hectare ## Major steps for each Park - Scoping meeting - Data review - Data acquisition - Field sampling - Classification characterization - Photo interpretation, mapping and automation - Accuracy assessment - Final product review Notes: These are the basic steps that are required for each park unit Data review - there are usually a lot of data avalaible for each unit, and it takes time and coordination to bring them together The field sampling should ideally take place when the photo interpreters are doing their field work, so there can be coordination between what the ecologists classifiy and what the intepreters identify The accuracy assessment should ideally be done when the mapping is complete so we can design a stratified random sample, but for efficiency’s sake, we often do accuracy assessment at the same time as the original field sampling ## Products from the program - Aerial photography (hardcopy, some new DOQQs) - Field data (hardcopy and database) - Classification report (description and key) - Photo interp report (description and key) - Accuracy report - Vegetation map data (digital coverage) ## FGDC National Vegetation Classification System A. PHYSIOGNOMY Division/Order - Tree dominant (dominant life form) Class - Woodland (spacing & height of dominant form) Subclass - Evergreen woodland (morphological & phenological similarity) Group - Temperate evergreen needle-leaved (climate, latitude, growth form, leaf form) Formation - Evergreen needle-leaved woodland with rounded crowns (mappable units) B. FLORISTICS Alliance (Cover Type) - Douglas Fir woodland (dominant species) Association (Community) - Douglas Fir / Snowberry woodland (subdominant or associated species) Notes: The system is hierarchical which allows it to be used for many different levels of analysis and study - from National to regional to each Park to each site. It is also standard - so we do not have to reinvent the wheel for each park, although a lot of development work has to be done for each park. ## Build a team - For managing and implementing - Plant ecology and classification review - GIS product review - Final product review - Archiving ## More team - Assemble teams to work on multiple parks - Use these projects to develop long-term relationships ## Management - You need a consistent project manager - One person should be in charge - Contract for deliverables (not just time) - Develop classification then map - Understand the differences between Cooperative agreements and Contracts ## More Management - Keep projects moving - Don’t stop and re-start - Ask for help when you need it (or before) - Coordinate with the national office ## Mapping beyond the NVCS - Species - Structure - Height classes - Layers (tree, shrub, herbaceous) - Density classes - Pattern ## Relationship with FIREPRO - Fire Fuels Mapping - Similar but not the same (ht to live crown, dead and down) - Fire Effects Monitoring - Similar but not the same (sampling techniques) ## New Models - Multiple park unit projects - Initiate and manage locally - “Regional/Network” field teams - Field based proposals - “New/other” technologies ## What else is new? - More efficient methods - More appropriate products - Mapping issues - Too detailed? - Hybrid techniques - Large parks - Small parks ## More? - Classification issues - Too detailed at association? - Inconsistent at association? ## Slide 23 Notes: NVC to the association level was felt to be too much detail for USGS-NPS VMP needs in the West, but adequate and achievable in the East. Statistics showed that, while the number of alliances reported by unit area for VMP projects is relatively consistent across the country, the number of associations is significantly greater in the West. This finding tends to refute the hypothesis that western areas have more units reported because of graeter environmental diversity, as greater diversity (at a comparable level for both regions) would tend to affect units in the NVC similarly (under the assumption that NVC units are treated at a comparable level of taxonomic resolution nationally). ## Slide 24 Notes: Numbers of plots (costs) tend to be significantly greater for western units. ## Slide 25 Notes: Investigation showed that two different models for delineating associations within alliances in the two regions. This graphic of the range of hypothetical associations within a single alliance is a very crude depiction of how alliances generally are parceled into associations in the regions. ## Slide 26 \| USGS-NPS VMP EXPERIENCE WITH CONCEPTUAL MODELS OF ASSOCIATIONS WITHIN THE CURRENT NVC \| \| \| --- \| --- \| \| “EASTERN” MODEL \| “WESTERN” MODEL \| \| Resolution of alliances is somewhat consistent nationally. \| \| \| Fewer associations per alliance \| More associations per alliance \| \| Associations tend to be allopatric and limited in range. For NPS units, Alliance : association tends to be 1 : 1 \| Associations tend to be sympatric and wide ranging. For NPS units, Alliance : association tends to be several or many : 1 \| \| Associations are also differentiated at the alliance level and are more distinguishable and more mappable. \| Associations within alliances are floristically very similar and are less distinguishable and less mappable. \| \| Stands representing widespread associations tend to be large. \| Stands representing widespread associations can be small and highly mosaiced. \| \| Association concepts often derived from local academic and habitat type studies. \| Association concepts more derived from state Natural Heritage data and NVC efforts. \| Notes: Different attributes, effects, and possible originating causes of the differing approaches. ## Slide 27 Notes: FGDC and ESA will soon be adopting guidelines that will require that all floristic units (alliances and associations) be proposed in a peer review process and be supported by plots that are representative of the unit’s range (“type specimens”). This process may bring more consistency to how NVC units are applied nationally. While this process standard may be adopted within the coming year, it will be much longer before the peer review process and well-populated national database are funded and functional. In the meantime, while recognizing the work of agencies that have contributed to NVC, it must be kept in mind that it is difficult to apply a globally extensive, but fairly generalized, classification that does not meet the objective review requirements specified by ESA / FGDC, to a spatially limited area with very specific floristic attributes. ## LESSONS LEARNED – working with the NVC within the VMP - NVC at the floristic levels is a work in progress - NVC process is iterative (park projects are not). - The diagnosis of floristic units needs to be understandable at the scale of the park, in order to meet I&M program goals (use of NVC is scale dependent). - More critical review of NVC units and objective basis for evaluating units are needed (as per FGDC / ESA standards). - More regional cross-regional communication regarding NVC development is needed. - NPS and other land management agencies need to be “at the table” in the NVC process (not be just a client). Notes: Lessons learned. ## WHAT TO DO NEXT? - Good question! - Communicate this issue to NPS staff (educated consumers) and our partners. - Perform classifications in several upcoming western parks to emphasize practical management units (test cases) to resolve in the “small picture” (VMP projects) - Revise VMP protocols to address the issue. - Communicate the issue to the NVC global community to attempt to resolve in the “big picture.” Notes: Lessons learned. ## More Information - Visit the Veg Mapping Homepage http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg ## Thanks Mike Story and Chris Lea NPS I&M (303)969-2746 (303)969-2807 - _[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])_ - _[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])_	en
converted_docs	803769	Task Description: Firm will issue electronic funds transfer in the amount of \$750.00 to support a conference entitled "Steroid hormone Receptors in Reproduction", which is a part of the 15^th^ annual meeting of the Triangle Consortium for Reproductive Biology. The conference will be held 2/11/06 in Chapel Hill, NC. Funds should be received as soon as possible after award, but no later than 2/8/06. Funds shall be sent electronically to a bank in Chapel Hill, NC. Account and contact information will be given at the time of award. \[Preparer: Fran Wagstaff, NIH/NIEHS, 919-541-4182\]	en
markdown	194831	# Presentation: 194831 ## DiscussionofHigh-level Strategies for Developinga Future “eScience” Program Breakout Group #4, 12/2/2004 ## Articulate the Big National, Societal Goals - Staying competitive in a changing environment (as in the natural environment) - Warming, agriculture, flooding in coastal areas, insurance - Bootstrapping American competitiveness and ingenuity to create New Industries - Nanotechnology, towards a knowledge economy Improving the Human Condition - Health information, Care Resources, Disaster Response and Management Energy, Water, Nutrients Defense Security Support Systems - Education ## The Big Goals EDUCATION Interdisciplinary Knowledge! Small to Big “Better Science” Democratization via for ## Pitching A Future eScience Program - Consider our program relative to the scope and funding of U.K., EU, Asia - Current DOE level of $34M is about 1% of OS budget of $3.4B - Can we double? - We would need a great Program Name - It’s important and hard to come up with one - “Cyberinfrastructure” is somewhat vague... - Encompasses collaboratories, Grid, etc. - eScience is taken, so... - Identify the Grand Challenges, translate to the Big Goals, drive the eScience thrusts, cost the program	en
markdown	670673	# Presentation: 670673 Electron high energy calibration Robert Zitoun Stony Brook and LAPP CAT Force Meeting May 13, 2003 - R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP EMID Meeting - 12 March 2003 ## Monte Carlo Energy Resolution - Found 3% resolution for 50 GeV electrons (3.1% w/o geo correction) - i.e. - Still have to look at Z Monte Carlo. Volker says 2.8% \| \| Run I \| Eta corrections p13 \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| S \| 0.15 \| 0.199 ± 0.008 \| \| N \| 0.16 \| 0.42 ± 0.08 \| \| C \| 0.003 \| 0.0076 ± 0.0014 \| - R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP EMID Meeting - 12 March 2003 ## Data Data - p13.05 + p13.06 + r13.06 - certified CC em objects - pT >25 GeV - out of “module boundaries” - one cluster matched to a track - Fit it with a Breit-Wigner function M = 90.2 ± 0.1 GeV - convoluted with a gaussian  = 3.6 ± 0.1 GeV - BW(MZ, 0 MZ/M0) * N(0, ) + bkg /M = 4.0% - MZ free,  is the resolution far from 2–2.8% - M0 and are the PDG values - allows for scale indeterminacy - R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP EMID Meeting - 12 March 2003 ## Step by Step Corrections - Take Cal DataChunk - Get back to raw ADC - Apply reco corrections one by one \| \| MZ/GeV \| Z/GeV \| Z/MZ \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| raw ADC \| 81.5 \| 3.6 \| 4.4 \| \| non linearity \| 86.7 \| 3.7 \| 4.3 \| \| gain correction \| 86.6 \| 3.6 \| 4.2 \| \| scale \| 86.5 \| 3.6 \| 4.1 \| \| geometric \| 90.2 \| 3.6 \| 4.0 \| - R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP EMID Meeting - 12 March 2003 ## Sampling not done at maximum (~1% effect) Chan to chan variation different in calibration and physics (~1%) - Chan to chan variation different in calibration and physics (~1%) Better Calibration - calibration - physics - 4 channels same  - in layer 3 - R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP EMID Meeting - 12 March 2003 ## Results with Better Calibration \| \| MZ/GeV \| Z/GeV \| Z/MZ \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| reco \| 90.2 \| 3.6 \| 4.0±0.1 \| \| calibration timing \| 90.2 \| 3.6 \| 4.0 \| \| physics timing \| 90.2 \| 3.6 \| 3.9 \| \| amplitude \| 90.0 \| 3.4 \| 3.8 \| - R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP EMID Meeting - 12 March 2003 ## Variations \| before \| 90.0 \| 3.4 \| 3.8±0.1 \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| after tuning weights \| 90.4 \| 3.3 \| 3.7 \| \| use 2 calweights \| 90.4 \| 3.3 \| 3.7 \| \| pulser amplitudes \| 90.2 \| 3.4 \| 3.8 \| \| 10  slices \| 90.4 \| 3.3 \| 3.7 \| Variations - Fit calweights to minimize Z width - 1.04±0.004 0.78±0.016 1.05±0.005 1.02±0.01 0.48±0.06 - highly correlated corr(1,2) = -0.9 corr(2, 3) = -0.8 - use 2 series of calweights for \|\|<0.5 or >0.5 - on the 4 CC pulser amplitudes - fit 4 parameters to minimize Z resolution - 1.005, 0.997, 1.000, 1.007 - Make 10  slices and fit 10 normalization constants - ~ 1.00 within <1% - R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP EMID Meeting - 12 March 2003 ## Shower Size - Volker’s suggestion:  width agrees with MC but not z \| \| M \|  \| resol \| evt # \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| all \| 90.4 \| 3.49 \| 3.86 \| 3332 \| \| z<8 \| 89.7 \| 3.28 \| 3.65 \| 645 \| \| z<10 \| 90.2 \| 3.50 \| 3.88 \| 608 \| \| z<14 \| 90.8 \| 3.73 \| 4.10 \| 773 \| \| z<30 \| 90.7 \| 3.39 \| 3.72 \| 576 \| \| \| M \|  \| resol \| evt # \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| all \| 90.4 \| 3.49 \| 3.86 \| 3332 \| \| <7 \| 90.4 \| 3.07 \| 3.39 \| 351 \| \| <9 \| 90.4 \| 3.43 \| 3.79 \| 667 \| \| <11 \| 90.6 \| 3.71 \| 4.10 \| 565 \| \| <20 \| 89.8 \| 3.73 \| 4.19 \| 569 \| - R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP EMID Meeting - 12 March 2003 ## Module Boundaries - CC calorimeter made of 32 wedges  = 0.2 - loss of clusters (?) - loss of energy (no plot) - Oleg Kouznetsov showed that - approx. gaussian energy loss - with  away from “crack” - amplitude 20%  = 15 mrad - R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP EMID Meeting - 12 March 2003 ## Module Boundaries (2) \| \| MZ/GeV \| Z/GeV \| Z/MZ \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| \| 90.4 \| 3.3 \| 3.7 \| \| \|\|>0.06 \| 91.0 \| 2.7 \| 3.0 \| \| \|\|<0.04 \| 87.3 \| 2.9 \| 3.3 \| \| Oleg \| 91.1 \| 3.1 \| 3.4 \| \| ampl = 21%  = 15mrad \| 91.3 \| 3.0 \| 3.3±0.13 \| -  = 3.3% - not yet 2–2.8% - but more to gain? - R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP EMID Meeting - 12 March 2003	en
converted_docs	095990	# Data Layout for GCRM Output 11/19/08 5:15 PM This document describes the horizontal and vertical grid used by the GCRM, how variables are placed on the grid, the information required to support visualization, and finally a data model for persisted data. The data model is described in terms of its mapping to the netcdf data model, though others are possible. The primary purpose is to document the grid and reach consensus on the data model for the grid. Therefore an emphasis is placed on the grid definition. A secondary purpose is to define document the mapping of internal GCRM data structures to actual output variables. This document is not intended to describe all the actual data variables though examples of the more complex 2d and 3d variables are provided. ## GCRM Horizontal Grid The GCRM uses the geodesic grid. A detailed description of the grid is beyond the scope of this document but can be found at the CSU web site - <http://kiwi.atmos.colostate.edu/BUGS/geodesic/>. The grid will be written using a morton ordering scheme (see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z-order_(curve)>). For our purpose, the benefits of this scheme are: it supports large contiguous writes and the data layout is not dependent upon the number of processors used to create it. An example data set that demonstrates this layout can be found at <http://climate.pnl.gov/data/>. The number of grid points in a grid is determined by the equation N=10x2\\(2r) + 2 where r is the recursion number. Some characteristics of the grid based on the r value is shown in Figure 1. Target r value is r=11 or higher. ![](media/image1.png){width="5.997222222222222in" height="2.4243055555555557in"} Figure 1. Table of grid characteristics for various values of r. Though there are 12 pentagons, all relevant arrays are dimensioned to 6 with one of the values repeated in the case of pentagons. Repeated values may occur anywhere within the 6 elements. For example a neighbor list may contain values 2,3,5,5,1900,1901. ## GCRM Vertical Dimension A vertical column is partitioned using vertical coordinate surfaces. The positions of these surfaces are referred to as interfaces. A model layer is sandwiched between two interfaces (see Figure 2). Variables will be defined at both interfaces and layers. For example, eta (the horizontal component of vorticity) is defined at interfaces, and zeta (the vertical component of vorticity) is defined in the layers. There will be 1 more interface than layer in a model column. For example, if we have a model with 4 layers, the values of the interfaces might be: > vertcoor_ifc = {0 km, 10 km, 20 km, 30 km, 40 km} > > and the values of the layers would then be: > vertcoor_lyr = {5 km, 15 km, 25 km, 35 km} \ Vertical interfaces and layers my either increase or decrease with increasing height. For example, pressure is used as a vertical coordinate, and it decreases with increasing height. The anticipated number of interfaces is 96 for 4 km model runs. In the initial versions of the GCRM, the grid metrics (areas, lengths etc.) will be the same for all levels. However, in future versions, we will need to account for increasing metrics (stretching) for increasing model layers \-- especially for a very deep atmosphere. This document considers only the case of uniform metrics.![](media/image2.png){width="5.501388888888889in" height="3.6756944444444444in"} Figure 2. Distribution of discrete variables on the grid. ## Variable Location On the Grid GCRM data can be cell centered, edge centered, or associated with corners as shown in Figure 2. The list below shows some examples of data and their grid location, in the initial GCRM model. > Prognostic variables: - Horizontal component of vorticity η ( \* 3 for edges) - Potential temperature θ - 5 species of water > Diagnostic Variables: - Vertical velocity w - Horizontal velocity V ( \* 3 for edges) - Vertical component of vorticity ζ ( \* 2 for corners) Edges are defined as the midpoint (on the sphere) of the distance between two cell centers. Corners are defined as the voronoi center of three cell centers. Additionally, variables are defined at both interfaces and layers as described above. The minimum amount of information necessary to construct all needed locations are: cell_neighbors, grid_center_lon, grid_center_lat, interfaces, and layers plus the functions: midpoint(cell1, cell2) voronoi_corner(cell1,cell2,cell3) The number of unique corners and edges on the grid can be determined from the number of cells as shown in figure 2. ![](media/image3.png){width="5.501388888888889in" height="3.4298611111111112in"} ### Cell Centered Data Cell centered data is straight-forward to describe. Internally to the model, 2d and 2d cell centered data will be defined as follows: > real centervar(i,j,j,b) > > real centervar(i,j,k,layer,b) > > real centervar(i,j,k+1,b) where i,j are indices of the horizontal grid within a block, k is the vertical component, and b is the block. Externally, data will be persisted with the following structure: > centervar(cells) > > centervar(cells,layers) > > centervar(cells,interfaces) ### Corner Data Internally to the model, corner data is associated with the unique corners of a cell. As previously described, there are two unique corners per cell. A model data structure may thus be defined as: > real cornervar(2,i,j,k,b) where the first index is the unique corners per cell and i,j,k, and b are as previously described. Some data, such as wind may have multiple components. For example: > real cornervar(2,2,i,j,k,b) stores the north/south component of wind in the 1^st^ value of the first index whereas the east/west component of wind is stored in the 2^nd^ value of the first index. The other indices are as described above. When data is persisted, each component of the first index will be written as two variables in the output data files. More generally, the form of variables is: > real cornervar(index2,index1,i,j,k,b) Index2 may be 2 in the case of the wind example above or three in the case of vectors. The current plan is to separate all indices at index2 into separate variables but the api will be flexible enough to support different choices for persistence. Index1 will be 2 for corners or 3 for edges (discussed below). The corner data can be persisted one of three ways: 1. All corners per cells: In this approach, corner data is associated with all 6 corners of a given cell. This approach simplifies post processing and analysis at the cost of storing 6 values per cell instead of two. This data duplication creates unnecessary file size bloating and carries a negative impact on bandwidth. Howevver, it should be noted that unlike the other options, no additional grid description data is required. In c index order, a variable would be defined as follows: > float cornervar(cells, layers, 6) > > No additional grid data is required. 2. Unique corners per cell: This approach follows the design of the gcrm model. It minimizes the data munging required to write the data. Aditional grid data and a small algorithm are required to map the corners to their cells. In c index order, with the I,j values transformed into cell indices, we would have the following data arrays: > float cornervar(cell, layer, 2) > > int grid_corner_map(cell, 6) > > The algorithm required to convert the value in grid_corner_map to > separate cell and unique corner indices is as follows: > > unique_corner = corner % 2, > > cell = (corner-unique_corner)/2 3. Arrays indexed by all unique corners: In this approache, data is associated with a "unique corner" index rather than being associated with individual cells. A mapping between cell corners and corner arry index must be provided. This strategy impacts subsetting in that the when requesting a region, multiple different dimensions and their coordinates must both be stored and considered in the subsetting. In c notation, the following arrays would be required: > float cornervar(corner, layer) > > float grid_corner_lat(corner) > > float grid_corner_lon(corner) > > int grid_corner_map(cell, 6) > > For each cell, the corner map contains the index of the 6 corners into > the corner dimension. The corner dimension lat/lon are required for > completeness and easy subsetting. Option 3 will be adopted because it is conceptually clear and generally applicable to arbitrary grids. ### Edge Data Storage of edge data has the same three options as corner data. Using the preferred option of storing all edge data as a flat array, the necessary variables are: > float edgevar(edge, layer) > > float grid_edge_lat(edge) > > float grid_edge_lon(edge) > > int grid_edge_map(cell,6) ## Visualization Corner and edge data create special difficulties for visualization. Figure 3 shows considerations for tesselation when visualizating cell, corner, and edge centered data. For corner variables, the algorithm is to iterate over each of the cells and retrieve the list of corners. With this information, the tesselation can be done in a straight forward manner. ![](media/image4.png){width="5.997222222222222in" height="3.2472222222222222in"} Figure 3. Tesselations for cell, corner, and edge centered data. ![](media/image5.png){width="5.983333333333333in" height="6.111805555555556in"} Figure4: Tesselation scheme for edge-centered data. The tesselation scheme for edge-centered data is slightly more complicated that cell and corner-centered data. Figure4 shows the desired tesselation. We need to create triangles for the inscribed hexagon (in blue) and the yellow "star" triangles. Creating the inscribed hexagon is easy: For a given cell, we find the position of the center. Then we find the positions of the 6 edge-midpoints. This is sufficient information to create the blue insribed hexagon. We also need to interpolate the edge data to the center of the cell. Creating the yellow "star" triangles is the tricky part. Refering to Figure4 and taking the light yellow triangle as an example, we know 2 vertices of the triangle (e1 and e2). The question is how do we determine e? The algorithm for finding e can be described as follows (ref to Figure 4): Assumptions: iteration is performed over cells rather than edges cell center and corner positions provided cell neighbor list provided edge positions provided/generated mapping from edge to cells may be available mapping of cell to unique corner and edge indices provided/generated counter --clockwise ordering for cell neighbors (e.g. h = {h0,h1,h2...}) counter --clockwise ordering for edges (e.g. h = {e0, e1, e2...}) Algorithm for finding e, and hence the triangle (e1,e2, e). We are given Cell h and edges e1, e2: 1\) Find the relevant neighboring cells h1 & h2\ a) First we find all cell_neighbors of h\ cell_neighbors(h) = {h0, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5}\ - Go through all cell neighbors\ - For each cell neighbor, go through all edges till you find e1. Return the cell that contains e1 (Cell h1 in our case).\ \ b) Based on counter-clockwise ordering of cell neighbors, return h2, the cell that immediately follows h1 in the ordering. 2\) Obtain the set of counter-clockwise edges E {e2, e, \...} in h2. Return the edge that immediately follows e2 in E. This corresponds to the desired edge "e" in our case.\ \ We need to take care to create the "star" triangles only once, and not three times. This can be done by inserting the triangle only when the current cell index is the minimum of the 3 cells. Note that if a mapping between an edge and its two cells is also available, this will speed up the algorithm. This would be defined as follows: > int grid_edge_cells(edges,2) It is also necessary to get the complete description of the cell bounds in order to draw the polygons. This information is provided by an cell dimensioned array that provides coordinates for each cell corner. The vertical dimension requires being able to look up an elevation value for each level. Currently no scaling or offsetting is planned. A spherical projection is done on the height and will need to take into account whether the z direction is moving up or down. This information must be provided as part of the metadata. ## Subsetting Current subsetting tools are geared toward lat/lon grids. Because of the monotonic nature of the coordinates, dimensions can be readily subsettted by index or value. For the geodesic grid, new software is necessary. For cell centered data, standard names can be used to find the lat/lon variables and use those to subset by coordinate value. However, for this to work for corner and edge data, the data must be indexed using the same scheme or subsetting must be performed as a multi-step process. For example, in option 3 in the corner section above, the cell centered data is subsetted based on cell centers, the corner data is subsetted based on corner coordinates, and edge data is subsetted based on edge coordinates. This allows existing tools that work based on generic dimension processing to work on this data with the caveat that at the edges of the grid region, cells will be missing some edge/corner data. However, to ensure that all corner and edge variables associated with a cell that is within the selection range, the corners and edges should be computed from the selected cells. More significantly, all index arrays will need to have the indices updated. ## NetCDF Mapping Given all the information from the previous sections, we can define a binding to our netcdf. We rely on CF conventions ([[http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-conventions/1.3/]{.underline}](http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-conventions/1.3/)) where appropriate, and extend them as necessary. In addition, the standard practice of providing dimension variables will be followed and can be leveraged by applications. For example, given the dimension layers, there will also be a variable named layers the provides the values for each layer. At this time, it is expected that each 3d variable will be stored in its own time series file with the full grid definition. The reasons for this choice at this time include: - Time series data for individual variables is likely to make data access the most convenient for the majority of operations. - Size limits imposed by netcdf3 currently restrict the size of variables due to integer offsets - Many processing tools do not yet support external grids Long term, our goal, which is supported by our IO API design, is to allow the modeler to aggregate variables together into files in any way they choose which includes control over whether or not a grid variables are written to each file or to one file. This will require conversion to netcdf4 or the upgrade of netcdf3 to handle large arrays. The best guess for the latter is early to mid 2009. The largest grid size that can be supported with current netcdf libraries is r=11 which represents a resolution of about 3.5 km. Initially, variables will be written as floats. Support for double precision will be added later if necessary. Similarly, indices will be written as ints initially. Though longs will ultimately be required, PNetCDF does not currently support them nor does netcdf generally support dimensions that are longs. The following netcdf definition is based on horizontal resolution of r=11. Variables in bold are new additions from original sample files. The exact mapping for corner and cell data is still up for debate. Two options are under consideration. A cell-centric view is show in blue. A unique corner/edge view is shown in purple. The following table summarizes the extra grid information and the additional size requirements for the alternative grid descriptions. The approximate extra size for the unique corner/edge view is due to the duplication of grid corner lat/lon. ------------------------ ------------------------ --------------------- [Variable]{.mark} [Formula]{.mark} [Size (floats)]{.mark} grid_edge_lat 3 \* (cells-2) .5 GB grid_edge_lon 3 \* (cells-2) .5 GB cell_corners 6 \* cells 1 GB cell_edges 6 \* cells 1 GB grid_edge_lat2 3 \* (cells-2) .5 GB grid_edge_lon2 3 \* (cells-2) .5 GB grid_corner_lat2 2 \* (cells-2) .3 GB grid_corner_lon2 2 \* (cells-2) .3 GB corner_cells 3\* 2 \* (cells-2) 1.0 GB edge_cells 2\* 3 \* (cells-2) 1.0 GB Total 3.0 GB /3.6 GB ------------------------ ------------------------ --------------------- Dimensions: > interfaces: 96\ > layers: 95 \# interfaces -1\ > cells: 41943042 > > corners: 83886080 \# total unique corners in the grid; 2 \* (cells > -- 2) > > edges: 125829120 \# total unique edges in the grid; 3 \* (cells - > 2) > > cellcorners: 6 \# max corners per cell > > celledges: 6 \# max edges per cell > > cellneighbors: 6 \# max neighbors per cell Variables: float interfaces(interfaces)\ interfaces:units = "Pa"; interfaces:positive = "down"; interfaces::axis = "Z"; float layers(layers)\ layers:units = "Pa"; > layers:positive = "down"; > > layers::axis = "Z"; > > float grid_center_lat(cells) > > grid_center_lat:long_name = \"Latitude of cell center\" ; > > grid_center_lat:units = \"radians\" ; > > grid_center_lat:standard_name = \"latitude\" ; > > grid_center_lat:bounds = \"grid_corner_lat\" ; > > float grid_corner_lat(cells,cellcorners) > > float grid_center_lon(cells) > > grid_center_lon:long_name = \"Longitude of cell center\" ; > > grid_center_lon:units = \"radians\" ; > > grid_center_lon:standard_name = \"longitude\" ; > > grid_center_lon:bounds = \"grid_corner_lon\" ; > > float grid_corner_lon(cells, cellcorners) > > float area(cells) > > grid_area:long_name = \"cell area\" ; > > grid_area:standard_name = \"area\" ; > > grid_area:units = \"square radians\" ; > > int cell_neighbors(cells, cellneighbors) > > cell_neighbors:long_name = \"Index of cell neighbors\" ; > > cell_neighbors:traverse = "counter-clockwise" ; > > float grid_edge_lat(cells, celledges) > > grid_edge_lat:long_name = \"Mid-point latitude of edge \" ; > > grid_edge_lat:standard_name = "latitude" ; > > grid_edge_lat:units = \"radians\" ; > > float grid_edge_lon(cells, celledges) > > grid_edge_lon:long_name = \"Mid-point longitude of edge\" ; > > grid_edge_lon:standard_name = "latitude" ; > > grid_edge_lon:units = \"radians\" ; > > int cell_corners(cells, cellcorners) > > cell_corners:traverse = "counter-clockwise" ; > > cell_corners:long_name = "mapping of unique corner indices for each > cell"; > > int cell_edges(cells, celledges) > > cell_edges::traverse = "counterclockwise" ; > > cell_edges:long_name = "mapping of unique edge indices for each cell"; > > float grid_corner_lat2(corners): > > grid_corner_lat2:long_name = "TBD"; > > float grid_corner_lon2(corners): > > grid_corner_lon2:long_name = ""TBD"; > > float grid_edge_lat2(edges): > > grid_edge_lat2:long_name = "TBD"; > > float grid_edge_lon2(edges): > > grid_edge_lon2:long_name = ""TBD"; > > int corner_cells(corners, 3): > > corner_cells:long_name = "list of cells per unique corner"; > > int edge_cells(edges, 2): > > edge_cells:long_name = "list of cells per unique edge"; > > int *grid_global_index(cells): \# To reconstruct full globe from > regional files IFF global files not used > > grid_global_index:long_name = "cells index into global cell array" > > Some example variables on this grid > > float centervar1(time, cells, layers): \# a cell centered variable > residing on a layer > > centervar1:coordinates = "grid_center_lat grid_center_lon"; > > float centervar2(time, cells, interfaces): \# a cell centered variable > residing on interface > > centervar2:coordinates = "grid_center_lat grid_center_lon"; > > float cornervar(time, corners, layers) > > cornervar:coordinates = "grid_corner_lat grid_corner_lon"; > > float edgevar(time, edges, layers) > > edgevar:coordinates = "grid_edge_lat grid_edge_lon"; > > \# global attributes:\ > :Conventions = \"CF-1.3\" ;\ > :institution = \"\<specifies where the original data was > produced\>\" ;\ > :title = \"\<a succint description of what is in the > dataset\>\" ;\ > :history = \"\<audit trail\>\" ;\ > :source = \"\<method of production of the original data\>\" ;\ > :references = \"\<published or web-based references that > describe the data or methods to produce it\>\" ;\ > :grid = \"geodesic\" ; > > :grid_cell_index_origin*: = \"0\" ; \# Identifies index of first > cell (i.e. origin)	en
converted_docs	120761	CONTENTS CHAPTER 3. PROCESSING APPLICATIONS FOR BENEFITS PARAGRAPH PAGE 3.01 \[General\] . 3-1 SUBCHAPTER I. \[CLAIMS (BASIC CONCEPTS)\] 3.02 \[Overview\]. 3-1 \[3.02A Claims (Definitions). 3-1 3.02B Claims (Formal Claim Requirement). 3-2 3.02C Claims (VA Responsibilities). 3-3 3.02D Claims (Time Limits). 3-3 3.02E Claims (Good Cause Extensions). 3-4\] SUBCHAPTER \[II\]. GENERAL PROCEDURES 3.03 Application Forms 3-\[6\] 3.04 Claims Processing Cycle 3-\[7\] \[3.04A Initial Actions in Claim Processing 3-\[8\] 3.05 Specific Issues in Original Application Processing 3-\[9\] 3.06 Verification of Service - Servicepersons. 3-\[10\] 3.07 Verification of Service - Veterans. 3-\[11\] 3.08 Statutory Bars to Benefits 3-\[11\] 3.09 Character of Discharge 3-\[11\] 3.10 Conditional Discharges 3-\[12\] SUBCHAPTER \[III\]. MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE ISSUES 3.11 General. 3-\[13\] 3.12 Full-Time Duty in the Reserve or National Guard. 3-\[13\] 3.13 Service Academy Preparatory Schools 3-\[13\] 3.14 Deductible Time 3-\[14\] SUBCHAPTER \[IV\]. INTERPRETING BIRLS DATA PARAGRAPH PAGE 3.15 Purpose. 3-\[15\] 3.16 Source of BIRLS Data 3-\[15\] 3.17 Character of Service Codes. 3-\[15\] 3.18 Separation Reason Codes. 3-\[16\] \[SUBCHAPTER V.\] TRAINING UNDER PRIOR BENEFIT PROGRAMS 3.19 General. 3-\[16\] 3.20 Identifying Prior Training Information. 3-\[16\] 3.21 Obtaining Prior Training Information When Not Readily Available. 3-\[18\] 3.22 Computations for Training Under Prior VA Education Benefit Programs. 3-\[18\] \[APPENDIX A. RULES OF EVIDENCE 3A.01 General . 3-A-2 3A.02 Reasonable Doubt Rule . 3-A-2 3A.03 Claim Not Well Grounded . 3-A-3 3A.04 Evidence Requested From Claimant . 3-A-3 3A.05 Evidence Requested From Other Sources . 3-A-5 3A.06 Primary And Secondary Evidence . 3-A-5 3A.07 Photocopies . 3-A-6 3A.08 New and Material Evidence . 3-A-6 3A.09 Reserved For Future Use . 3-A-7 3A.10 Affidavits or Certifications in Support of Claim . 3-A-7 3A.11 Reserved For Future Use . 3-A-7 3A.12 Reserved For Future Use . 3-A-7 3A.13 Translation of Foreign Documents . 3-A-7 3A.14 Requests for Evidence From Countries on the Treasury Department List . 3-A-7\] CHAPTER 3. PROCESSING APPLICATIONS FOR BENEFITS 3.01 \[GENERAL\] a. \[General.\] This chapter describes the application forms claimants must use to apply for the education benefits covered in this manual. It also provides procedures and reference material for certain issues that arise in application processing. To review procedures that are unique to a specific benefit, see chapter 3 of parts V, VI, VII, and VIII and chapters 11 and 12 of this part. \[b. M21-1 Procedures. This chapter also includes initial actions for claims processing in paragraph 3.04A. Appendix A includes general rules of evidence.\] SUBCHAPTER I. \[CLAIMS (BASIC CONCEPTS)\] 3.02 \[OVERVIEW\] Adjudication must observe certain basic rules that apply to claims and informal claims and the time limits for receipt of evidence. These rules are the same for all education benefits. \[ \] An individual must file a claim for educational assistance with VA. The claim must be in the form prescribed by the Secretary. (See par. 3.03 below for a listing of prescribed forms.). \[ \] \[3.02A CLAIMS (DEFINITIONS) Adjudication will use these definitions (paraphrased from 38 CFR 21.1029) when processing education claims. The regulations for the individual benefits are changed to refer to a common regulation (38 CFR 21.1029), which contains the principles for these benefits.\] a. Abandoned Claim. A claim is abandoned if: $1$ VA requests that the claimant furnish additional evidence in connection with a formal claim and the claimant $a$ Does not furnish that evidence within one year of the date of the request; and $b$ Does not show good cause why the evidence could not have been submitted within one year of the date of the request; OR $2$ VA requests that the claimant file a formal claim after receiving an informal claim and $a$ VA does not receive the formal claim within one year of the date of request; and $b$ The claimant does not show good cause why he or she could not have filed the formal claim in sufficient time for VA to have received it within one year of the date of the request. b. Date of Claim. The date of claim is the date on which a valid claim or application for educational assistance is filed with VA. $1$ The date of claim is the date that VA received an informal claim if an informal claim had been filed and VA receives a formal claim within one year of the date that VA requested it (or within such other time limit set by 38 CFR 21.1032). $2$ If a claim is abandoned, the date of claim is the date that a new formal claim is received or the date of an informal claim that meets the requirements of subparagraph (1) above. c. Formal Claim. A claim is a formal claim when the claimant (or his or her authorized representative) files the claim with VA, and\-- $1$ The claim is a claim for\-- $a$ Educational assistance; $b$ An increase in educational assistance; or $c$ An extension of the eligibility period for receiving educational assistance; and $2$ If there is a form (either paper or electronic) prescribed , the claim is filed on that form. d. Informal Claim. In general, VA will consider any communication from an individual, an authorized representative, or a Member of Congress to be an informal claim if it indicates an intent to apply for educational assistance. Upon receipt of an informal claim, if a formal claim has not been filed, VA will provide an application form to the claimant. If VA receives the application form in a timely manner, VA will consider the claim to have been filed on the date VA received the informal claim. $1$ When VA requests evidence in connection with a claim, and the claimant submits that evidence to VA after having abandoned the claim, the claimant's submission of the evidence is an informal claim. $2$ The act of enrolling in an approved school is not an informal claim. $3$ VA will not consider a communication received from a service organization, an attorney, or an agent to be an informal claim if a valid power of attorney, executed by the claimant, is not in effect at the time the communication is written. NOTE 1: An application filed with a U. S. embassy or consulate, if received earlier than in VA, will be considered as having been received in VA as of the earlier date. NOTE 2: If a claim is not filed on the prescribed form, it is an informal claim. For example, a telephone call from a claimant or a claimant\'s representative indicating an intent to apply for benefits is acceptable as an informal claim for date of claim purposes, but the issue will not be placed under pending-issue control. Send the proper application form to the claimant, and tell the claimant the completed form must be received in VA within one year to receive benefits from the date the telephone call was received. NOTE 3 Consider an unsigned application as an informal claim. Make a copy for the file and return the application to the claimant, advising him or her that the signed form must be returned within one year in order to receive benefits from the date the informal claim was originally received. Concurrently develop for any other necessary evidence, but do not establish a pending issue control until a signed application is received. 3.02B CLAIMS (FORMAL CLAIM REQUIRED) a. General. A claimant must file a formal claim to receive education benefits for pursuit of an education program. (38 CFR 21.1030). The formal claim must indicate the following: $1$ The proposed place of training; $2$ The school or training establishment; $3$ The objective of the education program; and $4$ Such other information as the Secretary may require. b. Additional Active Duty Requirement. A claimant who is on active duty must also show that he or she has consulted with his or her service education officer before filing a formal claim for educational assistance. 3.02C CLAIMS (VA RESPONSIBILITIES) a. General. VA has certain responsibilities when an individual files a claim for education benefits. (38 CFR 21.1031). b. Furnishing Forms. VA will send any necessary claim forms to an individual when he or she files an informal claim for education benefits. VA will also furnish appropriate instructions and, if appropriate, a description of any supporting evidence required to complete the informal claim. c. Requesting Additional Evidence. If the formal claim is incomplete or if VA requires additional evidence or information to make a determination on the claim, VA will notify the claimant of the evidence or information that VA needs to make such determination. This notification will include the one year time limit provision in paragraph 3.02Db. 3.02D CLAIMS (TIME LIMITS) The following time limits apply to both informal and formal claims for all education benefits. (38 CFR 21.1032). a. Failure to Furnish Form, Information, or Notice of Time Limit. VA\'s failure to give a claimant or potential claimant any form or information concerning the right to file a claim or to furnish notice of the time limit for the filing of a claim will not extend the time periods allowed for these actions. b. Notice of Time Limit for Filing Evidence. If a claimant's claim is incomplete, VA will notify the claimant of the evidence necessary to complete the claim. Unless payment of educational assistance is permitted by subparagraph e dealing with an extension for good cause, if the evidence is not received within one year from the date of such notification, VA will not pay educational assistance by reason of that claim. c. Time Limit for Filing A Claim for Extended Delimiting Date Due to Physical or Mental Disability (Chapters 30, 32 and 35). See paragraph 4.03. d. Time Limit for Filing A Claim for Extension of Eligibility Due to Suspension of Program (Chapter 35 Child). VA must receive a claim for an extended period of eligibility due to suspension of an eligible child\'s program of education by the later of the following dates. $1$ One year from the date on which the child's original period of eligibility ended; or $2$ One year from the date on which the condition that caused the suspension of the program of education ceased to exist. (See pt. VII, par. 1.04e for more on this issue.) e. Extension for Good Cause. See paragraph 3.02E. f. Computation of Time Limit $1$ In computing the time limit for any action required of a claimant or beneficiary, including the filing of claims or evidence requested by VA, exclude the first day of the specified period, and will include the last day (38 CFR 21.1032(f)). This rule is applicable in cases in which the time limit expires on a workday. When the time limit would expire on a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday, include the next succeeding workday in the computation. $2$ The first day of the specified period referred to in subparagraph (1) will be the date of the letter of notification to the claimant or beneficiary which establishes a time limit. 3.02E CLAIMS (GOOD CAUSE EXTENSIONS) a. Applicability to Education Programs. The good cause provisions apply to all education programs. b. Extension for Good Cause $1$ VA may extend for good cause a time limit within which a claimant or beneficiary is required to act to perfect a claim or challenge an adverse VA decision. VA may grant such an extension only when the following conditions are met: $a$ When a claimant or beneficiary requests an extension after expiration of a time limit, he or she must take the required action concurrently with or before the filing of that request; and $b$ The claimant or beneficiary must show good cause as to why he or she could not take the required action during the original time period and could not have taken the required action sooner. $2$ Claimants can appeal the denial of a time limit extension independently from other issues. c. Notification of Good Cause Extension. All development letters must advise the claimant that the one-year time limit can be extended for good cause. Include the following paragraph in [all development letters]{.underline}: Although you should respond to this letter within 30 days, you have one year from the date of this letter to submit the requested information. We may waive the one-year time limit if you can show good cause why you could not meet it. If you do not submit the requested evidence within the one-year time limit, benefits will be payable only from the date we actually receive the evidence. NOTE: Similar wording is already generated for letters sent by the PCGL (Personal Computer Generated Letter) system. d. Examples of Good Cause. Examples of good cause include, but are not limited to extended illness, death in the immediate family, and documented inability to obtain evidence from a third party. The claimant must explain how the circumstances prevented him or her from acting within the time limit. Exercise care that inability to act for an entire year is demonstrated. [NOTE]{.underline}: Although VA\'s failure to notify the claimant of the time limit does not extend the period allowed for submission of evidence, that failure can be considered good cause for late submission of the evidence if the claimant had no reasonable means of knowing that a time limit existed.\] e. Evidence Received Without Good Cause Extension Claim. If the claimant submits the evidence after the one year time limit but does not specifically request an extension of the one year time limit for good cause, apply the following procedures: $1$ If current action can be taken on the evidence, take that action. For example, if dependency evidence had been requested and is now received, and the veteran is currently in training and entitled to additional dependency allowance, adjust the veteran\'s award to include the dependents from the date that the evidence was received. If no current action can be taken on the evidence, annotate the claimant\'s folder to include that evidence in any future award actions. Notify the claimant of the action taken. In either case, include similar information to that in subparagraph (2) advising the claimant of his or her option to request an extension for good cause. $2$ If no current action can be taken on the evidence, advise the claimant with the following information: The evidence that we requested on [(date)]{.underline} was not received within one year. We can consider this evidence as being timely filed only if you can show good cause for why you could not respond in a timely manner. Basically, you should state why you could not send this evidence within the one year time limitation set by law. You should state specifically what happened and when it happened. Upon your request for good cause extension and information concerning why you could not send the evidence within the one‑year time limitation, we will consider extending the time limit by which the evidence should have been received. You should provide your request for an extension and your explanation within the next 30 days. It must be received within one year from the date of this letter to be considered for extension. f. Good Cause Extension Claims. Accept a claim for a good cause extension if the following elements are met: $1$ The requested evidence is received before or at the same time as the request for extension. $2$ The original time limit has expired. If a claimant requests an extension of time based on good cause before the original time limit has expired, advise the claimant that the claim for extension will be considered after the evidence is submitted. NOTE: The good cause explanation must always cover the entire period up to the date the requested evidence is received. g. Controls. Control claims for good cause extensions under the appropriate supplemental end product code for each program. When the issue is resolved, take the pending end product using the PCLR (Pending Issue Clear) command.\] h. Good Cause Statement and Evidence. Accept a claimant\'s statement as to the facts alleged concerning the good cause without additional development unless there is contradictory evidence of record. A claimant does not have to submit evidence substantiating the statement. i. Administrative Decision. Prepare an administrative decision on all claims for good cause extensions. The discussion section of the decision must address whether good cause has been shown and whether the length of the extension requested is reasonable. j. Extension Grants. If the extension is granted, the end of the time limit will be the date the evidence was received. The evidence will be considered as if it had been received within the original time limit. k. Extension Denials. If the extension is denied, advise the claimant of the reason(s) for the denial and the evidence considered in making the decision. A denial for extension is an issue that can be appealed. Include appeal rights in all denial notifications.\] \[SUBCHAPTER II\]. GENERAL PROCEDURES 3.03 APPLICATION FORMS \[NOTE: Photocopies or facsimile copies of original claims are acceptable. This is especially important in certain situations such as when a claimant is overseas.\] To make a formal claim for benefits, an individual must use the correct application form from the following list: a. VA Form 22-1990, Application for Education Benefits. This form is used by veterans and servicepersons applying under chapters 30 and 32 of title 38, U.S. Code and section 903 of Public Law 96‑342 and reservists applying under chapter \[1606\] of title 10, U.S. Code. VA Form 22-1990, modified as described in chapter 12, is also used by individuals to apply under the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986. It may also be used by dependents to apply for benefits in section 903 cases where transfer of entitlement is permitted. (See pt. VI, ch. 1.) NOTE: Persons applying for category II chapter 30 benefits need not file a new VA Form 22-1990 for chapter 30 if they previously filed under chapter 34. (See pt. V, par. 3.03a.) b. VA Form 22-1990t, Application and Enrollment Certification for Individualized Tutorial Assistance. This form is used by persons receiving benefits under chapters 30, 32, 35, \[1606\], and section 903 to apply for tutorial assistance. (See ch. 10 regarding tutorial assistance.) c. VA Form 22-1995, Request for Change of Place of Training. This form is used by persons under chapters 30, 32, \[1606\], and section 903 to apply for: $1$ A change of program or place of training; $2$ Reentry into training following a report of unsatisfactory attendance, progress, or conduct; or $3$ Benefits by a serviceperson who has reentered military service after receiving benefits as a veteran. \[NOTE 1: Claimants do not have to file a request for a change of school or change of program on any specific form. Claimants can use any means of communication (oral or written).\] NOTE \[2\]: Accept a completed VA Form 22-1990 in place of VA Form 22-1995. Accept a completed VA Form 22-5490 in place of VA Form 22-5495. d. VA Form \[24\]-5281, Application for Refund of Educational Contributions. This form is used by participants in the chapter 32 program to request a refund of money they have contributed. \[NOTE 1: For chapter 32 refund instructions, see circular 22-75-25, appendix A.\] NOTE \[2\]: This form is [not]{.underline} designed for requesting a chapter 32 refund in death cases. It is also [not]{.underline} designed for requesting the chapter 30 death benefit. See subparagraph i below regarding these benefits. e. VA Form 22-5490, Application for Survivors\' and Dependents\' Educational Assistance. This form is used by spouses and children to apply for benefits under chapter 35, title 38, U.S. Code. NOTE: General Counsel, in precedent opinion 12-92 dated May 28, 1992, held that a claim for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation and Pension may not be considered a claim for chapter 35 benefits. f. VA Form 22-5495, Request for Change of Program or Place of Training. This form is used by spouses and children under chapter 35 to apply for a change of program or place of training, or to apply for reentry into training following a report of unsatisfactory attendance, progress, or conduct. g. VA Form 22-8725, Application for Education Loan. This form is used by spouses and surviving spouses under chapter 35 to apply for VA education loans. (See pt. VII, ch. 8.) h. VA Form 22-8889, Application for Educational Assistance Test Program Benefits. This form is used by veterans, servicepersons, and eligible dependents to apply for benefits under section 901 of Public Law 96-342 and to apply for a change of program or place of training under that law. \[See ch. 11.\] i. VA Form 21-4138, Statement in Support of Claim. This form may be used to apply for the chapter 30 death benefit or for a refund of chapter 32 contributions in death cases. However, any written communication requesting these benefits will be accepted as a formal claim. (See pt. V, ch. 4, and pt. VI, ch. 7.) 3.04 CLAIMS PROCESSING CYCLE \[NOTE: If an education claim is received by a RO (Regional Office) that does not process education claims, that station should immediately forward it to the RPO that has jurisdiction over the claim.\] a. Initial Processing. Follow the procedures outlined in \[ \] chapter 1 for determining jurisdiction, folder establishment, \[pending issue control, workflow, delegation of authority and file number adjustment issues.\] b. Routing. \[Generally, attach all applications and accompanying documents to the claimant\'s folder and route it to the Authorization activity if the initial screening (see par. 1.27) determines that the item must be processed using the claimant\'s folder. See paragraph 1.30 for establishing a temporary folder when the RO cannot locate the folder within 5 days. For stations using TIMS (The Imaging Management System), TIMS automatically routes the claim, and has the necessary electronic folder available.\] [EXCEPTION:]{.underline} Route VA Form \[24-5281\] to the Finance activity of the station receiving the form. \[ \] c. Initial \[Actions\]. \[See paragraph 3.04A.\] d. Pamphlet Procedures. Adjudication will send each person filing an original claim a pamphlet explaining the benefit sought at the time the original claim is established unless the application form shows that the claimant has already received a pamphlet. This procedure will result in some duplicate pamphlets being received. \[A pamphlet is available for each education benefit. (See pt. I, par. 5.10.)\] e. Type of Benefit. Adjudication must either allow or deny each benefit claimed on an application. In addition, Adjudication should consider the possibility of eligibility to benefits not checked if this is to the advantage of the claimant. Claimants cannot always be expected to correctly identify or specify the benefit they are seeking. Remember that \[BDN\] will permit the processing of a denial of one benefit and not alert the adjudicator to the claimant\'s potential eligibility to one of the other benefits. \[NOTE 1: If a claimant applies for a benefit, and is also eligible for a greater benefit, VA has an obligation to notify the claimant of this eligibility. For example, notify a claimant if he or she applies for chapter 1606 benefits and also qualifies for chapter 30 benefits.\] NOTE \[2\]: If a veteran files a claim for multiple benefits or indicates \"unknown\" or \"unsure\" or does not check any benefit block and is not entitled to any benefit, RPOs must deny each benefit to which the veteran is not entitled. Disallow the claim in BDN to establish a disallowed master record. Suppress the BDN generated letter and send the claimant a dictated letter explaining why he or she is not eligible for each benefit denied. f. Disposition of Claims. If a formal claim is allowed, either a Certificate of Eligibility must be issued or an award must be authorized. See chapter 9 for procedures for issuing Certificates of Eligibility. For award processing, see part IV and chapter 4 of parts V, VI, VII, and VIII, depending on the benefit. For disallowance procedures, see chapter 9 and chapter 4 of parts V, VI, VII, and VIII. g. Recording End Products. Adjudication must record an end product only after final action is taken on all pending issues on the claim. M22-3, Manpower Control and Utilization Education Activities in Adjudication and Veterans Services Divisions, lists the end products for education claims processing. \[3.04A INITIAL ACTIONS IN CLAIM PROCESSING NOTE: This paragraph is based on M21-1, part III, chapter 2, subchapter I. a\. Assistance to Claimants. Extend all reasonable assistance to claimants in meeting the evidentiary requirements necessary to establish their claims under the applicable laws and regulations. Give them every opportunity to establish entitlement to the benefits sought, to include complete procedural and appellate rights. Provide the claimants complete information and advice in words the average person can easily understand. Thoroughly develop information from all sources before making decisions affecting entitlement. b\. Date-of-Receipt Stamp. All claims, applications and associated evidence should be date stamped on receipt in the RO mailroom. $1$ Do not affix stamps directly on original documents which are to be returned such as discharge certificates, court records and papers, marriage, birth and death certificates, divorce decrees and similar records. Instead, stamp the date of receipt on a paper tag and fasten it to the original document by paperclip. $2$ Do not routinely require the use of a date stamp in Adjudication, but, if an unstamped document is received in Adjudication, the first person who reviews the claim should date stamp it. $3$ The Adjudication Officer or designee, not below the grade of unit chief, may require the use of the receipt stamp to document unusual delays in the receipt of documents in the division. c\. Initial Screening. Review all applications, claims, correspondence and evidence immediately to determine if: $1$ The claim, because of its nature or facts, warrants expedited action; $2$ A prima facie claim is established which can be immediately referred to the rating activity; $3$ A claim is incomplete and requires further development; $4$ The claim warrants immediate denial. d\. Signature of Claimant $1$ Unsigned Application. See paragraph 3.02Ad, Note 3 $2$ Signature by Mark. Forms with signatures by mark or thumbprint must be witnessed by two persons who give their address. If the mark is witnessed by a VA employee, notary public or other person having the authority to administer oaths for general purposes, only that certification is required. $3$ Signature by Pencil. A penciled signature is acceptable. e\. Defective or Incomplete Application Forms. If an application is properly signed but is so incomplete that development for the specific information is not feasible, make a copy of the application and retain it as the file copy. Return the original application to the claimant with a request to complete the indicated items checked in red. If it appears from the application that there may be additional evidence that could be relevant to the claim, ask the claimant to submit this additional evidence with the application. For example, if the claimant indicates medical treatment for a disability, request him or her to submit the treatment records. Establish a 30-day Benefits Delivery Network (BDN) control. f\. Claims Filed and Lost. If VA loses a claim, the employee having knowledge of the facts will prepare a statement for the file. The employee and his or her supervisor will sign the statement. Base the effective date of the duplicate claim on the date of receipt of the lost claim as established by the statement.\] 3.05 SPECIFIC ISSUES IN ORIGINAL APPLICATION PROCESSING For issues that must be considered for specific benefit programs, see chapter 3 of parts V, VI, VII, or VIII, as applicable, or chapters 11 or 12 of this part (for section 901 and the Antiterrorism Act). Adjudication must consider the following issues when reviewing any original application: a. Verification of Service $1$ [Servicepersons]{.underline}. See paragraph 3.06. $2$ [Veterans]{.underline}. See paragraph 3.07. $3$ [Reservists]{.underline}. For proof of Selected Reserve service in chapter \[1606\] cases, see part VIII, chapter 3. For proof of Selected Reserve service in chapter 30 cases, when such service affects chapter 30 eligibility, see part V, chapter 3. b. Determining Active Duty. Determining what is or is not \"active duty\" can be a complex issue. See subchapter \[III\] for clarification on various situations. c. Requests for Additional Service Data. \[For some issues, adjudicators may use the service department contact points published periodically in an RPO letter from the Director of the Education Service. RPOs can access this information by searching ARMS (Automated Reference Materials System) for \"contact points\". Sometimes service data is necessary to request clarification of the service data of record with VA in addition to what the claimant submits and to what is available on \[BDN\] and through the \[contact points\]. To request this necessary service data, prepare VA Form 21‑3101, Request for Information. \[The previous means of requesting this service data was using BDN to send the form to the appropriate service branch. Beginning on December 14, 1998, stations will use PIES (Personnel Information Exchange System) to request this information.\] d. Application by Servicepersons for Training After Discharge. Applications received from servicepersons which indicate that the person\'s program of education will not begin until after his or her release from active duty require additional review. $1$ Review the application to determine if, in addition to the DD Form 214, further information, evidence, or forms are needed before benefits may be authorized. $2$ Send the claimant a dictated letter explaining that further action must be deferred pending receipt of additional information. The letter should specify what information is being requested and that the claimant should submit this information, if he or she has it or can obtain it. e. Application by Servicepersons on Terminal Leave. It is common for servicepersons to apply for benefits for a term which begins a few days or weeks before discharge from active duty. These servicepersons begin school while they are in a terminal leave status. In such cases, it is [not]{.underline} necessary to obtain the \[education officer\'s signature which is\] normally required as described in paragraph 3.06. Verification of active service as described in paragraph 3.06 is sufficient to establish eligibility. NOTE: Pay terminal leave cases from the first day of the term in which the individual attends school. \[ \] For example, a serviceperson is attending school from January 3, 1998 until May 22, 1998. She receives an honorable discharge on February 25, 1998. Pay the individual as a serviceperson receiving tuition and fees from January 3, 1998 until February 24, 1998. Pay the individual as a veteran from February 25, 1998 until May 22, 1998. f. Application by Veterans Who Received Benefits on Active Duty. If a veteran \[ \] previously filed an application as a serviceperson, a separate formal application is not required upon discharge. However, Adjudication will request whatever information may be necessary to determine the person\'s eligibility as a veteran. g. Eligibility Issues. To determine eligibility for a specific benefit, see the appropriate part of this manual. h. Program Approval Issues. See chapters 6 and 7. i. Counseling. See chapter 5 when the claimant requests counseling or counseling is required by law. $1$ [Counseling Requested but Not Required]{.underline}. A claimant may request counseling in a variety of ways as described in chapter 5. Do [not]{.underline} delay normal processing of the claim (i.e., issuing a Certificate of Eligibility or awarding benefits). Process the claim and then refer the case to the VR&C (Vocational Rehabilitation and Counseling) Division. $2$ [Counseling Required]{.underline}. In a few situations as described in chapter 5, counseling is required by law. Once eligibility to benefits is established in such cases, refer the case for counseling following the procedures in chapter 5. If the VR&C Division approves entrance or reentrance into training, only then will Adjudication issue a Certificate of Eligibility or award benefits. j. Review of Prior Training Under Other Laws. See subchapter IV. k. Extension of Delimiting Date. If an individual claims an extension of his or her original delimiting period, see chapter 4. 3.06 VERIFICATION OF SERVICE - SERVICEPERSONS a. \[Verification of Service\]. To verify service, take the following actions: $1$ The 30D (Chapter 30 DOD Data Record) screen should have sufficient information to verify service for a chapter 30 serviceperson. (See pt. V, par. 3.03b.) In the event that the 30D screen does not have sufficient information to verify service, the RPO should send VA Form 22-0569, Report of Contact With DOD, to the appropriate service department contact point. (See pt. V, par 8.11 for procedures on contacting the service department contact points) $2$ The M26 CH32/903 \[Participant Account Summary\] screen may have sufficient information to verify service for a chapter 32 or section 903 serviceperson. (See pt. II, par. 3.10.) In the event that the M26 screen does not have sufficient information to verify service, the RPO should send VA Form 22-0569 to the appropriate service department contact point. (The chapter 32 service coordinators are the same as the chapter 30 coordinators. See pt. V, par 8.11 for instructions on sending VA Form 22‑0569.) \[NOTE: The commanding officer\'s certification was a procedural requirement to assist in processing a serviceperson\'s application for education benefits and is not available on VA Form 22-1990, dated March, 1997. This signature was not required by law or regulation.\] b. Education Officer\'s Certification. Regulations require that a serviceperson under chapters 30, 32, and section 903 consult with his or her Education Officer before applying for educational assistance (38 CFR 21.5030(c) and 21.7030(a)(2)). Therefore, the signature of the education officer is required on each VA Form 22-1990 or VA Form 22‑1995 completed by a serviceperson. The Education Officer\'s signature is not a verification of service. 3.07 VERIFICATION OF SERVICE - VETERANS NOTE: The rules given below do [not]{.underline} apply in chapter 30 cases. For chapter 30, see part V, \[paragraph 3.03\]. a. Acceptable Documentation. See M21-1, part IV, paragraph 10.04b. b. BIRLS Data as Alternative Documentation. If evidence as described in subparagraph a is not received in support of an original claim by a veteran, review the BIRLS (Beneficiary Identification and Records Locator Subsystem) record. (See subch. III for interpretation of BIRLS data.) $1$ If BIRLS shows the CHARACTER OF SVC (Character of Service) is HON (Honorable), the SEP REASON CODE (Separation Reason Code) is SAT (Satisfactory), [and]{.underline} either the VERIFIED indicator has a \"Y\" or the VADS (Veterans Assistance Discharge System) indicator has a \"Y\", the service shown in BIRLS is considered as verified service. $2$ If BIRLS contains service dates but shows the SEP REASON CODE as UNK (Unknown) or blank, further development is not required if a photocopy (may be uncertified) of the veteran\'s DD Form 214 shows a satisfactory reason for separation. $3$ If the requirements of subparagraphs (1) and (2) above are not met, request additional verification of service per paragraph 3.05c as well as from the claimant. In addition, if CHARACTER OF SVC shows an entry other than HON or UHC (Under Honorable Conditions), request separation records from the service department to determine the facts and circumstances which led to the claimant\'s discharge. (See par. 3.09.) \[NOTE: The \"VADS\" indicator on the VID screen may contain a \"D\". This is not an indicator that service is verified, but only that the information came from Defense Management Data Center processing.\] c. Disallowance. If a claimant has submitted an alternative form of evidence of service which is not acceptable (e.g., an uncertified copy of a DD Form 214) [and]{.underline} his or her military service cannot be verified, send the claimant a dictated letter with an explanation of the attempts to verify service. If a previous letter did not adequately explain acceptable forms of evidence, include this information in this letter. A notice of appeal and procedural rights will be enclosed. 3.08 STATUTORY BARS TO BENEFITS There are certain statutory bars that apply to all VA benefits regardless of the character of discharge. See M21-1, part IV, paragraph 11.01 \[and 38 CFR 3.12c. A summary of these statutory bars follows: discharge of a conscientious objector who refused to perform military duties, discharge by reason of the sentence of a General Court Martial, resignation of an officer for the good of the service and desertion, and other than honorable discharge for AWOL exceeding 180 days unless there were compelling circumstances. Authorization must make an administrative decision on any statutory bar.\] 3.09 CHARACTER OF DISCHARGE \[a. Chapter 32 and Section 903.\] For chapter 32 (and section 903), and chapter 35 (if the claimant was on active duty), the claimant\'s discharge must be \"under conditions other than dishonorable.\" Follow the procedures in M21‑1, part IV, paragraph 11.01, if the claimant\'s discharge is not specifically \"honorable\" or \"under honorable conditions.\" \[b. Chapter 30.\] For chapter 30, only discharges that are specifically \"honorable\" are acceptable; therefore, the administrative decision described in paragraph 11.01 is never required in chapter 30 cases. \[However, conditional discharges may be an issue in chapter 30. See part V, paragraph 1.17e.\] \[c. Section 901.\] For section 901, see chapter 11. 3.10 CONDITIONAL DISCHARGES The rules governing conditional discharges from active service apply in all benefit determinations based on active service [except]{.underline} those under chapter 30. Under chapter 30, the claimant must receive an honorable discharge from the qualifying period of service. Therefore, the procedure in this paragraph does not apply. \[However, conditional discharges may be an issue in chapter 30. See part V, paragraph 1.17e.\] a. General. Before the change to 38 U.S.C. 101(18) by Public Law 95-126, a veteran who reenlisted before completing a period of service (i.e., before he or she was eligible for complete separation) could lose all entitlement to VA benefits if his or her subsequent discharge was under dishonorable or \"other than honorable\" conditions. The current definition of the term \"discharge or release\" in section 101(18) ensures eligibility to such a veteran provided he or she satisfactorily completed the period of active service for which he or she was obligated at the time of entry or reentry. b. Initial Procedure. When the application, service records, or DD Form 214 of a veteran who was released under dishonorable or \"other than honorable\" conditions shows a sufficiently long period of active service, \[use PIES to\] send a VA Form 21‑3101 to the appropriate service department with the following statement: \"Was the veteran eligible for complete separation prior to XX-XX-XX (date of dishonorable or \'other than honorable discharge\')? If not, state date(s) when this individual completed the period(s) of active service for which he or she was obligated at the time(s) of induction or reenlistment(s).\" \[Use PIES to also request service records, including any Board of Officer or court‑martial proceedings, at the same time.\] c. Character of Discharge Determination $1$ If development discloses a prior period of honorable service which would qualify the claimant for the benefit requested (i.e., the veteran received a complete discharge at some time in the past), the claim may be allowed on that basis. However, in such cases, a character of discharge determination will always be made to ensure the most favorable delimiting date possible. $2$ If it is determined that the last discharge or release was under dishonorable conditions for VA purposes, the character of discharge determination will discuss the issue of \"conditional\" discharge(s). Consideration will be given to whether the veteran rendered faithful and meritorious service throughout the period of active duty for which he or she was obligated at time of induction or enlistment. When the veteran has had several enlistments, the period to be considered will begin with the initial enlistment or induction and end with the date given by the service department as the completion date for the last full enlistment. EXAMPLE: ---------------------------- ----------------- ------------------------- Entered on Term of Scheduled Discharge Duty/Reenlistment Date Enlistment Date 9-16-80 2 years 9-15-82 4-01-82 4 years 3-31-86 10-01-85 4 years 9-30-89 ---------------------------- ----------------- ------------------------- A veteran, who had never been eligible for complete separation, was discharged June 17, 1988, with an \"other than honorable\" discharge. He is applying for chapter 32 benefits. He made all of his chapter 32 contributions before March 31, 1986. In its review, Authorization determined that the veteran was absent without leave from August 6, 1987, to April 23, 1988 (more than 180 consecutive days) without compelling reasons. If, before March 31, 1986, the veteran served faithfully and meritoriously, the character of discharge determination would conclude that although the 180-day bar under 38 CFR 3.12(c) applied to the discharge on June 17, 1988, the veteran had honest, faithful, and meritorious service from September 16, 1980, through March 31, 1986, and eligibility for VA purposes is established for that period. \[SUBCHAPTER III.\] MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE ISSUES 3.11 GENERAL The terms \"active duty,\" \"ACDUTRA\" (Active Duty for Training), and \"Selected Reserve\" have very specific meanings given in part I, chapter 2. The term \"active duty\" has \[its own definition for chapter 30. See part V, paragraph 1.02a\]. The paragraphs which follow clarify the effect of specific types of service. NOTE: This subchapter does not apply to chapter \[1606\] since chapter \[1606\] is a program under title 10 U.S.C. 3.12 FULL-TIME DUTY IN THE RESERVE OR NATIONAL GUARD In some instances full‑time duty in the Reserve or National Guard may be considered active duty under title 38. \[For chapter 30, see part V, paragraphs 1.02a and 1.17d.\] a. Reserve Service. See M21-1, part IV, paragraph 10.02. b. National Guard Service. See M21-1, part IV, paragraph 10.03. \[ \] 3.13 SERVICE ACADEMY PREPARATORY SCHOOLS a. Preparatory Schools. The Army, Navy, and Air Force provide preparatory school training for qualified personnel who are candidates for appointment from the enlisted ranks to one of the service academies. This training is provided at the U.S. Military Academy Preparatory School, the U.S. Naval Academy Preparatory School, and the U.S. Air Force Academy Preparatory School. \[NOTE: In 1994, the General Counsel affirmed the previous decision that characterizations of an individual\'s service at the U. S. Air Force Academy Preparatory School for purposes of entitlement to veterans\' benefits depends upon the status in which the individual enters this school. Service by an individual attending this school as a reservist called to active duty for the sole purpose of attending this school constitutes \"active duty for training\" and not active duty. Service by an enlisted person on active duty who is reassigned to this school without a release from active duty constitutes a continuation of that enlisted person\'s active duty.\] b. Not Same as Service Academy. Chapter 30, 32, 34, and section 903 regulations require that service as a cadet or midshipman at a service academy must be excluded from computation of periods of active duty. (See 38 CFR 21.7020(b)(1)(ii)(B) for chapter 30 and comparable regulations for the other education benefits.) The General Counsel has ruled that assignment to a preparatory school is not equivalent to assignment to a service academy because a preparatory school has no connection with an academy. Service at an Army, Navy, or Air Force preparatory school [is]{.underline} considered active duty . NOTE: See part V, chapter 1, for the effect of \[graduating from a\] service academy on chapter 30 eligibility. 3.14 DEDUCTIBLE TIME Two types of military service (not-on-duty time and non-creditable time) are not included as active duty for education benefit purposes. For veteran-applicants, this information can be found on DD Form 214 or VA Form 21‑3101. \[ \] a. Not-on-Duty Time. Not-on-duty time does not count as active duty under chapters 30, 32, 34, and sections 901 and 903. Periods of service which constitute not-on-duty time are defined by 38 CFR 3.15 and include: $1$ Time lost on absence without leave (without pay). $2$ Time lost while under arrest (without acquittal). $3$ \[In desertion.\] \[(4)\] Time lost while undergoing a sentence of court-martial. b. Non-creditable Service. Non-creditable service does not count as active duty under chapters 30, 32, 34, and sections 901 and 903. \[(See 38 CFR 21.7020(b)(1)(ii)\] for chapter 30. Periods of non-creditable service are: $1$ Service as a cadet or midshipman at one of the service academies. However, service at the Army, Navy, or Air Force Preparatory School is creditable service as stated in paragraph 3.13 above. \[ \] $2$ Periods while assigned by the service department to a civilian school for a course substantially the same as established courses offered to civilians. The term \"civilian school\" means any public or private school providing adult education, including colleges or universities, and schools providing business, trade, vocational, or technical training. It is not material that there were curricular deviations incident to the particular student\'s military assignments, or that a regular academic degree or certificate was not issued, as long as the course was one within the regularly prescribed program or curriculum of the school. A DD Form 214 \[or VA Form 22-1990\] will normally provide the necessary information. NOTE: See part V, chapter 1, for the effect that training at a \"civilian school\" has on chapter 30 eligibility. $3$ Service under the provisions of section \[12103 (formerly section 511(d)\] of title 10 pursuant to an enlistment in the Army National Guard or the Air National Guard, or as a Reserve for service in the Army Reserve, Naval Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, or Coast Guard Reserve. $4$ Periods of military service in an excess leave status. NOTE 1: A serviceperson attending school in an excess leave status, if otherwise eligible, may be paid at the rates payable to veterans including additional allowance for dependents. Excess leave is leave without pay and is granted only by the service department under emergency or unusual circumstances. The service department places the individual in a \"leave without pay\" status; the serviceperson pays the tuition and fees and agrees to extend the length of service on active duty. Education benefits may be authorized for the full period of enrollment certified by the school even though there may be a brief period of active duty during a holiday or during any other day the school was not in session which did not interrupt the continuity of pursuit of the course. NOTE 2: There is an important distinction in service department programs in which the serviceperson attends a civilian school while on excess leave without pay, and other programs in which the serviceperson attends a civilian school while on a temporary \"duty assignment with full pay and allowances.\" In the latter instance, the student is considered to be on active duty and should be paid education benefits at the rates payable to servicepersons \[unless the military is paying for the training\]. \[SUBCHAPTER IV.\] INTERPRETING BIRLS DATA 3.15 PURPOSE Data on the BIRLS VID (Veterans Identification) screen can sometimes be used as verification of service as noted in paragraph 3.07b. This subchapter provides information about BIRLS for ready reference. The procedures for establishing and updating BIRLS records are found in M21-1, part II, chapter 6. 3.16 SOURCE OF BIRLS DATA BIRLS data is entered either by RO personnel or from VADS. If data was entered from VADS, the VADS indicator on the VID screen will show a \"Y\". BIRLS data entered from VADS may not always show all periods of service or may indicate breaks in service when none actually exist. If all periods of service shown on the VID screen have been verified by acceptable documentary evidence, the VERIFIED indicator will show a \"Y.\" 3.17 CHARACTER OF SERVICE CODES BIRLS can display the character of service codes shown below: BIRLS CHARACTER OF SERVICE CODES ----------------- ----------------------------------------------------- BIRLS ENTRY DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE (DD214) HON [Hon]{.underline}orable UHC General ([U]{.underline}nder [H]{.underline}onorable [C]{.underline}onditions; [Not]{.underline} acceptable for chapter 30) OTH [O]{.underline}ther [T]{.underline}han [H]{.underline}onorable (May also be shown on DD 214 as Unsuitable or Bad Conduct) DIS [Dis]{.underline}honorable Discharge UNK [Unk]{.underline}nown HVA [H]{.underline}onorable for [VA]{.underline} purposes (not shown on DD 214); entered only after administrative decision made per M21-1, part IV, paragraph 11.01c. ([Will not entitle veteran to ch. 30)]{.underline} DVA [D]{.underline}ishonorable for [VA]{.underline} purposes (not shown on DD 214); entered only after administrative decision made per M21-1, part IV, paragraph 11.01c. ----------------- ----------------------------------------------------- 3.18 SEPARATION REASON CODES The possible separation reason codes are: a. DEV. (Development) VA cannot accept service as verified based only on a VADS record if DEV is coded as the separation reason. Development is always required. b. SAT. (Satisfactory) NOTE: \[\"SAT\"\] does [not]{.underline} mean that the separation reason is an acceptable early separation reason in the chapter 30 program. c. ADM. (Administrative Decision) Used when Character of Service is HVA or DVA. d. UNK. (Unknown). \[SUBCHAPTER V.\] TRAINING UNDER PRIOR BENEFIT PROGRAMS 3.19 GENERAL \[a. Basic Prior Training Determination. A station must first\] determine the amount of prior training under other programs in all cases where prior training is indicated. No person may receive benefits exceeding a total of 48 months by combining benefits under two or more benefit programs. Development is necessary [before]{.underline} initially paying current benefits when the amount of prior training and the current award could exceed 48 months. \[b. Prior Training Steps. These general steps are to assist stations in identifying prior credit information and determining the amount of any prior training that a claimant may have taken. $1$ Step 1. Review the claimant\'s application. $2$ Step 2. Determine if the claimant has other folders and where those folders are located. $3$ Step 3. Review BDN for prior training under current laws. $4$ Step 4. Request transfer of a claimant\'s other folder(s) (only if the BDN review does not show the amount of prior training) and review the paper documentation in the folder(s). $5$ Step 5. Determine all prior training.\] 3.20 IDENTIFYING PRIOR TRAINING INFORMATION Obtain information concerning possible training under a prior education program from several sources. The following list is not all inclusive: a. Review the Claimant\'s Application. A claimant may give prior training information on his or application. $1$ [Review for Chapter 35]{.underline} \[(a) [DEA Claimant.]{.underline}\] If a claimant files VA Form 22-5490 and shows that he or she previously applied for Dependents\' Educational Assistance (i.e., chapter 35), he or she should indicate the parent\'s name and file number. \[b. [Veteran Claimant.\]]{.underline} If a claimant files VA Form 22-1990 and shows that he or she previously applied for Survivor\'s Educational Assistance (i.e., chapter 35), the claimant should indicate the parent\'s name and file number. Review the chapter 35 record for the indicated file number to determine prior training. If the claimant\'s application indicates the parent\'s name but does not provide the file number, review BIRLS to determine the number. Use the BINQ (BIRLS Inquiry) command with the parent\'s name. NOTE: VA Form 22-5490 and VA Form 22-1990 have different terminology for the Dependents\' Educational Assistance program. $2$ [Review for Other Benefits]{.underline}. If a claimant\'s application shows he or she previously applied for one of the other education benefits, review the \[BDN\] master record for that benefit to determine prior training. b. Review the Claimant\'s BIRLS Record \[(1) Even if a claimant does not state prior training information on his or her application, check the BIRLS LOC screen to see if additional folders exist under which the claimant may have received benefits. $2$ If this BIRLS review shows that additional folder(s) exists, print the LOC screen or write down where those folders are located. $a$ Review the corresponding BDN master record. If there is no BDN record, attempt to recall the additional folder(s). $b$ If this review shows that the folder(s) have been transferred to a different RO, request a temporary transfer of the folder. $c$ If the BIRLS LOC screen shows a \"Y\" in the DESTROYED INDICATOR field or a chapter 35 DEA BIRLS BID (Beneficiary Identification Data) screen shows a \"Y\" in a similar field entitled DEA FOLDER IS DESTROYED, assume that these folders have been destroyed and apply the procedures in paragraph 3.21. NOTE: If the application shows prior training under the World War II or Korean Conflict education laws, see paragraph 3.21a. $c$ If BIRLS shows that the folder(s) have been retired or relocated, assume that these folders have been destroyed and apply the procedures in paragraph 3.21. (Folders are usually initially retired to an FRC (Federal Records Center). The FRC either destroys the folder or transfers it to the RMC (Records Management Center) locate at St. Louis, MO after a time specified in the appropriate VA records disposal authority.) NOTE: For information on BIRLS, see M21-1, part II, chapter 6.\] c. \[Determine all Prior Training.\] To obtain prior training information, take the following actions: review the appropriate \[BDN\] records (see pt. II, chs. 3 through 5 for information concerning the M21 Education Master Record screen and the 351 Chapter 106 Histories screen). If there is any indication that the claimant is (or was) entitled to chapter 31 benefits, review the chapter 31 M33 CH31 Entitlement/Diagnostic screen. 3.21 OBTAINING PRIOR TRAINING INFORMATION WHEN NOT READILY AVAILABLE a. Folder Destroyed. For applications that show prior training under Public Law 78-346)\[(World War II)\], Public Law 78-16 \[World War II)\], or Public Law 82-550 \[(Korean Conflict), assume the education or chapter 31 folder under these laws as having been destroyed under VA disposal authority. Also assume that all alternate types of prior training information. \[Microfilm records of the WWII or Korean War VR&E (Vocational Rehabilitation and Education) award account cards (VA Form 4-1391, Record of Payment and Training Status) or the payee account cards (punched cards) have been destroyed under VA disposal authority. Send the claimant a form or dictated letter requesting the information shown in subparagraph b.\] \[NOTE: If the outside of the claims folder has a stamped impression showing establishment of an R&E folder and that stamped impression is obliterated, this means that the veteran applied for benefits but did not enter training.\] b. \[No Record of Prior Training. When there are no available records of the applicant\'s training under prior VA laws or potential information has been destroyed under VA disposal authority\], use information furnished by the claimant to compute the prior training time. Original applications contain a section pertaining to prior VA training. When an application indicates training under other VA programs and no VA records can be obtained, \[request the following information from the claimant: $1$ Name of program or law under which benefits were paid; $2$ Name of the school or training establishment where training was pursued; $3$ Beginning and ending dates for each period of training; and $4$ Training times or monthly rates for each period of training.\] 3.22 COMPUTATIONS FOR TRAINING UNDER PRIOR VA BENEFIT PROGRAMS a. Prior VA Training Computations $1$ [Chapters 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, \[1606\] and Sections 901 and 903]{.underline}. In most cases, determine the prior training by \[BDN\] screens. If manual computations are necessary, see part IV, paragraphs 14.05 and 14.06. $2$ \[[Prior Public Laws]{.underline}. If a station encounters a case involving prior training for the World War II or Korean Conflict education laws, review M22-2, Part II, paragraph 5.05. If the station cannot find their copy of this manual, they should send E-mail to VAVBAWAS/CO/224B, giving appropriate details and requesting that Education Service provide a copy of this paragraph.\] b. Procedures. After obtaining all available records of the applicant\'s training under prior VA laws, determine the total amount of entitlement used. Except for chapter 32, enter this total amount of entitlement into \[BDN\] as prior training. \[BDN determines the current entitlement. For benefit specific procedures, see the following\]: $1$ Chapter 30. See part V, paragraph 2.07c. $2$ Chapter 32. See part VI, paragraph 3.06. $3$ Chapter 35. See part VII, paragraph 2.02. $4$ Chapter \[1606\]. See part VIII, paragraph 4.04. \[NOTE: For Out-of-System awards, see part IV, paragraph 12.10b.\] \[CONTENTS RULES OF EVIDENCE This appendix provides general rules of evidence pertaining to education claims. These procedures have been extracted from M21-1, part III, chapter 1 but are updated for education claims. 3A.01 GENERAL a\. Decisions on VA benefit eligibility and entitlement are based on the evidence of record. Evidence consists of documents, records, testimonials and information in any other form provided by, or obtained for, a claimant. The Department must fulfill its duty to assist by obtaining all necessary evidence before making a decision on a claim. VA is obligated to assist a claimant in developing all pertinent facts concerning a well-grounded claim and render a decision granting every benefit that is supported by law. VA is also obligated to protect the interests of the Government. b\. Before requesting evidence, identify all issues, determine what additional evidence is needed, identify the best sources for the evidence and initiate development. Request evidence from all sources simultaneously, but ensure the evidence is needed before requesting it. c\. Keep the claimant informed of the reason(s) for any excessive delay in the adjudication of his or her claim. Use any appropriate form of communication (i.e. telephone, letter or facsimile). d\. While the burden of proof ultimately rests with the claimant, VA will make reasonable efforts to help the claimant obtain any evidence that he or she specifically identifies, or any evidence which is reasonably suggested to exist which might enable the claimant to substantiate his or her claim. e\. The claimant\'s certified statement is usually sufficient evidence to establish a point in issue. In some cases more is required. f\. The claimant\'s statements will be accepted as true in the absence of contradictory evidence. It is appropriate to request further evidence if there is a substantial reason to challenge a claimant\'s statement, i.e., something beyond mere suspicion or doubt. g\. See 38 CFR 3.200 through 3.215 for VA regulations governing evidence requirements. 3A.02 REASONABLE DOUBT RULE a\. The reasonable doubt rule is found at 38 CFR 3.102. Every person involved in the adjudication of claims must be thoroughly familiar with this regulation. b\. The benefit of the doubt belongs to the claimant. If there is a balance of evidence for and against the claim, VA must allow the claim. In [Gilbert]{.underline} v [Derwinski]{.underline}, No 89-53, the CAVC (Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims) likened the reasonable doubt rule to a rule \"deeply embedded in sand lot baseball folklore that the \'tie goes to the runner.\' If the ball clearly beats the runner, he is out and the rule has no application. If the runner clearly beats the ball, he is safe and again, the rule has no application. If, however the play is close, then the runner is called safe by operation of the rule that \'the tie goes to the runner\'.\" After obtaining all relevant evidence, the adjudicator must evaluate the evidence and determine if the evidence in favor of the position held by the claimant is of greater weight than the evidence to the contrary. If the evidence supports the position of the claimant, the claim is allowed. If the evidence does not support the claimant, the claim is disallowed. If the evidence is approximately balanced, resolve doubt in favor of the claimant. *NOTE: The benefit of the doubt rule does not apply when the issue is a question of status. (See M21-1, part III, chapter 6 and part IV, chapter 10. (Status generally refers to claims that have no basis in law.)* 3A.03 CLAIM NOT WELL GROUNDED a\. In [Grottveit v. Brown]{.underline}, 5 Vet. App. 91 (1993), the CAVC defined a well-grounded claim as a plausible claim, meritorious on its own or capable of substantiation. It need not be conclusive, only possible. VA is not required to carry to full adjudication a claim which is not well grounded. Before a decision is made about a claim being well grounded, it will be fully developed. See part VII, paragraph 3.04a, Note, for an example of how this principle may apply in a chapter 35 claim. NOTE:* Claims which have no basis in law (e.g., chapter 35 claim from a grandchild or if the applicant does not claim to have a relationship to the veteran and does not submit evidence to establish any such relationship) should not be denied as not well grounded. Rather, these claims should be denied because of the absence of legal merit or the lack of entitlement under the law.* b\. Notification that a claim has been denied as not well grounded must clearly explain why the claim is not well grounded. Advise the claimant of the type of evidence required to establish the claim. Also advise the applicant that if VA does not receive that type of evidence within one year from the date of notification, no benefits will be awarded on the basis of that claim. Furnish notice of appeal rights. c\. Evidence required to reconsider a claim found not well grounded need not be new and material. It must merely establish the plausibility of the claim. 3A.04 EVIDENCE REQUESTED FROM CLAIMANT a\. Complete Request. Use BDN for development if it will produce a letter that clearly tells the claimant what evidence is needed; otherwise, use a form letter or locally produced letter. The basic test is whether the development letter clearly informs the claimant exactly what has to be done to establish entitlement to the benefit sought. b\. Enclosures. Enclose all necessary forms, with the veteran\'s file number on each, when writing to a claimant. c\. Facsimile and Telephone. Use of facsimile and telephone development is strongly encouraged. $1$ Appropriate cases include, but are not limited to: $a$ Receipt of medical evidence; $b$ Social security numbers and award/disallowance letters; $c$ Addresses; $d$ Employment information; $e$ Clarification of income items and medical expenses; and $f$ Forms (except signature on all original benefit applications). $2$ Document all information received by telephone on VA Form 119, Report of Contact. $3$ Award and denial letters must include reference to any telephone evidence used in the decision. Include the date of the call and the person supplying the information. d\. Notice of Time Limit. Advise the claimant that failure to furnish the evidence within the specified time limit may result in disallowance of the claim. Specify the time limit. e\. Controls for Submission of Evidence $1$ Unless otherwise specifically provided, establish a 30-day control for submission of evidence. $2$ If the evidence needed is not received within 30 days, disallow the claim for failure to prosecute. Notify the claimant of the reason for the disallowance and of the one-year time limit for submission of the evidence. Furnish notice of procedural and appellate rights. $3$ If the claimant furnishes some but not all requested evidence and the evidence submitted does not permit award action, do not disallow the claim for failure to prosecute until 30 days have elapsed from the date the evidence was requested. After 30 days, disallow the claim, advise the claimant specifically what essential evidence was not received and of the one-year time limit for submission of the evidence. Furnish notice of procedural and appellate rights. $4$ If the claimant furnishes part of the evidence before 30 days have elapsed and some benefits can be awarded, do not defer payment pending receipt of the rest of the evidence. Take award action. Inform the claimant of the evidence considered, the reasons for the decision and that action on the remaining aspects of the claim has been deferred pending receipt of the other requested evidence. Enclose notice of procedural and appellate rights. Maintain pending-issue control until final action is taken. If denial of the additional benefits results from the failure to furnish requested evidence, inform the claimant of the denial, outlining the evidence that was requested but not furnished and of the one-year time limit for submission of the evidence. Furnish notice of procedural and appellate rights. $5$ It is improper to deny a claim simultaneously with development of the same issue. A control with an accurate date of claim must be maintained as long as development is pending. If initial development raises new issues which must be resolved or if initial development failed to request essential evidence, extend the control for 30 days from the date of the most recent request for evidence. $6$ Grant an extension of a control for evidence if requested by the claimant or the claimant\'s authorized representative as long as a good faith effort is being made to furnish the requested evidence. An extension does not affect the statutory time limit for submission of evidence or the effective date of an award. f\. Address Unknown $1$ The claimant\'s address does not constitute evidence. Do not consider a claim to be abandoned solely because the claimant\'s address is unknown. If an award is stopped because the claimant\'s address is unknown and checks are undeliverable, payments may be resumed effective the day following the date of last payment if entitlement is otherwise established and the claimant furnishes a valid current address. See 38 CFR 3.158(c). Also, see 38 CFR 1.710 concerning homeless claimants. $2$ If any correspondence to a claimant, including award letters or requests for evidence, is returned as undeliverable, review the file to ensure the current address was used. (If the claimant receives education benefits via direct deposit or electronic funds transfer, see pt. IV, par. 13.01b.) $3$ If a request for evidence essential to establish entitlement addressed to the claimant\'s last known address is returned unclaimed, do not extend the time limit for submitting the evidence. In this situation consider the claim abandoned after the expiration of one-year from the date of request. See 38 CFR 3.158(a). g\. Claimant Unable/Unwilling to Furnish Address. If a claimant is unwilling or unable to furnish a current mailing address, send correspondence and checks to the Agent Cashier of the RO that is adjudicating the claim or to the Agent Cashier of any VA facility deemed appropriate. See 38 CFR 1.710(d). $1$ Checks will be returned to the Department of the Treasury if they are not picked up in 30 days. This will suspend the account. $2$ If correspondence is not picked up from the Agent Cashier within 30 days, it is returned to Adjudication. Follow undeliverable mail procedures (subpar. g(2) above) if correspondence is returned to Adjudication after 30 days. 3A.05 EVIDENCE REQUESTED FROM OTHER SOURCES a\. VA Responsibility to Assist Claimants. The ultimate responsibility for submitting evidence to establish or verify entitlement to VA benefits rests with the claimant. However, if requested by a beneficiary or authorized representative, make reasonable efforts to assist claimants in getting public documents and other evidence. b\. Administrative Time Limits NOTE:* In most instances, an educational institution is not a third party as stated in this paragraph. DO NOT give pre‑reduction notices when you receive VA Form 22-1999b.* $1$ Unless otherwise provided, control requests for evidence from a third party for 30 days. Simultaneously inform the claimant about the third party development. State the name and address of the third party and the specific evidence requested. Also, state the consequences of VA\'s failure to receive the requested evidence. $a$ If the third party evidence is needed to support an increased rate of VA benefits, advise the claimant that failure of either the claimant or the third party to furnish the evidence will result in an adjudication of the claim on the evidence of record. $b$ If the third party evidence is needed to support continued payment of the current rate of benefits, furnish predetermination notice of the reduction or termination which will result from failure to furnish the necessary evidence. $c$ If the evidence is not received within the 30-day control period, disallow the claim or adjust the award. $2$ Administrative time limits do not apply to evidence requested from VA medical centers and service departments. Maintain a control and initiate regular follow-ups until the records are located or a final reply is received indicating that the records cannot be located. If a service department or VA medical center indicates it does not have evidence which is essential to the adjudication of a claim, advise the claimant and give him or her 30 days to furnish additional information about possible alternate sources of the evidence. If the claimant does not reply or responds that there are no alternate sources of information, adjudicate the claim based on the evidence of record. c\. Fees for Evidence. VA is not authorized to pay a fee for copies of public documents or other evidence from Federal, State or local agencies or private sources. Most custodians of public documents furnish copies to VA free of charge. If payment of a fee is required to obtain a document, advise the claimant that VA is not authorized to pay the fee and advise him or her how to get the evidence. (VAOPGCPREC 07-95) d\. Where to Write for Vital Records. The Department of Health and Human Services publishes a booklet entitled \"Where to Write for Vital Records,\" DHHS Publication (PHS) 1142. It furnishes addresses from which certified copies of birth, death, marriage and divorce documents can be obtained. Request vital records by sending FL 21-107 or a locally generated letter to the address shown in the current version of that publication. 3A.06 PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EVIDENCE a\. Primary Evidence $1$ In most instances entitlement to VA benefits can be established by any evidence which is of sufficient weight to convince the decision maker of the point in issue. However, for purposes of establishing certain events, e.g., marriage, child\'s relationship, divorce, or death, VA regulations require specific types of evidence. $2$ If there is conflicting information or a protest by an interested party, there may be only one acceptable form of proof of an event. For example, under 38 CFR 3.205(b) the only acceptable documentary proof of dissolution of a marriage (other than by death) is a certified copy or abstract of a final decree of divorce or annulment. $3$ In other instances, e.g., marriage and child\'s relationship, VA regulations specify primary and secondary forms of evidence. A copy of the public record of marriage, birth or adoption is considered to be primary evidence of marriage or the child\'s relationship. Normally, primary evidence of the event is required to establish marriage or the relationship of a child. However, under the circumstances indicated in subparagraph b below, secondary evidence can suffice to establish marriage or a child\'s relationship. b\. Secondary Evidence. Secondary evidence of an event is any evidence which does not qualify as primary evidence. Consider secondary evidence only after all attempts to obtain primary evidence have been unsuccessful and the claimant has given a satisfactory explanation why primary evidence is not available. $1$ Acceptable reasons for unavailability of primary evidence include evidence that the primary record was destroyed and no copy exists or evidence that no official documentary evidence of the event was ever prepared. The mere fact that the claimant does not remember where the primary evidence is located is not an acceptable reason for resorting to secondary evidence. $2$ Secondary evidence is classified in order of acceptability depending on the event in issue. Resort to a lower order of secondary evidence only if the claimant establishes that the preferred form of secondary evidence is unavailable. The order of acceptability for specific types of evidence is as follows: $a$ Marriage. See M21-1, part III, paragraph 6.06. $b$ Birth. See M21-1, part III, paragraphs 6.17 and 6.25b. $c$ Adoption. See M21-1, part III, paragraph 6.20. $d$ Death. See M21-1, part III, paragraph 6.07e. 3A.07 PHOTOCOPIES a\. General. Copies or abstracts of public documents, e.g., marriage certificates, birth certificates, death certificates, are acceptable as evidence if VA is satisfied the copies are genuine and free from alteration or defect. Otherwise, VA may request a copy of the document certified over the signature and official seal of the person having custody of such record. b. Military Service. Copies of original service documents are acceptable only if issued to the claimant by the service department or by a public custodian of records. See 38 CFR 3.203(a). 3A.08 NEW AND MATERIAL EVIDENCE a\. A claimant must submit \"new and material\" evidence to reopen a previously disallowed claim. $1$ To qualify as \"new\", evidence, whether documentary, testimonial or in some other form, must be submitted to VA for the first time. $2$ A photocopy or other duplication of information already contained in a VA claims folder does not constitute new evidence since it was previously considered; neither does information confirming a point already established. b\. In order to be considered \"material\", the additional information must bear directly and substantially on the specific matter under consideration. c\. A determination by VA that information constitutes \"new and material evidence\" means that the new information is sufficiently significant, either by itself or in connection with evidence already of record, that it must be considered in order to decide the merits of the claim fairly. It does not mean that the evidence warrants a revision of a prior determination. d\. A decision not to reopen a claim because the evidence submitted is not new and material is an appealable decision. The claimant must be furnished notice of procedural and appellate rights. 3A.09 RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE 3A.10 AFFIDAVITS OR CERTIFICATIONS IN SUPPORT OF CLAIM a\. General. If affidavits or certifications are required by VA regulations or procedures, the requirement may be satisfied by completing a VA form containing the certification statement. Enclose the appropriate VA form with the request for evidence. b\. Use of VA Form 21-4138. If available VA forms are not appropriate, an individual\'s signed statement on VA Form 21-4138, Statement in Support of Claim, or any other written communication with the appropriate certification, is acceptable. 3A.11 RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE 3A.12 RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE 3A.13 TRANSLATION OF FOREIGN CORRESPONDENCE AND DOCUMENTS a\. Refer foreign language correspondence and documents for translation to such employees in the local office as may be deemed qualified by the Director. If the translator has sufficient adjudicative background to determine what information in a document has probative value, only the pertinent portions need be translated and certified. b\. If translation is not obtainable from local sources, refer the document to the Washington Regional Office. Send the request by letter or VA Form 70-2801, Request for Translation Into English, to the Director, Washington Regional Office (372/23), 1120 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20421. 3A.14 REQUESTS FOR EVIDENCE FROM COUNTRIES ON THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT LIST a\. The Treasury Department maintains a list of countries to which Treasury checks may not be sent because there is no reasonable assurance the payee will actually receive and be able to negotiate a check for full value. See 31 CFR 211.1 for the current Treasury Department list. Also see M21-1, part III, paragraph 11.13. b\. The prohibition against delivery of checks to the countries on the Treasury Department list does not preclude the development and adjudication of claims filed by persons residing in listed countries. However, before an award can be authorized to a person residing in a listed country, the claimant must furnish a mailing address in an unlisted country. The claimant may also request that checks be sent via direct deposit or electronic funds transfer or that they be delivered to the claimant in care of a foreign service post in a country which is not on the Treasury Department list.\]	en
log-files	899988	! Started logfile: 1800+440_S.log on Thu Aug 14 09:18:47 2008 observe 1800+440_S.edt ! Reading UV FITS file: 1800+440_S.edt ! AN table 1: 64 integrations on 105 of 105 possible baselines. ! AN table 2: 42 integrations on 105 of 105 possible baselines. ! AN table 3: 33 integrations on 105 of 105 possible baselines. ! AN table 4: 51 integrations on 105 of 105 possible baselines. ! Apparent sampling: 0.0830075 visibilities/baseline/integration-bin. ! * This seems a bit low - see "help observe" on the binwid argument. ! Found source: 1800+440 ! ! There are 4 IFs, and a total of 4 channels: ! ! IF Channel Frequency Freq offset Number of Overall IF ! origin at origin per channel channels bandwidth ! ------------------------------------------------------------- (Hz) ! 01 1 2.23697e+09 8e+06 1 8e+06 ! 02 2 2.26697e+09 8e+06 1 8e+06 ! 03 3 2.35697e+09 8e+06 1 8e+06 ! 04 4 2.37697e+09 8e+06 1 8e+06 ! ! Polarization(s): RR ! ! Read 947 lines of history. ! ! Reading 6624 visibilities. ![@gonzo7-0.4 1800+440_S] print "*******************************" ! ******************************* print "* Using gonzo instruction set *" ! * Using gonzo instruction set * print "*******************************" ! ********************************* float field_size field_size = 1024 float field_cell field_cell = 0.4 integer clean_niter clean_niter = 50 float clean_gain clean_gain = 0.03 float dynam dynam = 7.0 float win_mult win_mult = 1.8 float solint solint = 3.6/6.0 logical doflt doflt = true logical doamp float new_peak float flux_cutoff mapsize field_size,field_cell ! Map grid = 1024x1024 pixels with 0.400x0.400 milli-arcsec cellsize. select ! Selecting polarization: RR, channels: 1..4 ! Reading IF 1 channels: 1..1 ! Reading IF 2 channels: 2..2 ! Reading IF 3 channels: 3..3 ! Reading IF 4 channels: 4..4 startmod ! Applying default point source starting model. ! Performing phase self-cal ! Adding 1 model components to the UV plane model. ! The established model now contains 1 components and 1 Jy ! ! Correcting IF 1. ! A total of 804 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 1. ! A total of 532 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 2. ! A total of 343 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 3. ! A total of 595 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 4. ! ! Correcting IF 2. ! A total of 801 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 1. ! A total of 532 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 2. ! A total of 343 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 3. ! A total of 594 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 4. ! ! Correcting IF 3. ! A total of 801 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 1. ! A total of 532 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 2. ! A total of 346 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 3. ! A total of 576 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 4. ! ! Correcting IF 4. ! A total of 804 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 1. ! A total of 532 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 2. ! A total of 343 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 3. ! A total of 576 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 4. ! ! Fit before self-cal, rms=0.385058Jy sigma=0.003078 ! Fit after self-cal, rms=0.318940Jy sigma=0.002826 ! clrmod: Cleared the established, tentative and continuum models. ! Redundant starting model cleared. uvweight 2,-1 ! Uniform weighting binwidth: 2 (pixels). ! Gridding weights will be scaled by errors raised to the power -1. ! Radial weighting is not currently selected. doamp = false flux_cutoff = imstat(rms) * dynam ! Inverting map and beam ! Estimated beam: bmin=2.335 mas, bmaj=3.098 mas, bpa=9.412 degrees ! Estimated noise=1724.44 mJy/beam. repeat if (peak(flux) > flux_cutoff) peakwin win_mult clean clean_niter,clean_gain flux_cutoff = imstat(rms) * dynam selfcal doamp, doflt, solint new_peak = peak(flux) until(new_peak<=flux_cutoff) ! Added new window around map position (0, 0). ! clean: niter=50 gain=0.03 cutoff=0 ! Component: 050 - total flux cleaned = 0.581519 Jy ! Total flux subtracted in 50 components = 0.581519 Jy ! Clean residual min=-0.039495 max=0.162202 Jy/beam ! Clean residual mean=0.000209 rms=0.010075 Jy/beam ! Combined flux in latest and established models = 0.581519 Jy ! Performing phase self-cal over 0.6 minute time intervals ! Adding 1 model components to the UV plane model. ! The established model now contains 1 components and 0.581519 Jy ! ! Correcting IF 1. ! ! Correcting IF 2. ! ! Correcting IF 3. ! ! Correcting IF 4. ! ! Fit before self-cal, rms=0.287800Jy sigma=0.002706 ! Fit after self-cal, rms=0.287800Jy sigma=0.002706 ! Inverting map ! clean: niter=50 gain=0.03 cutoff=0 ! Component: 050 - total flux cleaned = 0.12784 Jy ! Total flux subtracted in 50 components = 0.12784 Jy ! Clean residual min=-0.028707 max=0.041108 Jy/beam ! Clean residual mean=0.000112 rms=0.007019 Jy/beam ! Combined flux in latest and established models = 0.709359 Jy ! Performing phase self-cal over 0.6 minute time intervals ! Adding 6 model components to the UV plane model. ! The established model now contains 6 components and 0.709359 Jy ! ! Correcting IF 1. ! ! Correcting IF 2. ! ! Correcting IF 3. ! ! Correcting IF 4. ! ! Fit before self-cal, rms=0.226809Jy sigma=0.001997 ! Fit after self-cal, rms=0.226801Jy sigma=0.001997 ! Inverting map print "**************************************" ! ************************************ print "* Finished Uniform Weighting CLEAN *" ! * Finished Uniform Weighting CLEAN * print "************************************" ! ************************************** uvweight 0,-1 ! Uniform weighting is not currently selected. ! Gridding weights will be scaled by errors raised to the power -1. ! Radial weighting is not currently selected. win_mult = win_mult * 1.6 clean_niter = clean_niter * 2 dynam = dynam - 0.5 doamp = false flux_cutoff = imstat(rms) * dynam ! Inverting map and beam ! Estimated beam: bmin=2.864 mas, bmaj=3.725 mas, bpa=6.67 degrees ! Estimated noise=980.155 mJy/beam. repeat if (peak(flux) > flux_cutoff) peakwin win_mult clean clean_niter,clean_gain flux_cutoff = imstat(rms) * dynam selfcal doamp, doflt, solint new_peak = peak(flux) until(new_peak<=flux_cutoff) ! clean: niter=100 gain=0.03 cutoff=0 ! Component: 050 - total flux cleaned = 0.0704945 Jy ! Component: 100 - total flux cleaned = 0.105677 Jy ! Total flux subtracted in 100 components = 0.105677 Jy ! Clean residual min=-0.033591 max=0.033683 Jy/beam ! Clean residual mean=0.000073 rms=0.007218 Jy/beam ! Combined flux in latest and established models = 0.815036 Jy ! Performing phase self-cal over 0.6 minute time intervals ! Adding 29 model components to the UV plane model. ! The established model now contains 31 components and 0.815036 Jy ! ! Correcting IF 1. ! ! Correcting IF 2. ! ! Correcting IF 3. ! ! Correcting IF 4. ! ! Fit before self-cal, rms=0.210136Jy sigma=0.001755 ! Fit after self-cal, rms=0.210054Jy sigma=0.001754 ! Inverting map print "**************************************" ! ************************************ print "* Finished Natural Weighting CLEAN *" ! * Finished Natural Weighting CLEAN * print "************************************" ! ************************************** gscale true ! Performing overall amplitude self-cal ! ! Correcting IF 1. ! A total of 39 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 1. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 1: ! BR 1.18 FD 1.07 HN 0.98 KB 1.00* ! KK 1.00* KP 1.00* LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.03 NY 1.08 OV 1.00* PT 1.11 ! SC 0.97 WZ 0.81 ZC 0.89 ! ! A total of 36 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 2. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 2: ! BR 1.00* FD 1.00* HN 1.05 KB 0.85 ! KK 1.00* KP 1.00* LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.58 NY 1.39 OV 1.00* PT 1.00* ! SC 1.00* WZ 1.01 ZC 1.00* ! ! A total of 9 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 3. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 3: ! BR 1.02 FD 0.86 HN 0.86 KB 1.00* ! KK 1.02 KP 1.02 LA 1.00* MK 1.02 ! NL 1.14 NY 1.11 OV 0.97 PT 1.02 ! SC 1.14 WZ 1.00* ZC 1.00* ! ! A total of 21 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 4. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 4: ! BR 1.05 FD 0.87 HN 1.16 KB 0.76 ! KK 1.00* KP 1.01 LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.00* NY 1.34 OV 1.01 PT 1.02 ! SC 0.80 WZ 0.83 ZC 0.89 ! ! ! Correcting IF 2. ! A total of 42 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 1. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 1: ! BR 1.14 FD 1.08 HN 1.02 KB 1.00* ! KK 1.00* KP 1.00* LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.04 NY 1.04 OV 1.00* PT 1.05 ! SC 0.99 WZ 0.91 ZC 0.82 ! ! A total of 36 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 2. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 2: ! BR 1.00* FD 1.00* HN 1.02 KB 0.78 ! KK 1.00* KP 1.00* LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.63 NY 1.26 OV 1.00* PT 1.00* ! SC 1.00* WZ 0.93 ZC 1.00* ! ! A total of 9 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 3. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 3: ! BR 1.01 FD 0.89 HN 0.85 KB 1.00* ! KK 1.01 KP 0.99 LA 1.00* MK 1.01 ! NL 1.14 NY 1.12 OV 0.98 PT 1.06 ! SC 1.02 WZ 1.00* ZC 1.00* ! ! A total of 18 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 4. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 4: ! BR 1.03 FD 0.87 HN 0.77 KB 0.83 ! KK 1.00* KP 0.99 LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.00* NY 1.37 OV 1.04 PT 1.07 ! SC 0.83 WZ 0.91 ZC 0.78 ! ! ! Correcting IF 3. ! A total of 42 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 1. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 1: ! BR 1.12 FD 1.06 HN 1.01 KB 1.00* ! KK 1.00* KP 1.00* LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.01 NY 1.08 OV 1.00* PT 1.04 ! SC 1.17 WZ 0.85 ZC 0.87 ! ! A total of 36 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 2. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 2: ! BR 1.00* FD 1.00* HN 0.76 KB 1.11 ! KK 1.00* KP 1.00* LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.41 NY 1.38 OV 1.00* PT 1.00* ! SC 1.00* WZ 1.03 ZC 1.00* ! ! A total of 6 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 3. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 3: ! BR 0.99 FD 0.82 HN 0.80 KB 1.00* ! KK 1.02 KP 0.91 LA 1.00* MK 0.94 ! NL 1.10 NY 1.13 OV 0.95 PT 1.03 ! SC 1.76 WZ 1.00* ZC 1.00* ! ! A total of 9 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 4. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 4: ! BR 0.99 FD 0.80 HN 0.88 KB 1.15 ! KK 1.00* KP 0.88 LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.00* NY 0.92 OV 1.02 PT 1.03 ! SC 1.06 WZ 0.87 ZC 1.02 ! ! ! Correcting IF 4. ! A total of 39 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 1. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 1: ! BR 1.09 FD 1.05 HN 0.97 KB 1.00* ! KK 1.00* KP 1.00* LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 0.98 NY 0.99 OV 1.00* PT 1.02 ! SC 0.98 WZ 0.84 ZC 0.90 ! ! A total of 36 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 2. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 2: ! BR 1.00* FD 1.00* HN 0.93 KB 1.70 ! KK 1.00* KP 1.00* LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.45 NY 1.33 OV 1.00* PT 1.00* ! SC 1.00* WZ 0.97 ZC 1.00* ! ! A total of 9 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 3. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 3: ! BR 0.92 FD 0.79 HN 0.84 KB 1.00* ! KK 1.04 KP 0.91 LA 1.00* MK 0.88 ! NL 1.09 NY 1.10 OV 0.94 PT 1.00 ! SC 1.01 WZ 1.00* ZC 1.00* ! ! A total of 9 telescope corrections were flagged in sub-array 4. ! Telescope amplitude corrections in sub-array 4: ! BR 0.92 FD 0.75 HN 0.89 KB 1.67 ! KK 1.00* KP 0.89 LA 1.00* MK 1.00* ! NL 1.00* NY 1.12 OV 1.00 PT 0.98 ! SC 0.92 WZ 0.89 ZC 1.01 ! ! ! Fit before self-cal, rms=0.210054Jy sigma=0.001754 ! Fit after self-cal, rms=0.161167Jy sigma=0.001171 dynam = dynam - 0.5 doamp = false flux_cutoff = imstat(rms) * dynam ! Inverting map and beam ! Estimated beam: bmin=3.01 mas, bmaj=3.789 mas, bpa=5.934 degrees ! Estimated noise=979.742 mJy/beam. repeat if (peak(flux) > flux_cutoff) peakwin win_mult clean clean_niter,clean_gain flux_cutoff = imstat(rms) * dynam selfcal doamp, doflt, solint new_peak = peak(flux) until(new_peak<=flux_cutoff) ! clean: niter=100 gain=0.03 cutoff=0 ! Component: 050 - total flux cleaned = -0.000255386 Jy ! Component: 100 - total flux cleaned = -0.000834218 Jy ! Total flux subtracted in 100 components = -0.000834218 Jy ! Clean residual min=-0.008399 max=0.012701 Jy/beam ! Clean residual mean=-0.000052 rms=0.002427 Jy/beam ! Combined flux in latest and established models = 0.814202 Jy ! Performing phase self-cal over 0.6 minute time intervals ! Adding 4 model components to the UV plane model. ! The established model now contains 35 components and 0.814202 Jy ! ! Correcting IF 1. ! ! Correcting IF 2. ! ! Correcting IF 3. ! ! Correcting IF 4. ! ! Fit before self-cal, rms=0.161024Jy sigma=0.001169 ! Fit after self-cal, rms=0.161086Jy sigma=0.001169 ! Inverting map dynam = dynam - 1.0 doamp = true solint = solint * (6.0/3.6) flux_cutoff = imstat(rms) * dynam repeat if (peak(flux) > flux_cutoff) peakwin win_mult clean clean_niter,clean_gain flux_cutoff = imstat(rms) * dynam selfcal doamp, doflt, solint new_peak = peak(flux) until(new_peak<=flux_cutoff) ! Added new window around map position (-9.2, -20.8). ! clean: niter=100 gain=0.03 cutoff=0 ! Component: 050 - total flux cleaned = 0.0119537 Jy ! Component: 100 - total flux cleaned = 0.0190326 Jy ! Total flux subtracted in 100 components = 0.0190326 Jy ! Clean residual min=-0.007515 max=0.011949 Jy/beam ! Clean residual mean=-0.000028 rms=0.002150 Jy/beam ! Combined flux in latest and established models = 0.833234 Jy ! Performing amp+phase self-cal over 1 minute time intervals ! Adding 30 model components to the UV plane model. ! The established model now contains 65 components and 0.833234 Jy ! ! Correcting IF 1. ! ! Correcting IF 2. ! ! Correcting IF 3. ! ! Correcting IF 4. ! ! Fit before self-cal, rms=0.160508Jy sigma=0.001154 ! Fit after self-cal, rms=0.157718Jy sigma=0.001114 ! Inverting map and beam ! Estimated beam: bmin=3.013 mas, bmaj=3.786 mas, bpa=5.712 degrees ! Estimated noise=977.309 mJy/beam. doamp = false solint = solint / (6.0/3.6) flux_cutoff = imstat(rms) * dynam repeat if (peak(flux) > flux_cutoff) peakwin win_mult clean clean_niter,clean_gain flux_cutoff = imstat(rms) * dynam selfcal doamp, doflt, solint new_peak = peak(flux) until(new_peak<=flux_cutoff) ! clean: niter=100 gain=0.03 cutoff=0 ! Component: 050 - total flux cleaned = 0.00588498 Jy ! Component: 100 - total flux cleaned = 0.0087958 Jy ! Total flux subtracted in 100 components = 0.0087958 Jy ! Clean residual min=-0.006580 max=0.009460 Jy/beam ! Clean residual mean=0.000008 rms=0.001821 Jy/beam ! Combined flux in latest and established models = 0.84203 Jy ! Performing phase self-cal over 0.6 minute time intervals ! Adding 16 model components to the UV plane model. ! The established model now contains 77 components and 0.84203 Jy ! ! Correcting IF 1. ! ! Correcting IF 2. ! ! Correcting IF 3. ! ! Correcting IF 4. ! ! Fit before self-cal, rms=0.157544Jy sigma=0.001110 ! Fit after self-cal, rms=0.157541Jy sigma=0.001110 ! Inverting map ! Added new window around map position (-2, -6). ! clean: niter=100 gain=0.03 cutoff=0 ! Component: 050 - total flux cleaned = 0.00955059 Jy ! Component: 100 - total flux cleaned = 0.0142668 Jy ! Total flux subtracted in 100 components = 0.0142668 Jy ! Clean residual min=-0.005817 max=0.006125 Jy/beam ! Clean residual mean=0.000010 rms=0.001570 Jy/beam ! Combined flux in latest and established models = 0.856297 Jy ! Performing phase self-cal over 0.6 minute time intervals ! Adding 21 model components to the UV plane model. ! The established model now contains 95 components and 0.856297 Jy ! ! Correcting IF 1. ! ! Correcting IF 2. ! ! Correcting IF 3. ! ! Correcting IF 4. ! ! Fit before self-cal, rms=0.157008Jy sigma=0.001103 ! Fit after self-cal, rms=0.156960Jy sigma=0.001102 ! Inverting map print "*********************************" ! ******************************* print "* Finished Amplitude Self-Cal *" ! * Finished Amplitude Self-Cal * print "*******************************" ! ******************************* save 1800+440_S ! Writing UV FITS file: 1800+440_S.uvf ! Writing 95 model components to file: 1800+440_S.mod ! wwins: Wrote 3 windows to 1800+440_S.win ! restore: Substituting estimate of restoring beam from last 'invert'. ! Restoring with beam: 3.013 x 3.786 at 5.712 degrees (North through East) ! Clean map min=-0.0059691 max=0.75316 Jy/beam ! Writing clean map to FITS file: 1800+440_S.fits ! Writing difmap environment to: 1800+440_S.par print "************************" ! ************************ print "* Now, make some plots *" ! * Now, make some plots * print "************************" ! ************************** ![@gonzo_plot 1800+440_S] device 1800+440_Suv.ps/vps,1,2 ! Attempting to open device: '1800+440_Suv.ps/vps' radplot ! Using default options string "m1" uvplot ! Using default options string "" device 1800+440_Sim.ps/vps ! Attempting to open device: '1800+440_Sim.ps/vps' uvweight 0,-1 ! Uniform weighting is not currently selected. ! Gridding weights will be scaled by errors raised to the power -1. ! Radial weighting is not currently selected. loglevs -1,2048,2 ! The new contour levels are: ! -1 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 cmul = imstat(rms)*3 ! Inverting map and beam ! Estimated beam: bmin=3.013 mas, bmaj=3.786 mas, bpa=5.712 degrees ! Estimated noise=977.309 mJy/beam. mappl cln ! restore: Substituting estimate of restoring beam from last 'invert'. ! Restoring with beam: 3.013 x 3.786 at 5.712 degrees (North through East) ! Clean map min=-0.0059691 max=0.75316 Jy/beam ![Exited script file: gonzo_plot] ![Exited script file: gonzo7-0.4] quit ! Quitting program ! Log file 1800+440_S.log closed on Thu Aug 14 09:19:07 2008	en
converted_docs	182703	Should the Military Adopt *an Aford-Type Guilty Plea?* [Major Steven E. Walburn]{.smallcaps}[^1] I am absolutely, positively, 100% not guilty![^2] # Orenthal James Simpson ## I. Introduction Specialist Jones is married with two small children. He works in a battalion S-1 office with Private First Class Smith, an attractive female soldier who is new to the unit. Smith is happily married and has a two-year-old child. Over time Specialist Jones finds himself increasingly attracted to Private Smith. Specialist Jones finally confides in Private Smith his feelings and his desire to have an affair. Private Smith rebuffs him, and demands that he leave her alone. His feelings for Private Smith growing every day, Specialist Jones continues to badger her. He is careful, however, to always approach Private Smith when they are "alone." Finally Jones decides he must "have" Smith and begins planning to rape her. Specialist Jones knows that Private Smith's husband is away on temporary duty in Cuba. His own wife and child have gone out of town to visit her parents. After dark one evening Specialist Jones drives to Private Smith's neighborhood and waits until after midnight. Once confident that Private Smith has gone to bed, Jones carefully climbs through the kitchen window of Private Smith's quarters. Once inside, he dons a ski mask and enters Private Smith's bedroom. Jones brutally rapes Private Smith. Although she resists the attack, Jones repeatedly beats her until she slips into unconsciousness. After regaining consciousness, Smith is able to call the military police and report the rape. As a result of the assault Smith suffers broken ribs and a severe concussion. Since the attack, Private Smith has frequent nightmares and is often withdrawn. She regularly sees a psychologist and her relationship with her husband has greatly deteriorated. The subsequent investigation immediately focuses on Jones, eventually leading to his apprehension. The government assembles an impressive amount of circumstantial scientific evidence linking Specialist Jones to the crime. He is charged with housebreaking,[^3] assault with intent to commit rape,[^4] and rape.[^5] Private Smith is extremely reluctant to testify against Specialist Jones. Her psychologist indicates Smith is terrified of Jones and suffers memory lapses which makes her potential testimony unreliable. Specialist Jones has his own demons to deal with. Fearful of receiving substantial confinement[^6] he steadfastly maintains his innocence. After careful consultation with his defense attorney, and a review of the government's evidence, Specialist Jones concludes he will almost certainly be convicted of these crimes. Specialist Jones informs his defense attorney he will do anything to avoid the potential of serving extensive confinement except admit his guilt. He informs his attorney that he "didn't do it," but he doesn't want his family to suffer through the stress and uncertainty of a fully contested trial. As a result of lengthy negotiations, the government indicates a willingness to enter into a pretrial agreement limiting confinement to no more than 20 years if Specialist Jones will plead guilty as charged. Despite the defense counsel's best efforts, Specialist Jones will not agree to admit he committed the offenses. He will agree, however, to enter a plea of guilty in order to take advantage of the government's sentence limitation offer. Assuming the government agrees, should Specialist Jones be permitted to avoid an express admission of culpability while entering a plea of guilty in order to receive a favorable pretrial agreement? This type of guilty plea, known as an Alford plea (after the case in which it was judicially recognized by the United States Supreme Court, North Carolina v. Alford),[^7] is now widely recognized in state and federal courts. The Alford plea is not presently recognized in the military justice system.[^8] A variety of factors convince civilian defendants to seek plea agreements allowing them to avoid the admission of guilt. They may wish to take advantage of attractive pretrial agreements rather than risk adverse trial results and potentially lengthy prison sentences. Some wish to avoid the publicity of a fully contested trial. Others might lack the necessary factual basis to plead guilty because voluntary alcohol or drug use has rendered them unable to remember committing the crime.[^9] Still others may very well be innocent, but the overwhelming strength of the government's case makes going to trial seem fruitless. For most of our judicial history accuseds in these circumstances had only two choices: take their chances at trial or plead guilty. By admitting guilt, these defendants were able to take advantage of favorable pretrial agreements. Unfortunately, in order to do so, some were forced to lie to their attorneys and the court concerning their true culpability. Both of these alternatives are objectionable to defendants and conflict with society's moral expectations of its criminal justice system.[^10] The Alford plea attempts to ease the tension these choices generate by offering a third alternative: a guilty plea without an express admission of criminal culpability. This article investigates the history of the Alford plea and its close cousin, the nolo contendere plea as authorized under Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.[^11] It also analyzes the advisability of adding an Alford-type guilty plea to the options presently available to accuseds in the military justice system. [^12] Section II of this article traces the history of the nolo contendere plea and examines present-day guilty plea practice in federal courts which is governed by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and several Supreme Court decisions. Section III examines current guilty plea practice in the military, which (but for an Alford-type guilty plea) is similar to guilty plea practice in the federal courts. Section IV examines the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Alford. This section also discusses the recognition of the plea, the Court of Military Appeal's rejection of it in United States v. Epps,[^13] and the present status of the plea. Section V discusses the potential advantages and disadvantages of the Alford plea from the perspective of the government and defense. Section VI examines several issues generated by the military's adoption of an Alford-type plea. These include: (1) what preliminary inquiry, if any, should be conducted by the military judge prior to accepting the plea; (2) what standard of proof should be required to establish the factual basis of the plea; (3) how useful will stipulations[^14] be in meeting this standard of proof? (4) the extent (during sentencing) an Alford plea should be considered as aggravation or mitigation; and (5) what jury instructions, if any, should be developed to properly instruct members concerning the existence and effect of the accused's Alford plea?[^15] Section VII outlines the author's opinion that the military should adopt an Alford-type plea as an additional option available to an accused servicemember. To properly place North Carolina v. Alford in perspective requires a discussion of the judicial development of guilty pleas in the federal courts followed by an in-depth examination of the plea of nolo contendere under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. Our discussion begins with a history of present day federal guilty plea practice. ### II. Present Guilty Plea Practice ### in the Federal Courts ### A. The Courts The basis for the present rules pertaining to guilty pleas in our federal courts is derived from several Supreme Court decisions decided between 1968 and 1970. The first of these is McCarthy v. United States.[^16] In McCarthy the defendant pleaded guilty to income tax evasion. At trial the judge failed to personally question McCarthy concerning the factual basis and circumstances of his criminal conduct.[^17] During the sentencing phase of the trial, McCarthy's attorney argued that McCarthy's failure to pay the disputed taxes was due to poor health, alcoholism, and poor record keeping. Rule 11(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure directs the trial judge to inquire whether a defendant who pleads guilty understands the nature of the charge against him and the consequences of his plea. In McCarthy the Court held that Rule 11(c)'s requirement to personally address the defendant must be carefully followed.[^18] The Supreme Court was careful to point out that its decision was based on its interpretation of Rule 11. The McCarthy decision implied that strictly following Rule 11(c) helps to establish the validity of a guilty plea, making it less vulnerable to post-conviction attack.[^19] The Court reasoned that the validity of the plea was strengthened by ensuring a defendant clearly understood the charges faced, and the consequences, of his plea of guilt. In Boykin v. Alabama[^20] the defendant pleaded guilty to five counts of armed robbery. The trial judge did not make a determination of the knowing and voluntary nature of the defendant's understanding and agreement with the charges. In fact, the defendant did not make any statements concerning the offenses. A jury sentenced Boykin to death. The Supreme Court held that a knowing waiver of due process rights could not be presumed from a silent record. The Court, citing McCarthy, also implied that procedures like Rule 11 may be constitutionally necessary before a court can accept a guilty plea.[^21] The Court noted: > If a defendant's guilty plea is not equally voluntary and knowing, it > has been obtained in violation of due process and is therefore void. > Moreover, because a guilty plea is an admission of all the elements of > a formal criminal charge, it cannot be truly voluntary unless the > defendant possesses an understanding of the law in relation to the > facts.[^22] Three subsequent Supreme Court rulings, decided on the same day,[^23] further examined the process constitutionally required to preserve guilty pleas. The defendant in Brady v. United States[^24] was prosecuted under the Federal Kidnapping Act, which authorized the death penalty.[^25] This Act, however, permitted defendants to automatically avoid a death penalty by pleading guilty.[^26] Faced with this choice, Brady pleaded guilty. Brady's attorney challenged the constitutionality of the Act by asserting that it impermissibly coerced defendants into pleading guilty. The Brady Court held two factors were key in determining if the guilty plea was properly accepted by the trial court: (1) whether the defendant understood the nature of his plea; and (2) whether it was made voluntarily. The Court found Brady's decision to plead guilty was both knowing and voluntary. The fact that Brady pleaded guilty in the face of a statute which "encouraged" guilty pleas did not invalidate an otherwise proper plea.[^27] In McMann v. Richardson[^28] the defendant challenged the propriety of a guilty plea entered after alleging the police had coerced him into confessing. The Supreme Court, while finding that the confession was coerced (and therefore illegally obtained), held the defendant's ability to consult with counsel after the confession, but before his decision to plead guilty, attenuated any taint the prior coerced confession may have had on his decision to plead guilty. More importantly, Justice White, writing for the Court, held a knowing and voluntary decision to plead (as opposed to confess) based upon "reasonably competent" legal advice is not subject to subsequent attack by the defendant. This is true even if the defendant misjudges the strength of the government's case.[^29] Parker v. North Carolina[^30] involved an attack upon a North Carolina statute which "rewarded" guilty pleas by eliminating the possibility of receiving the death penalty.[^31] On appeal, the defendant argued his attorney had improperly advised him that his confession was admissible.[^32] Justice White, again writing for the Court, held that even if the legal advice given Parker was inaccurate,[^33] this did not overcome the knowing and voluntary nature of Parker's plea. As shown in the record, the trial judge's inquiries clearly established the fact Parker had admitted his guilt at trial but was now seeking to disavow the admission upon subsequently discovering that his previous confession might have been inadmissible. One additional case, Tollett v. Henderson,[^34] played an important role in the development of modern day guilty plea practice. The defendant in Tollett, like the defendant in Parker, argued he had pleaded guilty only after receiving improper legal advice from his defense attorney. The Tollett Court rejected this argument, holding that a guilty plea could not be collaterally attacked unless the advice of counsel rendered to a defendant fell outside the "reasonably competent" standards set forth in McMann v. Richardson.[^35] Again, the Court emphasized that the trial judge had conducted an appropriate inquiry prior to accepting the guilty plea. The following conclusions can be drawn from these decisions: first, the only constitutional requirements of a guilty plea are that it be a voluntary, knowing, and intelligent choice among the options facing a defendant; second, even if the defendant has received erroneous legal advice (either concerning the strength of the government's case or the admissibility of evidence), an otherwise properly accepted guilty plea will not be overturned on appeal; and third, in examining post-trial challenges to guilty pleas, the Supreme Court will rely heavily on the evidence in the record of the accused's guilt. These cases form the backdrop to examine Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, which statutorily governs guilty pleas in federal courts.[^36] B. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 (Rule 11) 1. Rule 11 Guilty Pleas Rule 11(a) permits criminal defendants in federal court to plead guilty, not guilty, or nolo contendere.[^37] Not surprisingly, the development of Rule 11 has closely followed the just-discussed decisions of the Supreme Court. Under Rule 11(e)(1) the defendant and the government may engage in plea bargaining discussions.[^38] The court must ensure that the defendant is voluntarily making the plea.[^39] The court should also ensure that any plea agreement is disclosed in open court. The court may accept or reject the plea agreement.[^40] If the plea agreement is rejected the defendant may still enter a guilty plea without benefit of a pretrial agreement.[^41] Rule 11(f) does not require the factual basis to meet any particular standard (i.e., preponderance, clear and convincing, or beyond a reasonable doubt).[^42] 2. Nolo Contendere Pleas Rule 11(b) allows the plea of nolo contendere. Nolo contendere is a Latin phrase meaning "I will not contest it." When entering a plea under Rule 11(b), the defendant does not admit or deny the charges he is facing but also does not contest an entry of guilt by the court. A fine or prison sentence may be imposed pursuant to this plea.[^43] The plea of nolo contendere was recognized at common law in the United States.[^44] In 1926 the United States Supreme Court, in Hudson v. United States,[^45] was faced with deciding if a federal court had the power to impose a prison sentence after accepting a nolo contendere plea. Justice Stone, writing for the Court, traced the history of the plea of nolo contendere.[^46] The plea may have originated in an early medieval practice by which defendants wishing to avoid imprisonment would seek to make an end of the matter by offering to pay a sum of money to the king.[^47] An early 15th-century case indicated that a defendant did not admit his guilt when he sought such a compromise, but merely "that he put himself on the grace of our Lord, the King, and asked that he might be allowed to pay a fine."[^48] Justice Stone, noting that federal courts had embraced the nolo contendere plea, upheld the propriety of imposing a prison sentence (as permitted by the Probation Act of 1925)[^49] after acceptance of the plea. Throughout its history, the plea of nolo contendere has not been viewed as an express admission of guilt, but as consent by the defendant that he may be punished as if he were guilty.[^50] It was thought desirable to permit defendants to plead nolo contendere without making any inquiry into their actual guilt.[^51] Therefore, if the court accepts a nolo contendere plea, under Rule 11(f) there is no requirement to make a factual inquiry (of the accused) concerning the accuracy of the plea.[^52] However, there are several other steps federal trial courts must follow prior to accepting a Rule 11(b) plea of nolo contendere.[^53] The trial judge must address the defendant personally in open court, and pursuant to Rule 11(c), the judge must inform the defendant of, and determine the defendant understands, the following rights: > $1$ the nature of the charges and the mandatory minimum and maximum > punishments; > > $2$ the right to be represented by an attorney at every stage of the > proceeding and, if necessary, the appointment of an attorney to > represent him; > > $3$ the right to plead not guilty; > > $4$ the right to a jury trial; > > $5$ the right to the assistance of counsel; > > $6$ the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses; > > $7$ the right against compelled self-incrimination; > > $8$ that by pleading nolo contendere the defendant waives the > right to trial; and > > $9$ that if the defendant is questioned under oath, on the record, > the defendant's answers may later be used against him in a prosecution > for perjury or false statement.[^54] The plea of nolo contendere is an attractive alternative to defendants because a conviction based on this plea cannot subsequently be used against them in a later civil or criminal proceeding.[^55] This rule of "non-use" is consistent with the lack of a factual inquiry into the actual guilt of the defendant. The prosecution may oppose a nolo contendere plea when seeking a definite resolution of the defendant's guilt or innocence for either correctional purposes[^56] or for reasons of subsequent litigation. Although the plea of nolo contendere has long existed in federal practice, the desirability of this plea has been a subject of some disagreement.[^57] Courts view the desirability of the nolo contendere plea from both ends of the spectrum. One view is that the plea should be rejected unless a compelling reason for acceptance is established.[^58] On the other hand is the position that the plea should be accepted in the absence of a compelling reason to the contrary.[^59] With an understanding of the history, procedures and usage of Rule 11 guilty pleas and the plea of nolo contendere, a discussion of guilty plea practice in the military is in order. ### III. Present Guilty Plea Practice in the Military ### A. The Acceptance of Guilty Pleas The procedure for entering and accepting guilty pleas in the military is similar to that practiced in the federal courts. Military guilty plea practice is primarily governed by Article 45, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and Rule for Court Martial (R.C.M.) 910. The principal focus of military guilty plea practice is to ensure there is a factual basis for the plea and that no matter inconsistent with the plea is left unresolved.[^60] In pertinent part Article 45 states: > If an accused after . . . a plea of guilty sets up any matter > inconsistent with the plea, or if it appears that he has entered the > plea of guilty improvidently or through lack of understanding of its > meaning and effect . . . a plea of not guilty shall be entered in the > record, and the court shall proceed as though he had pleaded not > guilty.[^61] Like Federal Rule 11(c), R.C.M. 910(c) requires the military judge to address the accused personally prior to accepting a plea of guilty and inform him of the following: > $1$ The nature of the offense and the mandatory minimum and maximum > possible penalties; $2$ The right to counsel;[^62] $3$ The right to plead not guilty; $4$ The right to be tried by a court-martial; $5$ The right to confront and cross-examine witnesses; $6$ The right against self-incrimination; > $7$ If the accused persists in his plea of guilty to certain > offenses there will be no trial as to those offenses; > > $8$ By pleading guilty the accused waives the rights described in > subsection (c)(3) of this Rule; and > > $9$ The accused will be questioned under oath concerning the > offenses plead guilty to.[^63] The personal inquiry of the accused conducted by the military judge is often referred to as the Care inquiry.[^64] Like Rule 11(f), R.C.M. 910(e) doesn't require the factual basis to meet any particular standard, (i.e., preponderance, clear and convincing, or beyond a reasonable doubt). If a plea agreement exists, the military judge must also ensure the accused understands the meaning and effect of the agreement.[^65] In the military a pretrial agreement consists of two parts. The first part contains the promises of the accused and the government's agreement to be bound by a particular sentence limitation (which is not disclosed in this document).[^66] The second part of the agreement, called the "quantum" portion, contains the actual sentence limitation. The quantum portion of the pretrial agreement is not known by the court-martial panel or the military judge in a judge-alone case until after the sentence has been announced.[^67] Once the sentence has been announced[^68] the quantum portion of the pretrial agreement must be explained to the accused.[^69] If the accused does not understand (or agree) with this portion of the pretrial agreement, the agreement must be conformed to the accused's understanding (and/or the intent of the accused and government), or the accused may withdraw his guilty plea.[^70] ### B. Rejection of the Alford Plea in the Military Consistent with the requirements of Article 45, UCMJ and R.C.M. 910, the military has refused to recognize the Alford plea. In United States v. Epps[^71] the Court of Military Appeals[^72] rejected the use of an Alford-type guilty plea. The COMA ruled that while Alford may establish the minimum constitutional requirements for an acceptable guilty plea, the military imposes a higher standard. Therefore, while federal and military guilty plea procedures are quite similar, neither Rule 11(b) pleas of nolo contendere nor Alford pleas are presently recognized in the military justice system.[^73] We next examine in detail the guilty plea option judicially created by the United States Supreme Court in Alford. ### IV. North Carolina v. Alford ### A. A Plea is Born In 1963 Henry Alford was indicted for first-degree murder. In-court testimony revealed that Alford and the murder victim had argued at the victim's house. Alford left, and a short time later the victim answered a knock at his door. Before completely opening the door the victim was fatally shot. There were no eyewitnesses. Additional testimony revealed that earlier Alford had taken his shotgun from his home and threatened to kill the victim. Even more damaging to Alford, after the victim's death, witnesses related that Alford claimed that he had killed him.[^74] Under North Carolina law at the time, the death penalty was automatic upon conviction for first-degree murder if two circumstances were met: (1) the defendant pleaded not guilty; and (2) the jury did not positively recommend a life sentence.[^75] Although Alford faced mandatory life imprisonment if he pleaded guilty to first-degree murder, he could avoid the death penalty by his guilty plea.[^76] Alford persisted in his claim of total innocence; but after consultation with his court-appointed attorney, he agreed to plead guilty to second-degree murder. He insisted he was pleading guilty only to avoid the almost certain death penalty he faced if convicted after contesting the charge.[^77] The trial court established that Alford's attorney had adequately explained to his client the difference between first- and second-degree murder, and of his right to a fully-contested trial. Alford's attorney recommended he accept the plea-bargained deal based on the strong evidence in the state's possession of his guilt.[^78] Throughout his trial Alford maintained his innocence while steadfastly indicating his desire to plead guilty.[^79] The trial judge eventually accepted Alford's plea and sentenced him to the maximum penalty for second-degree murder, thirty years confinement. On appeal, Alford sought a new trial, arguing he had been coerced into pleading guilty by fear of the death penalty. The Supreme Court of North Carolina held that Alford's plea was knowing and voluntary.[^80] Alford next petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus, first in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, then in the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.[^81] Both courts, relying on the findings of the state court, denied Alford's writ.[^82] Each court found Alford's plea to have been knowingly and intelligently made. Undeterred, Alford again petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court. The district court again denied relief. The trial judge considered an inquiry into the voluntariness of Alford's plea foreclosed by the prior action of the court.[^83] Alford appealed, and a divided panel for the Fourth Circuit reversed, holding that Alford's plea was involuntary since it was based on his fear of the death penalty.[^84] In reversing, the Fourth Circuit relied heavily upon the Supreme Court's 1968 decision in United States v. Jackson.[^85] In Jackson the Supreme Court held the death penalty provision of the Federal Kidnapping Act was unconstitutional as it made "the risk of death the price for asserting the right to a jury trial and thereby impaired free exercise of that constitutional right."[^86] The Fourth Circuit invalidated North Carolina's statute reasoning that the statute impermissibly "encouraged" Alford to waive his constitutional rights in order to remove the threat of the death penalty.[^87] In a six-to-three decision[^88] the Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the Fourth Circuit and remanded the case for further proceedings.[^89] Authoring the majority opinion, Justice White, citing Brady v. United States,[^90] wrote that a guilty plea representing "a voluntary and intelligent choice among the alternative courses of action" is not compelled within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.[^91] This is true even if the accused is unable (or unwilling) to admit his participation in the acts constituting the crime.[^92] Justice White further opined: Ordinarily, a judgment of conviction resting on a plea of guilty is justified by the defendant's admission that he committed the crime charged against him and his consent that judgment be entered without a trial of any kind. The plea usually subsumes both elements, and justifiably so, even though there is no separate, express admission by the defendant that he committed the particular acts claimed to constitute the crime charged in the indictment.[^93] The Alford Court established that if a guilty plea is voluntarily made, an express admission of culpability is not constitutionally required for conviction. Justice White compared Alford's plea to a plea of nolo contendere: > Nor can we perceive any material difference between a plea that > refuses to admit commission of the criminal act and a plea containing > a protestation of innocence when, as in the instant case, a defendant > intelligently concludes that his interests require entry of a guilty > plea and the record before the judge contains strong evidence of > actual guilt.[^94] The Court, therefore, found little practical difference between pleas of nolo contendere, which had long been accepted by courts under common law and Rule 11(b), and the plea entered by Alford. Based on the Court's rationale, the only difference between an Alford plea and a plea of nolo contendere is the absence of the factual basis for the plea when accepting nolo contendere pleas.[^95] Alford establishes that two criteria be met before the trial court can accept an Alford plea: (1) the defendant must intelligently conclude it is in his best interest to plead guilty; and (2) there must be evidence in the record of actual guilt.[^96] The Court found the testimony presented in Alford's trial established a strong factual basis of his guilt.[^97] Additionally, the Court found that Alford had clearly expressed his desire to enter the plea.[^98] Based on this analysis, the majority concluded the trial judge had not committed error by accepting Alford's plea.[^99] Thus, based on Alford a trial court should not accept a guilty plea when the defendant claims innocence until, at a minimum, the court has established the factual basis required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(f). A Rule 11(f) factual inquiry attempts to resolve the conflict inherent between the waiver of trial and the claim of innocence.[^100] Importantly, courts must establish the factual basis for such pleas from evidence outside the statements of the accused.[^101] It is this aspect of Alford (the quantum of proof required to establish the factual basis of the guilty plea) which has generated the most disagreement among the lower courts. B. The Standard of Proof Required to Establish Guilt Before Accepting an Alford Plea Did the Alford majority intend to require the lower courts to employ a higher standard of proof than required by Rule 11(f) before accepting Alford-type guilty pleas, or was it simply commenting on the quantum of evidence present in the Alford case only? The disagreement among lower courts concerning the required standard undoubtedly results from the lack of guidance given by the Supreme Court in Alford concerning this issue. Standards have varied widely, from "evidence merely sufficient to avoid a directed verdict,"[^102] to a statutorily required standard of beyond a reasonable doubt.[^103] The Federal Courts of Appeals are almost equally split over this issue. The Fourth,[^104] Sixth,[^105] and Tenth[^106] Circuits have held Alford requires no higher standard than Rule 11(f), which grants the trial judge wide discretion in determining if a factual basis exists. The Third,[^107] Seventh,[^108] and Ninth[^109] Circuits require "strong evidence" in addition to Rule 11(f)'s establishment of a factual basis. The Fifth Circuit requires a factual basis "precise enough and sufficiently specific to show that the accused's conduct on the occasion involved was within the ambit of that defined as criminal."[^110] The Ninth Circuit, in United States v. Alber,[^111] adopted the requirement of a "strong factual basis" if the defendant enters a guilty plea while continuing to assert his innocence.[^112] However, at another point in its opinion, the Alber court states, "The court need not be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt than (sic) an accused is guilty. It need only be convinced that there is sufficient evidence to justify the reaching of such a conclusion."[^113] In United States v. Morrow[^114] the Fourth Circuit stated: "because an Alford plea is a variation of a guilty plea, a court accepting such a plea must comply with the basic requirements outlined in Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(f)."[^115] Morrow charged that the trial court's acceptance of his plea was in error because it lacked a strong factual basis.[^116] The Fourth Circuit held a trial court has wide discretion in determining whether a factual basis exists.[^117] Although the court held compliance with Rule 11(f) was sufficient to establish the factual basis of Morrow's plea, it also opined that Rule 11 itself required a "strong" factual basis.[^118] Contrast Morrow with United States v. Tunning.[^119] In Tunning the Sixth Circuit held there is no "special" factual requirement when accepting an Alford plea. After analyzing many of the other Circuit's decisions, including Alber and Morrow, Judge Ryan, writing for the majority, stated: > We hold today that there is no difference in the requirements of Fed. > R. Crim. P. 11(f) for a defendant who pleads guilty and admits to acts > constituting the crime and a defendant who pleads guilty but who > either 1) affirmatively protests his innocence or 2) refuses to admit > to acts constituting the crime; that is, either of the two possible > Alford-type guilty pleas. "\[S\]trong evidence of actual guilt" is > not necessary to satisfy Rule 11(f), even where a defendant protests > his innocence. Just as for any guilty plea, when a defendant desires > to enter an Alford-type guilty plea, Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(f) requires > only that the district court "satisfy it\[self\] that there is a > factual basis for the plea." United States v. Tunning, 69 F. 3d at > 111-12. The Tenth Circuit, in United States v. Keiswetter, highlights the lower court's confusion concerning the factual basis requirement of an Alford-type guilty plea: > Contrary to the assertion in the dissent, it is not clear that > Alford mandated a finding of "strong evidence" in every case. > Rather, because the record in that case revealed "strong evidence" of > the defendant's guilt, the plea of guilty was not constitutionally > infirm. Neither Alford, nor any case subsequent to Alford, suggest > that "strong evidence" is the only constitutionally adequate standard > for the acceptance of an Alford plea. The outer limits of factual > basis sufficiency for an Alford plea have yet to be defined.[^120] With this backdrop, courts, while recognizing the validity of the plea, have taken different paths in determining the propriety of accepting Alford-type guilty pleas. ### C. The Acceptance of Alford Pleas Although the courts have recognized the validity of the Alford plea, they have taken different paths in addressing the desirability of accepting such pleas. The Supreme Court in Alford held that a trial court does not violate due process when accepting a guilty plea from a defendant claiming innocence.[^121] The Court also made clear that criminal defendants do not have a right to acceptance of their Alford pleas.[^122] Alford expressly notes that states are free to accept or reject the use of such pleas.[^123] Federal judges are likewise free to reject Alford pleas (as well as nolo contendere pleas entered pursuant to Rule 11).[^124] However, the Court did not delineate the scope of the trial judge's discretion in accepting or rejecting Alford pleas. Various circuits have accepted the Supreme Court's invitation in Alford to explore the scope of the trial court's discretion to accept or reject a guilty plea.[^125] A majority have held that a district court can reject a guilty plea simply because the defendant protests his innocence.[^126] One commentator, referring to the wide latitude invited by the Supreme Court's language, has written "the practical effect is to create a system in which defendants have no rights and trial courts can do no wrong."[^127] Contrary to this view, trial courts have not been automatically affirmed when rejecting Alford-type guilty pleas. An example is United States v. Gaskins.[^128] In Gaskins the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held the trial judge abused his discretion by rejecting Gaskin's guilty plea solely because he refused to admit guilt. Such an outcome was also suggested in Farley v. Glanton[^129] where, in a footnote, the Supreme Court of Iowa stated that a policy of uniformly refusing Alford pleas might amount to refusal by the judge to exercise his discretion (which would constitute reversible error). In United States v. Cox,[^130] a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, the trial judge's rejection of an Alford plea was found proper because it preserved the appearance of fairness of the justice system in the public's eye.[^131] Additionally, the Seventh Circuit emphasized the importance of giving the trial judge wide discretion in this area: > Restricting a district court's discretion to reject Alford pleas > could produce even more difficulties. We could not support a principle > under which, if the \[trial\] court refused to accept a plea, the > defendant after trial and a conviction and a sentence not to his > liking could return and freely litigate the correctness of the court's > finding that the requirements of Rule 11 had not been fully met.[^132] Perhaps because of this conflict between guilt and innocence inherent in permitting a defendant to enter an Alford plea, its acceptance by the lower courts has been "luke-warm." ### D. The Present Status of the Alford Plea Many state and federal courts have embraced the Alford plea.[^133] A few states, however, have refused to recognize Alford-type guilty pleas. These states, like the military, require a defendant who pleads guilty to personally admit they committed the crimes charged.[^134] According to at least two commentators, the Alford plea has fallen into general disfavor.[^135] This position of disfavor is not without support as several courts have commented on the "unusualness" of such a plea. For example, in United States v. Morrow[^136] the Fourth Circuit stated: > We agree with the Fifth Circuit's assessment of the plea: Although > excellent reasons exist for permitting an Alford plea, the logic > underlying this type of plea is counter-intuitive. The average > defendant may have some difficulty reconciling himself to the notion > of pleading guilty while maintaining his innocence.... It is essential > that a court accepting an Alford plea make every effort to ensure > that a defendant recognize precisely what his plea entails.[^137] Alford pleas are clearly disfavored by the Department of Justice. According to the Principles of Federal Prosecution:[^138] > The attorney for the government should not, except with the approval > of the Assistant Attorney General with supervisory responsibility over > the subject matter, enter into a plea agreement if the defendant > maintains his innocence with respect to the charge or charges to which > he offers to plead guilty. If the defendant tenders a plea of guilty > but denies that he has in fact committed the offense(s), the attorney > for the government should make an offer of proof of all facts known to > the government to support the conclusion that the defendant is in fact > guilty.[^139] The Comment to this section states that despite the constitutional validity of Alford pleas, such pleas should be avoided except in the most unusual circumstances, even if no plea agreement is involved and the plea would cover all pending charges.[^140] According to the Comment, such pleas are particularly undesirable when entered as part of an agreement with the government.[^141] Involvement by the government in the inducement of guilty pleas by defendants who protest their innocence may create the appearance of prosecutorial overreaching.[^142] The Comment further states that it is preferable to have a jury resolve the factual and legal dispute between the government and the defendant, rather than have government attorneys encourage defendants to plead guilty under circumstances that the public might regard as questionable or unfair.[^143] While there may be some uneasiness in handling an Alford-type guilty plea, before rejecting its use its potential advantages and disadvantages should be examined. V. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF AN **ALFORD-TYPE GUILTY PLEA** ### A. Potential Advantages of an Alford-Type Guilty Plea Most attorneys accept plea bargaining as proper and "good," providing advantages to both the defendant and the prosecutor. The value of plea bargaining was acknowledged by the Supreme Court in Santobello v. New York,[^144] wherein the Court stated: "The disposition of criminal charges by agreement between the prosecutor and the accused, sometimes loosely called 'plea bargaining', is an essential component of the administration of justice. Properly administered, it is to be encouraged." [^145] Plea bargaining is an efficient means of disposing of criminal cases. It provides the government a sure conviction, and the accused a sentence ceiling. Permitting the use of an Alford plea expands the options available when negotiating such agreements. The options currently available in military plea bargaining are more limited. The common practice in military plea bargaining permits the accused to plead guilty either to a lesser included offense, or to less than all charges and specifications. With a pretrial agreement in hand, the government may choose to forego expending the time and effort necessary to prove the greater offense (or the remaining charges and specifications). The government may also choose, unless specifically bargained away in the pretrial agreement, to prove the greater offense (or the remaining charge(s) and specification(s)). When choosing that option the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the greater offense or additional charges.[^146] Contrast that with Alford where the government carries a lower burden (i.e., strong evidence of guilt or simply a factual basis). In fact, it may have been the potential inability of the government to meet its burden of proof that led to a pretrial agreement which permits the accused to plead not guilty to certain charges.[^147] During pretrial agreement negotiations defense counsel often indicate to the government that the accused cannot plead to the offenses as charged because he is not "provident" to one or more of the charges or specifications. Pursuant to Care[^148] and R.C.M. 910 the military judge cannot accept a guilty plea if the accused raises matters inconsistent with the plea or refuses to admit criminal culpability to each element of each offense. The government must then choose between permitting the accused to plead to lesser included offenses and/or less than all the charges, or proving its case. The adoption of Alford-type guilty pleas makes another option available. If the government desires conviction of all charged offenses, or insists on a plea of guilty to certain "major" offenses, the accused's inability to be "provident" would no longer be a barrier to conviction. Assuming that an accused desires the benefits gained from such a plea, the accused could enter an Alford-type plea thereby eliminating the need for a providency inquiry concerning those charges. This option becomes especially important in sex offense crimes such as rape or carnal knowledge.[^149] An accused who has committed rape will often seek to enter a "traditional" guilty plea to indecent assault, a lesser included offense of rape,[^150] or if the victim is a minor, indecent acts (or liberties) with a minor.[^151] Persons guilty of such offenses are often extremely reluctant to admit committing such offenses. This is partly based on the disdain society has placed on these crimes and those who commit them. On the other hand, while an accused may be reluctant to admit guilt to the charged offense, he may be willing to enter an Alford plea to the charge of rape in order to lessen the potential maximum punishment faced. To illustrate, the government might be willing to enter a pretrial agreement for 15 years only if the accused enters an Alford plea to rape.[^152] The maximum punishment for rape is death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.[^153] The maximum punishments for two of the potential lesser included offenses of rape are: (1) indecent assault-dishonorable discharge, total forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 5 years;[^154] and (2) indecent acts or liberties with a child-dishonorable discharge, total forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 7 years.[^155] The government may be unwilling to accept a plea to a lesser included offense based on the facts and the significantly reduced maximum punishments. On the other hand, the government may assess the strength of its case and determine the charge of rape, while appropriate, presents difficulties in proof. In such a case, an Alford plea would serve the interests of justice well. Once the Alford plea is entered, the government's burden of proof as to the rape is lowered to simply showing a sufficient factual basis of the accused's guilt, making the task of convicting the accused for this charge much easier; and the accused receives a limitation on his sentence while maintaining his innocence. Further, although the accused's sentence is limited, the government has the potential to gain greater confinement than was available under the lesser included offenses (15 years versus 5 or 7 years). Moreover, the government now stands a greater chance of obtaining punishment equal to or greater than the 15-year deal with a conviction of rape versus one for indecent assault or indecent acts.[^156] Additionally, if the government convicts the accused of additional offenses after an Alford plea, it may receive the same "aggravation effect" on sentencing as if the accused had fully contested the charge(s). From a theoretical standpoint, the final outcome is no different: The accused said he didn't do it, but the fact-finder has found that he did. The government may have actually gained additional ammunition for aggravation because arguably the accused has not accepted responsibility for his criminal acts.[^157] The Alford plea can also be attractive to the accused and his defense attorney. Military defense counsel often encounter clients who, in the face of overwhelming evidence of guilt, continue to maintain their innocence. This places the defense counsel between the proverbial "rock and a hard place." Defense counsel cannot ethically "force" their clients to plead guilty to a crime they say they didn't commit, yet it appears to be in their clients' best interest to avoid contesting a sure loser. Assuming there is no lesser included offense(s) to which the client is willing to admit guilt, the present UCMJ pleas of "guilty" or "not guilty"[^158] trap the accused and defense counsel into pleading "not guilty." This sometimes forecloses the possibility of a pretrial agreement and requires the client to risk receiving the maximum punishments available to the court-martial. It is certain that more than one innocent[^159] accused has "lied" to the court during the providency inquiry in order to protect his pretrial agreement. A policy that encourages untruthfulness tarnishes the integrity of the system and undermines the very basis of the military guilty plea. The counter-argument is that that is exactly what an Alford plea does in reverse: it permits a guilty accused to "lie" about his guilt to the court, while receiving the benefit of a pretrial agreement. There is, however, one important difference between these two scenarios. Under the military's present providency inquiry rules the accused is required, under oath, to admit guilt.[^160] The accused, if he believes himself innocent, is therefore committing perjury if he or she "admits" guilt.[^161] Some observers might feel this is of little consequence. If an individual is willing to send himself or herself to jail for a crime he didn't commit, no one is injured but the accused. This overlooks the "perjury"--which decreases confidence in our system of military justice.[^162] On the other hand, with the adoption of an Alford-type plea the accused is saying "I'm innocent but I knowingly and voluntarily want to plead guilty anyway because it is in my best interest." There is no need for a providency inquiry which requires the accused, under oath, to "prove" his guilt. Rather, the government is required, independent of the accused's statements, to establish the factual basis of guilt. The guilty accused is not committing perjury while proclaiming innocence,[^163] and the burden is placed back upon the government to produce sufficient evidence of the accused's guilt. The accused may maintain his innocence while receiving the protection of a pretrial agreement. This alternative should greatly improve the relationship between the client and defense attorney. Once the accused is aware of the Alford option, he should have no reason to lie to his attorney (or the military judge) concerning his guilt in order to avail himself of an advantageous pretrial agreement. While there are many attractive advantages to adopting the Alford plea, there are likewise several disadvantages that deserve discussion. ### B. Potential Disadvantages of an Alford-Type Guilty Plea Among the potential disadvantages to adopting the Alford plea are: (1) the erosion of a basic premise of American justice that only guilty persons are convicted; (2) potential loss of confidence in the military criminal justice system; (3) fear that the plea will be overused; (4) the danger of repeated collateral attacks once the plea is accepted; and (5) the possible harm such pleas may have to accuseds and victims alike. 1. Ensuring Only Guilty Accused Are Convicted. Probably the most troubling aspect of an Alford plea is the potential to undermine what is arguably the most fundamental underpinning of our criminal justice system: that only the truly guilty are convicted and punished. The United States, in fashioning its criminal justice system, has taken great pains to reduce the risk of convicting an innocent defendant.[^164] Before Alford there were three methods used to determine guilt: (1) admission of guilt by the accused; (2) a plea of nolo contendere; or (3) conviction after a contested trial on the merits. Because the conviction of an innocent person is to be avoided, the adoption of a process that not only permits, but potentially encourages innocent people to plead guilty, deserves careful examination.[^165] One might argue the plea of nolo contendere has permitted this for hundreds of years. However, with a nolo plea an accused is not really pleading guilty or not guilty, he is refusing to contest his guilt. With an Alford plea. the accused is affirmatively asserting his innocence. 2. Loss of Confidence in Military Justice System. A second pitfall of the Alford plea is the potential loss of confidence in our military justice system. It can be problematic for the government to explain to the public how a soldier professing his innocence can be convicted and sentenced pursuant to a guilty plea. The following passage from United States v. Bednarski[^166] is illustrative of this concern: > We see at least two reasons why the \[trial\] court must have > discretion whether or not to accept a plea even though a strong case > may be made as to its voluntariness. The first is that a conviction > affects more than the court and the defendant; the public is involved. > However legally sound the Alford principle, which we of course do > not dispute, the public might well not understand or accept the fact > that a defendant who denied his guilt was nonetheless placed in a > position of pleading guilty and going to jail . . . .[^167] This concern may be ill-founded. We routinely convict and sentence members of the armed forces (after a contested trial) who continue to profess their innocence. Also, one must not forget that an Alford plea is not an absolute right. As previously discussed, the Supreme Court vested trial courts with great discretion to determine the appropriateness of accepting any guilty plea based on the accused's waiver of rights and the government's evidence sufficiently showing guilt. If the military judge has valid concerns about the accused's true guilt, an Alford plea should not be accepted. It is hard to imagine an appeals court would find that a judge abused his discretion by rejecting an Alford plea offer based on a finding that there was insufficient evidence of the accused's guilt. Furthermore, one should not forget that the Alford plea is a negotiated plea. The government must agree to the terms of any pretrial agreement, including the type of plea to be entered by the accused. The accused does not have an independent right to an Alford plea coupled with a pretrial agreement (or any other combination of guilty plea and pretrial agreement).[^168] 3. Fear that the Plea will be Overused. An accused in the military receives little benefit from an Alford-type guilty plea if there is no corresponding pretrial agreement. An accused who pleads guilty without the benefit of a pretrial agreement will normally receive credit from the court during sentencing for accepting responsibility and saving the government the time and expense of a contested trial. An Alford-type guilty plea arguably does not accomplish either of these goals. The absence of a sentence cap would likely dissuade the accused from entering an Alford-type plea. Thus, in cases where no pretrial agreement has been reached, accuseds are not likely to seek Alford-type pleas. Further, the government in this type of case would gain little from agreeing to this approach. The accused is not accepting responsibility for his criminal acts, and the government, because there is no stipulation of fact, is put to at least the minimal time and expense of presenting a factual basis of the accused's guilt. Finally, since the Alford plea is negotiated, it can't be unilaterally overruled by the defense. 4. The Fear of Collateral Attack. There are always at least two potential avenues of attack upon an Alford plea: the voluntariness of the plea, or the adequacy of the evidence as to guilt. The concern over post-trial attacks is lessened by the broad discretion given to the trial court in accepting Alford pleas. A successful appeal of an Alford plea based solely upon the acceptance by the trial court of the plea is unlikely. This is especially true if Rule 11(f) has been properly followed.[^169] 5. Harm to Victims and Accused. Another area of concern is the impact Alford-type guilty pleas may have on victims. At least one author argues that permitting a defendant to enter an Alford plea robs the victim of the ability to place the criminal experience behind them. In his article, The Retributive Theory of "Just Deserts" and Victim Participation in Plea Bargaining,[^170] David Starkweather argues that only a plea process that emphasizes offender responsibility enables a victim to accept what happened and reach a point of "forgiveness."[^171] In his opinion, an Alford plea is a "green light" to criminals to ignore "guilt" whenever it is expedient to do so.[^172] The wrongdoer's refusal to admit guilt stymies victims' ability to "get on with their life." Additionally, permitting a defendant to make his way through the criminal justice system without admitting responsibility for his actions increases a victim's sense of alienation. It also fails to satisfy an important historical foundation of punishment, that of retribution. In Starkweather's view the ultimate goal of retribution is "to permit the criminal to atone for his crime and then be reconciled to society."[^173] In his opinion, an offender permitted to escape recognition of guilt will never reach the point of "atonement" and, therefore, the resulting goal of retribution is never achieved. These arguments are not persuasive. Undoubtedly, victims of crime desire that the perpetrator be convicted and punished for his crime(s). However, the distinction to a victim between a traditional guilty plea and an Alford plea is arguably insignificant. The primary concern of most victims is the conviction (and appropriate punishment) of the perpetrator. The means used to reach these goals are less important after all. Victims are satisfied with results when the accused denies guilt, yet is found guilty after a litigated trial and subsequently punished. To argue that retribution can only be exacted by a confession of guilt misses the mark. It is the conviction and the resulting punishment which serve, at least partly, the retributive purpose. To argue otherwise would mean victims are satisfied with an admission of guilt but no consequences to the admission. The military is presently required to include victims in the plea bargaining process.[^174] This would ensure a victim's concerns over a possible Alford plea are properly addressed. A wise trial counsel will rarely disregard a victim's wishes in this area. This is especially true if the government has a strong case and there is little risk of acquittal.[^175] The next section assumes that the Alford plea has been adopted for use in the military. As discussed in the introduction to this paper, there are several issues which deserve analysis (and resolution) since adoption by the military of an Alford plea will require several changes to our present guilty plea practice. *VI. ISSUES IF AN ALFORD-TYPE* GUILTY PLEA IS ADOPTED Issues generated by the military's adoption of an Alford-type plea include: (1) what preliminary inquiry, if any, should be conducted by the military judge prior to accepting the plea?; (2) what standard of proof should be required to establish the factual basis of the plea?; (3) how useful will stipulations be in meeting this standard of proof?; (4) to what extent (during sentencing) an Alford-type plea should be considered as aggravation or mitigation; and (5) what jury instructions, if any, should be developed to properly instruct members concerning the existence and effect of the accused's Alford-type guilty plea? A. The Guilty Plea Inquiry. Adoption by the military of the Alford plea would require several changes to our present guilty plea practice. As discussed in Section IV, the Manual for Courts-Martial sets forth several requirements before the military judge may accept a guilty plea. Underlying these requirements is the desire to ensure that the accused's plea is knowing, voluntary and factually-based. To accomplish this end the military judge must (among other requirements) ensure the accused understands: $1$ the legal effect of his plea;[^176] $2$ the rights he foregoes when entering a plea of guilty;[^177] > $3$ the minimum mandatory (if any) and maximum punishment authorized > by law in the case;[^178] and > > $4$ if made pursuant to a pretrial agreement, the meaning and effect > of the agreement.[^179] If the Alford plea is adopted, several aspects of the guilty plea inquiry will require revision. Perhaps the most significant change is that the military judge must determine that a factual basis exists for the plea from sources other than the accused.[^180] This will require R.C.M. 910 to be revised. As we have seen, a major part of the guilty plea inquiry consists of the providency inquiry pursuant to R.C.M. 910. During this stage of the court-martial the accused is placed under oath and questioned by the military judge. The accused is required, by his answers, to establish the factual basis of his guilty plea.[^181] Because the accused in an Alford plea is refusing to admit guilt, this inquiry will no longer be required (just as it is omitted in federal courts when accepting a plea of nolo contendere). Therefore, R.C.M.s 910(c)(5) and 910(e) should be amended to exclude the requirement that the accused be questioned under oath concerning the factual basis of charges to which an Alford plea is being entered. The basis of the accused's guilt will then be proven by introduction by the government of proof sufficient to meet the factual basis threshold required by the Supreme Court and R.C.M. 910(e) (which is consistent with Rule 11(f))[^182] Such evidence could consist of one or more of the following: (1) stipulations of fact; (2) stipulations of expected testimony; (3) live witnesses; or (4) documentary or physical evidence. In federal courts the factual basis may be established by stipulation, an offer of proof by the government, the presentence report,[^183] or the accused's confession. As the court in United States v. Sweet[^184] observed, "because the accused servicemember may not plead nolo contendere or plead guilty while proclaiming innocence, these alternative methods of establishing a factual basis for guilty pleas have not been adopted for military practice."[^185] The adoption of additional methods of proof must also be considered if an Alford-type guilty plea is established in the military justice system. While we have no equivalent to the presentence report, the ability of the government to make an offer of proof would be especially helpful to trial counsel, as would the introduction of an accused's pretrial statements without having to meet the formality of proof now required.[^186] ### B. The Use of Stipulations Stipulations of fact are written documents, signed by the trial counsel, defense counsel, and the accused, setting forth the undisputed facts surrounding the offenses. The courts encourage the use of stipulations.[^187] The requirement of a stipulation of fact in connection with a negotiated guilty plea is virtually automatic.[^188] This is the simplest use of a stipulation of fact. The accused, in return for a sentence cap, agrees that the facts necessary to prove each element of each charged offense are true. Additionally, stipulations of fact often remove the necessity for the government to call witnesses during sentencing. If the accused has only pleaded guilty to lesser-included offenses, the stipulation may ease the government's burden in proving the greater offense(s). In this type of case the accused agrees to some (but not all) of the facts necessary to prove each element of each charged offense. The government therefore relies on the guilty plea inquiry and the stipulation to obtain conviction on the lesser-included offense(s), and as a basis for going forward on the greater offense(s).[^189] The government, as part of a pretrial agreement, can also require the accused to enter into what is called a confessional stipulation of fact. Such stipulations of fact are authorized by R.C.M. 705(c)(2)(A).[^190] The court of Military Appeals first recognized confessional stipulations in the case of United States v. Bertelson.[^191] Bertelson was convicted of distributing methamphetamine after a plea of not guilty and the introduction of a confessional stipulation. Bertelson had originally attempted to plead guilty, but the military judge rejected his plea as being improvident[^192] based on Bertelson's claim that he lacked predisposition to commit the crime.[^193] In order to maintain the sentence limitation contained in the pretrial agreement, Bertelson agreed to every fact needed to prove his guilt in a stipulation of fact. In Bertelson the Court of Military Appeals defined a confessional stipulation as a "stipulation which practically amounts to a confession."[^194] While confirming the accused must first knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily consent to admission of the stipulation,[^195] the court also noted that once the accused knowingly consents to the admission of any objectionable evidence, it is irretrievable.[^196] Although the Bertelson court affirmed the validity of "confessional stipulations"[^197] it set forth two requirements for their use: the accused must knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily consent to its admission;[^198] and the military judge must ascertain from the accused, on the record, that a factual basis exists for the stipulation.[^199] The court therefore adopted the necessity of a Care-like inquiry.[^200] If this inquiry produces inconsistencies the military judge must reject the stipulation.[^201] The military judge may also, in the interest of justice, decline to accept a stipulation.[^202] Rule for Courts-Martial 811 sets forth the general rules for the acceptance of any stipulation (whether pertaining to a fact, a document, or expected testimony). As a first step, the judge must ensure that the parties consent to its admission.[^203] The Discussion to R.C.M. 811(c) capsulizes the Bertelson court's holdings.[^204] If the stipulation practically amounts to a confession to which a not guilty plea is outstanding,[^205] it may not be accepted unless the military judge ascertains from the accused: > $1$ That the accused understands the right not to stipulate and that > the stipulation will not be accepted without the accused's consent; > > $2$ That the accused understands the contents and effect of the > stipulation; > > $3$ That a factual basis exists for the stipulation; and > > $4$ That the accused, after consulting with counsel, consents to the > stipulation. The court must also ascertain from the accused and counsel for each party whether there are any agreements between the parties in connection with the stipulation. If there is an agreement, the judge must determine its terms.[^206] As previously discussed, the government often uses stipulations of fact in "proving up" one or more of the charges to be litigated. An accused who is unwilling to accept guilt on certain offenses may readily admit to certain inculpating facts concerning these offenses in return for the protection afforded by a pretrial agreement. Once protected by the pretrial agreement the accused no longer fears the consequences of conviction on the additional charges.[^207] Such an arrangement may also be attractive to the government.[^208] This method of using stipulations would presumably be employed on a regular basis with Alford-type guilty pleas.[^209] The accused would maintain his innocence, accept the benefits of a negotiated pretrial agreement, and provide, in part, the ammunition necessary for the government to prove the factual basis of the desired charge(s). A second type of stipulation, a stipulation of expected testimony, also deserves brief discussion. A stipulation of expected testimony, as it's name denotes, is a stipulation between the parties that a witness, if called, would testify as to certain matters.[^210] Such stipulations are recognized in the military.[^211] Importantly, an accused who permits a stipulation of expected testimony to be used is not necessarily agreeing to the truthfulness of such testimony.[^212] In spite of this limitation the government, in conjunction with an Alford-type plea, can make good use of such evidence in order to meet its burden of proof as to guilt, and/or in support of the government's sentencing case. We have previously discussed the potential usefulness of the Alford plea in some of the most difficult cases faced by the government and accuseds: child sex abuse prosecutions. It is these cases which present the most challenging problems of proof, not to mention the reluctance of accuseds to accept responsibility by pleading guilty.[^213] A sex offender unable or unwilling to admit culpability in the face of possible conviction (and substantial confinement) could now maintain his innocence while protecting himself by negotiating a pretrial agreement. The government obtains a sure conviction without requiring the child victim to testify on the merits, or possibly at all.[^214] By requiring the accused, as part of the pretrial agreement, to stipulate to as many inculpating facts as possible (short of a "full" confessional stipulation) the government has saved time, effort and expense. The government could then supplement the stipulation with additional evidence, as needed, to satisfy the factual basis requirement of R.C.M. 910(e).[^215] This result is positive for all concerned. The government obtains what could have been a difficult conviction with relative ease. The child victim is spared the ordeal of having to face the abuser and the resulting trauma so often connected with a fully contested trial. The accused maintains his innocence while protecting himself from the potentially devastating results of conviction after a contest. The sentencing advantages gained by the government, as previously discussed, are twofold: (1) the potential for negotiating a "higher" confinement ceiling; and (2) a better chance of reaching the sentence ceiling agreed upon by the accused.[^216] ### C. The Standard of Proof As discussed in Section II, it is possible that many lower courts have relied on the requirements of Rule 11(f) because they are familiar with its standard, and realize prosecutors required to meet a beyond a reasonable doubt burden would likely be reluctant to accept Alford pleas. The standard should not be proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The Supreme Court does not require it, and more importantly, the main attraction to the government of an Alford plea is the lessened burden of proof. This becomes important for the government because of the relative ease in proving the charges; the potential savings of time and effort; and the elimination of "live" testimony. Should an Alford-type guilty plea be adopted by the military, the present quantum of proof required to meet the factual basis of R.C.M. 910(e) should be sufficient to firmly establish the accused's guilt. R.C.M. 910(e) states: "The military judge shall not accept a plea of guilty without making such inquiry of the accused as shall satisfy the military judge that there is a factual basis for the plea." With adoption of an Alford-type plea the government should only be required to provide a factual basis sufficient to satisfy the military judge. Besides being constitutionally adequate, the present standard is one with which military judges and military appellate courts are already competent in evaluating. The potential gain from a higher burden of proof would be the possible prevention of convicting the truly innocent accused. This protection does not outweigh the advantages offered by our present standard. D. The Extent of Mitigation to be Afforded *an Alford-Type Guilty Plea* The mitigation normally associated with a guilty plea is divided between credit for acceptance of responsibility and the guilty plea's contribution to judicial economy. The acceptance of responsibility for one's crime(s) is seen as an indicator of one's potential for rehabilitation. In the military, rehabilitative potential is defined as "the accused's potential to be restored, through vocational, correctional, or therapeutic training or other corrective measures to a useful and constructive place in society."[^217] Court members are presently instructed that a guilty plea "may be the first step towards rehabilitation."[^218] Should an accused who enters an Alford-type guilty plea be entitled to receive such an instruction? It is helpful to examine, by analogy, how federal courts, under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines (hereinafter Guidelines),[^219] have answered this question. These Guidelines assign various point totals for particular crimes and employ an elaborate system of adding and subtracting points based on the circumstances surrounding the crime and the particular characteristics of the defendant. The final point total determines the sentencing range available to the court.[^220] Section 3E1.1 of the Guidelines, entitled "Acceptance of Responsibility," provides: > $a$ If the defendant clearly demonstrates a recognition and > affirmative acceptance of responsibility for his criminal conduct, > reduce the offense level by 2 levels. > > $b$ A defendant may be given consideration under this section > without regard to whether his conviction is based upon a guilty plea > or a finding of guilty by the court or jury or the practical certainty > of conviction at trial. > > $c$ A defendant who enters a guilty plea is not entitled to a > sentencing reduction under this section as a matter of right.[^221] The following principles, therefore, govern acceptance of responsibility under federal practice: the defendant bears the burden of "proving" to the court he has accepted responsibility for his criminal conduct; the basis of the conviction is irrelevant to this determination; and the entry of a guilty plea does not automatically entitle the defendant to this "credit." The Sixth Circuit, in United States v. Tucker,[^222] held that entry of an Alford plea does not, per se, preclude a sentence reduction for acceptance of responsibility.[^223] The court analyzed this issue as follows: > At first glance, it may be perfectly logical that a defendant's > pleading guilty while maintaining his innocence does not amount to > accepting responsibility. A closer look at the Guideline, however, > indicates that an Alford plea does not bar such a reduction. First, > the language of the Guideline states that a court may not consider > that a guilty plea is based on "the practical certainty of conviction > at trial." This language recognizes the problem addressed by Alford > pleas and arguably allows a reduction despite such pleas. Second, the > factors to be considered by the court in considering requests for an > acceptance of responsibility reduction are not inconsistent with > Alford pleas. For example, a defendant, while pleading guilty and > maintaining his innocence may still voluntarily resign from the office > or position held during the commission of the offense, Application > Note 1(f), or voluntarily assist the authorities in recovering the > fruits and instrumentalities of the offense, Application Note > 1(e).[^224] While not holding an Alford plea to be an automatic disqualifier from receiving acceptance of responsibility credit, several courts, contrary to the Sixth Circuit's decision in Tucker, have considered the entry of an Alford plea in a negative light when determining acceptance of responsibility.[^225] A defendant's refusal to acknowledge essential elements of an offense is inconsistent with the commentary to the guidelines. The commentary states that truthful admission of the criminal conduct is relevant to determine if the defendant should receive this reduction (referring to acceptance of responsibility).[^226] If an unqualified guilty plea can serve as evidence of a defendant's acceptance of responsibility,[^227] then logically the qualifications a defendant states in his guilty plea can serve as evidence that he has not fully recognized and accepted personal responsibility for the crime.[^228] In United States v. Harlan,[^229] the trial judge stated: "Moreover, the court should point out that the defendant's nolo plea (mistakenly referring to the defendant's Alford plea) is not, in the court's mind, an acknowledgment of guilt nor can it be taken as an acceptance of responsibility as argued by counsel."[^230] Under this approach, an accused is not losing the right nor opportunity to introduce other types of mitigation evidence such as cooperation with the authorities, assistance in recovering stolen property, etc. What the accused forfeits is the positive inference that a "traditional" guilty plea carries. An accused should not receive even the inference, based on his Alford-type guilty plea, that he has taken the "first step towards rehabilitation." Therefore, the above instruction should be omitted when an Alford plea is entered by the accused. The accused is, however, entitled to receive some mitigation for his Alford guilty plea. By entering an Alford plea the accused saves the government time, effort, and expense. This is true even though the government may be forced to expend some effort above that normally associated with "traditional" guilty pleas. The amount of effort required by the government in any particular case depends on several factors. Among these are the complexities of the charges, the detail and scope of the stipulation of fact, and the difficulty and expense of obtaining additional evidence (if required). A closely related issue is the need, if any, for jury instructions to be given prior to the accused taking the stand during sentencing after he has entered an Alford-type guilty plea. ### E. Jury Instructions A modified instruction should be given concerning the entry by an accused of an Alford-type guilty plea. The present instruction reads as follows: "Time, effort and expense to the government (have been) (usually are) saved by a plea of guilty."[^231] The following is a suggested instruction: > The accused in this case has freely and voluntarily entered what is > referred to as an Alford-type plea. This plea permits the accused to > maintain his innocence while at the same time agreeing to plead guilty > and thereby waive his right to a trial as to his guilt or innocence. > The accused has determined it is in his best interests to enter such a > plea. An Alford-type guilty plea is a matter of mitigation which > must be considered along with all other facts and circumstances of the > case. Although not admitting culpability, time, effort, and expense to > the government (usually are) (have been) saved by the accused's plea > of guilty.[^232] The use of the Alford plea does present one additional issue in this area: The type of mitigation credit, and therefore instruction, which should be given if the accused enters a "split" guilty plea, i.e., an Alford-type guilty plea as to some charges or specifications and a "traditional" guilty plea as to others. Under these circumstances the accused deserves "full" mitigation credit. The military judge should therefore use the present language of the above instruction, including the phrase that the accused's plea "may be the first step towards rehabilitation." Although an accused facing many charges could misuse this inference by only admitting culpability to the least serious offense, accused servicemembers should receive the benefit of the doubt with respect to the instruction. Of course, the amount of mitigation offered by the court is discretionary.[^233] VII. LEGISLATIVE CHANGES REQUIRED IF **ALFORD-TYPE PLEA ADOPTED** Adoption of an Alford-type plea by the military would require a statutory change to Article 45, UCMJ, as well as amendments to R.C.M. 910. Article 45 presently requires a guilty plea to be rejected if the court becomes aware of any matter inconsistent with the plea.[^234] A suggested amendment to Article 45 is found in the Appendix to this article. Consistent with a change to Article 45, R.C.M. 910 and its comments would likewise require amendment.[^235] Changes to R.C.M. 910 could be accomplished by Executive Order since Congress has delegated to the President the authority to prescribe regulations respecting pretrial and post-trial procedure. These regulations may not conflict with the Code but must, so far as practical, apply principles of law and rules of evidence generally recognized in criminal tribunals in federal district courts.[^236] Suggested amendments to R.C.M. 910 and its comments are also found in the Appendix. VIII. CONCLUSION The military should adopt the Alford-type guilty plea as its benefits far outweigh its disadvantages. Accuseds who enter Alford pleas really fall into two categories: (1) those who are guilty but refuse for personal or tactical reasons to admit guilt; and (2) those who are innocent but fear the possibility of being wrongly convicted and thereby facing the potential of receiving the maximum punishment available to the court. We need not be concerned with the first group of accuseds. Conviction of a guilty person pursuant to an Alford-type plea is a proper result. The real focus should be on the possibility, or even likelihood, that innocent accuseds will find it advantageous to enter Alford-type pleas of guilt, thereby bringing upon themselves a "wrongful" conviction. Should we refuse to offer them, and by necessity all other accuseds, the option of an Alford-type plea? The author believes not. The overwhelming majority of accuseds brought before courts-martial today are guilty even though their guilt may be to a lesser included offense encompassed within the charged offense(s). Therefore, the number of accused who are now entering "traditional" guilty pleas, then lying during the providency inquiry in order to protect themselves from potentially severe punishments, is extremely small. This conclusion is based on the following: (1) trust and faith in the integrity of the military investigative community; (2) our ability as judge advocates to "screen out" cases when evidence is weak; and (3) perhaps, most importantly, the providence inquiry which an accused must undergo pursuant to Care. While not a widespread problem, adoption of the Alford-type plea should totally eliminate the need for an innocent person to lie to the court.[^237] The chances of a truly innocent person being convicted would further be screened by the requirement that the government establish an adequate factual basis for the plea. The government must satisfy the military judge that the accused, contrary to his protestations of innocence, is in fact guilty. In fairness to an accused, if, after consultation with his defense counsel, he knowingly and intelligently determines that his best interest is served by an Alford-type guilty plea, he should be free to choose this path. The system should not force him to lie under oath, nor to go to trial with no promise of the ultimate outcome concerning guilt or punishment. We must trust the accused to make such an important decision for himself. The military provides an accused facing court-martial with a qualified defense attorney. Together, they are in the best position to properly weigh the impact his decision, and the resulting conviction, will have upon himself and his family. The concern over the public's perception of Alford pleas, while arguably valid, should not prevent the adoption of this type of plea for the military. Trial counsel should take full advantage of the opportunity afforded by our present military practice, as well as any additional methods of proof instituted as part of the adoption of the Alford-type plea, to thwart the accused's efforts to project a public image of innocence. To minimize the adverse effects of Alford-type pleas on the public's perception of the administration of justice within the military, trial counsel should establish as strong a factual basis as possible for every Alford-type guilty plea.[^238] APPENDIX The changes recommended to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the Manual for Courts-Martial, are set forth below. Changes are denoted by italics. #### I. ARTICLE 45, UCMJ $a$ No change. If an accused after arraignment makes an irregular pleading, or after a plea of guilty sets up matter inconsistent with the plea, or if it appears that he has entered the plea of guilty improvidently or through lack of understanding of its meaning and effect, or if he fails or refuses to plead, a plea of not guilty shall be entered in the record, and the court shall proceed as though he had pleaded not guilty. $b$ No change. A plea of guilty by the accused may not be received to any charge or specification alleging an offense for which the death penalty may be adjudged. With respect to any other charge or specification to which a plea of guilty has been made by the accused and accepted by the military judge or by a court-martial without a military judge, a finding of guilty of the charge or specification may, if permitted by regulations of the Secretary concerned, be entered immediately without vote. This finding shall constitute the finding of the court unless the plea of guilty is withdrawn prior to announcement of the sentence, in which event the proceedings shall continue as though the accused had pleaded not guilty. $c$ Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraph (a), nothing in this Article prevents an accused from entering the type of plea authorized by the United States Supreme Court in North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970), commonly known as an Alford plea. ### II. RULE 910. PLEAS $a$ Alternatives. $1$ In general. An accused may plead as follows: guilty; not guilty to an offense as charged, but guilty of a named lesser included offense; guilty with exceptions, with or without substitutions, not guilty of the exceptions, but guilty of the substitutions, if any; or not guilty. The accused may enter an Alford-type guilty plea to any of the above guilty plea options. A plea of guilty may not be received as to an offense for which the death penalty may be adjudged by the court-martial. ##### Discussion See paragraph 2, Part IV, concerning lesser included offenses. When the plea is to a named lesser included offense without the use of exceptions and substitutions, the defense counsel should provide a written revised specification accurately reflecting the plea and request that the revised specification be included in the record as an appellate exhibit. A plea of guilty to a lesser included offense does not bar the prosecution from proceeding on the offense as charged. See also subsection (g) of this rule. Pleas pursuant to North Carolina v. Alford are now authorized in the military. See 400 U.S. 25 (1970). A plea of guilty does not prevent the introduction of evidence, either in support of the factual basis for the plea, or, after findings are entered, in aggravation. See R.C.M. 1001(b)(4). $2$ Conditional pleas (No change). With the approval of the military judge and the consent of the Government, an accused may enter a conditional plea of guilty, reserving the right, on further review or appeal, to review of the adverse determination of any specified pretrial motion. If the accused prevails on further review or appeal, the accused shall be allowed to withdraw the plea of guilty. The Secretary concerned may prescribe who may consent for Government; unless otherwise prescribed by the Secretary concerned, the trial counsel may consent on behalf of the Government. $b$ Refusal to plead; irregular plea (No change). If an accused fails or refuses to plead, or makes an irregular plea, the military judge shall enter a plea of not guilty for the accused. ### Discussion An irregular plea includes pleas such as guilty \[without criminality or\][^239] guilty to a charge but not guilty to all specifications thereunder. When a plea is ambiguous, the military judge should have it clarified before proceeding further. An Alford-type plea is not considered an irregular plea. $c$ Advice to accused (No change). Before accepting a plea of guilty, the military judge shall address the accused personally and inform the accused of, and determine that the accused understands, the following: $1$ (No change). The nature of the offense to which the plea is offered, the mandatory minimum penalty, if any, provided by law, and the maximum possible penalty provided by law. ### Discussion The elements of each offense to which the accused has pleaded guilty should be described to the accused. See also subsection (e) of this rule. $2$ (No change). In a general or special court-martial, if the accused is not represented by counsel, that the accused has the right to be represented by counsel at every stage of the proceedings. ### Discussion In a general or special court-martial, if the accused is not represented by counsel, a plea of guilty should not be accepted. $3$ (No change). That the accused has the right to plead not guilty or to persist in that plea if already made, and that the accused has the right to be tried by a court-martial, and that at such trial the accused has the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses against the accused, and the right against self-incrimination; $4$ (No change). That if the accused pleads guilty, there will not be a trial of any kind as to those offenses to which the accused has so pleaded, so that by pleading guilty the accused waives the rights described in subsection (c)(3) of this Rule; and $5$ Inquiry of Accused. $a$ New subparagraph (Present paragraph 5). That if the accused pleads guilty, the military judge will question the accused about the offenses to which the accused has pleaded guilty, and, if the accused answers these questions under oath, on the record, and in the presence of counsel, the accused\'s answers may later be used against the accused in a prosecution for perjury or false statement. $b$ New subparagraph. If the accused has entered an Alford-type plea to one or more of the charges, the inquiry set forth in subparagraph (a) will not be conducted as to those charges. ### Discussion The advice in subsection (5) is inapplicable in a court-martial in which the accused is not represented by counsel. An accused who enters an Alford-type plea to one or more charges does not accept full and complete responsibility concerning the charge(s). Therefore, it is inappropriate for the military judge to question the accused concerning these offenses. $d$ Ensuring that the plea is voluntary (No change). Ensuring that the plea is voluntary. The military judge shall not accept a plea of guilty without first, by addressing the accused personally, determining that the plea is voluntary and not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from a plea agreement under R.C.M. 705. The military judge shall also inquire whether the accused\'s willingness to plead guilty results from prior discussions between the convening authority, a representative of the convening authority, or trial counsel, and the accused or defense counsel. $e$ Determining accuracy of plea. $1$ New subparagraph (Present paragraph e). Determining accuracy of plea. The military judge shall not accept a plea of guilty without making such inquiry of the accused as shall satisfy the military judge that there is a factual basis for the plea. The accused shall be questioned under oath about the offenses. $2$ New subparagraph. If the accused has entered an Alford-type guilty plea to one or more of the charges, the inquiry set forth in subparagraph (e)(1) will not be conducted as to those charges. The Government shall have the burden of satisfying the military judge that there is a factual basis for the plea. ### Discussion ### ### (1) New subparagraph (Present Discussion). A plea of guilty must be in accord with the truth. Before the plea is accepted, the accused must admit every element of the offense(s) to which the accused pleaded guilty. Ordinarily, the elements should be explained to the accused. If any potential defense is raised by the accused\'s account of the offense or by other matter presented to the military judge, the military judge should explain such a defense to the accused and should not accept the plea unless the accused admits facts which negate the defense. If the statute of limitations would otherwise bar trial for the offense, the military judge should not accept a plea of guilty to it without an affirmative waiver by the accused. See R.C.M. 907(b)(2)(B). The accused need not describe from personal recollection all the circumstances necessary to establish a factual basis for the plea. Nevertheless the accused must be convinced of, and able to describe all the facts necessary to establish guilt. For example, an accused may be unable to recall certain events in an offense, but may still be able to adequately describe the offense based on witness statements or similar sources which the accused believes to be true. The accused should remain at the counsel table during questioning by the military judge. $2$ New subparagraph. An accused who enters an Alford-type plea to one or more charges is denying guilt as to those charges. Therefore, it is inappropriate for the military judge to question the accused concerning these offenses. The government may meet its burden of proving the factual basis by introducing the following: stipulations of fact, stipulations of expected testimony, witness testimony, documentary evidence, or physical evidence. These examples are not to be considered the only methods potentially available to the government to establish the factual basis of the plea. $f$ Plea agreement inquiry (No change). $1$ In general. A plea agreement may not be accepted if it does not comply with R.C.M. 705. $2$ Notice. The parties shall inform the military judge if a plea agreement exists. ###### Discussion The military judge should ask whether a plea agreement exists. See subsection (d) of this rule. Even if the military judge fails to so inquire or the accused answers incorrectly, counsel have an obligation to bring any agreements or understandings in connection with the plea to the attention of the military judge. $3$ Disclosure. If a plea agreement exists, the military judge shall require disclosure of the entire agreement before the plea is accepted, provided that in trial before military judge alone the military judge ordinarily shall not examine any sentence limitation contained in the agreement until after the sentence of the court-martial has been announced. $4$ Inquiry. The military judge shall inquire to ensure: $A$ That the accused understands the agreement; and $B$ That the parties agree to the terms of the agreement. ### Discussion If the plea agreement contains any unclear or ambiguous terms, the military judge should obtain clarification from the parties. If there is doubt about the accused\'s understanding of any terms in the agreement, the military judge should explain those terms to the accused. $g$ Findings (No change). Findings based on a plea of guilty may be entered immediately upon acceptance of the plea at an Article 39(a) session unless: (1) Such action is not permitted by regulations of the Secretary concerned; (2) The plea is to a lesser included offense and the prosecution intends to proceed to trial on the offense as charged; or $3$ Trial is by a special court-martial without a military judge, in which case the president of the court-martial may enter findings based on the pleas without a formal vote except when subsection (g)(2) of this rule applies. ### Discussion If the accused has pleaded guilty to some offenses but not to others, the military judge should ordinarily defer informing the members of the offenses to which the accused has pleaded guilty until after findings on the remaining offenses have been entered. See R.C.M. 913(a), Discussion and R.C.M. 920(e), Discussion, paragraph 3. $h$ Later action. $1$ Withdrawal by the accused (No change). Withdrawal by the accused. If after acceptance of the plea but before the sentence is announced the accused requests to withdraw a plea of guilty and substitute a plea of not guilty or a plea of guilty to a lesser included offense, the military judge may as a matter of discretion permit the accused to do so. $2$ Statements by accused inconsistent with plea (No change). Statements by accused inconsistent with plea. If after findings but before the sentence is announced the accused makes a statement to the court-martial, in testimony or otherwise, or presents evidence which is inconsistent with a plea of guilty on which a finding is based, the military judge shall inquire into the providence of the plea. If, following such inquiry, it appears that the accused entered the plea improvidently or through lack of understanding of its meaning and effect a plea of not guilty shall be entered as to the affected charges and specifications. ### Discussion When the accused withdraws a previously accepted plea for guilty or a plea of guilty is set aside, counsel should be given a reasonable time to prepare to proceed. In a trial by military judge alone, recusal of the military judge or disapproval of the request for trial by military judge alone will ordinarily be necessary when a plea is rejected or withdrawn after findings; in trial with members, a mistrial will ordinarily be necessary. $3$ New subparagraph. Alford-type guilty pleas. The requirements of subparagraph (h)(2) are not applicable to Alford-type pleas. However, if the military judge determines that the accused has entered an Alford-type plea to one or more charges or specifications through a lack of understanding of its meaning and effect, a plea of not guilty shall be entered as to the affected charge(s) and specification(s). $4$ New subparagraph (Present subparagraph (3)). Pretrial agreement inquiry. After sentence is announced the military judge shall inquire into any parts of a pretrial agreement which were not previously examined by the military judge. If the military judge determines that the accused does not understand the material terms of the agreement, or that the parties disagree as to such terms, the military judge shall conform, with the consent of the Government, the agreement to the accused\'s understanding or permit the accused to withdraw the plea. ### Discussion See subsection (f)(3) of this rule. An inquiry pursuant to R.C.M. 910(e)(1) is not conducted when an accused enters an Alford-type guilty plea. Therefore, the accused is not likely to make statements considered to be "inconsistent" with the Alford-type plea. It is still appropriate, however, for the military judge to ensure that the accused understands the meaning and effect of his Alford-type guilty plea. [^1]: ^\^ Major Walburn (B.A., Virginia Intermont College; J.D., University of Tennessee; LL.M., United States Army Judge Advocate General's School), is an instructor, The Air Force Judge Advocate General School, Maxwell AFB, Alabama. He is a member of the Bar in Tennessee.* [^2]: Mr. Simpson's infamous response when asked by Judge Ito, "How do you plead?" The People Of The State Of California v. Orenthal James Simpson, No. BA097211 (1995). [^3]: Uniform Code of Military Justice (1995 ed.) \[hereinafter UCMJ\], art. 130. Housebreaking carries a maximum punishment of dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 5 years. [^4]: UCMJ art. 134 (1995). Assault with intent to commit rape carries a maximum punishment of dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 20 years. [^5]: UCMJ art. 120 (1995). Rape carries a maximum punishment of death or other such punishment as a court-martial may direct. [^6]: Pursuant to the [Manual for Courts-Martial]{.smallcaps}, [United States]{.smallcaps}, R.C.M. 210(f)(1)(A)(iii)(b) (1995 ed.) \[hereinafter MCM\], if the case is not referred capital (permitting consideration of the death penalty as a punishment), the maximum confinement would be for life. [^7]: United States v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970). [^8]: Pursuant to R.C.M. 910(a), MCM, the pleas presently available in the military are: 1\. Guilty; 2\. Not guilty to an offense charged, but guilty of a named lesser included offense; 3\. Guilty with exceptions, with or without substitutions, not guilty of the exceptions, but guilty of the substitutions, if any; or 4\. Not guilty. Conditional guilty pleas are also permitted. MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 910(b). [^9]: An accused in the military can be convicted even if he does not personally remember committing the offense(s) if, after reviewing the evidence against him, he is in fact convinced he committed the offense(s). See Discussion, MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 910(e). [^10]: Curtis J. Shipley, The Alford Plea: A Necessary but Unpredictable Tool for the Criminal Defendant, 72 [Iowa L. Rev]{.smallcaps}. 1063 (1987). [^11]: See infra notes 34-40 and accompanying text. [^12]: Throughout the remainder of this article "Alford" and "Alford-type" pleas should be considered as synonymous. [^13]: United States v. Epps, 25 M.J. 319 (C.M.A. 1987). [^14]: There are two types of stipulations: stipulations of fact and stipulations of expected testimony. These are discussed in Section VI. [^15]: Two additional areas of court-martial practice could also be affected by adoption of the Alford plea: the admissibility of a prior conviction pursuant to Mil. R. Evid. 609 (see also Mil. R. Evid. 410), and the effect (if any) the Alford plea would have on our present hearsay exceptions (see Mil. R. Evid. 803(22)). These two areas are not considered a major concern in today's military since the chances of remaining on active duty for any length of time after conviction by a special or general court-martial is remote. [^16]: McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459 (1969). [^17]: Id. at 464. [^18]: Id. at 465-67. [^19]: Id. [^20]: Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969). [^21]: Id. at 243-44. [^22]: Id. at 243 n.5, citing Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938). [^23]: 4 May 1970. [^24]: Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (1970). [^25]: 18 U.S.C. § 1201 (1956). [^26]: This Act was similar to the North Carolina statute in Alford. [^27]: A similar argument was used in Alford. The Supreme Court distinguished Brady from United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570 (1968), by observing the Court in Jackson had prohibited imposition of the death penalty under § 1201(a); the Court did not hold that all guilty pleas encouraged by the fear of possible death are involuntary, nor did it invalidate such pleas whether involuntary or not. [^28]: McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759 (1970). [^29]: Id. at 766. [^30]: Parker v. North Carolina, 397 U.S. 790 (1970). [^31]: Parker also involved an attack upon an arguably coerced pretrial confession. Id. at 797. [^32]: During the trial Parker again admitted he had committed the murder. Id. at 798. [^33]: The Court held the advice received by Parker was "well within the range of competence required of attorneys representing defendants in criminal cases." Id. at 797-98. [^34]: Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258 (1973). [^35]: Review of guilty pleas when improper legal advice is alleged are examined under the present standard for determining effectiveness of counsel found in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984); see also Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985). [^36]: Based on these cases Rule 11 was modified in 1975. Although Rule 11 has also been amended several times since 1975, the basic requirements of these cases still control its application. Notably, Rule 11(h) expressly adopted a harmless-error standard when reviewing alleged violations of the procedures contained within the rule. This in effect overruled the part of McCarthy which held noncompliance with Rule 11 was per se prejudicial (See McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 471-72 (1969)). [^37]: Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(a). [^38]: The government may agree to do any of the following: $1$ move for dismissal of other charges; $2$ make a recommendation, or agree not to oppose the defendant's request, for a particular sentence, with the understanding such recommendation or request shall not be binding upon the court; or $3$ agree that a specific sentence is the appropriate disposition of the case. The plea agreement may require the defendant to plead guilty to the charged offense or a lesser or related offense. The court may not participate in plea bargaining discussions. Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(e)(1). [^39]: Id. 11(d). [^40]: Id. 11(e)(3) and (4). [^41]: Id. 11(e)(4). In the military this is known as "cold-pleading." [^42]: Id. 11(f). [^43]: [Black's Law Dictionary 1048 (6th. ed. 1990).]{.smallcaps} [^44]: Hudson v. United States, 272 U.S. 451, 453 (1926); see also United States v. Norris, 281 U.S. 619 (1929) (holding the plea of nolo contendere has the effect of plea of guilty for purposes of the case); and Lott v. United States, 367 U.S. 421, 426 (1961) (plea of nolo contendere is equivalent of admitting every essential element of offenses charged and is tantamount to 'an admission of guilt for purposes of the case,' quoting Hudson v. United States). [^45]: 272 U.S. 451 at 453. [^46]: For additional background on the plea of nolo contendere, see 1 [C. Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure]{.smallcaps} § 177 (1982). [^47]: See 2 [Frederick Pollock & Frederic W. Maitland, The History of English Law]{.smallcaps} 517 (2d ed. 1899). [^48]: [Anon., Y.B. Hill]{.smallcaps}., 9 Hen. 6, f. 59, pl.8 (1431). [^49]: Section 1 of that Act provides for the suspension of the sentence and release of the prisoner on probation "after conviction or after a plea of guilty or nolo contendere for any crime or offense not punishable by death or life imprisonment . . . ." Probation Act of 1925, 43 Stat. 1259 (1925); 272 U.S. 451 at 452-53. [^50]: Such a plea also included a prayer for leniency. The present view of the true meaning of a nolo plea is not clear, see supra note Error: Reference source not found and accompanying text. For purposes of this article the view adopted by the Supreme Court and Rule 11 is accepted as accurate. [^51]: United States v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 35 n.8 (1970). [^52]: Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(f). This rule only requires a factual basis for guilty pleas, not pleas of nolo contendere. The Notes of the \[Federal\] Advisory Committee on Rules state: "For a variety of reasons it is desirable in some cases to permit entry of judgment upon a plea of nolo contendere without inquiry into the factual basis for the plea. The new third sentence (referring to subparagraph f) is not, therefore, made applicable to pleas of nolo contendere." This result is consistent with the common law plea of nolo contendere and its development by the courts. When exploring this area of the law one must constantly determine whether the origin of the guilty plea rule being examined is constitutionally required, or set in place by statute or case law. This "inquiry" refers to a question and answer session with the accused. [^53]: These steps are also required before accepting a "traditional" guilty plea. Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(a). [^54]: Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c). [^55]: Id. 11(e)(6)(B). See also 4 [Wigmore]{.smallcaps} ¶ 1066(4) at 58 (3d ed. 1940, Supp. 1970); Rules of Evidence for United States Courts and Magistrates, Rule 803(22) (Nov. 1971); Bruce Lenvin and Michael Meyers, Nolo Contendere: Its Nature and Implications, 51 [Yale L.J]{.smallcaps}. 1255 (1942); and ABA Standards Relating to Pleas of Guilty § 1.1(a) and (b), Commentary at 15-18 (Approved Draft, 1968). This prohibition concerns the use of the plea to "prove" the accused's guilt in a later proceeding. It does not include the use of the conviction obtained after the accused has entered a plea of nolo contendere for impeachment purposes pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 609 (as well as Mil. R. Evid. 609). [^56]: See infra note Error: Reference source not found and accompanying text. Admission of criminal culpability is sometimes important in developing a rehabilitation plan for the defendant. [^57]: See Edward Lane-Reticker, Nolo Contendere in North Carolina, 34 [N.C. L. Rev]{.smallcaps}. 280 at 290-291 (1956) (criticizing the plea); and Note, The Nature and Consequences of the Plea of Nolo Contendere, 33 [Neb. L. Rev]{.smallcaps}. 428 at 434 (1954) (favoring the plea). The American Bar Association Project on Standards for Criminal Justice takes the position that "the case for the nolo plea is not strong enough to justify a minimum standard supporting its use," but because "use of the plea contributes in some degree to the avoidance of unnecessary trials" it does not proscribe use of a nolo plea. ABA, Standards Relating to Pleas of Guilty ¶ 1.1(a), Commentary at 16 (Approved Draft, 1968). [^58]: United States v. Bagliore, 182 F. Supp. 714, 716 (E.D.N.Y. 1960). [^59]: United States v. Jones, 119 F. Supp. 288, 290 (S.D. Cal. 1954). The trial court is empowered to balance the competing interests in determining the desirability of a nolo contendere plea. Factors which should be considered include the position of the government and the defendant, as well as the interest of the public in the effective administration of justice (see Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(a)(1)(b)). [^60]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 910(d) and (e). [^61]: UCMJ art. 45 (1995). [^62]: If a general or special court-martial. MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 501(b). [^63]: If the accused answers the questions under oath, on the record, in the presence of counsel, the accused's answers may later be used against the accused in a prosecution for perjury or false statement. MCM, supra note5, R.C.M. 910(c)(5). [^64]: United States v. Care, 18 U.S.C.M.A. 535, 40 C.M.R. 247 (1969). In Care the Court of Military Appeals held that effective thirty days after the date of the opinion, all records of trial involving guilty pleas must contain, in addition to an explanation of the elements of the offense, a personal interrogation of the accused concerning what he did "to make clear the basis for a determination by the military judge . . . whether the acts or the omissions of the accused constitute the offense or offenses to which he is pleading guilty." 40 C.M.R. 247 at 253. For a critical analysis of Care the reader is directed to a thought-provoking article by Terry L. Elling, Guilty Plea Inquiries: Do We Care Too Much?, 134 [Mil. L. Rev]{.smallcaps}. 195 (Fall 1991). [^65]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 910(f). [^66]: A pretrial agreement does not always contain a sentence limitation. For example, the agreement may only require the government refer the case to a particular level court (i.e., special court-martial versus a general court-martial). MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 705(b)(2)(A). Of course, such a referral does limit the punishment the accused may receive because the maximum punishment available to a special court-martial is substantially less than at a general court-martial. MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 201(f). [^67]: A court-martial panel is similar to a civilian jury. [^68]: If the accused has chosen to be sentenced by the military judge, the military judge announces his sentence, then consults the quantum portion of the pretrial agreement. If the judge's sentence is "lighter" than that agreed to by the parties, the accused receives the benefit of the judge's sentence. If a panel sentences the accused, the panel announces the sentence, is dismissed, and the judge then examines the quantum portion of the pretrial agreement. As with the military judge, if the panel's sentence is "lighter" the accused receives the benefit of the more favorable sentence. If the sentence announced is "greater" than the pretrial agreement, then the sentence cap of the pretrial agreement controls. By following this procedure the sentencing authority is not "tainted" by knowledge of the sentence ceiling contained within the pretrial agreement. MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 705(e). [^69]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 910(h)(3). [^70]: Id. [^71]: United States v. Epps, 25 M.J. 319 (C.M.A. 1987). [^72]: On October 5, 1994, the United States Court of Military Appeals was renamed the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces \[hereinafter CAAF\]. [^73]: See supra note Error: Reference source not found and accompanying text. [^74]: United States v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 28 (1970). [^75]: [N.C. Gen. Stat]{.smallcaps}. § 14-17 (1965). The provision of North Carolina law permitting guilty pleas to capital offenses was repealed in 1969. [^76]: Id. § 14-17. [^77]: Alford was a likely candidate for the death penalty based on his impressive criminal resume. Besides the current murder, Alford had served six years of a ten-year sentence for murder, been convicted nine times for armed robbery, and also had convictions for forgery, transporting stolen goods, and carrying a concealed weapon. 400 U.S. 25 at 29 n.4. [^78]: Almost all of the witnesses interviewed by Alford's attorney supported the prosecution's case against Alford. 400 U.S. at 27. [^79]: During his arraignment he testified he did not kill the victim. Alford told the judge: "Well, I'm still pleading that you all got me to plead guilty. I plead the other way, circumstantial evidence; that the jury will prosecute me on \-- on the second. You told me to plead guilty, right. I don't \-- I'm not guilty but I plead guilty." 400 U.S. 25 at 28 n.2. [^80]: 400 U.S. 25 at 29-30. [^81]: 405 F.2d at 341, Alford v. North Carolina, No. 10,391 (4th Cir. August 25, 1966) (Mem.). [^82]: Id. [^83]: 405 F.2d at 342. [^84]: Alford v. North Carolina, 405 F.2d 340, 341 (4th Cir. 1968). [^85]: United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570 (1968). [^86]: Id. at 570-72 (footnote omitted). [^87]: Id. [^88]: Justices Brennan, Douglas and Marshall dissented. [^89]: The final outcome on the remand of Alford's case is apparently unreported. [^90]: United States v. Brady, 397 U.S. 742 (1970). [^91]: United States v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 31 (1970). [^92]: Id. at 37. Such a situation could arise when a defendant is voluntarily under the influence of drugs or alcohol. [^93]: Id. (citing Brady, 400 U.S. 25 at 32 and McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459 (1969)). [^94]: 400 U.S. at 37. [^95]: Id. at 36 n.8. [^96]: Id. at 37. The Court's decision left unclear what constitutes "a strong factual basis." This issue is discussed in Section IVB, infra. [^97]: Id. at 37-38. [^98]: Id. at 38. [^99]: Id. [^100]: Id. at 36 n.8. [^101]: David Alschuler, The Defense Attorney's Role in Plea Bargaining, 84 [Yale L.J]{.smallcaps}. 1179, 1292n.1 (1975); see also State v. Hanson, 344 N.W.2d 725, 728 (Iowa Ct. App. 1983). [^102]: United States v. Webb, 433 F.2d 400, 403 (1st Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 958 (1971). [^103]: [Ala. Code § 15-15-23 (1995).]{.smallcaps} Alabama may require this standard because there is no appellate review of guilty pleas except in capital cases. See Joan Barkai, Accuracy Inquiries for All Felony and Misdemeanor Pleas: Voluntary Pleas but Innocent Defendants?, 126 [U. Pa. L. Rev]{.smallcaps}. 88 at 126n.251. [^104]: United States v. Morrow, 914 F.2d 608 (4th Cir. 1990). [^105]: United States v. Tunning, 69 F.3d 107 (6th Cir. 1995). [^106]: United States v. Keiswetter, 860 F.2d 992 (10th Cir. 1988), modified in part on reh'g en banc, 866 F.2d 1301 (10th Cir. 1989). [^107]: United States v. Hecht, 638 F.2d 651 (3rd Cir. 1981). This issue was not central to the decided issue in Hecht. [^108]: United States v. Cox, 923 F.2d 519 (7th Cir. 1991). Cox involved the rejection by the trial court of an Alford plea. While somewhat blurring the distinction between the requirements of Rule 11, and the requirements of Alford as understood by the Court, Chief Judge Bauer stated: > The court had before it the entire body of evidence adduced at the > first trial (which resulted in a mistrial); certainly a sufficient > factual basis to satisfy Rule 11. Cox himself agreed that the > Government's proof was strong, and believed that it would likely > result in a conviction. It was that belief that motivated him to > knowingly and voluntarily waive his right to trial in return for > the assurance of a sentence of only two years. Thus, the > requirements of Alford were satisfied as well. [^109]: United States v. Alber, 56 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). [^110]: United States v. Johnson, 546 F.2d 1225 (5th Cir. 1977); see also, Clicque v. United States, 514 F.2d 923, 931 (5th Cir. 1975) (finding defendant's conduct fell within the ambit of criminal activity). [^111]: 546 F.2d at 1226. [^112]: Id. at 1110. [^113]: Id. (citing United States v. Neel, 547 F.2d 95, 96 (9th Cir. 1976)). [^114]: 914 F.2d 608 at 612. [^115]: Id. at 611. [^116]: Id. [^117]: Id. citing United States v. Lumpkins, 845 F.2d 1444, 1451 (7th Cir. 1988); and United States v. Pinto, 838 F.2d 1566, 1569 (11th Cir. 1988). [^118]: United States v. Morrow, 914 F.2d 608 at 612. [^119]: United States v. Tunning, 69 F.3d 107 (6th Cir. 1995). [^120]: 860 F.2d 992 at 995 n.6. [^121]: United States v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 39 (1970). [^122]: Id. n.11. [^123]: Id. [^124]: Id. See also United States v. Bednarski, 455 F.2d 364, 365 (1st Cir. 1971) ("We find nothing in Alford that obliges the court to accept a guilty plea merely because it was warranted in doing so."). [^125]: 400 U.S. at 39 n.11. [^126]: Id. [^127]: Alschuler, supra note Error: Reference source not found, at 1301. [^128]: United States v. Gaskins, 485 F.2d 1046 (D.C. Cir. 1973). [^129]: Farley v. Glanton, 280 N.W.2d 411, 415 n.2 (Iowa 1979). [^130]: United States v. Cox, 923 F.2d 519 (7th Cir. 1991). [^131]: Id. at 524-25. The trial court in Cox rejected the plea agreement stating: > Without \[Cox's admission of guilt of distribution to Vasquez\], I > do not feel comfortable in finding him guilty, and because as I > understand it there has been a denial of guilt of the charges > brought against him and the essential elements therein, I cannot > accept the guilty plea at this time. Id. [^132]: Id. (citing United States v. Bednarski, 445 F.2d 364 (1st Cir. 1971)). [^133]: Alschuler, supra note Error: Reference source not found, at 1298-99. See also 2 [David Rossman, Criminal Law Advocacy]{.smallcaps} ¶ 9.01(3), at 9-7 to 9-8. Some states have statutorily recognized the Alford plea: > A defendant who is unwilling to admit to any element of the > offense that would provide a factual basis for a plea of guilty > may, with the consent of the court, enter a plea of guilty to the > offense if the defendant considers the plea to be in the > defendant's best interest and if a factual basis exists for the > plea. > > [Mont. Code Ann.]{.smallcaps} § 46-12-212(2) (1993). [^134]: See [Mich. Stat. Ann]{.smallcaps}. § 6.302 (D)(1) (Law. Co-op. 1995); [Ind. Code Ann]{.smallcaps}. § 35-4-1-4(b) (Michie 1985). [^135]: Shipley, supra note Error: Reference source not found, at 1068. In reaching this conclusion Shipley states: "An explanation for the lack of judicial enthusiasm toward Alford pleas is the fact that many states have adopted the Alford principle in cases affirming trial court decisions to accept equivocal pleas rather than in cases giving defendants a right to have their equivocal pleas accepted" (footnotes omitted). [^136]: United States v. Morrow, 914 F.2d 608 (4th Cir. 1990). [^137]: Id. at 611 n.6 (citing United States v. Punch, 709 F.2d 889 (5th Cir. 1983) (footnote omitted)). The Fifth Circuit continues to express reservations concerning the desirability of Alford pleas. See United States v. Harlan, 35 F.3d 176, 182 n.7 (5th Cir. 1994). [^138]: 6 Fed. Sent. R. 317, Principles of Federal Prosecution, Part D(4) (May/June 1994). The principles of federal prosecution are intended to promote the reasoned exercise of prosecutorial discretion by attorneys for the government. See also 10 [DoJ Alert]{.smallcaps} 21 (October 1992) announcing that the Criminal Division had amended the U.S. Attorney's Manual to require Department of Justice review of all "Alford pleas." [^139]: 6 Fed. Sent. R. 317, Principles of Federal Prosecution, Part D(4) (May/June 1994). [^140]: Id. [^141]: Id. [^142]: Id. The potential threat of lengthy confinement, or additional charges, often gives the government the ability to dictate the terms of any pretrial agreement. This includes not only any sentence limitation but also the charges which the defendant must plead guilty to in order to obtain such an agreement. [^143]: Id. In spite of a defendant's presumption of innocence one may argue that the government always holds the "upper hand." This conclusion is based on the inherent power and discretion of the prosecutor's office, as well as the investigatory resources not normally available to defendants. [^144]: Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (1971). [^145]: Id. at 260. An in-depth discussion of the merits, necessity, or wisdom of plea bargaining is beyond the scope of this paper. [^146]: See MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M.s 918(c) and 920(e)(5). [^147]: As will be discussed, if the military adopts Alford-type guilty pleas, the required quantum of proof should be clearly established. See discussion of R.C.M. 910(e) in Section VII, infra. [^148]: United States v. Care, 18 U.S.C.M.A. 535, 40 C.M.R. 247 (1969). [^149]: UCMJ art. 120 (1995). [^150]: UCMJ art. 134 (1995). Article 134 covers a variety of crimes not specifically mentioned in the other punitive articles. [^151]: Id. [^152]: The actual pretrial agreement will of course be a product of several factors: the skills of the trial and defense counsel, the strength of the government's case, the desire of the government to protect the victim(s) from the ordeal of a fully contested case, and the degree of willingness on the accused's part to accept culpability. [^153]: UCMJ art. 20 (1995). [^154]: UCMJ art. 134 (1995). [^155]: Id. The presence, and number, of lesser included offenses depends on the facts of a particular case (as well as the manner in which a particular case has been charged). See United States v. Weymouth, 43 M.J. 329 (1995). [^156]: See MCM, supra note Error: Reference source not found, R.C.M. 705(e), and accompanying text. As that note points out, obtaining a sentence which punishes the accused more seriously than the limitation contained in the pretrial agreement permits the accused to receive the "maximum" punishment authorized by the agreement. [^157]: The Federal Sentencing Guidelines do not automatically require this conclusion. These Guidelines, and the mitigation aspect of an Alford plea, are discussed in more detail in Section VII, infra. [^158]: See supra note 5 and accompanying text. [^159]: At least to some of the charges and specifications. [^160]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M.s 910(c)(5) and 910(e). [^161]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 910(c)(5). [^162]: But this conclusion defies logic and reality. No one can seriously argue that a federal conviction negatively impacts the accused only. Such a conviction is often almost as devastating (both emotionally and financially) on the accused's family, friends and the surrounding community. Many times the accused represents the head of the household and serves as the primary economic provider. If the accused is a servicemember, his conviction often leads to the loss of the important benefits his military service has provided to his family (i.e., government quarters, medical and dental care, commissary and post exchange privileges, etc.). [^163]: The author believes many defense attorneys, prosecutors, and for that matter, lay persons, have come to the unofficial conclusion that an accused has an almost "constitutional" right to lie about his or her guilt (false swearing charges to the contrary). [^164]: Rossman, supra note Error: Reference source not found, ¶ 9.02(2)(c)(i), at 9-20-25. A discussion of the history and scope of such safeguards is well beyond the scope of this paper. To name just a few reinforces this fact: the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof, the right against self-incrimination, the right to a jury trial, and the rules of evidence. [^165]: Accused can claim they are innocent but are being "forced" to plead guilty by the "system." See [J. Bond, Plea Bargaining and Guilty Pleas §]{.smallcaps} 3.55(c) (2d ed. 1982). [^166]: United States v. Bednarski, 445 F.2d 364 (1st Cir. 1971). [^167]: Id. at 366. [^168]: See supra notes Error: Reference source not found-120 and accompanying text. [^169]: United States v. Carter, 619 F.2d 293 (3rd Cir. 1980). In the military, R.C.M. 1201(a) provides automatic review by a Court of Criminal Appeals for all cases which include a sentence containing any of the following: (1) death; (2) a punitive discharge; or (3) confinement for one year or longer, unless the accused has waived or withdrawn appellate review. [^170]: David Starkweather, The Retributive Theory of "Just Deserts" and Victim Participation in Plea Bargaining, 67 [Ind. L.J]{.smallcaps}. 853 (1992). [^171]: Id. at 865. [^172]: Id. at 866. [^173]: Id. at 867. [^174]: The Victim/Witness Protection Act of 1982, 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 1501 note, 1503, 1505, 1510, 1512 note, 1512-15, 3146, 3579, 3580 (West 1984 & Supp. 1994); 18 App. Rule 32 (1988); the Victims of Crime Act of 1984, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 10601-03 (West 1995); and the Victim's Rights and Restitution Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 10606-07 (West 1995). For a service's implementation of these laws see [Dep't of Army, Reg. 27-10, Military Justice]{.smallcaps}, Chapter 18 (8 August 1994 Update). [^175]: It would seem the Alford plea is a truly advantageous option for defendants since they gain the ability to plea bargain a limitation on their punishment without ever admitting guilt. The author readily admits the obvious: refusal to admit guilt doesn't equal innocence. Almost every defense counsel has encountered at least one client who steadfastly maintained his innocence until the overwhelming evidence (or the government's charitable deal) allowed him to "see the light" and "confess" his guilt to the defense counsel and others. However, there is at least one area where the Alford plea may prove problematic: sex offenses. This problem is ably discussed by Alice J. Hinshaw, State v. Cameron: Making the Alford Plea an Effective Tool in Sex Offense Cases, 55 [Mont. L. Rev]{.smallcaps}. 281 (1994). To successfully enter and complete a sex offender program requires the admission of guilt. See [Dep't of Army, Reg. 608-18, The Army Family Advocacy Program]{.smallcaps}, para. 3-28, 4-4 (1 September 1995). An accused's steadfast denial of criminal responsibility in this area may deny him or her the very help he or she so desperately needs. If the military adopts an Alford-type plea, defense counsel and military judges must ensure the possible collateral effects of the plea are properly explained to the accused; e.g., denials of culpability after conviction may make the offender ineligible to participate in a sexual offender rehabilitative program. The accused may decide that the benefits of enrollment in a sex offender program outweigh the benefits of entering an Alford plea. Only the accused and his family can make such a personal decision. It is crucial that the accused be fully informed of the consequences of his Alford-type plea so that the decision can be an informed one. [^176]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 910(c)(4). [^177]: Id. R.C.M. 910(c)(3). [^178]: Id. R.C.M. 910(c)(1). [^179]: Id. R.C.M. 910(f). [^180]: Id. R.C.M. 910(e). [^181]: Id. R.C.M.s 910(c)(5), 910(e) and 910(f). [^182]: Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(f). See also United States v. Morrow, 914 F.2d 608, 612 (4^th^ Cir. 1990). [^183]: The military does not presently rely on a presentence report. For an in-depth discussion of sentencing within the military see Kevin Lovejoy, Abolition of Court Member Sentencing in the Military, 142 [Mil. L. Rev]{.smallcaps}. 1 (1993). [^184]: United States v. Sweet, 38 M.J. 583 (N.M.C.M.R. 1993). [^185]: Id. at 589 (citations omitted). [^186]: See Mil. R. Evid 103 and 104. [^187]: In United States v. Sweet, 38 M.J. 583 (N.M.C.M.R. 1993) (en banc), the court stated: > "We encourage the use of stipulations to support the factual basis > for guilty pleas because they are usually prepared in a more > relaxed atmosphere than that at trial, they can be drafted to > ensure factual accuracy, and they establish a framework for > counsel and the accused to discuss the applicable law." Id at > 592. [^188]: In over 10 years of practicing law in the military the author is unaware of a single instance where a negotiated guilty plea was not supported by a stipulation of fact. [^189]: An example would be a soldier who, charged with desertion under Article 85, UCMJ, will only plead guilty to AWOL (absence without leave, a violation of Article 86, UCMJ). The accused is willing to enter a confessional stipulation concerning the AWOL. This stipulation would therefore contain all the facts necessary to prove desertion except the intent to remain away permanently (the only real difference between AWOL and desertion). The government would then only be required to offer evidence on this single element. See United States v. Wilson, 20 U.S.C.M.A. 71, 42 C.M.R. 263 (1970). In Wilson, the only evidence concerning the element of the accused's intent to remain away permanently was a stipulation of fact and the accused's own in-court testimony. The COMA held the stipulation of fact was not confessional (as to desertion) and that inconsistencies within the accused's testimony led to the conviction for desertion. [^190]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 705(c)(2) states: > Subject to subsection (c)(1)(A) of this rule \[requiring that any > term or condition in a pretrial agreement must be entered freely > and voluntarily by an accused\], subsection (c)(1)(B) of this rule > \[dealing with the deprivation of certain rights of an accused\] > does not prohibit either party from proposing the following > additional conditions: (A) A promise to enter into a stipulation > of fact concerning offenses to which a plea of guilty or as to > which a confessional stipulation will be entered. [^191]: United States v. Bertelson, 3 M.J. 314 (C.M.A. 1977). [^192]: In the military an accused must be "provident" to their guilty plea. In other words, the accused must willingly agree that they committed the offense(s) and that they have no valid legal defense. MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 910. [^193]: 3 M.J. at 315 n.1. [^194]: The COMA stated: "We believe that a stipulation can be said to amount 'practically' to a judicial confession when, for all facts and purpose, it constitutes a de facto plea of guilty, i.e., it is the equivalent of entering a guilty plea to the charge" Id. at 315 n.2. [^195]: 3 M.J. at 315. [^196]: United States v. Gustafson, 17 U.S.C.M.A. 150, 37 C.M.R. 414 (1967); United States v. Frederick, 3 M.J. 230 (C.M.A. 1977). Once accepted, the parties are bound by a stipulation of fact unless the stipulation is withdrawn or stricken from the record. United States v. Gerlach, 16 U.S.C.M.A. 383, 385, 37 C.M.R. 3, 5 (1966). [^197]: The court in Bertelson upheld the potential use of such stipulations although the language of then paragraph 154b(1) of the 1969 Manual for Courts-Martial stated "\[W\]henever an accused has pleaded not guilty and the plea still stands, a stipulation which practically amounts to a confession should not be received in evidence." 3 M.J. at 316. However, the court cautioned that before permitting the use of a stipulation which the accused himself wants admitted, the military judge must inform him of the provisions of this paragraph to ensure he understands that absent his consent a stipulation of fact is inadmissible. 3 M.J. at 316. This provision is no longer in the Manual for Courts-Martial. [^198]: Id. at 315. [^199]: Id. at 316-17. The court set aside Bertelson's conviction because the judge failed to properly conduct these two inquiries. The court was particularly concerned about the existence of an agreement not to raise defenses or motions, which was prohibited. [^200]: United States v. Care, 18 U.S.C.M.A. 535, 40 C.M.R. 247 (1969) (requiring that prior to accepting a plea the court determine is was voluntarily made and factually sound). See also United States v. Terry, 21 U.S.C.M.A. 442, 45 C.M.R. 216 (1972); and United States v. Green, 24 U.S.C.M.A. 299, 52 C.M.R. 10, 1 M.J. 453 (1976). These requirements are now found in R.C.M. 910(d) and (e). [^201]: 3 M.J. at 316. [^202]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 811(a). [^203]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 811(c). [^204]: See supra Section VI. [^205]: The Discussion to R.C.M. 811(c) states that a stipulation practically amounts to a confession when it is the equivalent of a guilty plea (ala Bertelson) when it establishes, directly or by reasonable inference, every element of a charged offense and when the defense does not present evidence to contest any potential remaining issue of the merits. [^206]: Id. [^207]: Although defense counsel should carefully weigh the sentence potential being arguably gained by the government in convicting the accused of additional charges and specifications. [^208]: The government enters pretrial agreements containing "split-pleas" because it is able to gain a conviction on the additional charges with relative ease. This is true because the stipulation has reduced (or eliminated) the need for live testimony (thereby saving the government time, and in many cases, money). The government is also likely to gain ammunition from the stipulation to use on sentencing. [^209]: For example, in Alford, the defendant could have agreed to stipulate to the following apparently undisputed facts: (1) the victim and Alford had argued the day of the killing; (2) Alford had earlier taken his shotgun from his home and threatened to kill the victim; and (3) after the victim's death Alford claimed to have killed the victim. [^210]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 811. [^211]: Id. [^212]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 811(e). Another potential hurdle is that this rule states that the Military Rules of Evidence apply to the contents of a stipulation. Stipulations of expected testimony, on the other hand, do not face this requirement. [^213]: Notwithstanding the potential problems with rehabilitating an accused who refuses to claim culpability, the Alford plea offers a viable solution to effectively resolve these cases. [^214]: This could be accomplished by requiring the accused to agree (as part of the pretrial agreement) to admission of a stipulation of the victim's expected testimony. [^215]: See supra Section VI. [^216]: See supra note Error: Reference source not found and accompanying text. [^217]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 1001(b)(5)(A). [^218]: [Dep't of Army, Pamphlet 27-9, Military Judge's Benchbook]{.smallcaps} 101 (Sept. 30, 1996) \[hereinafter [Benchbook]{.smallcaps}\]. [^219]: [U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual]{.smallcaps} (1995) \[hereinafter [Guidelines]{.smallcaps}\]. [^220]: The court may only depart upwards or downwards from the determined range for good cause. An in-depth discussion of these Guidelines is beyond the scope of this paper. [^221]: [Guidelines]{.smallcaps}, supra note Error: Reference source not found, § 3E1.1. [^222]: United States v. Tucker, 925 F.2d 990, 993 (6th Cir. 1991). The court did, however, uphold the trial court's denial of the reduction based on other indications that the defendant had failed to meet the burden of proving that she accepted responsibility for her actions. [^223]: See also United States v. Rodriguez, 905 F.2d 372, 373 (11th Cir. 1990). [^224]: 925 F.2d at 992 (1991). [^225]: United States v. Harlan, 35 F.3d 176 (5th Cir. 1994); 925 F.2d at 20 (1st Cir. 1991). [^226]: [Guidelines]{.smallcaps}, supra note Error: Reference source not found, § 3E1.1, Commentary. [^227]: [Guidelines]{.smallcaps}, supra note Error: Reference source not found, § 3E1.1, application note 3. [^228]: 905 F.2d 372 (1990). [^229]: 35 F.3d 176 (1994). [^230]: Id. at 180. [^231]: [Benchbook]{.smallcaps}, supra note Error: Reference source not found, pg. 101. [^232]: This is a variation of the instruction presently found in the Benchbook concerning the mitigation of a guilty plea. See id. [^233]: An accused who chooses to accept responsibility for only one or two of many offenses will arguably receive only minimal mitigation consideration. [^234]: MCM, supra note 5, R.C.M. 910(d) and (e). [^235]: See supra note Error: Reference source not found and accompanying text. [^236]: UCMJ art. 36(a) (1995). [^237]: The conviction of an innocent person pursuant to any guilty plea should be rare because of the requirement that a factual basis for the plea be established prior to acceptance by court. Unfortunately, no system is perfect. [^238]: Comment to [Principles of Federal Prosecution]{.smallcaps}, supra note Error: Reference source not found. [^239]: ^^ These words should be omitted.	en
markdown	280366	# Presentation: 280366 ## State Review of Draft Standards - August 17, 2007 Draft Version ## State Statutes - At least 20 states with IT access procurement laws (more with policies - might be web only) - Most laws reference federal IT access standards - Some adopt in total (including Application) - Some require, others allow for state adoption of standards (so federal can be adapted/rejected). ## State Review Questions - Do we understand the standard? - For Procurement - Can we review/rate conformance to the standard based on vendor provided information? - Will the review/rating information help us in purchasing decision making? - For Direct Delivery by Covered State Agencies - Can we conform to the standard? ## Overall Structure Concern - Proposed structure exceedingly complex to implement in bids - For telecom bids - 10 current applicable technical standards - 49 proposed applicable technical standards - For web application bids - 26 current applicable technical standards - 48 proposed applicable technical standards - Many N/A vendors responses; state will have little ability to verify if really NA or not. - State will likely revise structure to meet procurement needs. ## Functional Performance Criteria - will not adopt - Extremely subjective and variable - Not measurable using vendor supplied information - Heavily dependent on AT compatibility and changes - Creates need to conduct usability testing - Review results not defendable in bid protest or legal action. - Defendable judgments would require - Hands-on direct evaluation of products with range of AT products (without reliable, valid testing protocols being available) - Cadre of experts across disability areas (qualify as expert witness) with statistically valid usability results - Forces decision-making into disability type value judgments ## General Technical Requirements(Adopt-2, Adapt-3, Reject-3) - Will not adopt (same reasons as functional performance) - 1.2.A Closed Products and Functions - 1.2.E Audio Information - 1.2.F. Visual Information - Scope Concerns (will likely adapt and limit application) - 1.2. D. Pass Through - 1.2. G. Color (OK when limited to web/software) - 1.2. H. Text Size (OK when limited to web/software) ## Hardware Aspects of Products(Adopt-2, Adapt-2, Unknown-2) - 2.1.D. Touch Operated - Sept version = functional performance, will not adopt (may adapt to use mechanical control standard) - 2.1.E. Standard Connection - scope of application, may restrict - clarity on “publicly available industry standards” ## Products with Speech(Adopt-3, Adapt-2, Reject-1) - Will not adopt (not verifiable per vendor data) - 2.2.B. Interference with Hearing Device - Will likely adapt - 2.2.D. Volume - “Maximum volume level must be at least” contradicts itself - Unsure if 80dB is appropriate either as minimum or maximum - Unsure if 50 dB is appropriate and what “controlled volume” is - F. Volume Reset - Will likely delete exception for headsets/headphones, public use headsets must have reset for liability reasons ## User Interface and Electronic Content(Adopt-9, Adapt-11, Reject-1, Unknown-2) - Scope concerns with this section - “These provisions apply to all electronic user interfaces and content.” - - Scope of H, L, M, P, Q, R, U, V and W seems OK. All are limited by embedded standard wording to web, applications, or platforms - - Scope of A, B, C, F, I, K, N, O, S, T of major concern. Moved from web/software to broader scope. - - Items D and E are new and unclear. - - Item G seems to duplicate 1.2-B (Flash) - - Item J will not adopt (Audio Turn-off), was partially an A/V standard but requirement was expanded and application scope was broadened. ## A/V Content or Players(Adopt-2) - Likely adopt both standards – might use different term than “functional equivalent” in standard to avoid confusion with the concept of equivalent facilitation in Subpart A. ## Real-time Voice(Adopt-3, Adapt-1, Reject-1, Unknown-1) - Will not adopt A – Accessibility Configuration as technical standard (may include as state policy or in other provisions) - Will likely adopt B (Real-time Text), C (Voice Terminal) but note complexity of B & C will eliminate ability to do internal review, will result in reliance on vendor assurance. - Will likely adapt D (IVR) - revise to address exclusive use of and efficiency “direct access” versus relay assisted for mixed voice/text users. - Unsure of F (Video Support) ## A/V Content(Adopt-2, Adapt-3) - Will adapt 6.A (Synchronized Alternatives), - 6.B (Captions and Transcripts), and - 6.C (Video Description) - – covered entities in state unable to deliver 100% level required (100% of all products, 100% captioned and described. - Will adopt D and E. ## Info, Documentation and Support(Adopt-1, Reject-2) - Will adopt 7.1.A (Accessible Documentation) - Will not adopt 7.1.B (Keyboard Shortcuts) or 7.2.A (Support Services) - Review verification of ALL keyboard shortcuts – - not helpful in decision making - Impossible to verify AT expertise of IT vendors ## Content Format and Authoring Tools(Unknown-15) - Unsure of all 8.1 and 8.2. Probably OK as long as scope is clearly applicable to software and authoring tools. - If intent is to scope to all electronic content, all files, email, etc. – Will not adopt or will restrict scope.	en
all-txt-docs	083989	/* ev2lin.f -- translated by f2c (version 19980913). You must link the resulting object file with the libraries: -lf2c -lm (in that order) / #include "f2c.h" / Table of constant values / static doublereal c_b90 = .66666666666666663; static doublereal c_b91 = 3.5; static doublereal c_b152 = 1.5; / $Procedure EV2LIN ( Evaluate "two-line" element data) / / Subroutine / int ev2lin_(doublereal et, doublereal geophs, doublereal elems, doublereal state) { / Initialized data / static logical doinit = TRUE_; / System generated locals / integer i__1; doublereal d__1; / Builtin functions / integer s_rnge(char , integer, char , integer); double cos(doublereal), sin(doublereal), sqrt(doublereal), pow_dd( doublereal , doublereal ), d_mod(doublereal , doublereal ), atan2(doublereal, doublereal); / Local variables / static integer head; static doublereal coef, eeta, delm, aodp, delo, capu, xmdf, aynl, elsq, temp; static integer last; static doublereal rdot, cosu, tokm; static integer list[12] / was [2][6] /; static doublereal sinu, coef1, t2cof, t3cof, t4cof, t5cof, temp1, temp2, temp3, temp4, temp5, cos2u, temp6, mov1m, sin2u, a, e, f; static integer i__, j; static doublereal m; static integer n; static doublereal r__, s, u, betal, omega, betao, epoch, ecose, aycof, delmo, esine, a3ovk2, tcube, cosik, tempa, bstar, cosio, xincl, etasq, rfdot, sinik, a1, rdotk, c1, c2, c3, c4, c5, cosuk, d2, d3, j2, j3, j4, qomso, d4, lower; extern doublereal twopi_(void); static doublereal q1, q2, psisq, qoms24, s4, sinio, sinmo, sinuk, tempe, betao2, betao3, betao4, templ, tfour, upper, x1m5th, x1mth2, x3thm1, x7thm1, fmod2p, theta2, theta4, xinck, xlcof, xmcof, xmdot, xnode, xnodp; static integer count; static doublereal xndd6o; static integer after; static logical recog, unrec; static doublereal ae, xhdot1, xndt2o, ke, ao, fl, eo, qoms2t, er, fu, pl, omgadf, rk, qo, uk, so, xl; static integer before; static doublereal xn, omegao, delomg; extern doublereal brcktd_(doublereal , doublereal , doublereal ); static doublereal omgcof, perige, ux, uy, uz, fprime, elemnt[60] /* was [10][6] /, tsince, ae2, ae3, ae4, epsiln, xnodeo, cosnok, lstgeo[8], omgdot, ck2, cosepw, ck4, prelim[174] / was [29][6] /, rfdotk, sinepw, sinnok, vx, tokmps, vy, pinvsq, vz, xnodcf, xnoddf, xnodek, epwnxt, xnodot; static logical newgeo; static doublereal eta, axn, ayn, epw, est, tsi, xll, xmo, xno, xmp, tsq, xlt, xmx, xmy, del1, c1sq, pix2; / $ Abstract / / This routine evaluates NORAD two-line element data for / / near-earth orbiting spacecraft (that is spacecraft with / / orbital periods less than 225 minutes). / / $ Copyright / / Copyright (1997), California Institute of Technology. / / U.S. Government sponsorship acknowledged. / / $ Required_Reading / / None. / / $ Keywords / / EPHEMERIS / / $ Declarations / / $ Brief_I/O / / VARIABLE I/O DESCRIPTION / / -------- --- -------------------------------------------------- / / ET I Epoch in seconds past ephemeris epoch J2000. / / GEOPHS I Geophysical constants / / ELEMS I Two-line element data / / STATE O Evaluated state / / NMODL P Parameter controlling number of buffered elements. / / $ Detailed_Input / / ET is the poch in seconds past ephemeris epoch J2000 / / at which a state should be produced from the / / input elements. / / GEOPHS is a collection of 8 geophysical constants needed / / for computing a state. The order of these / / constants must be: / / GEOPHS(1) = J2 gravitational harmonic for earth / / GEOPHS(2) = J3 gravitational harmonic for earth / / GEOPHS(3) = J4 gravitational harmonic for earth / / These first three constants are dimensionless. / / GEOPHS(4) = KE: Square root of the GM for earth where / / GM is expressed in earth radii cubed per / / minutes squared. / / GEOPHS(5) = QO: Low altitude bound for atmospheric / / model in km. / / GEOPHS(6) = SO: High altitude bound for atmospheric / / model in km. / / GEOPHS(7) = RE: Equatorial radius of the earth in km. / / GEOPHS(8) = AE: Distance units/earth radius / / (normally 1) / / Below are currently recommended values for these / / items: / / J2 = 1.082616D-3 / / J3 = -2.53881D-6 / / J4 = -1.65597D-6 / / The next item is the square root of GM for the / / earth given in units of earth-radii*1.5/Minute / /* KE = 7.43669161D-2 / / The next two items give the top and / / bottom of the atmospheric drag model / / used by the type 10 ephemeris type. / / Don't adjust these unless you understand / / the full implications of such changes. / / QO = 120.0D0 / / SO = 78.0D0 / / The following is the equatorial radius / / of the earth as used by NORAD in km. / / ER = 6378.135D0 / / The value of AE is the number of / / distance units per earth radii used by / / the NORAD state propagation software. / / The value should be 1 unless you've got / / a very good understanding of the NORAD / / routine SGP4 and the affect of changing / / this value.. / / AE = 1.0D0 / / ELEMS is an array containg two-line element data / / as prescribed below. The elements XNDD6O and BSTAR / / must already be scaled by the proper exponent stored / / in the two line elements set. Moreover, the / / various items must be converted to the units shown / / here. / / ELEMS ( 1 ) = XNDT2O in radians/minute*2 / /* ELEMS ( 2 ) = XNDD6O in radians/minute*3 / /* ELEMS ( 3 ) = BSTAR / / ELEMS ( 4 ) = XINCL in radians / / ELEMS ( 5 ) = XNODEO in radians / / ELEMS ( 6 ) = EO / / ELEMS ( 7 ) = OMEGAO in radians / / ELEMS ( 8 ) = XMO in radians / / ELEMS ( 9 ) = XNO in radians/minute / / ELEMS ( 10 ) = EPOCH of the elements in seconds / / past ephemeris epoch J2000. / / $ Detailed_Output / / STATE is the state produced by evaluating the input elements / / at the input epoch ET. Units are km and km/sec. / / $ Parameters / / NMODL is a parameter that controls how many element sets / / can be buffered internally. Since there are a lot / / of computations that are independent of time these / / are buffered and only computed if an unbuffered / / model is supplied. This value should always / / be at least 2. Increasing it a great deal is not / / advised since the time needed to search the / / buffered elements for a match increases linearly / / with the NMODL. Imperically, 6 seems to be a good / / break even value for NMODL. / / $ Files / / None. / / $ Exceptions / / Error free. / / 1) No checks are made on the reasonableness of the inputs. / / $ Particulars / / This routine evaluates NORAD two-line element sets for / / near-earth orbitting satellites. Near earth is defined to / / be a satellite with an orbital period of less than 225 / / minutes. This code is an adaptation of the NORAD routine / / SGP4 to elliminate common blocks, allow buffering of models / / and intermediate parameters and double precision calculations. / / $ Examples / / None. / / $ Restrictions / / None. / / $ Author_and_Institution / / W.L. Taber (JPL) / / $ Literature_References / / None. / / $ Version / / - SPICELIB Version 1.0.1, 10-MAR-1998 (EDW) / / Corrected error in header describing the GEOPHS array. / / - SPICELIB Version 1.0.0, 14-JAN-1994 (WLT) / / -& / / $ Index_Entries / / Evaluate NORAD two-line element data. / / -& / / Spicelib functions / / Local Parameters / / The following parameters give the location of the various / / geophysical parameters needed for the two line element / / sets. / / KJ2 --- location of J2 / / KJ3 --- location of J3 / / KJ4 --- location if J4 / / KKE --- location of KE = sqrt(GM) in eart-radii*1.5/MIN / /* KQO --- upper bound of atmospheric model in KM / / KSO --- lower bound of atmospheric model in KM / / KER --- earth equatorial radius in KM. / / KAE --- distance units/earth radius / / An enumeration of the various components of the / / elements array---ELEMS / / KNDT20 / / KNDD60 / / KBSTAR / / KINCL / / KNODE0 / / KECC / / KOMEGA / / KMO / / KNO / / The parameters NEXT and PREV are used in our linked list / / LIST(NEXT,I) points to the list item the occurs after / / list item I. LIST ( PREV, I ) points to the list item / / that preceeds list item I. / / NEXT / / PREV / / There are a number of preliminary quantities that are needed / / to compute the state. Those that are not time dependent and / / depend only upon the elements are stored in a buffer so that / / if an element set matches a saved set, these preliminary / / quantities will not be recomputed. PRSIZE is the parameter / / used to declare the needed room. / / When we perform bisection in the solution of Kepler's equation / / we don't want to bisect too many times. / / Numerical Constants / / Local variables / / Geophysical Quantities / / Elements / / Intermediate quantities. The time independent quantities / / are calculated only as new elements come into the routine. / / Rather than always making function calls we store the / / values of the PI dependent constants the first time / / through the routine. / if (doinit) { doinit = FALSE_; pix2 = twopi_(); for (i__ = 1; i__ <= 8; ++i__) { lstgeo[(i__1 = i__ - 1) < 8 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("lstgeo", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)556)] = 0.; } for (i__ = 1; i__ <= 6; ++i__) { for (j = 1; j <= 10; ++j) { elemnt[(i__1 = j + i__ 10 - 11) < 60 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("elemnt", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)561)] = 0.; } } /* Set up our doubly linked list of most recently used / / models. Here's how things are supposed to be arranged: / / LIST(NEXT,I) points to the ephemeris model that was used / / most recently after ephemeris model I. / / LIST(PREV,I) points to the latest ephemeris model used / / that was used more recently than I. / / HEAD points to the most recently used ephemris / / model. / head = 1; list[(i__1 = (head << 1) - 1) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("list" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)580)] = 0; list[0] = 2; for (i__ = 2; i__ <= 5; ++i__) { list[(i__1 = (i__ << 1) - 2) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "list", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)585)] = i__ + 1; list[(i__1 = (i__ << 1) - 1) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "list", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)586)] = i__ - 1; } list[10] = 0; list[11] = 5; } / We update the geophysical parameters only if there / / has been a change from the last time they were / / supplied. / if (lstgeo[7] != geophs[7] \|\| lstgeo[6] != geophs[6] \|\| lstgeo[0] != geophs[0] \|\| lstgeo[1] != geophs[1] \|\| lstgeo[2] != geophs[2] \|\| lstgeo[3] != geophs[3] \|\| lstgeo[4] != geophs[4] \|\| lstgeo[5] != geophs[5]) { for (i__ = 1; i__ <= 8; ++i__) { lstgeo[(i__1 = i__ - 1) < 8 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("lstgeo", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)608)] = geophs[i__ - 1]; } j2 = geophs[0]; j3 = geophs[1]; j4 = geophs[2]; ke = geophs[3]; qo = geophs[4]; so = geophs[5]; er = geophs[6]; ae = geophs[7]; ae2 = ae ae; ae3 = ae * ae2; ae4 = ae * ae3; ck2 = j2 * .5 * ae2; a3ovk2 = j3 * -2. * ae / j2; ck4 = j4 * -.375 * ae4; qomso = qo - so; q1 = qomso * ae / er; q2 = q1 * q1; qoms2t = q2 * q2; s = ae * (so / er + 1.); /* When we've finished up we will need to convert everything / / back to KM and KM/SEC the two variables below give the / / factors we shall need to do this. / tokm = er / ae; tokmps = tokm / 60.; newgeo = TRUE_; } else { newgeo = FALSE_; } / Fetch all of the pieces of this model. / epoch = elems[9]; xndt2o = elems[0]; xndd6o = elems[1]; bstar = elems[2]; xincl = elems[3]; xnodeo = elems[4]; eo = elems[5]; omegao = elems[6]; xmo = elems[7]; xno = elems[8]; / See if this model is already buffered, start at the first / / model in the list (the most recently used model). / unrec = TRUE_; n = head; while(n != 0 && unrec) { / The actual order of the elements is such that we can / / usually tell that a stored model is different from / / the one under consideration by looking at the / / end of the list first. Hence we start with I = NELEMS / / and decrement I until we have looked at everything / / or found a mismatch. / recog = TRUE_; i__ = 10; while(recog && i__ > 0) { recog = recog && elemnt[(i__1 = i__ + n 10 - 11) < 60 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("elemnt", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen) 683)] == elems[i__ - 1]; --i__; } unrec = ! recog; if (unrec) { last = n; n = list[(i__1 = (n << 1) - 2) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "list", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)691)]; } } if (n == 0) { n = last; } /* Either N points to a recognized item or it points to the / / tail of the list where the least recently used items is / / located. In either case N must be made the head of the / / list. (If it is already the head of the list we don't / / have to bother with anything.) / if (n != head) { / Find the items that come before and after N and / / link them together. / before = list[(i__1 = (n << 1) - 1) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "list", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)712)]; after = list[(i__1 = (n << 1) - 2) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "list", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)713)]; list[(i__1 = (before << 1) - 2) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "list", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)715)] = after; if (after != 0) { list[(i__1 = (after << 1) - 1) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "list", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)718)] = before; } / Now the guy that will come after N is the current / / head of the list. N will have no predecessor. / list[(i__1 = (n << 1) - 2) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("list", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)724)] = head; list[(i__1 = (n << 1) - 1) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("list", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)725)] = 0; / The predecessor the the current head of the list becomes N / list[(i__1 = (head << 1) - 1) < 12 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("list" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)729)] = n; / and finally, N becomes the head of the list. / head = n; } if (recog && ! newgeo) { / We can just look up the intermediate values from / / computations performed on a previous call to this / / routine. / aodp = prelim[(i__1 = n 29 - 29) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)744)]; aycof = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 28) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)745)]; c1 = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 27) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)746)]; c4 = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 26) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)747)]; c5 = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 25) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)748)]; cosio = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 24) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)749)]; d2 = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 23) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)750)]; d3 = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 22) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)751)]; d4 = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 21) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)752)]; delmo = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 20) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)753)]; eta = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 19) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)754)]; omgcof = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 18) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)755)]; omgdot = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 17) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)756)]; perige = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 16) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)757)]; sinio = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 15) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)758)]; sinmo = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 14) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)759)]; t2cof = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 13) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)760)]; t3cof = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 12) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)761)]; t4cof = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 11) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)762)]; t5cof = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 10) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)763)]; x1mth2 = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 9) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)764)]; x3thm1 = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 8) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)765)]; x7thm1 = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 7) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)766)]; xlcof = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 6) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)767)]; xmcof = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 5) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)768)]; xmdot = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 4) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)769)]; xnodcf = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 3) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)770)]; xnodot = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 2) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)771)]; xnodp = prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 1) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge( "prelim", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)772)]; } else { /* Compute all of the intermediate items needed. / / First, the inclination dependent constants. / cosio = cos(xincl); sinio = sin(xincl); theta2 = cosio cosio; theta4 = theta2 * theta2; x3thm1 = theta2 * 3. - 1.; x7thm1 = theta2 * 7. - 1.; x1mth2 = 1. - theta2; x1m5th = 1. - theta2 * 5.; /* Eccentricity dependent constants / betao = sqrt(1. - eo eo); betao2 = 1. - eo * eo; betao3 = betao * betao2; betao4 = betao2 * betao2; /* Semi-major axis and ascending node related constants. / d__1 = ke / xno; a1 = pow_dd(&d__1, &c_b90); del1 = ck2 1.5 * x3thm1 / (a1 * a1 * betao3); ao = a1 * (1. - del1 * (del1 * (del1 * 134. / 81. + 1.) + .33333333333333331)); delo = ck2 * 1.5 * x3thm1 / (ao * ao * betao3); xnodp = xno / (delo + 1.); aodp = ao / (1. - delo); s4 = s; qoms24 = qoms2t; perige = er * (aodp * (1. - eo) - ae); /* For perigee below 156 km, the values of S and QOMS2T are / / altered. / if (perige < 156.) { s4 = perige - 78.; if (perige <= 98.) { s4 = 20.; } / Computing 4th power / d__1 = (120. - s4) ae / er, d__1 = d__1; qoms24 = d__1 d__1; s4 = ae + s4 / er; } /* The next block is simply a pretty print of the code in / / sgp4 from label number 10 through the label 90. / pinvsq = 1. / (aodp aodp * betao4); tsi = 1. / (aodp - s4); eta = aodp * eo * tsi; etasq = eta * eta; eeta = eo * eta; /* Computing 4th power / d__1 = tsi, d__1 = d__1; coef = qoms24 * (d__1 * d__1); psisq = (d__1 = 1. - etasq, abs(d__1)); coef1 = coef / pow_dd(&psisq, &c_b91); c1 = bstar * coef1 * xnodp * (aodp * (etasq * 1.5 + 1. + eeta * ( etasq + 4.)) + ck2 * .75 * tsi * psisq * x3thm1 * (etasq * ( etasq * 3. + 24.) + 8.)); c2 = c1 / bstar; c3 = coef * tsi * a3ovk2 * xnodp * ae * sinio / eo; c4 = xnodp * 2. * coef1 * aodp * betao2 * (eta * (etasq * 5. + 2.) + eo * (etasq * 2. + .5) - ck2 * tsi / (aodp * psisq) * 2. * ( x3thm1 * -3. * (1. - eeta * 2. + etasq * (1.5 - eta * .5)) + cos(omegao * 2.) * .75 * x1mth2 * (etasq * 2. - eeta * (etasq + 1.)))); c5 = coef1 * 2. * aodp * betao2 * ((etasq + eeta) * 2.75 + 1. + eeta * etasq); temp1 = ck2 * 3. * pinvsq * xnodp; temp2 = temp1 * ck2 * pinvsq; temp3 = ck4 * 1.25 * pinvsq * pinvsq * xnodp; xmdot = xnodp + temp1 * .5 * betao * x3thm1 + temp2 * .0625 * betao * (13. - theta2 * 78. + theta4 * 137.); omgdot = temp1 * -.5 * x1m5th + temp2 * .0625 * (7. - theta2 * 114. + theta4 * 395.) + temp3 * (3. - theta2 * 36. + theta4 * 49.); xhdot1 = -temp1 * cosio; xnodot = xhdot1 + cosio * (temp2 * .5 * (4. - theta2 * 19.) + temp3 * 2. * (3. - theta2 * 7.)); omgcof = bstar * c3 * cos(omegao); xmcof = -bstar * .66666666666666663 * coef * ae / eeta; xnodcf = betao2 * 3.5 * xhdot1 * c1; t2cof = c1 * 1.5; aycof = a3ovk2 * .25 * sinio; xlcof = aycof * .5 * (cosio * 5. + 3.) / (cosio + 1.); /* Computing 3rd power / d__1 = eta cos(xmo) + 1.; delmo = d__1 * (d__1 * d__1); sinmo = sin(xmo); /* For perigee less than 220 kilometers, the ISIMP flag is set / / and the equations are truncated to linear variation in SQRT / / A and quadratic variation in mean anomaly. Also, the C3 / / term, the Delta OMEGA term, and the Delta M term are / / dropped. (Note: Normally we would just use / if (perige >= 220.) { c1sq = c1 c1; d2 = tsi * 4. * c1sq * aodp; temp = d2 * tsi * c1 * .33333333333333331; d3 = temp * (s4 + aodp * 17.); d4 = temp * tsi * c1 * aodp * .5 * (aodp * 221. + s4 * 31.); t3cof = d2 + c1sq * 2.; t4cof = (d3 * 3. + c1 * (d2 * 12. + c1sq * 10.)) * .25; t5cof = (d4 * 3. + c1 * 12. * d3 + d2 * 6. * d2 + c1sq * 15. * ( d2 * 2. + c1sq)) * .2; } /* Now store the intermediate computations so that if we / / should hit this model again we can just look up the needed / / results from the above computations. / prelim[(i__1 = n 29 - 29) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)944)] = aodp; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 28) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)945)] = aycof; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 27) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)946)] = c1; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 26) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)947)] = c4; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 25) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)948)] = c5; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 24) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)949)] = cosio; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 23) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)950)] = d2; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 22) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)951)] = d3; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 21) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)952)] = d4; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 20) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)953)] = delmo; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 19) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)954)] = eta; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 18) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)955)] = omgcof; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 17) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)956)] = omgdot; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 16) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)957)] = perige; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 15) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)958)] = sinio; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 14) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)959)] = sinmo; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 13) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)960)] = t2cof; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 12) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)961)] = t3cof; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 11) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)962)] = t4cof; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 10) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prel" "im", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)963)] = t5cof; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 9) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)964)] = x1mth2; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 8) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)965)] = x3thm1; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 7) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)966)] = x7thm1; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 6) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)967)] = xlcof; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 5) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)968)] = xmcof; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 4) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)969)] = xmdot; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 3) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)970)] = xnodcf; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 2) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)971)] = xnodot; prelim[(i__1 = n * 29 - 1) < 174 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("prelim" , i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)972)] = xnodp; /* Finally, move these elements in the storage area / / for checking the next time through. / for (i__ = 1; i__ <= 10; ++i__) { elemnt[(i__1 = i__ + n 10 - 11) < 60 && 0 <= i__1 ? i__1 : s_rnge("elemnt", i__1, "ev2lin_", (ftnlen)978)] = elems[ i__ - 1]; } } /* Now that all of the introductions are out of the way / / we can get down to business. / / Compute the time since the epoch for this model. / tsince = et - epoch; /* and convert it to minutes / tsince /= 60.; xmdf = xmo + xmdot tsince; omgadf = omegao + omgdot * tsince; xnoddf = xnodeo + xnodot * tsince; omega = omgadf; xmp = xmdf; tsq = tsince * tsince; xnode = xnoddf + xnodcf * tsq; tempa = 1. - c1 * tsince; tempe = bstar * c4 * tsince; templ = t2cof * tsq; if (perige > 220.) { tcube = tsq * tsince; tfour = tcube * tsince; delomg = omgcof * tsince; /* Computing 3rd power / d__1 = eta cos(xmdf) + 1.; delm = xmcof * (d__1 * (d__1 * d__1) - delmo); temp = delomg + delm; xmp = xmdf + temp; omega = omgadf - temp; tempa = tempa - d2 * tsq - d3 * tcube - d4 * tfour; tempe += bstar * c5 * (sin(xmp) - sinmo); templ = templ + tcube * t3cof + tfour * (t4cof + tsince * t5cof); } /* Computing 2nd power / d__1 = tempa; a = aodp (d__1 * d__1); xl = xmp + omega + xnode + xnodp * templ; e = eo - tempe; /* The parameter BETA used to be needed, but it's only use / / was in the computation of TEMP below where it got squared / / so we'll remove it from the list of things to compute. / / BETA = DSQRT( 1.0D0 - EE ) / xn = ke / pow_dd(&a, &c_b152); /* Long period periodics / temp = 1. / (a (1. - e * e)); aynl = temp * aycof; ayn = e * sin(omega) + aynl; axn = e * cos(omega); xll = temp * xlcof * axn; xlt = xl + xll; /* Solve keplers equation. / / We are going to solve for the roots of this equation by / / using a mixture of Newton's method and the prescription for / / root finding outlined in the SPICE routine UNITIM. / / We are going to solve the equation / / U = EPW - AXN * SIN(EPW) + AYN * COS(EPW) / / Where / / AYN = E * SIN(OMEGA) + AYNL / / AXN = E * COS(OMEGA) / / And / / AYNL = -0.50D0 * SINIO * AE * J3 / (J2A(1.0D0 - EE)) / /* Since this is a low earth orbiter (period less than 225 minutes) / / The maximum value E can take (without having the orbiter / / plowing fields) is approximately 0.47 and AYNL will not be / / more than about .01. ( Typically E will be much smaller / / on the order of about .1 ) Thus we can initially / / view the problem of solving the equation for EPW as a / / function of the form / / U = EPW + F ( EPW ) (1) / / Where F( EPW ) = -AXNSIN(EPW) + AYNCOS(EPW) / / Note that \| F'(EPW) \| < M = DSQRT( AXN2 + AYN2 ) < 0.48 / / From the above discussion it is evident that F is a contraction / / mapping. So that we can employ the same techniques as were / / used in the routine UNITIM to get our first approximations of / / the root. Once we have some good first approximations, we / / will speed up the root finding by using Newton's method for / / finding a zero of a function. The function we will work on / / is / / f (x) = x - U - AXNSIN(x) + AYNCOS(x) (2) / / By applying Newton's method we will go from linear to / / quadratic convergence. / / We will keep track of our error bounds along the way so / / that we will know how many iterations to perform in each / / phase of the root extraction. / / few steps using bisection. / / For the benefit of those interested / / here's the basics of what we'll do. / / Whichever EPW satisfies equation (1) will be / / unique. The uniqueness of the solution is ensured because the / / expression on the right-hand side of the equation is / / monotone increasing in EPW. / / Let's suppose that EPW is the solution, then the following / / is true. / / EPW = U - F(EPW) / / but we can also replace the EPW on the right hand side of the / / equation by U - F(EPW). Thus / / EPW = U - F( U - F(EPW)) / / = U - F( U - F( U - F(EPW))) / / = U - F( U - F( U - F( U - F(EPW)))) / / = U - F( U - F( U - F( U - F( U - F(EPW))))) / / . / / . / / . / / = U - F( U - F( U - F( U - F( U - F(U - ... ))) / / and so on, for as long as we have patience to perform the / / substitutions. / / The point of doing this recursive substitution is that we / / hope to move EPW to an insignificant part of the computation. / / This would seem to have a reasonable chance of success since / / F is a bounded and has a small derivative. / / Following this idea, we will attempt to solve for EPW using / / the recursive method outlined below. / / We will make our first guess at EPW, call it EPW_0. / / EPW_0 = U / / Our next guess, EPW_1, is given by: / / EPW_1 = U - F(EPW_0) / / And so on: / / EPW_2 = U - F(EPW_1) [ = U - F(U - F(U)) ] / / EPW_3 = U - F(EPW_2) [ = U - F(U - F(U - F(U))) ] / / . / / . / / . / / EPW_n = U - F(EPW_(n-1)) [ = U - F(U - F(U - F(U...)))] / / The questions to ask at this point are: / / 1) Do the EPW_i's converge? / / 2) If they converge, do they converge to EPW? / / 3) If they converge to EPW, how fast do they get there? / / 1) The sequence of approximations converges. / / \| EPW_n - EPW_(n-1) \| = [ U - F( EPW_(n-1) ) ] / / - [ U - F( EPW_(n-2) ) ] / / = [ F( EPW_(n-2) ) - F( EPW_(n-1)) ] / / The function F has an important property. The absolute / / value of its derivative is always less than M. / / This means that for any pair of real numbers s,t / / \| F(t) - F(s) \| < M\| t - s \|. / /* From this observation, we can see that / / \| EPW_n - EPW_(n-1) \| < M\| EPW_(n-1) - EPW_(n-2) \| / /* With this fact available, we could (with a bit more work) / / conclude that the sequence of EPW_i's converges and that / / it converges at a rate that is at least as fast as the / / sequence M, M2, M3. In fact the difference / / \|EPW - EPW_N\| < M/(1-M) * \| EPW_N - EPW_(N-1) \| / / < M/(1-M) * M*N \| EPW_1 - EPW_0 \| / /* 2) If we let EPW be the limit of the EPW_i's then it follows / / that / / EPW = U - F(EPW). / / or that / / U = EPW + F(EPW). / / We will use this technique to get an approximation that / / is within a tolerance of EPW and then switch to / / a Newton's method. (We'll compute the tolerance using / / the value of M given above). / / For the Newton's method portion of the problem, recall / / from Taylor's formula that: / / f(x) = f(x_0) + f'(x_0)(x-x_0) + f''(c)/2 (x-x_0)*2 / /* for some c between x and x_0 / / If x happens to be a zero of f then we can rearrange the / / terms above to get / / f(x_0) f''(c) / / x = x_0 - ------- + -------- ( x - x_0)*2 / /* f'(x_0) f'(x_0) / / Thus the error in the Newton approximation / / f(x_0) / / x = x_0 - ------- / / f'(x_0) / / is / / f''(c) / / -------- ( x - x_0)*2 / /* f'(x_0) / / Thus if we can bound f'' and pick a good first / / choice for x_0 (using the first method outlined / / above we can get quadratic convergence.) / / In our case we have / / f (x) = x - U - AXNSIN(x) + AYNCOS(x) / / f' (x) = 1 - AXNCOS(x) - AYNSIN(x) / / f''(x) = AXNSIN(x) - AYNCOS(x) / / So that: / / f' (x) > 1 - M / / f''(x) < M / / Thus the error in the Newton's approximation is / / at most / / M/(1-M) * ( x - x_0 )*2 / /* Thus as long as our original estimate (determined using / / the contraction method) gets within a reasonable tolerance / / of x, we can use Newton's method to acheive faster / / convergence. / m = sqrt(axn axn + ayn * ayn); mov1m = (d__1 = m / (1. - m), abs(d__1)); d__1 = xlt - xnode; fmod2p = d_mod(&d__1, &pix2); if (fmod2p < 0.) { fmod2p += pix2; } capu = fmod2p; epw = capu; est = 1.; while(est > .125) { epwnxt = capu - axn * sin(epw) + ayn * cos(epw); est = mov1m * (d__1 = epwnxt - epw, abs(d__1)); epw = epwnxt; } /* We need to be able to add something to EPW and not / / get EPW (but not too much). / epsiln = est; if (epsiln + epw != epw) { / Now we switch over to Newton's method. Note that / / since our error estimate is less than 1/8, six iterations / / of Newton's method should get us to within 1/2*96 of / /* the correct answer (If there were no round off to contend / / with). / for (i__ = 1; i__ <= 5; ++i__) { sinepw = sin(epw); cosepw = cos(epw); f = epw - capu - axn sinepw + ayn * cosepw; fprime = 1. - axn * cosepw - ayn * sinepw; epwnxt = epw - f / fprime; /* Our new error estimate comes from the discussion / / of convergence of Newton's method. / epw = epwnxt; if (epw + est != epw) { epsiln = est; est = mov1m est * est; } } } /* Finally, we use bisection to avoid the problems of / / round-off that may be present in Newton's method. Since / / we've gotten quite close to the answer (theoretically / / anyway) we won't have to perform many bisection passes. / / First we must bracket the root. Note that we will / / increase EPSILN so that we don't spend much time / / determining the bracketing interval. Also if the first / / addition of EPSILN to EPW doesn't modify it, were set up / / to just quit. This happens only if F is sufficiently / / close to zero that it can't alter EPW by adding it to / / or subtracting it from EPW. / sinepw = sin(epw); cosepw = cos(epw); f = epw - capu - axn sinepw + ayn * cosepw; /* Computing MAX / d__1 = abs(f); epsiln = max(d__1,epsiln); if (f == 0.) { lower = epw; upper = epw; } else if (f > 0.) { fu = f; upper = epw; lower = epw - epsiln; epw = lower; while(f > 0. && lower != upper) { epw -= epsiln; f = epw - capu - axn sin(epw) + ayn * cos(epw); epsiln = 2.; } lower = epw; fl = f; if (f == 0.) { upper = lower; } } else if (f < 0.) { fl = f; lower = epw; upper = epw + epsiln; epw = upper; while(f < 0. && lower != upper) { epw += epsiln; f = epw - capu - axn sin(epw) + ayn * cos(epw); epsiln = 2.; } upper = epw; fu = f; if (f == 0.) { lower = epw; } } / Finally, bisect until we can do no more. / count = 0; while(upper > lower && count < 20) { ++count; d__1 = (upper + lower) .5; epw = brcktd_(&d__1, &lower, &upper); /* EPW eventually will not be different from one of the / / two bracketing values. If this is the time, we need / / to decide on a value for EPW. That's done below. / if (epw == upper \|\| epw == lower) { if (-fl < fu) { epw = lower; upper = lower; } else { epw = upper; lower = upper; } } else { f = epw - capu - axn sin(epw) + ayn * cos(epw); if (f > 0.) { upper = epw; fu = f; } else if (f < 0.) { lower = epw; fl = f; } else { lower = epw; upper = epw; } } } /* Short period preliminary quantities / sinepw = sin(epw); cosepw = cos(epw); temp3 = axn sinepw; temp4 = ayn * cosepw; temp5 = axn * cosepw; temp6 = ayn * sinepw; ecose = temp5 + temp6; esine = temp3 - temp4; elsq = axn * axn + ayn * ayn; temp = 1. - elsq; pl = a * temp; r__ = a * (1. - ecose); temp1 = 1. / r__; rdot = ke * temp1 * sqrt(a) * esine; rfdot = ke * temp1 * sqrt(pl); temp2 = a * temp1; betal = sqrt(temp); temp3 = 1. / (betal + 1.); cosu = temp2 * (cosepw - axn + ayn * esine * temp3); sinu = temp2 * (sinepw - ayn - axn * esine * temp3); /* Compute the angle from the x-axis of the point ( COSU, SINU ) / if (sinu != 0. \|\| cosu != 0.) { u = atan2(sinu, cosu); if (u < 0.) { u += pix2; } } else { u = 0.; } sin2u = sinu 2. * cosu; cos2u = cosu * 2. * cosu - 1.; temp = 1. / pl; temp1 = ck2 * temp; temp2 = temp1 * temp; /* Update for short periodics / rk = r__ (1. - temp2 * 1.5 * betal * x3thm1) + temp1 * .5 * x1mth2 * cos2u; uk = u - temp2 * .25 * x7thm1 * sin2u; xnodek = xnode + temp2 * 1.5 * cosio * sin2u; xinck = xincl + temp2 * 1.5 * cosio * cos2u * sinio; rdotk = rdot - xn * temp1 * x1mth2 * sin2u; rfdotk = rfdot + xn * temp1 * (x1mth2 * cos2u + x3thm1 * 1.5); /* Orientation vectors / sinuk = sin(uk); cosuk = cos(uk); sinik = sin(xinck); cosik = cos(xinck); sinnok = sin(xnodek); cosnok = cos(xnodek); xmx = -sinnok cosik; xmy = cosnok * cosik; ux = xmx * sinuk + cosnok * cosuk; uy = xmy * sinuk + sinnok * cosuk; uz = sinik * sinuk; vx = xmx * cosuk - cosnok * sinuk; vy = xmy * cosuk - sinnok * sinuk; vz = sinik * cosuk; /* Position and velocity / state[0] = tokm rk * ux; state[1] = tokm * rk * uy; state[2] = tokm * rk * uz; state[3] = tokmps * (rdotk * ux + rfdotk * vx); state[4] = tokmps * (rdotk * uy + rfdotk * vy); state[5] = tokmps * (rdotk * uz + rfdotk * vz); return 0; } /* ev2lin_ */	en
converted_docs	135929	This Notice extends and updates Notice FHEO 2001-1, same subject, which expires on April 30, 2002. The update consists of a new contact person and contact telephone. This Notice makes no substantive changes to the policy set forth in FHEO Notice 97-1 which FHEO 2001-1 extended. This Notice sets forth specific substantive and procedural restrictions regarding the filing and investigation by the Department of complaints under the Fair Housing Act (the Act) that may involve issues relating to the protections guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.[^1] 2 It provides guidance to field and Headquarters staff concerning the appropriate handling of any matter involving third parties, such as neighbors who are not directly participating in real estate transactions, who are alleged to have violated Section 818 of the Act, which makes it unlawful to \"coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any person in the exercise or enjoyment\" of rights under the Act. Absent force, physical harm, or a clear threat of force or physical harm to one or more individuals,[^2] public activities directed toward achieving action by a governmental entity or official \-- even where hostile, distasteful, and/or bigoted \-- can be part of a robust discussion of public issues. Activities to urge governmental action are an essential part of a constitutional democracy. Thus, this Department will not accept for filing or investigate any complaint under Section 818 that involves public activities that: 1. are directed toward achieving action by a governmental entity or official; and 2. do not involve force, physical harm, or a clear threat of force or physical harm to one or more individuals. Examples of the types of public activities that are \"directed toward achieving action by a governmental entity or official\" and are covered by these guidelines include: 1. distributing fliers, pamphlets, brochures, posters, or other written materials to the public at large; 2. holding open community or neighborhood meetings; 3. writing articles or letters to the editor or making statements in a newspaper; ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` 1. conducting peaceful demonstrations; 2. testifying at public hearings; and 3. > 3 1. communicating directly with a governmental entity concerning official governmental matters.[^3] Moreover, in order to ensure that the Department\'s investigative process does not interfere with protected rights under the First Amendment, no complaint alleging a violation of Section 818 as described above may be filed absent prior formal approval from Headquarters. Finally, this Notice details a number of procedural safeguards designed to insure that, when investigations do proceed, they are conducted promptly and in a manner that does not interfere or chill in any way the rights of individuals to engage in speech protected by the First Amendment. # [The Law]{.underline} {#the-law .unnumbered} This Department must always act with great respect for the constitutional protections embodied in the First Amendment, including the rights to freedom of speech, press, and religion, and the right to petition peaceably the government for redress of grievances. Where Fair Housing Act concerns intersect with First Amendment protections, the deference required under the First Amendment to protected activities requires that the Department not engage in investigation of certain behavior which, although alleged to be discriminatory, is nonetheless clearly protected by the First Amendment. In other cases, when the facts available to the Department do not reasonably indicate the precise applicability of the First Amendment, the Department\'s investigations must be prompt and carefully tailored to be consistent with applicable First Amendment law and must cease where First Amendment protection is determined to apply. In any case, increased sensitivity to First Amendment protections must be the watchword of any investigative activity. The Department must make every effort to assure that its actions do not unduly chill the exercise of free speech rights. It is clear that the Supreme Court has, in the civil rights context, determined that certain kinds of \"speech\" may constitutionally be prohibited because the speech is limited as part of a general prohibition against behavior which amounts to unlawful discrimination or interference with the exercise of civil rights. [See]{.underline} [R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul]{.underline}, 112 S. Ct. 2538 (1992); [Wisconsin v. Mitchell]{.underline}, 113 S. Ct. 2194, 2200 (1993) 4 (citing [Roberts v. United States Jaycees]{.underline}, 468 U.S. 609, 628 (1984); [Hishon v. King & Spalding]{.underline}, 467 U.S. 69, 78 (1984); [Runyon v. McCrary]{.underline}, 427 U.S. 160, 176 (1976)). The Fair Housing Act, therefore, constitutionally prohibits certain combinations of speech with behavior and speech itself that rises to the level of conduct. For example, where third parties, such as neighbors, engage in behavior, including speech, which is coercive, threatening, intimidating or harassing, the behavior may violate Section 818 of the Act. [See]{.underline}, [e.g.]{.underline}, [Sofarelli v. Pinellas County]{.underline}, 931 F.2d 718 (11th Cir. 1991); [People Helpers Foundation v. Richmond]{.underline}, 781 F. Supp. 1132 (E.D. Va. 1992); [HUD v. Johnson]{.underline}, HUDALJ 06-93-1316-8 (HUD Office of Admin. Law Judges 7-26-94); [HUD v. Williams]{.underline}, 2 Fair Housing-Fair Lending (Prentice Hall), ¶ 25,007 (HUD Office of Admin. Law Judges 2-18-93); [HUD v. Weber]{.underline}, 2 Fair Housing-Fair Lending (Prentice Hall), ¶ 24,041 (HUD Office of Admin. Law Judges 2-18-93). In order to ensure that First Amendment rights are not chilled, the steps detailed in this Notice must be followed in any case involving alleged violations of Section 818 of the Act by third parties not directly involved in a real estate transaction and which may involve speech protested by the First Amendment. # [Complaint Review]{.underline} {#complaint-review .unnumbered} Allegations that public activities coerced, intimidated, threatened, or interfered with a person\'s exercise or enjoyment of rights under the Fair Housing Act [will not be accepted for filing]{.underline} if those public activities: 2. were directed toward achieving action by a governmental entity or official; and 3. did not involve force, physical harm, or the threat of force or physical harm to one or more individuals. Each case submitted for filing must be reviewed on its own facts. Examples of the types of public activities that are \"directed toward achieving action by a governmental entity or official\" include: 4. distributing fliers, pamphlets, brochures, posters, or other written materials to the public at large; 5. holding open community or neighborhood meetings; 6. writing articles or letters to the editor or making statements in a newspaper; 5 1. conducting peaceful demonstrations;[^4] 2. testifying at public hearings; or 3. otherwise communicating with a governmental entity concerning an official governmental matter.[^5] An intemperate and perhaps even hostile statement made at a zoning hearing that has the effect of making persons protected by the Fair Housing Act feel unwelcome in a neighborhood will not be sufficient for filing a complaint or beginning an investigation under the Fair Housing Act. Furthermore, in order to assure maximum protection for freedom of speech, no complaint involving speech under Section 818 may be accepted for filing absent prior written approval from Headquarters. # [Cases Involving Frivolous Litigation]{.underline} Where the action alleged to be discriminatory is the filing or prosecution of a lawsuit, similar standards will apply. A lawsuit which is frivolous can be a violation of the Act. [Sofarelli v. Pinellas County]{.underline}, 931 F.2d 718, 725 (11th Cir. 1991); [Woods-Drake v. Lundy]{.underline}, 667 F.2d 1198, 1202 (5th Cir. 1982); [Miller v. Towne Oaks East Apartments]{.underline}, 797 F. Supp. 557, 561-62 (E.D. Tex. 1992); [U.S. v. Scott]{.underline}, 788 F. Supp. 1555, 1561 (D. Kan. 1992); [Northside Realty Associates, Inc. v. Chapman]{.underline}, 411 F. Supp. 1195, 1199-1200 (N.D. Ga. 1976); [HUD v. Grappone]{.underline}, 2 Fair Housing-Fair Lending (P-H), Para. 25,059 (HUD Office of Admin. Law Judges 10-1-93); [U.S. v. Robinson]{.underline}, Civ. No. 3:92CV00345 (D.Conn. Jan. 26, 1995). Fair Housing-Fair Lending (P-H), Para. 15,881 (D. Conn. 1993) (Magistrate Judge\'s Opinion). 6 However, given the sensitivity and complexity of the issues relating to such litigation, all situations involving claims that litigation amounts to a violation of Section 818 must be cleared with Headquarters before the complaint is filed. # [Investigatory Process]{.underline} To avoid infringing upon protected speech, any investigation which may be necessary to obtain information about the extent to which the First Amendment may be applicable should be prompt, narrowly tailored to gather sufficient preliminary data to allow such a decision to be made, and conducted in close consultation with counsel. [Headquarters must concur in the investigative plan for all cases relating to possible First Amendment issues before the investigation is conducted]{.underline}. Where investigation is undertaken, particularly when the speech is on-going, great care must be taken to avoid chilling the First Amendment rights of the speakers. Such care must include, at a minimum, conducting an expedited investigation and avoiding any direct or indirect interference with any on-going speech. Where possible, investigation of speech-related activity protected by the First Amendment should be conducted through public records, such as-transcripts or tapes of hearings, newspaper records, or interviews of public decision makers, rather than interviews of the speakers or review of private correspondence. # [Production of Documents]{.underline} In no circumstances should document requests be made or a subpoena be served or threatened in an effort to acquire membership lists, fundraising information or financial data of an organization that is or may be engaging in protected speech activities. # [Conciliation Efforts]{.underline} In Section 810(b) of the Fair Housing Act, Congress mandated that conciliation efforts be made in every case, where feasible, from the initial date that a complaint is filed. Because the government carries special responsibilities under the First Amendment that private parties do not, special sensitivity to constitutional concerns must be demonstrated in the preparation and transmittal of conciliation proposals. Under no circumstances should the Department propose or transmit any proposals that would circumscribe the First Amendment rights of any party to the complaint. 7 By following these guidelines, the Department can be certain that any investigations that are conducted will not chill protected political speech in any manner. Questions regarding this guidance or specific situations should be addressed to Diana Ortiz, Director, Office of Enforcement, at (202) 708-2904. > \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ > > Kenneth L. Marcus, > > General Deputy Assistant Secretary for > > Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity [^1]: The Department well recognizes that there may be disagreement with the Department\'s decision not to accept complaints in certain categories of cases outlined in this guidance. This guidance is not meant to circumscribe the right of any individual who believes that his/her rights under the Fair Housing Act have been violated to seek redress through private legal action. Nevertheless, the Department recognizes that the power and resources of the state are unique and that, for many private citizens, being the subject of a \"federal investigation\" can be inherently and unavoidably \"chilling.\" Where activities that on their face implicate the protections of the First Amendment are the subject of a complaint, the Department chooses to err on the side of the First Amendment. The Department believes that the primacy of the First Amendment, which guarantees full and unfettered discussion in the political forum, weighs against the initiation of investigations of those activities by the federal government except under the conditions set out in this Notice. [^2]: This memorandum in no way affects the Department\'s practice of referring certain complaints involving threats of violence to the Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution. [^3]: ^3^ This does not include litigation filed in courts. Procedures for complaints alleging the filing of frivolous litigation are discussed separately in this Notice. [^4]: In certain circumstances where such activities repeatedly occur in close proximity to a captive audience, such as in front of an individual\'s home, a claim under the Fair Housing Act may be cognizable. [See]{.underline}, [e.g.]{.underline}, [People Helpers Foundation v. Richmond]{.underline}, 781 F. Supp. 2132 (E.D. Va. 1992) (a course of harassment, which included neighbors organizing in front of a group home for persons with disabilities, using derogatory language to refer to the occupants, and photographing occupants and volunteers, stated a claim under Section 818). Because of the complexity of the legal analysis required in these cases, however, Intake staff are directed to refer allegations of this type to Headquarters immediately. No such complaint may be filed without prior written approval from Headquarters. [^5]: This does not include litigation filed in courts.	en
converted_docs	448338	# Enhancing Elder Chronic Care Through Technology and Care Coordination Rita Kobb MS, MN, ARNP, BC-address all correspondence and reprint requests Lead Care Coordinator Rural Home Care Project (08) North Florida/South Georgia Veterans Health System 801 South Marion Street Lake City, Florida 32025 386-754-6412 Fax 386-754-6416 [email protected] Nannette Hoffman MD Chief, Geriatrics & Extended Care Service North Florida/South Georgia Veterans Health System (11F) 1611 SW Archer Road Gainesville, Florida 32608 Robert Lodge MSW Care Coordinator North Florida/South Georgia Veterans Health System Lake City, Florida Sheri Kline MSN, ARNP, BC Care Coordinator North Florida/South Georgia Veterans Health System Gainesville, Florida Abstract The Rural Home Care Project is one of eight clinical demonstration pilots in an expansive technology initiative implemented in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Sunshine Network in Florida and Puerto Rico. Three care coordinators consisting of two nurse practitioners and a social worker collaborate with primary care providers in the management of high-risk, high-cost veterans with multiple chronic diseases such as diabetes and heart failure. The project staff uses home telehealth devices to proactively monitor and educate patients to prevent healthcare crises. The evaluation methodology is a quasi-experimental design that uses a group of usual care veterans for comparison. The methodology includes interviews with surveys, and statistical analysis through a series of repeated-measure of covariance modeling designed by a Health Economist and his research team from the University of Maryland. Results for 281 patients show that care coordination enhanced by technology reduced hospital admissions, bed days of care, emergency room visits, and pharmacy prescriptions while showing high patient and provider satisfaction. Veterans also had improved perception of physical health as evidenced by a standardized functional status measure. Over the past century, medical and technological advances have dramatically altered healthcare delivery and improved longevity. Concordantly, the prevalence of chronic diseases in our aging population has grown in part due to this increased longevity. Today, chronic illnesses such as heart disease and diabetes are among the most predominant and costly. More than 1.7 million Americans die annually from chronic disease. The frail and elderly are particularly at risk. When calculating the burden of chronic disease, we significantly underestimate the severity of this national health problem if we fail to consider the additional strain of accompanying disability.^1,2^ One of ten people in the United States has a chronic disabling condition that has significantly limited activity and the ability to enjoy life.^2,3^ In the year 2000, 17% of the population was over age 65. In twenty years, that percentage will rise to 25%.^1^ These demographics are very germane to the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The VHA is one of three major branches of the Department of Veterans Affairs and the VHA provides a comprehensive healthcare system for the nation's veterans. The VHA has about 1,300 care facilities, including 163 hospitals, 850 ambulatory care and community-based outpatient clinics, 206 counseling centers, 137 nursing homes, and 43 domiciliary facilities. Due to technology and changes in national and VA health care trends, the VHA has evolved from a hospital-based system to a primary outpatient-focused system over the past five years.^4^ Within the VHA, the numbers of veterans seeking care from the system has doubled since 1995. Currently, there are over 6 million enrolled veterans consuming \$23 billion in healthcare resources. Many of these are over age 65 and the total veteran population continues to age rapidly.^5^ In an effort to manage chronic disease, healthcare organizations frequently try harder to make current mechanisms of care delivery work instead of putting efforts toward changing the manner in which care is provided.^6^ Given the importance of preventive care and coordinating services to enhance access to primary care, finding cost-effective methods for managing chronic conditions becomes a healthcare challenge we must confront. Background The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) in Florida and Puerto Rico examined some concerning trends. Among its users of services, it found that 4% of the population consumed 41% of the total available resources.^7^ This four percent was comprised of chronically ill and disabled veterans. Based upon the above resource utilization traditional care may have been inadequately addressing the older chronically ill population's complex medical needs in a cost efficient manner. To address this issue a task force was formed to develop a novel care delivery system for chronically ill and disabled veterans in Florida and Puerto Rico. From this task force, the Community Care Coordination Service (CCCS) evolved in October 1999. The CCCS received funding from the VHA for eight clinical demonstration pilots. These demonstration projects used innovative technology to enhance the care coordination for chronically ill veterans that were considered high-risk, high-use, and high-cost. This article is about one of these successful pilots, the Rural Home Care Project (RHCP). The RHCP began April of 2000 as a population management initiative combining expert care coordination with home telehealth technology to proactively manage complex chronically ill older veterans. The RHCP is based in the North Florida/South Georgia Veterans Health System (NF/SG VHS) that is part of the VHA in Florida and Puerto Rico. The service area of the system includes nineteen counties in southern Georgia and thirty-seven counties in north Florida. The project staff members' main goal was to work collaboratively with primary care providers to reduce veterans' hospitalizations, unscheduled clinic and emergency room visits, and prescription medication costs. The RHCP has two geriatric nurse practitioners, a social worker, and a program support assistant. For technology use, the RHCP team selected home telehealth equipment to meet the specific needs of project patients and to enhance the care coordinator's effectiveness. They did this after reviewing the home telehealth literature.^8^ This equipment included an in-home messaging device, the Health Buddy from Health Hero Network, American Telecare's audio-video units, the Aviva 1010SLX with peripheral vital sign monitoring, Wind Currents TeleVyou 500 videophone, and the telephone. All equipment used plain old telephone service (POTS) and was consistently reliable in the rural environment. All veterans had to have telephone service for enrollment. ## Methods The evaluation methodology was a prospective, quasi-experimental design with periodic data collection at 6-month intervals. A series of repeated-measure analysis of covariance modeling was used. A Health Economist and his research team from the University of Maryland developed a database, with an Intranet interface for staff to enter survey and demographic data. Veterans were identified as potential project enrollees due to their high-cost (\> \$25,000) and high-use (two or more hospital admissions, frequent emergency room visits, many unscheduled walk-in visits, and 10 or more prescriptions) in the year preceding enrollment. In this group the most common chronic disease diagnoses were hypertension, heart failure, emphysema, coronary artery disease, and diabetes. Veterans were risk-stratified into three levels based upon their disease severity, functional and cognitive status, caregiver presence in the home, and type of residence. RHCP staff members developed a technology decision tree to help appropriately match the technology to the patient. (Figure 1) This decision tree was largely based upon the literature review as no veterans in the NF/SG VHS had ever used home telehealth technology and staff did not know if this technology would work or be accepted by the patients. It was understood that this decision tree would be modified as needed based upon the data collected over the pilot demonstration. A group of usual care veterans (n=1120) with similar diagnoses, clinical outcomes, health care resource consumption, and health care expenses, were compared to those enrolled in the RHCP. The usual care group was randomly selected through one of the VHA data sources, the decision support system (DSS) and was enrolled in the NF/SG VHS. The decision support system is the VHA's large computerized cost allocation system that merges clinical, utilization, and cost information for individual as well as groups of patients.^9^ Veterans in the RHCP also were compared to themselves pre and post enrollment. The sample included in this article (n=281) represents those veterans with 12 months pre and post enrollment data. Twelve percent of the total number of veterans contacted for enrollment declined participation. More than 90% of those who declined did so due to discomfort with the technology. Patient and provider satisfaction surveys were conducted at 6-month intervals. Functional status data were also collected using the SF 36V, a validated tool for assessing function and perceived health in the veteran population.^10^ Patients completed the tool at baseline during face-to-face interviews. After baseline, all interviews were conducted by phone follow-up that provided an efficient cost-effective approach for feedback of results to project team members. In addition, cost and resource utilization data was reviewed from several VHA sources including (DSS) and the computerized patient record system (CPRS). CPRS is the VA's comprehensive computerized patient record that employs a graphical interface mimicking the sections of a paper medical record allowing clinicians anywhere in the VHA system to access patient-related information and disseminate findings. Project team members can send progress notes to any clinician for co-signature. This improves communication and information management efficiency. Results Over 425 veterans have been enrolled in the project since implementation. Outcome data presented is for the 281 patients with 12-months of pre-and-post enrollment data. The usual care group consisted of 1120 veterans, a comparison of demographics with project patients is provided. (See table 1) Project patients showed a greater improvement in healthcare resource consumption as compared to the usual care group. (See table 2) Patient and provider satisfaction surveys about the technology and the project were completed every 6 months. Patients reported high levels of satisfaction with both project team members and technology. They reported the technology was easy to use and helpful in managing their chronic conditions. (See Figure 2) Providers also responded very positively in the surveys. (See Figure 3) Satisfaction data related to technology usage and care coordination was only collected on project patients' as the usual care group did not have these interventions. Because hypertension was the number one diagnosis noted in the target population, medication compliance in this group was tracked. Medication compliance was monitored every quarter this included reviewing prescription refill patterns, CPRS for notes related to medication issues, and talking directly with veterans and caregivers. Project patients started out with 68% compliance in the first quarter of enrollment and rates steadily rose to maintain themselves consistently over the target goal of 78%. Current compliance rates are 93%. Compliance data on immunization administration was also collected. Target goals were set by CCCS staff to reflect VA performance measure standards for project patients, for hypertensive medication compliance, influenza, and pneumoccacal vaccines. Panel patients' compliance rates were 83% for flu and 84% for pneumovax. Usage compliance was collected for one of the technologies used-the Health Buddy. Veterans answered questions daily and compliance was based upon how many sessions they received and how many they actually answered. Compliance rates for project patients have been between 90-92%. This was considered to be a positive outcome because the population has been labeled as non-compliant and some non-compliance with the technology was anticipated. The authors believe the high compliance rates were due in part to the diligent monitoring by the care coordinators and the unexpected high acceptance of the technology. Functional status data collected by the SF 36V also showed improvement from baseline. At one year from enrollment, patients demonstrated a positive change in their perceptions of physical health, social functioning, and mental health with no decline in perception about bodily pain, vitality, or emotional status. (See Figure 4) Veterans selected for enrollment had multiple chronic health conditions that negatively impacted their quality of life. Reporting no decline represented the perception of maintaining current functional ability. Therefore having no decline was also seen as a positive outcome by the project team. ## Discussion Chronic disease imposes a heavy financial and emotional burden on patients and the healthcare system. The Rural Home Care project used a novel approach that blended expert care coordination with home telehealth technology to promote independence, compliance, and to maintain the chronic disease patient in the least restrictive environment-the home. Rural Home Care staff strongly relied upon primary care provider collaboration with the new role of care coordinator. Technology was employed to enhance the achievement of project goals and needed to be user friendly for both patient and care coordinator. We believe the project results demonstrate the success of partnering technology with skilled professional intervention. In addition veterans readily responded to the technology. An example of this was a 78-year old WW II veteran who had 5 admissions, 15 bed days of care, 3 emergency room visits, and 18 clinic visits in the 6 months prior to enrollment. He was using the Health Buddy disease management tool for monitoring his heart failure. He was compliant with answering his daily questions. He reported that the device gave him back stability in his life. He had no healthcare consumption in the 6 months after enrollment. Even though patients were readily accepting the technology, there were some initial hurdles from providers in believing the technology could be useful. Staff was able to change providers' perceptions about technology building a strong foundation for collaboration. The Rural Home Care Project proved that chronic disease veterans could benefit from a new way of delivering care and that by coordinating services resource utilization could be reduced without a subsequent loss of quality. A healthcare system seeking to improve the management of chronic diseases must accept the need for radical change. Focusing on keeping people as healthy and active as possible in the context of chronic illness will transform any system from reactive to proactive. Home telehealth technology can be a tremendous asset in managing chronic illness because it helps the clinician to be proactive. This requires not only determining what care or service is needed but making sure the patient gets it at the right time, and in the right place. Acknowledgements ### Juanita Bradley Program Assistant Rural Home Care Project Dr. Douglas Bradham DrPh University of Maryland, Baltimore References > 1\. Centers For Disease Control. National Diabetes Facts and Figures, > 2000. > > [www.cdc.gov](http://www.cdc.gov/). > > 2\. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. > [www.improvingchroniccare.org](http://www.improvingchroniccare.org/) > > 3\. Federal Interagency Forum on Aging Related Statistics. > [www.agingstats.gov]{.underline} > > 4\. Veterans Health Administration Intranet. > [vaww.va.gov/med]{.underline}. 5. Roswell Sworn in as VA Under Secretary for Health April 2002. vaww.visn8.med.va.gov 6. Institute of Medicine. [Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21^st^ century]{.underline}. Washington, DC: National Academy press, 2001. 7. Florida-Puerto Rico Veterans Integrated Service Network. VISN 8 Network Plan. April 2001. 8. Hersh, W., Helfand, M., Wallace, J., Kraemer, D., Patterson, P., Shapiro, S., & Greenlick, M. (2000). Clinical outcomes resulting from telemedicine interventions: a systematic review. [BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making]{.underline}, [1]{.underline}(5). Available at <http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6947/1/5> 9. Health Economist Research Center. [www.herc.research.med.va.gov](http://www.herc.research.med.va.gov/) 10. Kazis, L., et al. Health-Related Quality of Life in patients Served by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Arch Intern Med. Vol. 158. March 1998. Pp 82-88. Figure 1 Rural Home Care Technology Decision Tree ### ### Figure 2 Patient Satisfaction ![](media/image1.png) Graph above indicates: Customer Satisfaction Survey Results, Patients (n=281). Survey conducted every six months. Question: Do you think technology has helped you stay healthy? 270 respondents (96%) stated "yes", 11 respondents (4%) stated "no". Question: Has having staff monitor you made you feel more comfortable? 267 respondents (95%) said "yes", while 14 (5%) said "no". Question: Would you recommend this project o other veterans? 273 respondents(97%) replied "yes", while 8 respondents (3%) indicated "no". Figure 3 Provider Satisfaction ![](media/image2.png) Graph above indicates: Customer Satisfaction Survey Results, Providers (n=57). Survey conducted every six months. Question: Is communication between yourself and care coordinator time/appropriate? 56 respondents (98%) indicated "yes", 1 (2%) indicated "no". Question: Is the project a benefit to your patients? All 57 (100%) of the respondents indicated "yes". Question: Would upi refer patients to this project? 57 respondents (100%) indicated "yes". Figure 4 SF 36V Results at Baseline and 12 months ![](media/image3.wmf) Graph above indicates: Physical Function has increased from 28 to 40. Role Physical has increased from 27 to 37. Bodily Pain has not changed. General Health has increased from 47 to 49. Vitality has remain the same. Social Function has increased from 49 to 60. Role Emotional remains unchanged. Mental Health increased from 72 to 85. Table 1 Demographics Comparison Usual Care to Rural Home Care (RHCP) +--------+------+-----+--------+-------+------+-------+------------+ \| \| ## \| ## \| ### \| Ma \| # \| #### \| #### Top 5 \| \| \| Avg \| ## \| # War \| rital \| ### \| Insu \| \| \| \| Age \| Gen \| Period \| Sta \| Race \| rance \| DRGs \| \| \| \| der \| \| tus \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Cover \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| age \| \| +========+======+=====+========+=======+======+=======+============+ \| # \| 70 \| # \| ##### \| ### \| ### \| ##### \| ##### HTN \| \| # Usua \| \| ### \| WW II \| ## Ma \| ## C \| None \| \| \| l Care \| \| # M \| \| rried \| \| \| ##### CHF \| \| \| \| \| (35%) \| \| ( \| (60%) \| \| \| # \| \| (9 \| \| (53%) \| 70%) \| \| COPD \| \| ### N \| \| 8%) \| \| \| \| \| \| \| = 1120 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Diabetes \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Atrial \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Fi \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| brillation \| +--------+------+-----+--------+-------+------+-------+------------+ \| # \| 72 \| # \| ##### \| ### \| ### \| ##### \| ##### HTN \| \| # RHCP \| \| ### \| WW II \| ## Ma \| ## C \| None \| \| \| \| \| # M \| \| rried \| \| \| ##### CHF \| \| N = \| \| \| (43%) \| \| ( \| (55%) \| \| \| 281 \| \| (9 \| \| (52%) \| 65%) \| \| #### \| \| \| \| 8%) \| \| \| \| \| # Diabetes \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| COPD \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Cardiac \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| A \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| rrhythmias \| +--------+------+-----+--------+-------+------+-------+------------+ Table 2 Resource Utilization Comparison Usual Care to Rural Home Care (RHCP) Percentage Change (- = decrease; + = increase) +--------+---------+------+---------+------+-------+-------+--------+ \| \| ## Adm \| # \| #### \| \| #### \| C \| Phar \| \| \| issions \| ### \| NH Adm \| NH \| ER v \| linic \| macy \| \| \| \| BDOC \| issions \| \| isits \| vis \| \| \| \| \| \| \| BD \| \| its \| \| \| \| \| \| \| OC \| \| \| \| +========+=========+======+=========+======+=======+=======+========+ \| # \| +27% \| +32% \| +11% \| +18% \| +22% \| +19% \| ##### \| \| # Usua \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l Care \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +37% \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| # \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ### N \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| = 1120 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------+---------+------+---------+------+-------+-------+--------+ \| # \| -60% \| -68% \| -81% \| -94% \| -66% \| -4% \| ##### \| \| # RHCP \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| -59% \| \| N = \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 281 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +--------+---------+------+---------+------+-------+-------+--------+	en
converted_docs	731977	##### [Revised March 2, 2006]{.underline} ##### 2005-2006 No Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon Schools Program U.S. Department of Education Cover Sheet Type of School: (Check all that apply) \_X\_ Elementary \_\_ Middle \_\_ High \_\_ K-12 \_\_Charter Name of Principal [Mrs. Marilyn L. Davidson]{.underline} (Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other) (As it should appear in the official records) Official School Name [Main Elementary]{.underline} (As it should appear in the official records) School Mailing Address\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_[722 Mill Bay Road]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ (If address is P.O. Box, also include street address) [Kodiak]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[Alaska]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[99615]{.underline}\_\_\_ City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total) County \_\_[Kodiak Island Borough]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_State School Code Number\\_\_[0280090\_]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Telephone [( 907 ) 486-9100]{.underline} Fax [( 907 ) 486-9139]{.underline} Website/URL www.kodiakpublicschools.org\\main\\ E-mail [email protected] I have reviewed the information in this application, including the eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my knowledge all information is accurate. Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ (Principal's Signature) Name of Superintendent\ [Mrs. Betty Walters]{.underline} (Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other) District Name [Kodiak Island Borough School District]{.underline} Tel. [( 907 )486-9210]{.underline} I have reviewed the information in this application, including the eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my knowledge it is accurate. Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ (Superintendent's Signature) Name of School Board President/Chairperson\_\_\_\_\_\_[Mr. Roy Brown\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_s]{.underline} (Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other) I have reviewed the information in this package, including the eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my knowledge it is accurate. Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ (School Board President's/Chairperson's Signature) \Private Schools: If the information requested is not applicable, write N/A in the space.* PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION \[Include this page in the school's application as page 2.\] The signatures on the first page of this application certify that each of the statements below concerning the school\'s eligibility and compliance with U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) requirements is true and correct. 1. The school has some configuration that includes grades K-12. (Schools with one principal, even K-12 schools, must apply as an entire school.) 2. The school has not been in school improvement status or been identified by the state as \"persistently dangerous\" within the last two years. To meet final eligibility, the school must meet the state's adequate yearly progress requirement in the 2005-2006 school year. 3. If the school includes grades 7 or higher, it has foreign language as a part of its core curriculum. 4. The school has been in existence for five full years, that is, from at least September 2000 and has not received the 2003, 2004, or 2005 No Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon Schools Award. 5. The nominated school or district is not refusing the OCR access to information necessary to investigate a civil rights complaint or to conduct a district‑wide compliance review. 6. The OCR has not issued a violation letter of findings to the school district concluding that the nominated school or the district as a whole has violated one or more of the civil rights statutes. A violation letter of findings will not be considered outstanding if the OCR has accepted a corrective action plan from the district to remedy the violation. 7. The U.S. Department of Justice does not have a pending suit alleging that the nominated school, or the school district as a whole, has violated one or more of the civil rights statutes or the Constitution\'s equal protection clause. 8. There are no findings of violations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in a U.S. Department of Education monitoring report that apply to the school or school district in question; or if there are such findings, the state or district has corrected, or agreed to correct, the findings. PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA All data are the most recent year available. DISTRICT (Questions 1‑2 not applicable to private schools) ---------------------------------- ---------- --------------------------- 1 Number of schools in the 4 Elementary schools district: 1 Middle schools 0 Junior high schools 1 High schools 8 Other 14 TOTAL 2\. District Per Pupil \$10,339 Expenditure: Average State Per Pupil \$10,467 Expenditure: ---------------------------------- ---------- --------------------------- SCHOOL (To be completed by all schools) 3\. Category that best describes the area where the school is located: > \[ \] Urban or large central city > > \[ \] Suburban school with characteristics typical of an urban area > > \[ \] Suburban > > \[ X\] Small city or town in a rural area > > \[ \] Rural 4\. \_\_\_[3]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his position at this school. \_\_\_[10]{.underline} If fewer than three years, how long was the previous principal at this school? 5\. Number of students as of October 1 enrolled at each grade level or its equivalent in applying school only: ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- --------- Grade \# of \# of Grade Grade \# of \# of Grade Males Females Total Males Females Total PreK 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 K 28 10 38 8 0 0 0 1 28 30 58 9 0 0 0 2 19 24 43 10 0 0 0 3 23 16 39 11 0 0 0 4 29 20 49 12 0 0 0 5 17 20 37 Other 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 TOTAL 264 STUDENTS IN THE APPLYING SCHOOL ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- --------- *\[Throughout the document, round numbers to avoid decimals.\]* ------------------------------ ---------- ---------------------------------- 6\. Racial/ethnic composition 11 White of the students in the school: 1 Black or African American 14 Hispanic or Latino 66 Asian/Pacific Islander 8 American Indian/Alaskan Native 100% Total ------------------------------ ---------- ---------------------------------- Use only the five standard categories in reporting the racial/ethnic composition of the school. 7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year: \_\_\_\_[32]{.underline}\_\_\_\_% > \[This rate should be calculated using the grid below. The answer to > (6) is the mobility rate.\] ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------ (1) Number of students who 43 transferred *to* the school after October 1 until the end of the year. (2) Number of students who 41 transferred *from* the school after October 1 until the end of the year. (3) Total of all transferred 84 students \[sum of rows (1) and (2)\] (4) Total number of students in 264 the school as of October 1 (5) Total transferred students 0.3182 in row (3) divided by total students in row (4) (6) Amount in row (5) 32% multiplied by 100 ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------ 8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: \_\_[50]{.underline}\_\_% \_\_[133]{.underline}\_\_Total Number LEP Number of languages represented: \_\_\_[7]{.underline}\_\_\_ Specify languages: Arabic; Ilocano (Filipino dialect); Laotian; Spanish; Tagalog; Visayan (Filipino dialect); Yup'ik 9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: \_\_[61]{.underline}\_\_\_% Total number students who qualify: \_\_\_[160]{.underline}\_\_ > If this method does not produce an accurate estimate of the percentage > of students from low‑income families or the school does not > participate in the federally‑supported lunch program, specify a more > accurate estimate, tell why the school chose it, and explain how it > arrived at this estimate. 10\. Students receiving special education services: \_\_\_[16]{.underline}\_\_\_% \_\_\_[41]{.underline}\_\_\_Total Number of Students Served > Indicate below the number of students with disabilities according to > conditions designated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education > Act. Do not add additional categories. \_[2]{.underline}\_\_Autism \_[0]{.underline}\_\_Orthopedic Impairment \_[1]{.underline}\_\_Deafness \_[2]{.underline}\_\_Other Health Impaired \_[0]{.underline}\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_[17]{.underline}\_Specific Learning Disability \_[0]{.underline}\_\_Emotional Disturbance \_[19]{.underline}\_Speech or Language Impairment \_[0]{.underline}\_\_Hearing Impairment \_[0]{.underline}\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury > \_[0]{.underline}\_\_Mental Retardation \_[0]{.underline}\_\_Visual > Impairment Including Blindness > > \_[0]{.underline}\_\_Multiple Disabilities 11. Indicate number of full‑time and part‑time staff members in each of the categories below: Number of Staff ------------------------------------ ----------------------------- ----------------------------- [Full-time]{.underline} [Part-Time]{.underline} Administrator(s) 1 Classroom teachers 13 Special resource 5 8 teachers/specialists Paraprofessionals 6 2 Support staff 3 2 Total number 28 12 ------------------------------------ ----------------------------- ----------------------------- 12. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio, that is, the number of students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers: \_[20:1]{.underline}\_\_ 13\. Show the attendance patterns of teachers and students as a percentage. The student dropout rate is defined by the state. The student drop-off rate is the difference between the number of entering students and the number of exiting students from the same cohort. (From the same cohort, subtract the number of exiting students from the number of entering students; divide that number by the number of entering students; multiply by 100 to get the percentage drop-off rate.) Briefly explain in 100 words or fewer any major discrepancy between the dropout rate and the drop-off rate. Only middle and high schools need to supply dropout rates and only high schools need to supply drop-off rates. ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2004-2005 2003-2004 2002-2003 2001-2002 2000-2001 Daily student attendance 95% 96% 98 % 94% 94% Daily teacher attendance 88% 91% 89% 92% 90% Teacher turnover rate 21% 21% 7% 7% 14% Student dropout rate NA NA NA NA NA (middle/high) Student drop-off rate NA NA NA NA NA (high school) ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- PART III ‑ SUMMARY Main Elementary is a K-5 school in the town of Kodiak, Alaska. Kodiak is located in the northeast area of Kodiak Island in the Gulf of Alaska. Kodiak Island is famous for huge Kodiak brown bears, world-class sport fishing, and one of the largest commercial fishing ports in the nation. The Kodiak Island Borough, with a population of 13,900 persons includes the City of Kodiak, seven villages, the U.S. Coast Guard Base, plus several remote camps and lodges. The City of Kodiak, with a population of 6100, is the seventh largest city in the state of Alaska. The Kodiak Island Borough School District serves 2740 students in grades K-12 throughout the island archipelago. 264 students are currently enrolled at Main Elementary. Of those students 60% are economically disadvantaged and 60% are English Language Learners. Main Elementary houses 13 regular education classrooms. Two reading specialists provide targeted assistance for students in grades K through 5. Two specialists also serve students in the English Language Acquisition Program. Additionally, students are served by resource/special education teachers, music teachers and physical education teachers. There is also support for student development in speech/ language therapy and occupational therapy/physical therapy. Vital services are also provided by support staff including instructional aides, secretaries, nurse, custodial support, and cafeteria staff. There is a strong sense of team among the Main staff that extends throughout the community and includes parents, students, and community partners. Instruction is guided by the grade level expectations established by the State of Alaska, by the district curriculum, by adopted programs, and by response to intervention efforts. The mission of the Kodiak Island Borough School District is contained in the following statement: The Kodiak Island Borough School District, in close cooperation with our diverse island community, exists to provide an educational program of the highest standard that empowers all students to achieve personal and academic excellence while developing their full potential as responsible, productive citizens. The shared vision at Main Elementary is for every student to have the opportunity for achievement, personal growth and enrichment with a well-qualified staff and efficient and effective communication among staff, students, families, and the community. This vision is often expressed through the song One Child At A Time, written by Nnenna Freelon. The instructional program at Main Elementary focuses on success, one child at a time. Instructional efforts are guided and focused via ongoing assessment information. Among the assessments frequently referenced are the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), Scholastic Reading Inventory, and Star Math. Teachers work collaboratively to address the needs of students; there is a drive to intervene on behalf of students as quickly as a concern is raised. Main Elementary is fortunate to be a partner and participant in many efforts. We are a part of the Following the Leaders program and uses the information gained from [www.homeroom.com](http://www.homeroom.com/) and Skills Tutor on line resources to inform instruction. Main Elementary is host to a before and after school program funded through the 21^st^ Century Community Learning Centers program. This program provides support for targeted students who have not attained proficiency in reading, writing, and/or math, provides arts and activities to promote student engagement and motivation, and also works with parents to increase their parenting skills and their capacity to support their children's learning efforts. Partnerships exist with the US Coast Guard Communication Station, the local Kiwanis Club, the Kodiak Baptist Mission, and Kodiak College. The driving force at Main Elementary is the strong passion for teaching and learning that is displayed regularly among staff and students. We are determined to meet the needs of all learners---one child at a time. PART IV -- INDICATORS OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS 1. Assessment Results Main Elementary participates in Alaska's Standards-Based Assessment system that measures student performance against Alaska's State Performance Standards called Grade Level Expectations. There are four performance levels in this system: advanced, proficient, below proficient, and far below proficient. Visit the following web site to learn more: <http://www.eed.state.ak.us/tls/assessment/> Beginning in Spring 2005, the Standards Based Assessment (SBA) was instituted for grades 3 through 9 replacing the Benchmark at grades 3, 6, and 8. The SBA is a test based on Alaska state standards and compliant with state and federal statutes. In 2002-2003 and 2004-2005 school years, only third grade was measured with the similar standards-based assessment called Alaska State Benchmark Exam. From 2002-2003 to 2003-2004 the Terra Nova/CAT 6 was the only measure available for students in fourth grade. These students were then tested with the SBA in 2004-2005. During 2002-2003-2004-2005 school years fifth grade was measured with the Terra Nova/ CAT 6 and in 2004-2005 with the SBA. Main Elementary has seen a gain in the number of proficient students against 3 Grade Level Expectations in reading writing and math from 2002-2003 to 2004-2005 school years. Gains were seen in 4 and 5 Grade Level Expectations in reading and math from 2002-2003 to 2004-2005 school years. These gains were in both its aggregate population and its disaggregated subgroups. The most noteworthy is that of the growth in the sub-group of Limited English Proficient (LEP) students. Whereas the fifth grade LEP students have seen an 8 to 11 percentage points gain in Reading and Math as measured by the Terra Nova/ CAT 6, third grade LEP students have seen a gain of 10 percentage points in Reading, 33 percentage points in Writing, and 45 percentage points in Math as measured by State-Standards Assessments. Fourth grade LEP students could only be compared from 2002-2003 to 2003-2004 school years due to changes in State testing. During this period these students have seen a gain of 6 percentage points in Reading, 9 in Writing and 11 in Math as measured by the Terra Nova CAT 6. Third grade State Standards-Based Assessment results demonstrate an aggregate gain of 10 percentage points in Reading, 33 percentage points in Writing, and 45 percentage points in Math. These gains are due to focused interventions provided to the LEP students who make up 60% of Main Elementary School's student population. The greatest discrepancy was found in the Hispanic subgroup. This group demonstrated negative gains instead of the positive gains reported for other groups. This subgroup has been transient population most recently represented by students newly immigrated from El Salvador and were rated as Non-English Proficient which means possessing no English skills as represented by the Idea Proficiency Test. These students are individually showing growth on local progress monitoring assessments and are expected to see significant increased in proficiency in coming years. 2. Using Assessment Results Main Elementary uses multiple sources of assessment data in a variety of ways. Information from Alaska's Standards Based Assessment provides specific information regarding instructional needs for each of the grade level expectations in language arts and math. This allows teachers to know where additional or adjusted instruction needs to occur. Local assessments are used regularly to inform students, teachers, and families regarding student growth in a variety of areas. In reading, the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) is used to place students in groups for reading instruction and also provides a progress monitoring tool. The Scholastic Reading Inventory assesses reading comprehension and provides a Lexile range for students which again measures growth and also provides guidance for appropriately leveled reading materials. Math assessments are curriculum-based and standards-based. The STAR Math assessment provides overview information regarding gains in math skills. The Kodiak Island Borough School District utilizes a standards-based report card that is informed by a set of assessments that have been developed by grade level teams of teachers. These assessments are directly related to the Alaska Grade Level Expectations. Of importance for many students at Main Elementary, the Idea Proficiency Test is used to determine proficiency in the English language. Some work has been done to develop a measure of oral language fluency, but a need still exists in this area. 3. Communicating Assessment Results Information regarding student performance is communicated to parents, students, and the community in a variety of ways. Typical methods include: - Standards based report card is shared at the end of each trimester. - Family conferences are held three times a year. Goal setting conferences are held during the first week of school in order for parent, student, and teacher to share objectives for the year. Conferences are also scheduled at the end of the first and second trimester where the report card and assessment binder is shared. - Personal communication between families and teachers occurs frequently on an as needed basis. In many cases, translators assist with the communications. These communications may be by telephone or by e-mail. - Kodiak media assist in communicating broad information regarding student achievement to the community. This includes both radio stations and the local newspaper. - The Main Parent Teacher Organization is a venue for communications on a monthly basis. - The Main School Newsletter is sent home weekly and includes information regarding student performance as appropriate. - Teachers use student planners as a means of ongoing communication with parents. - Communication with students is an ongoing conversation regarding their gains and how those gains occur. 4. Sharing Success Main Elementary works in close collaboration with the other schools on the island, sharing both successes and challenges, and working together to improve the educational program for all Kodiak students. Main Elementary was recently given the opportunity to share its story with districts from throughout Alaska at the Department of Education and Early Development's No Child Left Behind conference held in Anchorage. This was an opportunity to share specific strategies and interventions that are proving effective at Main. Main is also pleased to share information and experience with pre-service teachers who request practicum opportunities in the building. Although it is challenging geographically to reach beyond the island, there is ongoing outreach through technology such as e-mail communications, the school's website, and the availability of video conference technology within the district. PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION 1. Curriculum Main Elementary, as well as all schools in the Kodiak Island Borough School District, is guided by a standards-based curriculum that is aligned to the Alaska Content Standards and the Alaska Grade Level Expectations in reading, writing, and math. Alignment to the Alaska Grade Level Expectations for science is underway. Instructional materials and programs have been adopted to facilitate learning for all students. The focus is on continual growth for all students---not merely reaching proficiency as measured by state assessments, but to aim for and celebrate gains for all students. Reading instruction includes both skill development and the development of an appreciation of literature. Non-fiction reading plays heavily into instruction. The Lexile Framework is utilized to match readers with appropriate text and to allow students and teachers to monitor student growth. Oral reading fluency measures are also used to chart growth for students. Writing instruction includes spelling instruction that is embedded in writing, a comprehensive writing curriculum and a designated intervention program that helps students develop skills in expository writing. Writers' workshop is an important part of instruction in the primary grades and there has been great success with a focus on student-made books. Mathematics instruction includes both concept development and skill development. The primary program for delivery is the Bridges program. It is supplemented with Accelerated Math. There is a realization that students must develop as mathematical thinkers with the ability to express themselves as well as to solve problems. Science and social studies instruction is often integrated with reading, writing and math instruction. Each grade level focuses on specific themes and topics as delineated by the district curricula. Skill development and critical thinking within science and social studies topics help students connect school to the local and global community. The Arts curriculum includes music, visual art, drama, and dance. Music instruction is provided by specialists to all students. Visual art and drama experiences are frequently integrated into regular classroom instruction and dance opportunities are most often extended in music and physical education classes. There has been enhanced experience in the arts as the school has begun to participate in the Alaska State Council on the Arts' Artists in Schools residency program which provides instruction for students and inservice training for teachers in the idea of arts integration. The physical education curriculum provides instruction in skills, fitness, and sportsmanship and gives students information and training in healthy living. Students are assessed regularly and receive information regarding appropriate targets for their performance and their growth toward those goals. Technology instruction is integrated throughout the instructional program. Keyboarding skills are built throughout the K-5 sequence. Technology-based instructional and assessment programs include [www.homeroom.com/](http://www.homeroom.com/ ) Skills Tutor, Accelerated Math, STAR Math, Scholastic Reading Counts, Scholastic Reading Inventory, Soliloquy Reading, and Rosetta Stone. Internet access is available throughout the building and students frequently have the opportunity to research topics via the world wide web. 2a. Reading Main Elementary's reading philosophy is one of balanced instruction, recognizing the need for skill development in phonics and decoding strategies along with the importance of literature and language rich instruction. There is a strong focus on early intervention. Interventions are provided from a menu of programs and approaches that have been adopted by the district and identified by teachers. In many cases there is an automatic placement of students in small intervention groups with instruction supplied by Title I-A reading specialists, and if needs are not met in that situation, there is a referral to the building's problem solving team where more specific and intensive strategizing takes place to meet the student's needs. The Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Signatures series is the adopted program for grades K-5, although there is recognition that there are gaps in the series. In order to supplement and fill those gaps, the Sopris West Read Well program is the basis of reading instruction in grade one, giving all students a firm grounding in the skills of reading. Additionally, leveled books, REWARDS, Read Naturally, and other programs are used to meet specific needs of students. Main Elementary has adopted a Walk-To-Read program that provides students in grades 1-5 with an uninterrupted hour of reading instruction at their instructional level each day. Staff members including classroom teachers, Title I-A reading specialists, English Language Acquisition teachers, Special Education staff, and all available paraprofessionals work together to analyze assessment information and to place students in small groups where appropriate instruction at an appropriate rate can occur so as to maximize the opportunity for each student. These groups are fluid and staff members meet and consider student progress regularly and reform groups as necessary to promote student achievement. 3. Mathematics, Science, Art, Etc. > The mathematics program is based on the [Bridges in > Mathematics]{.underline} program, published by the Math Learning > Center. The Bridges program is currently used in grades K-4. Grade 5 > instruction is currently based on the Visual Math program, the > precursor of Bridges. The Bridges program is showing good > effectiveness at Main Elementary, and seems to be particularly > successful for our English Language Learners. Bridges emphasizes > visual thinking and is noted to be language rich although not language > dependent. Both concept development and skills practice are integrated > throughout the program. Bridges spirals through the content strands > and there is a frequent revisiting of key skills and concepts. Bridges > is divided into two basic parts, the units and Number Corner. The > units include problems and investigations, work places and > assessments. Number Corner provides a daily skill workout for > students. Computation skills are supplemented by use of the > Accelerated Mathematics program, a computer-based program that gives > students the opportunity to practice basic problems. Bridges > encourages thinking and sharing as students investigate situations and > solve problems in a variety of ways. 4. Instructional Methods > Instructional methods at Main Elementary are as diverse as the > students who are served in the school. Staff members have referred to > Main as being a "Whatever It Takes" school because student achievement > is more important than personal commitment to any program or strategy. > For the sake of our majority population of English Language Learners, > Main staff members have undertaken the study of the Sheltered > Instruction Observation Protocol, which promotes planning and > instruction in such a way that vocabulary and content are made > accessible to all learners. Additionally, there are several tenets of > instructional practice that are frequently employed at Main. These > include: - Small group instruction (teaming of teachers and paraprofessionals in such a way that students are given as much individual attention as possible) - Early Intervention (being guided by early assessment results to catch students as soon as possible) - Technology enhanced instruction (use of web-based technology resources such as [www.homeroom.com](http://www.homeroom.com/) and Skills Tutor as well as Scholastic Reading Counts, Scholastic Reading Inventory, STAR Math, and Accelerated Math all of which encourage and enable students to mark their own growth toward personal goals) - Arts Integration (teachers will regularly integrate readers' theatre, tableau, drama, visual arts of all kinds, music and dance into regular instruction, establishing goals in the arts as well as in another core curriculum area) - Assessment-driven instruction (students access their assessment binders frequently and chart their own growth in such a way as to measure their gains and study their own learning) 5. Professional Development > Professional development efforts at Main Elementary emanate from > identified needs within the school and reflect the efforts of the > learning community to meet those needs. We believe that professional > development should be job-embedded, on-going, and collegial in nature. > Professional development incorporates or builds on past learning > whenever possible. While many trainings for curricular programs take > place annually or as needed, there has been a strong sequence of > learning opportunities that has included study of differentiated > instruction, primary reading assessment (DIBELS), vocabulary > development, reading comprehension and the arts, and the Sheltered > Instruction Observation Protocol. In all of these cases, the learning > was contained in a credit course sponsored by the district in > cooperation with our local community college. The courses were > generated based on perceived needs and as the result of dialogue with > teachers. While there are in-service days sponsored by the district at > the beginning of the school year and during a two day event annually, > a great contribution to professional development is made through > collaborative efforts during the school day and during the weekly > early release for professional development time. Major work has been > accomplished in curriculum revision, development of the standards > based report card and grade level assessments, review of instructional > methods and collegial sharing, etc. Professional development also has > included training opportunities in building school climate and > anti-bullying, and many technology trainings. As we recognize the > importance of giving all team members access to the information > necessary to carry the process forward, efforts are made to include > paraprofessionals and other support staff in trainings whenever > possible. PART VII - ASSESSMENT RESULTS RESULTS OF STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade[: 3\_]{.underline} Test: [Alaska State Benchmark Exam]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year: [2001/2/3/4/5]{.underline} Publisher: [State of Alaska Dep't of Education]{.underline} ---------------------------------------- ----------- ------------ ----------- 2004-2005 2003-2004 2002-2003 Testing month April March March SCHOOL SCORES \% At or Above Meets State Standards 70% 66% 60% \% At Exceeds State Standards 25% 2% 10% Number of students tested 49 44 48 Percent of total students tested 96% 100% 100% Number of students alternatively 0 0 0 assessed Percent of students alternatively 0 0% 0% assessed SUBGROUP SCORES 1. Low Income Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 72% 59% 59% \% At Exceeds State Standards 4% 0% 0% Number of students tested 25 34 27 2. Limited English Proficient \% At or Above Meets State Standards 75% 65% 56% \% At Exceeds State Standards 17% 4% 5% Number of students tested 29 28 37 3. Disabled Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 70% \% At Exceeds State Standards 10% Number of students tested 10 \* \* 4. Female Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 72% 70% 68% \% At Exceeds State Standards 48% 5% 9% Number of students tested 21 20 22 5. Male Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 71% 63% 54% \% At Exceeds State Standards 7% 0% 12% Number of students tested 28 24 26 6. Asian/Pacific Islander Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 87% 68% 55% \% At Exceeds State Standards 27% 4% 7% Number of students tested 30 28 29 7. Hispanic Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 30% 60% \% At Exceeds State Standards 0% 0% Number of students tested 10 10 \* ---------------------------------------- ----------- ------------ ----------- Note: Not all ethnicities reported due to statistically insignificant numbers of students in some subgroups. \* Fewer than 10 students RESULTS OF STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS Subject: [Writing]{.underline} Grade[: 3\_]{.underline} Test: [Alaska State Benchmark and Standards-Based Exams]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year: [2001/2/3/4/5]{.underline} Publisher: [State of Alaska Dep't of Education]{.underline} -------------------------------------- ----------- ------------- ----------- 2004-2005 2003-2004 2002-2003 Testing month April March March SCHOOL SCORES \% At or Above Meets State Standards 89% 68% 56% \% At Exceeds State Standards 22% 2% 10% Number of students tested 49 44 48 Percent of total students tested 96% 100% 100% Number of students alternatively 0 0 0 assessed Percent of students alternatively 0% 0% 0% assessed SUBGROUP SCORES 1. Low Income Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 92% 65% 51% \% At Exceeds State Standards 8% 0% 7% Number of students tested 25 34 27 2. Limited English Proficient \% At or Above Meets State Standards 89% 58% 52% \% At Exceeds State Standards 17% 4% 11% Number of students tested 29 28 37 3. Disabled Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 80% \% At Exceeds State Standards 10% Number of students tested 10 \* \* 4. Female Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 90% 75% 64% \% At Exceeds State Standards 38% 5% 14% Number of students tested 21 20 22 5. Male Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 90% 63% 50% \% At Exceeds State Standards 11% 0% 8% Number of students tested 28 24 26 6. Asian/Pacific Islander Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 93% 72% 59% \% At Exceeds State Standards 23% 4% 14% Number of students tested 30 28 29 7. Hispanic Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 80% 50% \% At Exceeds State Standards 10% 0% Number of students tested 10 10 \* -------------------------------------- ----------- ------------- ----------- \Fewer than 10 students RESULTS OF STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS* Subject: [Math]{.underline} Grade[: 3\_]{.underline} Test: [Alaska State Benchmark and Standards-Based Exams]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year: [2001/2/3/4/5]{.underline} Publisher: [State of Alaska Dep't of Education]{.underline} --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2004-2005 2003-2004 2002-2003 Testing month April March March SCHOOL SCORES \% At or Above Meets State Standards 89% 64% 44% \% At Exceeds State Standards 22% 16% 15% Number of students tested 50 44 48 Percent of total students tested 98% 100% 100% Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively assessed 0% 0% 0% SUBGROUP SCORES 1. Low Income Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 68% 56% 37% \% At Exceeds State Standards 20% 9% 4% Number of students tested 25 34 27 2. Limited English Proficient \% At or Above Meets State Standards 66% 61% 43% \% At Exceeds State Standards 23% 4% 11% Number of students tested 30 28 37 3. Disabled Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 60% \% At Exceeds State Standards 20% Number of students tested 10 \* \* 4. Female Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 81% 70% 59% \% At Exceeds State Standards 38% 15% 18% Number of students tested 21 20 22 5. Male Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 69% 59% 30% \% At Exceeds State Standards 24% 17% 11% Number of students tested 29 24 26 6. Asian/Pacific Islander Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 83% 64% 48% \% At Exceeds State Standards 35% 18% 14% Number of students tested 31 28 29 7. Hispanic Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 30% 60% 33% \% At Exceeds State Standards 10% 10% 0% Number of students tested 10 10 \* --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- \Fewer than 10 students Subject: Reading Grade: 4 Test: Terra Nova ( CAT5 and CAT6) in 01-04 and Alaska Standards Based Assessment in 05 ---------------------------------------- --------------- ----------- ----------- 2004-2005\\* 2003-2004 2002-2003 Testing month February February March SCHOOL SCORES \% At or Above Meets State Standards 73% 69% 63% \% At Exceeds State Standards 9% 27% 26% Number of students tested 45 48 46 Percent of total students tested 100% 100% 100% Number of students alternatively 0 0 0 assessed Percent of students alternatively 0 0 0 assessed SUBGROUP SCORES 1\. Low Income Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 77% 60% 60% \% At Exceeds State Standards 7% 18% 20% Number of students tested 30 33 30 2\. LEP Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 66% 58% 53% \% At Exceeds State Standards 7% 19% 22% Number of students tested 29 36 32 3\. Female Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 76% 78% 79% \% At Exceeds State Standards 14% 30% 33% Number of students tested 21 23 24 4\. Male Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 71% 60% 46% \% At Exceeds State Standards 4% 24% 19% Number of students tested 24 25 22 5\. Asian/Pacific Islander \% At or Above Meets State Standards 72% 68% 60% \% At Exceeds State Standards 7% 25% 22% Number of students tested 29 28 32 6\. Hispanic Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 70% 60% \% At Exceeds State Standards 10% 20% Number of students tested 10 10 \* ---------------------------------------- --------------- ----------- ----------- \Fewer than 10 students \\Change From CAT6 to SBA Subject: Writing Grade: 4 Test: Terra Nova (CAT5 and CAT6) in 01-04 and Alaska Standards Based Assessment in 05 ---------------------------------------- --------------- ----------- ----------- 2004-2005\\* 2003-2004 2002-2003 Testing month February. February March SCHOOL SCORES \% At or Above Meets State Standards 62% 81% 72% \% At Exceeds State Standards 2% 6% 11% Number of students tested 45 48 46 Percent of total students tested 100% 100% 100% Number of students alternatively 0 0 0 assessed Percent of students alternatively 0 0 0 assessed SUBGROUP SCORES 1\. Low Income Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 69% 79% 70% \% At Exceeds State Standards 3% 0 0 Number of students tested 30 33 30 2\. LEP Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 55% 78% 63% \% At Exceeds State Standards 0 0 3% Number of students tested 29 36 32 3\. Female Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 72% 87% 92% \% At Exceeds State Standards 5% 9% 13% Number of students tested 21 23 24 4\. Male Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 54% 76% 50% \% At Exceeds State Standards 0 4% 9% Number of students tested 24 25 22 5\. Asian/Pacific Islander \% At or Above Meets State Standards 62% 90% 69% \% At Exceeds State Standards 0 0 3% Number of students tested 29 28 32 6\. Hispanic Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 60% 70% \% At Exceeds State Standards 0 0 Number of students tested 10 10 \* ---------------------------------------- --------------- ----------- ----------- \Fewer than 10 students \\Change From CAT6 to SBA Subject: Math Grade: 4 Test: Terra Nova (CAT5 and CAT6) in 01-04 and Alaska Standards Based Assessment in 05 ----------------------------------------- --------------- ----------- ----------- 2004-2005\\* 2003-2004 2002-2003 Testing month February February March SCHOOL SCORES \% At or Above Meets State Standards 58% 59% 48% \% At Exceeds State Standards 11% 13% 20% Number of students tested 45 48 46 Percent of total students tested 100% 100% 100% Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively 0 0 0 assessed SUBGROUP SCORES 1\. Low Income Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 57% 78% 47% \% At Exceeds State Standards 10% 3% 10% Number of students tested 30 33 30 2\. LEP Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 48% 53% 38% \% At Exceeds State Standards 7% 6% 19% Number of students tested 29 36 32 4\. Female Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 67% 74% 59% \% At Exceeds State Standards 19% 13% 13% Number of students tested 21 23 24 5\. Male Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 50% 44% 36% \% At Exceeds State Standards 4% 12% 27% Number of students tested 24 25 22 6\. Asian/Pacific Islander \% At or Above Meets State Standards 65% 68% 47% \% At Exceeds State Standards 10% 14% 19% Number of students tested 29 28 32 7\. Hispanic Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 40% 40% \% At Exceeds State Standards 0 0 Number of students tested 10 10 \* ----------------------------------------- --------------- ----------- ----------- \Fewer than 10 students \\Change From CAT6 to SBA Subject: Reading Grade: 5 Test: Terra Nova (CAT5 and CAT6) in 01-04 and Alaska Standards Based Assessment in 05 ----------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 2004-2005 2003-2004 2002-2003 Testing month February February March SCHOOL SCORES* \% At or Above Meets State Standards 83% 70% 67% \% At Exceeds State Standards 19% 35% 32% Number of students tested 47 46 34 Percent of total students tested 100% 100% 97% Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively 0 0 0 assessed SUBGROUP SCORES 1\. Low Income Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 74% 61% 47% \% At Exceeds State Standards 11% 32% 14% Number of students tested 27 28 21 2\. LEP Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 77% 63% 52% \% At Exceeds State Standards 15% 29% 14% Number of students tested 34 35 21 3\. Female Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 91% 80% 71% \% At Exceeds State Standards 24% 36% 38% Number of students tested 21 25 21 4\. Male Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 77% 57% 61% \% At Exceeds State Standards 15% 33% 23% Number of students tested 26 21 13 5\. Asian/Pacific Islander \% At or Above Meets State Standards 84% 66% 61% \% At Exceeds State Standards 19% 33% 22% Number of students tested 26 30 18 6\. Hispanic Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 70% \% At Exceeds State Standards 10% Number of students tested 10 \* \* ----------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- \Fewer than 10 students \\Change From CAT6 to SBA Subject: Writing Grade: 5 Test: Terra Nova (CAT5 and CAT6) in 01-04 and Alaska Standards Based Assessment in 05 ----------------------------------------- --------------- ----------- ----------- 2004-2005\\* 2003-2004 2002-2003 Testing month February February March SCHOOL SCORES \% At or Above Meets State Standards 57% 61% 68% \% At Exceeds State Standards 28% 15% 18% Number of students tested 47 46 34 Percent of total students tested 100% 100% 97% Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively 0 0 0 assessed SUBGROUP SCORES 1\. Low Income Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 63% 61% 71% \% At Exceeds State Standards 11% 11% 5% Number of students tested 27 28 21 2\. LEP Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 83% 71% 76% \% At Exceeds State Standards 18% 11% 5% Number of students tested 34 35 21 5\. Female Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 86% 84% 86% \% At Exceeds State Standards 38% 16% 24% Number of students tested 21 25 22 6\. Male Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 84% 66% 85% \% At Exceeds State Standards 19% 14% 8% Number of students tested 26 21 13 8\. Asian/Pacific Islander \% At or Above Meets State Standards 93% 77% 78% \% At Exceeds State Standards 31% 10% 6% Number of students tested 26 30 18 10\. Hispanic Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 70% \% At Exceeds State Standards 0 Number of students tested 10 \* \* ----------------------------------------- --------------- ----------- ----------- \Fewer than 10 students \\Change From CAT6 to SBA Subject: Math Grade: 5 Test: Terra Nova ( CAT5 and CAT6) in 01-04 and Alaska Standards Based Assessment in 05 ----------------------------------------- --------------- ----------- ----------- 2004-2005\\* 2003-2004 2002-2003 Testing month February February March SCHOOL SCORES \% At or Above Meets State Standards 76% 60% 56% \% At Exceeds State Standards 23% 17% 15% Number of students tested 47 46 34 Percent of total students tested 100% 100% 97% Number of students alternatively assessed 0 0 0 Percent of students alternatively 0 0 0 assessed SUBGROUP SCORES 1\. Low Income Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 70% 57% 48% \% At Exceeds State Standards 11% 18% 5% Number of students tested 27 28 21 2\. LEP Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 71% 51% 43% \% At Exceeds State Standards 15% 17% 5% Number of students tested 34 35 21 3\. Female Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 91% 76% 57% \% At Exceeds State Standards 29% 16% 14% Number of students tested 21 25 21 4\. Male Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 65% 43% 53% \% At Exceeds State Standards 19% 19% 15% Number of students tested 26 21 13 5\. Asian/Pacific Islander \% At or Above Meets State Standards 85% 57% 78% \% At Exceeds State Standards 23% 17% 6% Number of students tested 26 30 18 6\. Hispanic Students \% At or Above Meets State Standards 50% \% At Exceeds State Standards 10% Number of students tested 10 \* \* ----------------------------------------- --------------- ----------- ----------- \Fewer than 10 students \\Change From CAT6 to SBA [ASSESSMENTS]{.underline}* [REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS]{.underline} Because Alaska does not require schools to report disaggregated national data, the following information was mined from our databases of disaggregated scores. We are providing the mean of the national percentile score for each subgroup. Therefore the Mean of the National Percentile Ranking of the Terra Nova/ CAT 6 results for fifth grade spanning the years of 2003-2005 will be used for referencing against national norms. The fifth grade sub groups that are report are Limited English Proficient (LEP), Low Income, Students with other subgroups are of insufficient number to report. Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [5]{.underline} Test: [Terra Nova]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs\_\_X\_\_ Scaled scores [\_\_]{.underline} \_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_ +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| \| 20 \| 20 \| 200 \| \| \| 04-2005 \| 03-2004 \| 2-2003 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Testing month \| F \| F \| March \| \| \| ebruary \| ebruary \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > SCHOOL SCORES \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Mean of National Percentile \| 50 \| 50 \| 51 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 47 \| 46 \| 34 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Percent of total students tested \| 100% \| 100% \| 100% \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| Number of students alternatively \| 0 \| 0 \| 0 \| \| assessed \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| Percent of students alternatively \| 0 \| 0 \| 0 \| \| assessed \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > SUBGROUP SCORES \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 1\. Low Income Students \| 41 \| 45 \| 43 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 27 \| 28 \| 21 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 2\. LEP Students \| 43 \| 45 \| 43 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 38 \| 35 \| 21 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 3\. Female Students \| 51 \| 54 \| 51 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 20 \| 25 \| 21 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 4\. Male Students \| 51 \| 45 \| 48 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 26 \| 21 \| 13 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 5\. Asian/Pacific Islander \| 50 \| 48 \| 47 \| \| > Students \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 25 \| 30 \| 18 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 6\. Hispanic Students \| 38 \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 10 \| \* \| \* \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \Fewer than 10 students Subject: [Writing]{.underline} Grade: [5]{.underline} Test: [Terra Nova]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs_X\_\_\_ Scaled scores [\_\_]{.underline}\_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_ +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| \| 20 \| 20 \| 200 \| \| \| 04-2005 \| 03-2004 \| 2-2003 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Testing month \| F \| F \| March \| \| \| ebruary \| ebruary \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > SCHOOL SCORES* \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Mean of National Percentile \| 50 \| 59 \| 50 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 47 \| 46 \| 34 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Percent of total students tested \| 100% \| 100% \| 100% \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| Number of students alternatively \| 0 \| 0 \| 0 \| \| assessed \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| Percent of students alternatively \| 0 \| 0 \| 0 \| \| assessed \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > SUBGROUP SCORES \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 1\. Low Income Students \| 45 \| 45 \| 48 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 27 \| 28 \| 21 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 2\. LEP Students \| 46 \| 45 \| 45 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 38 \| 35 \| 21 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 3\. Female Students \| 57 \| 53 \| 51 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 20 \| 25 \| 21 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 4\. Male Students \| 47 \| 45 \| 49 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 26 \| 21 \| 13 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 5\. Asian/Pacific Islander \| 53 \| 48 \| 49 \| \| > Students \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 25 \| 30 \| 18 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 6\. Hispanic Students \| 41 \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 10 \| \* \| \* \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \Fewer than 10 students Subject: [Math]{.underline} Grade: [5]{.underline} Test: [Terra Nova]{.underline} Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [CTB McGraw Hill]{.underline} Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs \_\_X\_\_ Scaled scores [\_\_]{.underline}\_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_ +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| \| 20 \| 20 \| 200 \| \| \| 04-2005 \| 03-2004 \| 2-2003 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Testing month \| F \| F \| March \| \| \| ebruary \| ebruary \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > SCHOOL SCORES* \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Mean of National Percentile \| 45 \| 47 \| 49 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 47 \| 46 \| 34 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Percent of total students tested \| 100% \| 100% \| 100% \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| Number of students alternatively \| 0 \| 0 \| 0 \| \| assessed \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| Percent of students alternatively \| 0 \| 0 \| 0 \| \| assessed \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > SUBGROUP SCORES \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 1\. Low Income Students \| 41 \| 45 \| 46 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 27 \| 28 \| 21 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 2\. LEP Students \| 41 \| 44 \| 45 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 38 \| 35 \| 21 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 3\. Female Students \| 52 \| 51 \| 48 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 20 \| 25 \| 21 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 4\. Male Students \| 42 \| 42 \| 51 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 26 \| 21 \| 13 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 5\. Asian/Pacific Islander \| 51 \| 49 \| 50 \| \| > Students \| \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 25 \| 30 \| 18 \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > 6\. Hispanic Students \| 29 \| \| \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \| > Number of students tested \| 10 \| \* \| \* \| +----------------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+ \*Fewer than 10 students	en
converted_docs	551913	Transcript of Remarks of Chairman Michael K. Powell Before Cellular Telecommunications Internet Association's CTIA Wireless 2001 March 20, 2001 Las Vegas, NV Format: Conversation with Tom Wheeler, President and CEO of CTIA. TOM WHEELER ("WHEELER"): Chairman, thank you for being with us. CHAIRMAN MICHAEL POWELL ("POWELL"): Good to be with you, Tom, always. WHEELER: Are you used to that title yet -- Mr. Chairman? POWELL: No, not yet. WHEELER: I mean, do you turn around when somebody says, "Hey, Mr. Chairman?" POWELL: A little bit. WHEELER: A little bit. POWELL: It's a little daunting. WHEELER: So, you've just seen a dog and pony show here about the issues of spectrum, and what wireless can mean in rural America and elsewhere. What's your reaction? POWELL: I think it's outstanding. You know, we're certainly in an extraordinary period of innovation across all of the sectors of the communications industries, and wireless is exciting because it's at the cutting edge of innovation. I think it's at the cutting edge of competitive principles. We're learning a lot from the way that industry is evolving, the way those technologies are evolving, and they're constantly instructing us about the power and the potential of technology to change peoples' lives. So, it's instructive to us. We always look forward to having an opportunity to work with the industry on continuing to realize that great promise for consumers. WHEELER: You know, it is really significant that you're sitting here today talking with us instead of talking at us. What's that say about the Powell chairmanship? POWELL: "It says" my mother taught me well. \[laughter\] The problems are too daunting, they're too great, they're too challenging. The future is too speculative and uncertain for anyone to pretend that they have all of the answers and all the solutions. And I think that that points both government and industry to partnership, to sharing their collective resources and their collective insights, so that as a total package we make thoughtful decisions, meaningful decisions, efficient choices. So, that is the goal that we're both trying to achieve, which is that consumers reap the highest and best values from these changes. And I think the humility with which we recognize that, or recognize the uncertainly and the challenges and the fascinating products and services, is a good way to build a relationship. WHEELER: Does the role of the FCC change as a result of the changes in the marketplace and the kind of things you're seeing here? POWELL: I think, absolutely. I think there's no reason that the government doesn't have to rethink its business model. I don't think there's any reason that the government doesn't have to understand and digest the way that technology changes the way you run your business, the way you run your institution -- your agency. We are in the process of systematically reviewing and thinking through what is the optimal, organizational model for the Commission. What's the best way to structure it? How do we create procedures and processes that allow us to be efficient and responsive in internet time? We are acutely aware that a decision that is way too late is worse than a bad decision early. We need to be more effective and quicker at doing that. And I think that we need to be a lot more technology-savvy -- fluent in the technologies of the agencies with which we interact -- or our relevancy is at issue. And if we are not a partner and participant as we were talking a minute ago, we're a distorting influence, and I think that's something we deeply want to avoid. WHEELER: In internet time -- in internet time[s]{.underline}, and at internet time -- can a regulatory agency be a participant and a partner in the terms you just used? POWELL: I think you can. It has to, in some ways, take humble stock of what it's appropriate role is . . . where it can make a meaningful intervention and where it can't. I think it needs to understand, at times, the futility of its involvement even when seemingly it has a good idea. There are a number of ways, both substantively and procedurally, I think we can do that. We are putting an increasing emphasis at the agency, for example, on an enforcement model, as opposed to the traditional regulatory model. You know, a great many of the regulations that we steward are what I call "by the grace of us" regulations. You want to do something you come get permission, you wait nine months, we say yes, and the opportunity is gone. We're trying to get more and more out of kind of up-front, prophylactic, permissive kind of regulatory environments, to one in which we provide greater flexibility, greater opportunity for innovation and change, but when you cheat and break the rules, we'll kill you at the back end. WHEELER: That's subtle. POWELL: Not so subtle. WHEELER: You've been using the term "vision matters" to try and explain to your troops where you want to go. Explain that to us. What do you mean by "vision matters?" POWELL: You know, it's another thing that . . . I've spent the better part of my life in government and it tends to be an institution that is very reactive. Things come up -- it's the problem of the day, the item of the day, the issue or the order of the day. But what is needed more and more is to try to have some coherency -- some vision -- as to what you're trying to get to so that you can harmonize more of your decisions toward the same goal. Vision, though, in my view of it in a regulatory sense, is not "I know what the model . . . I know what the industry looks like . . . I know what the products and services look like." I don't know any of those things. But I do know that there are certain persistent trends that we take account of, certain distortions and the lack of harmony among different regulatory environments that we have to work to remove as we sort of drive toward that flag. I've described it recently to people like a good basketball team \-- apropos of March. You don't know how every game is going to go. You don't know what are the challenges of the game. But you build the team for any game, and you build the assets to adapt and change as conditions change. And you recruit the right people, and you train them, and they're disciplined, and then that team can take on whatever uncertainties are presented in any game, and with good coaching can adjust and make adjustments to that. But if it understands it's basic game plan, it's strengths -- what it does well, it's weaknesses -- what it does less-well, I think that it will increasingly be proud of its service and proud of its contribution to the revolution. WHEELER: Can a regulatory agency shoot three-pointers? POWELL: \[chuckle\] We're going to try. WHEELER: Let's talk about your vision on some issues, then, for a second. I mean, we've been spending the last half-hour up here talking about spectrum. Tell us the Powell vision for the world of wireless spectrum. POWELL: I think that spectrum becomes an increasing challenge. I think the country needs to spend some collective thinking on trying to have a more coherent, nationally harmonized spectrum policy. We're trying to do that, as I touched on, to some degree in the Commission, itself. We have many spectrum challenges across many different bureaus, many different priorities, many different policies woven into them. We're certainly looking at ways to create kind of a better over-arching coordination of those policies so that, at least the policies emanating out of the Commission are more coherent. But, as you are well aware, we don't own the entire problem. Critical spectrum is spread all across the United States Government, with different points of decisional responsibility -- the government users themselves, the Department of Defense, the Federal Aviation Administration. So, we really do need, as well, to partner with . . . the Administration has to play a critical role, Congress has to play a critical role, so that the policy has some coherence, and the nation can make some more thoughtful decisions about where it places the highest value on, and arguably and definitely, scarce resources. WHEELER: Let's see if we can parse the spectrum issue into three parts. You just mentioned all three of them . . . two of them. One is lack of a plan. I mean, spectrum planning today is an exercise for the budget committees in the Congress when they say, "oh, let's sell some more spectrum and make some money." How do we get to a plan? Second part is -- that plan, as you just indicated, is going to have to access spectrum that is currently occupied by others in the government -- particularly the Defense Department. And the third component is, because the second component is going to take awhile, we've got perhaps an interim solution in spectrum caps, and the free-flow spectrum amongst various licensees. Can you kind of ad seriatim 1, 2, 3 go through those? POWELL: \[Chuckle.\] Those are a lot of steps. I think the first recognition is that there is value in having a plan. That sounds obvious, probably, to this audience. It's not so intuitive to some quarters of Washington and I think the case is continuing to be developed for greater coherency out of recognition that many different users have very different interests that have to be coordinated. I do think the Administration has to take a central role with respect to the government portion of the piece. I think, as you mentioned, Congress has to take a sober role about to what degree it's going to see spectrum policy as a matter of budget policy. Fortunately, I'm not a budgeteer -- it's not my job to figure out where each and every dollar comes from in the total collective federal budget -- but I do have growing concerns that if maximization of money is the interest, you can countermand or undermine the communication policies that are associated with the efficiencies of spectrum. So, I think that they have to play a central role. And, finally, and as to your question about caps -- I think that the Commission recognizes that it has a duty and an obligation to reevaluate and revalidate or get rid of rules that are artificial or structural constraints on growth. It has at times employed these kinds of mechanism for the facilitation of competitive markets in their infancy. But, as those conditions change and markets become more competitive, I think the government has a duty and an obligation to reevaluate whether the rule continues to serve its purpose. With respect to the cap you are concerned about, in particular, we do have vehicles on the road that provide an opportunity for that reexamination that are coming up fairly quick this year, and I think that'll be an opportunity to undertake that exercise in this case. WHEELER: That's a great piece of information, but I hesitate to point out -- you bookended it -- you skipped the second point. These guys over . . . POWELL: I can only do two parts of . . . WHEELER: These guys over across the river -- you know, in the Pentagon -- and their spectrum. What kind of role does, or can, the FCC play in that? POWELL: You know, I think that that role is limited to a degree. You know, the Federal Communications Commission is an independent agency. It's not a component of the administration. I think it can be an advocate for an understanding, collectively of the government, what the trade-offs are, but we can't trivialize the uses of our spectrum for our national security and national defense either. Those decisions are way above my pay grade, in some respects. And, as the son of a four-star, I respect authority in that regard. But I do think that it can be an advocate, that it can be an institution that is able to lay out what the challenge . . . help lay out what the challenges are for the country, collectively, so that our President and the members of Congress can make coherent decisions about where it places the national interest highest and best. I think that we have not done as well with this as we could. I think there are a number of initiatives under way, some which were done under the prior administration that will continue in part, and I think we'll have an opportunity to look at that. WHEELER: You know, Jerry Yang is our next guest here and I've been saying to the folks on our staff that there's a reason why Yahoo started in the United States and not in, let's say, France. And that was because of the fact that there was a backbone here. There was the ability for guys with good ideas, like Jerry Yang, to test them and then to go to scale quickly because the wired internet was here. It appears, from the charts that John Stanton was showing a moment ago, as though the rest of the world -- our trade partners -- have stolen a page out of our play book and are saying they're going to build the infrastructure for the next generation internet -- the wireless internet -- so that theire home team can have an advantage against our home team. Do you think that that message has gotten through in Washington? POWELL: As we would have said in law school, I think that those developments cause an issue-spotter. I mean that at least we have had some circumstances that point out the need to examine that and see what our response is to it. I'm not normally one who is quick to sort of take up a national champion view of coherent policies. I think that they can be misleading, but I do think that the situation in other parts of the world have alerted us to the changes in the situation. This was always a touchy trade-off, as we know. Going first is not always going to cause you to be the winner. Going first also, in an innovative market, runs the risk that you imbed inferior technology -- you bet too fast, too soon, too early. When the government, itself, is so heavily involved in sort of the industrial policy of infrastructure choices and innovation, my view is that their record is not particularly noteworthy over history on technological interventions. And so I think it's a very delicate balance between the right involvement of government to facilitate the conditions for markets. Because you know what, Jerry Yang also would have only come to being in a United States that rewards entrepreneurs and risk-takers and market mechanisms that allow them to reward and profit from their innovations. And those same forces are also what create a lot of energy and innovation. I think it's curious when some people criticize the United States for its policy over multiple standards in the second generation, and I giggle a little bit and, yes, and CDMA wouldn't have been produced if we had bet on a technology at the time we were asked to -- the very standard that's forming the foundation of that third generation in other parts of the world. I would also remind people that in Europe they had a high-definition TV industrial policy infrastructure, too, that imbedded and inferior technology prematurely. So, it's not a simple question of being ahead. You know, like a good marathon runner -- I think sometimes being two or three steps back in the race until you get closer to the end is not a bad place to be. WHEELER: Kind of like our demo did a minute ago. POWELL: Yeah. That was pretty good. WHEELER: Let's pick up on that point -- and the government as a predictor or facilitator of infrastructure decisions. I was serious about what I was saying about John Stanton up here. John has a vision and has put his money where his vision is. Yet, it keeps doing this against government policy that was designed for a narrowband world. How do we get around that? POWELL: We get around it the way we get around everything. We assess what the situation is. We look at what it's constraints are. We try to find out what the policy trade-offs were -- the first principles of the rule that they're running into -- and we reassess whether those first principles have any continuing validity in the context of that modern innovation. One thing that we have to humbly accept in the government is we will not be the first to walk into new pastures. It's going to be people like John Stanton. It's going to be the industry. It's going to be the market that is going to bring to us disruptions, changes, little wobbles in the matrix, if you will. That will be brought to us and it will be our obligation to sort of assess that and try to rapidly reevaluate the kinds of constraints they're finding. It's fascinating if you go back through a lot of communications technology history. It's always the monster we tilt to -- to use George Gildr's term -- it's always some entrepreneur that's breaking the rule, that has found a way around something. Whether it was Bill McGowan and the use of microwaves to circumvent AT&T's monopoly over long distance. Whether it be Einstein's refusal to accept, you know, that in quantum mechanics things can have two behaviors and change technology forever, against the critics . . . I mean, we're always going to encounter that entrepreneur who refuses to accept convention and shows us something that we've never seen before. I think that's wonderful, that's exciting. It's not our job to look ahead of that always and figure out what it is. It's our job, though, when it's brought to us, to try to digest it rapidly and see if we can't get out of his way. But, it's important to remember our job is tough because it's not just "get out of it's way." It's "get out of it's way and make sure we preserve the policies that were originally imbedded in the constraint" or to justify them or to eliminate them. And, so, it's a multi-faceted question. WHEELER: But maybe that's where you're "and we're watching, and if you don't behave, I'm coming down on you" attitude comes from. POWELL: Yeah, it's interesting. Because I think more and more in this kind of space, vigilance is becoming an important policy all by itself. Which is, if you're confident, like I am, that the government has to be careful not to intervene prematurely in an innovation market lest it distort the evolution or prejudge the winners, I think the concomitant obligation is that it has to be very smart about watching trends and observing changes. Because your industry and others would be the first to come to government, as well, if it ran into truly heinous anti-competitive activity -- if it truly ran into jurisdictional limitations that were causing you problems. We recognize that government can be a big and important part of that, but what it has to be doing is not just purely reacting, but constantly watching and evaluating and understanding persistent trends so that it can start to get on top quicker when those challenges are presented. WHEELER: Let's go back to your first priorities . . . one of your first values points. Let's stipulate that the systems for delivering narrowband services in remote areas of the United States has worked. Should there be a bright-line between that and delivery of broadband services? Do we need to say broadband is a different game and it's not just porting over old policies? We'll stick with the first principles here -- we'll keep this going -- but this is a different environment that ought to follow the kind of doctrine you were just talking about in terms of let's lay off and let's see what happens? POWELL: I definitely think that it's very positive to kind of conceptualize what the challenge is. We're sort of standing in the middle between two worlds. One communication world and regulatory environment is one that is very, very mature. It's symbolized by the 100 year-old public switched telephone network. The technologies are relatively mature. We understand them and we understand their characteristics. The cost dimensions are relatively mature. We have some basic understandings of costing and pricing in that market after that 100 years of experiences. We have great understanding about quality control and those kinds of services. We have a great familiarity with the players. We know Bell operating companies, we know IXCs, long distance companies. I think that's a very mature part of the cycle. It's an engineering marvel, but it's a sophisticated version of tin can and string in the way that was when it was first invented. What we start to see is we're standing in the middle between that and a legacy world that's trying to untangle itself and be more competitive and provide more opportunity. At the same time, on the other side of our world, is this innovation space that's in its infancy -- where the technology and the architectures are virgin and new -- and we're still understanding the optimal solution for the delivery of services. Wireless certainly is at the leading edge of trying to fiddle with and understand and experiment with optimal infrastructures. Optical technologies are phenomenal and what they will be. But, because those are in their infancy, too: our understanding of their cost dynamics, (for example intercarrier compensation); our understanding of the kinds of goods and services people will or won't deliver; whether consumers will brace any of this despite our techno-ecstasy about all of the possibilities. So we have a tough job because we kind of live in this no-man's land part of the tennis court. You know, you and I were talking the other night, this is the bad place to be. This is where you're picking balls up off your shoelaces. And we really need to sort of charge the net and get into a power position where we have a much greater understanding. But, we can't forget that we have a duty to untangle and continue to be concerned about the legacy legal questions, the regulatory questions, that are behind us as well. WHEELER: Techno-ecstasy? POWELL: Yeah, well. WHEELER: Good term. Let me ask you . . . I mean, this has been terrific and, on behalf of all of our friends sitting out here . . . to be able to see inside your philosophical head, is the reason why we were talking about "this is the right man for the job." Clearly, you've thought about these things. Let me ask you some tough bullet questions on some tough specific issues that you've got to deal with. Privacy. We've petitioned the Commission to come up with . . . we've adopted our own code of conduct. We've petitioned the Commission to come up and enact that so that it applies across the board and to work out something with the FTC so that it applies to people whom you don't regulate. What's your thought about that? POWELL: Well, on the petition specifically -- we did receive that. We've put it out for public notice, I believe, just the other day. So we've taken the petition seriously. We've initiated the process to take a careful examination of it. I haven't examined it personally, so I won't comment on the specifics of that. But I think that the association recognizes, as I think people in the internet space, generally, are starting to recognize, the interplay between the potential of internet-oriented services and privacy is going to determine how greatly the promises of this stuff is realized. One of the most fundamental truths about internet-based IP services or ubiquitous network-based services is that it allows for intimate tailoring. A personalized everything. You know, I like to joke that it's not the "me" generation anymore, it's the "my" generation. It's my Yahoo, my Amazon, my priceline.com. Everything is my, my, my. But that tailorization comes with allowing greater revelation of the most intimate details of your life. And the interplay between those two things is where both the producers and the consumers are trying to find the sweet spot of the value that they provide to each other. Consumers are very complicated on issues of privacy. In many ways, if you ask them the question flatly they'll be very, very concerned about it. In other ways, they're willing to trade or sell aspects of their life in exchange for something of value. I think the challenge for producers is, are they really providing, number one, fair notice and opportunity to make that choice thoughtfully and with full knowledge of its consequences and, secondly, whether they're really getting something in exchange that's valuable to them for me to give away to you my phone number or my buying habits or my working habits. But, as we know, there will be public policy issues as a consequence. The day somebody is arrested and there is a whole log record of what they do. That's going to be a serious issue to people. But this interplay, in my opinion, as a matter of public policy, is the critical interplay between consumers, government policy and producers, because the killer ap of the internet -- whatever it is -- is personalization at some level. And personalization is the diminution of some degree of privacy, at least to those service providers. It's interesting -- you know I made an observation about universal service and broadband. In many ways, how much ubiquity and affordability we get in the country is simply a matter of how much privacy we're going to be willing to exchange. You know, there are access companies out there who will give you free access. There are computer companies out there giving people free computers -- depending on whether you're willing to share enough of your life with them -- and so where that line gets drawn is going to have a lot to do with where we land as a matter of mass-market, ubiquitous services, and whether the promise of the technology is fully realized. WHEELER: Boy, I'd love to go down some of thoughts with you, but I'm going to hit you with the next issue. Okay? Numbering. There's two scarce realities -- two scarce resources -- in this country right now -- spectrum and telephone numbers. How do we develop governmental policies to make sure that the inability to get numbers doesn't retard growth? POWELL: Yeah, well. Numbering is an exhausting issue. But . . . I know, I know . . . I didn't rehearse that. I think the first point you made is critical -- which is the recognition that it is a scarce resource -- it can be depleted and it will be depleted. Normally, in an economic system you cure that by having market allocation measures that help allocate to their highest and best uses. You would charge for it or you would have a market for it. Regrettably, in this context it's generally believed that there isn't existing authority for introducing those kinds of mechanisms, and so you really do get into kind of a central planned, heavy governmental involvement mechanism in which we try to sort of create mechanisms and resources that cried for efficient use of numbers and try to police inefficient numbers and reclaim numbers that are not being used. There are any number of vehicles that are out there that are being experimented with and attempted -- everything from number pooling to utilization benchmarks. If you're not using numbers, you will release them or you will not be able to get others. Service-specific overlays, technology-specific overlays -- which can be controversial, depending on the state or the jurisdiction of the circumstances. It's also complicated by the fact that it's not perfectly one-size-fits-all. That is, the numbering challenges in some markets and jurisdictions are greater and more acute than in others. And all of that is to say that there are a lot of variables in that soup. I think the Commission recognizes this is an issue close to the heart all over the country -- in the wireline context as well -- and I think we are increasingly trying to work with states and others to find ways to help solve that problem. But, it does start from the premise it's scarce and it does start from the premise that new services will deplete those numbers. But, there will be other critical parts that the industry will have responsibility in, too. It doesn't work if there's not number portability. If you can't move numbers around, you lose the flexibility and you've lost resources permanently, if when people make moves around this innovation space they can't take their numbers with them. So, there are a lot of those pieces in there and I just think this is one of those you just slog through the mud on and continue to hope you make a difference. WHEELER: Okay. Last issue but on that same kind of theme. The involvement of the regulatory agency in new technology . . . in the ability to deliver new technologies. There is a back-log at the Commission in terms of type-acceptance of phones. Our manufacturers are saying "hey, we have to spend too much time. . . that the life-span of phones is going downhill, increasingly becoming shorter." In Japan, now, it's down to six or nine months. Here, it's a couple of years. But they need to be bringing out the new phones that can do the kinds of things we were demonstrating here. The back-up in the approval process at the Commission -- is there a way that we can work on that together? POWELL: Yeah. I think you and I have talked about this. We certainly accept that the increased pace of product cycles, a greater premium on new services, is putting a greater premium on trying to have rapid and expeditious review procedures and effective procedures, so that we're not the bottleneck in innovation. I think that working with you, we can do, and we've already begun some systematic review of our processes, to see where we can create greater uniformity, more efficient streamlined procedures, and to try to identify clearly what really are the problems. Some of them are really intriguing. A good portion of the backlog you refer to is the growing concern about RF emissions, and on the extreme end, concerns about everything from an individual's health. Regrettably, it's an area where there are very few standards or consensuses to the right testing standards and regimes among engineers and standard bodies like IEEE. We have to try to drive a recognition of that problem and an understanding that we do need a coherent standard in order to efficiently test for those things that I think consumers are going to insist that we test for. And, I think you'll want the protections of having the government having looked at those questions. WHEELER: And there is a new standard coming on . . . POWELL: There's a new standard coming on it and our engineering group, which is outstanding, has been working to try to take the lead on that, as well. But, we're more than happy to work with you and other interested players to make that process a much better one for you. WHEELER: Well, Chairman Powell, we look forward to working with you through your chairmanship. We look forward to you coming back and visiting with us again at subsequent wireless shows. We're particularly grateful for you being here today. Thank you very much. POWELL: Thank you, Tom. Thank you.	en
log-files	623346	<!-- Title: 08:58:11 Tue Mar 11 2003 --> <!-- Crewchief: New Day --> <!-- Op1:   --> <!-- Op2:   --> <!-- Op3:   --> <!-- Op4:   --> <!-- Op5:   --> <!-- Op6:   --> <!-- Notes: --> <pre>database activity</pre> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 08:58:32 2003 --> <pre>rerunning rman last nights failed the cron job for cleanup failed so rman immediately failed due to space</pre> <!-- Author: ns --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 09:01:07 2003 --> <pre>Clean up for MCS will not continue. I do not have additional undo or temp space. Still looking to get additional space on /dev/vx/dsk/oradg/tempdatvol 5242880 1864356 3167372 38% /dbs24 /dev/vx/dsk/oradg/rollbkvol 3145728 3144487 1170 100% /dbs25 </pre> <!-- Author: ns --> <!-- Comment: Tue Mar 11 11;45;44 comment by...js --> <pre>ok, it's going pretty slow, since some of the filesystems I'm dealing with are 68gb +</pre> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 09:31:00 2003 --> <pre>Many local=no on box Still trying to understand what daspc0 connections are? why the connecitons below do not get terminated! my guess is they are not dead connections as oracle knows them so they are not cleaned up! They came on the machine when archiver hung 4:51 and 4:56... It;s been 12 hours think things are fine but I will try to learn who is daspc0. Explanation of cdffarms2 below the local=no connections which will be killed off today. Only people in oracle's .k5login are nelly, diana, julie, anil, johnw, alansill. oracle 27154 1 0 16:47:42 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27883 1 0 16:50:50 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27324 1 0 16:49:15 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 26650 1 0 16:46:01 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 28537 1 0 16:52:38 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27887 1 0 16:50:51 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27127 1 0 16:47:36 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27332 1 0 16:49:16 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27901 1 0 16:50:58 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 18034 1 0 Feb 27 ? 14:40 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 26632 1 0 16:45:56 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27133 1 0 16:47:38 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27893 1 0 16:50:55 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27358 1 0 16:49:22 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 28525 1 0 16:52:33 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 28539 1 0 16:52:39 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27117 1 0 16:47:33 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27891 1 0 16:50:54 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 26662 1 0 16:46:05 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27346 1 0 16:49:19 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27895 1 0 16:50:56 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27889 1 0 16:50:53 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27356 1 0 16:49:21 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27152 1 0 16:47:41 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 18026 1 0 Feb 27 ? 0:06 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27142 1 0 16:47:40 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 28531 1 0 16:52:36 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 28521 1 0 16:52:32 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 17595 1 0 Feb 27 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 18032 1 0 Feb 27 ? 3:34 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27131 1 0 16:47:37 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27125 1 0 16:47:35 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27899 1 0 16:50:57 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 22532 1 0 20:50:07 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 26638 1 0 16:45:57 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 28501 1 0 16:52:29 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27348 1 0 16:49:20 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27139 1 0 16:47:39 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 26652 1 0 16:46:02 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 2510 1 0 19:30:33 ? 0:02 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 26626 1 0 16:45:55 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 26658 1 0 16:46:04 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27318 1 0 16:49:12 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 17593 1 0 Feb 27 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 17597 1 0 Feb 27 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 2416 1 9 19:30:01 ? 30:22 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 28515 1 0 16:52:31 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 26654 1 0 16:46:03 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 18028 1 0 Feb 27 ? 3:05 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 28535 1 0 16:52:37 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 22981 1 5 20:51:15 ? 0:02 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27158 1 0 16:47:44 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27340 1 0 16:49:17 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 26640 1 0 16:45:58 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 17091 1 0 Feb 27 ? 8:43 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27322 1 0 16:49:14 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 27907 1 0 16:50:59 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 26644 1 0 16:45:59 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 17599 1 0 Feb 27 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 28505 1 0 16:52:30 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=B REGARDING CDFFARMS 2 From cdffarm2 (I think you are asking about this machine,although you wrote 'cdfarms2') we are connecting to database from : 1, daemon "dispatcher",which starts jobs processing the data on the farm. This daemon is connecting to database to find out level3 tag. It executes only this one query: """ select l3_tcls.tcl_tag from runconfigurations, runsets, valid_tag_sets, l3_tcls where runconfigurations.rs_name = runsets.name and runsets.l3tagset = valid_tag_sets.l3tagset and valid_tag_sets.tcl_tag = l3_tcls.tcl_tag and runconfigurations.runnumber="+str(run) """ But last job with dispatcher was started on: """ Mar 08 00:19:27 2003: Submitted job 66588 """ and so,the last connection should be before this time. 2, cronjob 'progress.csh' which executes at 1.00 in night,and is used to create graph on our web page and I haven't seen any problem with graph... 3, cronjob "good_run_list_check" This cronjob is running every hour(starts at whole hour): from crontab: """ 0 0-23/1 * * * /home/cdfprod0/good_runs/good_run_list_check.csh """ and checks the status of good runs in database and compares with our internal database. So, I don't know about nothig what could be connecting between 4:51 pm and 4:57. About machine 'daspc0' I don't know anything. Roman we have one more daemon at cdffarm2 that "checks" the health of the offline production database about once in a minute or so. It does so by connecting to the database and closing the connection right after it gets it. No activity whatsoever is performed by this daemon. This daemon checks the conditions on the farm for all of the sub components. Miro </pre> <!-- Author: nstanfield --> <!-- Comment: Tue Mar 11 09;55;12 comment by...ns --> <pre>processes left remotely logged in db.. replication and sam all processes that came on 4:51 to 4:57 from cdffarms2 and daspc0 killed manually oracle will not clean them up since it is a strange dead connection still trying to locate daspc0 oracle 27901 1 0 16:50:58 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 18034 1 4 Feb 27 ? 27:07 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 18026 1 0 Feb 27 ? 0:06 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 17595 1 0 Feb 27 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 18032 1 0 Feb 27 ? 3:36 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 17593 1 0 Feb 27 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 17597 1 0 Feb 27 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 18028 1 0 Feb 27 ? 3:05 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 17091 1 0 Feb 27 ? 9:08 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 17599 1 0 Feb 27 ? 0:00 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ))) oracle 5243 1 6 09:10:01 ? 22:37 oraclecdfofprd (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=no)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=BEQ)))</pre> <!-- Comment: Tue Mar 11 10;23;21 comment by...ns --> <pre>There are many many connections in the oracle's listener file that reflect the info below: 10-MAR-2003 00:03:00 * (CONNECT_DATA=(SID=cdfofprd)(GLOBAL_NAME=cdfofprd.fnal.gov)(CID=(PROGRAM=)(HOST=cdffarm2.fnal.gov)(USER=cdfprod0))) * (ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=tcp)(HOST=131.225.238.3)(PORT=34717)) * establish * cdfofprd * 0 There are several during this period.. our trouble period.. that did not connect to the db but tried to. 10-MAR-2003 16:51:01 * (CONNECT_DATA=(SID=cdfofprd)(GLOBAL_NAME=cdfofprd.fnal.gov)(CID=(PROGRAM=)(HOST=cdffarm2.fnal.gov)(USER=cdfprod0))) * (ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=tcp)(HOST=131.225.238.3)(PORT=55623)) * establish * cdfofprd * 0 11-MAR-2003 10:09:43 * (CONNECT_DATA=(SID=cdfofprd)(GLOBAL_NAME=cdfofprd.fnal.gov)(CID=(PROGRAM=)(HOST=cdffarm2.fnal.gov)(USER=cdfprod0))) * (ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=tcp)(HOST=131.225.238.3)(PORT=49127)) * establish * cdfofprd * 0 Why are they trying to connect if there is no FARMS activity? </pre> <!-- Comment: Tue Mar 11 12;16;38 comment by...ns --> <pre>Hi All We have been investigating the interruption on cdfofprd between 4:51 pm and 4:56 yesterday. We have been investigating daspc0 and it's location. I was just in Anil's office and unplugged his Linux box from the network while Richard did a ping. It seems this machine is Anil's linux desktop. We had connections from this box to fcdfora1 yesterday when we had the issue with the /cdf/dbs_bkup area showing 100% interrupting connections to the database between 4:51 and 4:56. We also had many many connections from cdffarms2. We have resolved the issues. Anil did cleanup that mount point, and we understand the connections to the machines from daspc0 and cdffarm2 are legitimate. Although the cdffarm2 was not running it did attempt to connect? </pre> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 10:08:22 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CRITICAL Tablespace Full Tablespace SYSTEM is 47.59% full. 103776.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace RBS is 51.58% full. 942070.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace LRG_RBS is 23.44% full. 5.01757e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace USERDATA_01 is 59.23% full. 1.97198e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace USERINDEX_01 is 35.25% full. 5.03879e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace SYSTEM_REP_DATA is 72.20% full. 193240.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace TOOLMAN is 72.05% full. 1.37378e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace CALIB_PRD_REP_DATA is 69.52% full. 1.29221e+07 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace CALIB_PRD_REP_INDEX is 54.08% full. 2.96585e+07 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace REPADMIN_PRD_DATA is 24.74% full. 77064.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace HDWDB_PRD_REP_DATA is 42.38% full. 557608.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace RUNDB_PRD_REP_DATA is 66.07% full. 2.81458e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace RUNDB_PRD_RE CRITICAL Mar 11 2003 10:07:46 AM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 10:21:03 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CLEARED Unscheduled Jobs Event test "Unscheduled Jobs" is cleared CLEARED Mar 11 2003 10:20:46 AM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 10:30:23 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : STARTED </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 10:30:23 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : COMPLETED </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 10:41:30 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CLEARED Failed Jobs Event test "Failed Jobs" is cleared CLEARED Mar 11 2003 10:40:45 AM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 10:41:30 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Target Type : Node Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CLEARED Data Gatherer UpDown Event test "Data Gatherer UpDown" is cleared CLEARED Mar 11 2003 10:40:45 AM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 11:48:06 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfonprd Target Type : Database Node Name : b0dau35.fnal.gov Status : WARNING Alert The following errors are in the ALERT file : ORA-01555 caused by SQL statement below (Query Duration=7022 sec, SCN: 0x0000.4af0ed17):. WARNING Mar 11 2003 11:47:44 AM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 12:34:50 2003 --> <pre>Discussions on fcdfora2/1 replacements HI, CPU load is growing on fcdflnx1 to the point that it is between 25% and 50% loaded at all times, on average, sometimes for hours between 50% and 75%. Under these conditions I cannot expect to shut off cdfrep01 and have fcdfora1 pick up the load without overloading. We can deal with short term anticipated growth in user load by adding fcdfora3 to the mix (and continuing to try to improve the efficiency of CDF code, our only ace-in-the-hole), but in general we knew at the outset that we would have to replace fcdfora1 as we would eventually reach this condition. Having 2 replicas to load balance and take the bulk of the user load when we get streams running will be reassuring (and I hope will improve and simplify the replication picture), but we should have amore substantial system with its equivalent dev/int system behind this. Also SAM usage will be growing and right now the SAM db servers connect only to cdfofprd, something that will be more important in the future. Hope this helps clear up some of the issues... Thanks, Alan On Monday, March 10, 2003, at 04:27 PM, Nelly Stanfield wrote: > Hi Alan > > Trying to multitask here. Julie has been > asking about the status for the fcdfora1/2 > replacement. What is CDF timeline replacement > for these machines? As you can see > our plan is to understand fcdfora3 utilization > then make a recommendation. I want to make > sure I am not holding CDF up? > > Thanks > Nelly > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Nelly Stanfield" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 4:23 PM > Subject: replacing fcdfora1/2 > > >> Julie >> >> To update you on fcdfora1/2 replacements. Richard >> is working with us since he understands >> fcdfora1, cdfrep01 utilization. We gave >> him spec's on RAC which we will not be pursuing. >> We half thought we would buy something that >> was flexible enough to grow into RAC but have >> decided against it. >> >> We need (ANIL AND I) to start up our stream >> integration testing on FCDFORA3 this will >> allow us to see how this linux box performs >> along with Richard watching i/o, writes, etc. >> >> We know for sure we will not use IDE disks >> on the replacements even though fcdfora3 >> is IDE at this time. Testing this box >> will give us another metric. >> >> Then I need to understand from CDF what >> the schedule is for the replacements as >> this will definitely affect Richard's purchase. >> >> Below is the requisition Fagan filled out >> for the d0ora1 replacement. Nice machine! >> >> >> >> >> D0 replacement for d0ora1 >> >> Request: CD89432 Status: In MMS (See the Lab's MMS Sytem ) >> Fiscal Year: 2003 Request Date: 02/13/2003 >> Requester Badge: 08244N FAGAN, DAVID J >> Requisition For: CD/D0A >> Suggested Vendor: Best Source Need by Date: 06/30/2003 Sole >> Source? N >> Deliver To: FCC PREP >> Choose Person >> Short Project Description Sun production server >> In Warranty? N Urgent? N >> Blanket Order?N >> Change Order? N >> Line Quantity Description Price Budget >> Code Cost >> Element Line >> Type Category Div Project Dept Project Capitalize WBS# >> Line Total >> 1 1 EACH Sun V880,8x900Mhz,16GB memory,12-73GB fibre Hdd,3 >> add'l Fibre Channel optical Gigabit Ethernets's, 4 Fibre > Channel >> optical controllers.Includes Trade-in credit(4-16x300 Origin >> 2000's,w/ 3 Meta Routers & 8 Cards(represents min $40K credit) >> 43700.00 ORP 41 Goods-Receivables COMPUTER PERIPHERALS >> D0-RUN2-ANALYSIS-CPU SELF CD89432 $ 43,700 >> > > </pre> <!-- Author: ns --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 12:53:57 2003 --> <pre>we were living on 1 72G disk with 4G to spare.. now NOTHING is to spare! space Filesystem kbytes used avail capacity Mounted on /dev/vx/dsk/oradg/backupvol 71303168 70613696 684152 100% /backup</pre> <!-- Author: nstanfield --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 15:28:06 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : WARNING Alert The following errors are in the ALERT file : ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 3736 ORA-12008: error in snapshot refresh path ORA-01555: snapshot too old: rollback segment number 72 with name "_SYSSMU72$" too small ORA-02063: preceding line from CDFONPRD ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 617 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 674 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_IREFRESH", line 577 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REFRESH", line 211 ORA-06512: at line 1. WARNING Mar 11 2003 03:27:26 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 15:28:06 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : WARNING Alert The following errors are in the ALERT file : ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 3736 ORA-12008: error in snapshot refresh path ORA-01555: snapshot too old: rollback segment number 72 with name "_SYSSMU72$" too small ORA-02063: preceding line from CDFONPRD ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 617 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 674 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_IREFRESH", line 577 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REFRESH", line 211 ORA-06512: at line 1. WARNING Mar 11 2003 03:27:26 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 15:39:20 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CRITICAL Tablespace Full Tablespace SYSTEM is 47.59% full. 103776.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace RBS is 51.58% full. 942070.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace USERDATA_01 is 59.23% full. 1.97198e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace USERINDEX_01 is 35.25% full. 5.03879e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace SYSTEM_REP_DATA is 72.20% full. 193240.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace TOOLMAN is 72.05% full. 1.37378e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace CALIB_PRD_REP_DATA is 69.54% full. 1.2917e+07 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace CALIB_PRD_REP_INDEX is 54.10% full. 2.96472e+07 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace REPADMIN_PRD_DATA is 24.74% full. 77064.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace HDWDB_PRD_REP_DATA is 42.38% full. 557608.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace RUNDB_PRD_REP_DATA is 66.07% full. 2.81458e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace RUNDB_PRD_REP_INDEX is 79.36% full. 1.6283e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace SU CRITICAL Mar 11 2003 03:38:56 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 15:41:13 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CLEARED Failed Jobs Event test "Failed Jobs" is cleared CLEARED Mar 11 2003 03:40:50 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 15:41:32 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CLEARED Unscheduled Jobs Event test "Unscheduled Jobs" is cleared CLEARED Mar 11 2003 03:41:15 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 15:49:33 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CRITICAL Tablespace Full Tablespace SYSTEM is 47.59% full. 103776.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace RBS is 51.58% full. 942070.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace USERDATA_01 is 59.23% full. 1.97198e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace USERINDEX_01 is 35.25% full. 5.03879e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace SYSTEM_REP_DATA is 72.20% full. 193240.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace TOOLMAN is 72.05% full. 1.37378e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace CALIB_PRD_REP_DATA is 69.54% full. 1.2917e+07 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace CALIB_PRD_REP_INDEX is 54.10% full. 2.96472e+07 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace REPADMIN_PRD_DATA is 24.74% full. 77064.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace HDWDB_PRD_REP_DATA is 42.38% full. 557608.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace RUNDB_PRD_REP_DATA is 66.07% full. 2.81458e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace RUNDB_PRD_REP_INDEX is 79.36% full. 1.6283e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace SU CRITICAL Mar 11 2003 03:49:05 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Comment: Tue Mar 11 15;57;57 comment by...ns --> <pre>Dmitri I had changed the threshold on this alert because we were toubleshooting alerts. I will reset to it's original value. The snapshot to old is a REAL alert and our replication for mcs is failing due to limited space on onprd! We expected this alert yesterday too but did not receive it, thus the work on OEM/alerts. Seems the alerts are alerting NOW! </pre> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 16:05:36 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CRITICAL Tablespace Full Tablespace EVENTS_MAXVALUE is 91.85% full. 55032.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace RUNDB_PRD_REP_INDEX is 79.36% full. 1.6283e+06 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_IDX_P04 is 80.04% full. 36792.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_IDX_P05 is 80.04% full. 36792.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_IDX_P01 is 80.04% full. 36792.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_P01 is 80.01% full. 155032.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_IDX_P03 is 80.04% full. 36792.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_IDX_P02 is 80.04% full. 36792.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_IDX_MAXVALUE is 80.04% full. 36792.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_P02 is 80.01% full. 155032.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_P03 is 80.01% full. 155032.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_P04 is 80.01% full. 155032.0 KBytes of free space remain. Tablespace EVENTS_P05 is 80.01% full CRITICAL Mar 11 2003 04:04:15 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 16:24:58 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfonprd Target Type : Database Node Name : b0dau35.fnal.gov Status : WARNING Alert The following errors are in the ALERT file : ORA-01555 caused by SQL statement below (Query Duration=392 sec, SCN: 0x0000.4afeb900):. WARNING Mar 11 2003 04:22:44 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 16:53:23 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : WARNING Alert The following errors are in the ALERT file : ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 3736 ORA-12008: error in snapshot refresh path ORA-01555: snapshot too old: rollback segment number 70 with name "_SYSSMU70$" too small ORA-02063: preceding line from CDFONPRD ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 617 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 674 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_IREFRESH", line 577 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REFRESH", line 211 ORA-06512: at line 1. WARNING Mar 11 2003 04:52:42 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 17:14:15 2003 --> <pre>Dropped the refresh group for Slow Control ie. MCS due to not enough space in undo tablespace. Refresh of Slow Control is erroring out with the following error message : error in snapshot refresh path ORA-01555: snapshot too old: rollback segment number 70 with name "_SYSSMU70$" too small ORA-02063: preceding line from CDFONPRD ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT". It tried couple of times with the same error. Waiting for more space to be allocated to the mount point where undo tablespace resides. Hopefully reboot of b0dau35 will allow sysadmin to have more space allocated to that area. Once we will have more space for undo on cdfonprd, we will kick off the refresh for Slow Control. Further cleanup of MCS on-hold until this batch is replicated to cdfofprd. Replication for other schema will continue to run. </pre> <!-- Author: akumar --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 17:26:44 2003 --> <pre>Frank/Jeff Originally I wanted to manually stop the database since we were closely monitoring some replication that had been going on. We have stopped the replication of MCS refresh groups and will restart it once we get additional space. All other replication is uninterrupted. Stating that! You can simply reboot the machine when you are ready and let the rc scripts handle the shutdown/restart of the database. </pre> <!-- Author: ns --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 17:33:20 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : b0dau35.fnal.gov Target Type : Node Node Name : b0dau35.fnal.gov Status : NODE UNREACHABLE Node UpDown VNI-4009 : Cannot contact agent on the node. Agent may be down or network communication to the node has failed. NODE UNREACHABLE Mar 11 2003 05:30:38 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 17:33:20 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfonprd Target Type : Database Node Name : b0dau35.fnal.gov Status : NODE UNREACHABLE Node UpDown VNI-4009 : Cannot contact agent on the node. Agent may be down or network communication to the node has failed. NODE UNREACHABLE Mar 11 2003 05:30:38 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 17:33:20 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : WARNING Alert The following errors are in the ALERT file : ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 3898 ORA-02068: following severe error from CDFONPRD ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 617 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 674 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_IREFRESH", line 577 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REFRESH", line 211 ORA-06512: at line 1 ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 3378 ORA-02068: following severe error from CDFONPRD ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 617 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 674 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_IREFRESH", line 577 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REFRESH", line 211 ORA-06512: at line 1 ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 3885 ORA-02068: following severe error from CDFONPRD ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 617 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 674 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_IREFRESH", line 577 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REFRESH", line 211 .... WARNING Mar 11 2003 05:32:50 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 17:39:33 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : WARNING Alert The following errors are in the ALERT file : ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 3378 ORA-12535: TNS:operation timed out ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 617 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 674 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_IREFRESH", line 577 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REFRESH", line 211 ORA-06512: at line 1. WARNING Mar 11 2003 05:37:51 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 17:39:48 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : b0dau35.fnal.gov Target Type : Node Node Name : b0dau35.fnal.gov Status : CLEARED Node UpDown Event test "Node UpDown" is cleared CLEARED Mar 11 2003 05:39:30 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 17:39:48 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfonprd Target Type : Database Node Name : b0dau35.fnal.gov Status : CLEARED Node UpDown Event test "Node UpDown" is cleared CLEARED Mar 11 2003 05:39:30 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 17:41:37 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CRITICAL Failed Jobs Job 3378 has failed 2 times. Job 3898 has failed 2 times. Job 3885 has failed 2 times. Job 3894 has failed 2 times. CRITICAL Mar 11 2003 05:40:52 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 17:43:42 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : WARNING Alert The following errors are in the ALERT file : ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 3885 ORA-12541: TNS:no listener ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 617 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 674 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_IREFRESH", line 577 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REFRESH", line 211 ORA-06512: at line 1 ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 3898 ORA-12541: TNS:no listener ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 617 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 674 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_IREFRESH", line 577 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REFRESH", line 211 ORA-06512: at line 1 ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 3894 ORA-12541: TNS:no listener ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 617 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_SNAPSHOT", line 674 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_IREFRESH", line 577 ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REFRESH", line 211 .... WARNING Mar 11 2003 05:42:52 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Tue Mar 11 18:41:41 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfofprd.fnal.gov Target Type : Database Node Name : fcdfora1.fnal.gov Status : CLEARED Failed Jobs Event test "Failed Jobs" is cleared CLEARED Mar 11 2003 06:40:53 PM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Date: Wed Mar 12 00:03:39 2003 --> <pre> Target Name : cdfonprd Target Type : Database Node Name : b0dau35.fnal.gov Status : CLEARED Alert Event test "Alert" is cleared CLEARED Mar 12 2003 12:02:44 AM </pre> <!-- Author: oem-admin (email) --> <!-- Comment: Wed Mar 12 13;45;20 comment by...ns --> <pre>when we bounced the db we took out parameters set while turning on functional indexes.. we believe these in ORACLE 9 do not have to be set to use functional indexes we do believe it affects explain plan and optimizer on tables totally unrelated to functional indexes more later </pre>	en
converted_docs	907454	*Excerpt from Annual Report of the Director of the Mint to the Secretary of the Treasury Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1906* Washington: Government Printing Office, 1906, Page 42-43. -- Historical Reference Collection United States Mint. THE GREAT EARTHQUAKE AND FIRE The mint escaped destruction or serious damage by the earthquake of April 18 and the fire that followed, although it was the only structure, but one, left standing within many blocks in every direction. The superintendent supplies the following account of the damage suffered, of the vigorous fight made to save the edifice, and of the service rendered to the city by the institution and its staff of officials and employees in the period of disorganization which followed: The San Francisco mint building was constructed shortly after what was called the big earthquake of 1868 and was built against damage by future seismic disturbances, and it is a pleasure to report that, with the exception of a few hundred dollars' damage to the chimneys of the building, the earthquake did not leave its mark otherwise on the entire building. There is not a fracture or a crack to be found anywhere in the massive walls. The damage to the chimneys and stacks was repaired at a comparatively small outlay, but, upon the advice of the superintendent of repairs of public buildings, it was decided to cut down the height of the tall smokestacks by taking about 20 feet off of the tops for the purpose of reducing the possibility of further damage should we be visited by another earthquake. The building, however, was not so fortunate in the matter of damage after escaping destruction by the great earthquake. As the front of the building sets back from the street a short distance, and the current of wind was from the building, this part of the structure was very little injured, the flag pole surmounting the peak on the front of the building being the only part damaged; but the other sides of the building, being nearer to the flames, all suffered. On the south end the damage was confined to the loss of plate-glass windows; on the west end, in addition to the glass, the sash and window frames were destroyed, and on the north end, besides the loss of the window finishings, the stone forming the walls was badly flaked for the entire face of the wall. It was here the greatest heat was encountered, the flames having driven directly against the whole side of the structure. In addition to this damage a section of the roof covering probably a space of 30 by 40 feet was burned. During the few days following the fire, while inexperienced and careless city officials were blowing down dangerous walls in the vicinity of the mint, several thousand dollars' worth of plate-glass windows left in the front of the building were destroyed by the dynamite explosions. In all, the damage, in dollars and cents, is estimated as follows: Replacing plate-glass windows, sash, and frames.........................................................\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\$5,000 Repairing roof, stacks, and altering same..................................................................\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...8,000 (The largest part of this outlay, however, comes from reducing the height of the smokestacks.) For replacing the stonework on the north end of the building.......................................\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...40,000 The large platform scales in the street were destroyed and are being replaced at a cost of...........\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\.....400 Inasmuch as the flaked stone on the north end of the building in no way affects the comfort or stability of the structure, and the only purpose in replacing it would be to make a perfect wall, I would suggest that the scarred wall be allowed to remain as a record of the greatest disaster that ever visited a civilized people, and as a monument to the heroic conduct of the Government employees who risked their lives to preserve the building. In a few years every vestige of the disaster will have been removed and these scars left on one of the Government's best buildings will be a matter of interest for generations to come. The building was saved through the recent establishment of a fire-protection plant within the building. About fifty of the officers and employees of the mint succeeded in reaching the institution and, with the exception of two or three, they remained in the building fighting the fire until all danger was passed, and in their efforts to protect the building there was a constant battle from early morning until quite late in the afternoon. An abundance of water was supplied from the artesian well in the mint and forced to the various parts of the building by a steam pump. As the subtreasury had been destroyed and every bank in the city lay in ruins, the mint was the only financial institution left intact, consequently it immediately became the financial center and nucleus for the resumption of business, and the point of distribution of financial relief. The assistant treasurer was given offices and vault room in the building and supplied with money with which to resume business. The banks organized a union bank, embracing all the leading banks of the city, and they were afforded space and vault room, by which they were able to transact a regular banking business. Besides this, at the request of the President, we became the depository and treasury for the relief funds until the banks were able to return to business in their own quarters. In addition to all this the mint officials handled, in round numbers, \$40,000,000---money that was transferred by telegraph through a system of transferring funds from various parts of the East to individuals and banks and corporations in this city, made possible by an order of Secretary of the Treasury Shaw. This was one of the greatest relief measures instituted, and was received with expressions of gratitude by all. This work was the most arduous of all our labors, employing nearly all of the clerical force from early morning until late in the evening. Of course we had no system or method for the transaction of that kind of business, it being entirely foreign to our usual line of work, but all the money was transferred and distributed without loss, error, or unnecessary delay. It can be readily understood that the great fire destroyed the gas and electric lighting system throughout that portion of the city swept by the conflagration. Our electrician, however, by the Saturday following the fire, had improvised an electric-lighting plant by changing over one of our big motors into a generator, so the building and the streets around were lit up by electricity, which helped to add a little cheerfulness to the desolation and ruin surrounding us. In addition to protecting the building, our artesian water supply afforded a priceless blessing to thousands for some weeks after the fire, it being the only source of water for a great distance around. We arranged supply stations on the outside of the building, and a constant throng of people availed themselves of it all day. The workmen who were not assisting in cleaning up the building, or handling the vast sums of money being paid out, were detailed into shifts for doing guard duty, night and day, and inasmuch as there were no restaurants or food-supply places within a great distance of the mint, it was necessary for us to arrange to furnish food for all connected with the institution. Some of our workers who had had experience in cooking volunteered to act as cooks, while others served as waiters. Our principal meal was at the lunch hour, when as many as 124 persons were furnished with meals in one day. At first these meals were supplied gratis, but subsequently it was thought best to impose a small charge, so as to cover the cost of food necessary to be purchased. When we discontinued the restaurant, some time in June, we found there had accumulated a surplus, after all bills had been paid, of \$188.35. This fund was kept intact until the news of the great earthquake and fire at Valparaiso was flashed across the country, whereupon the sum was donated for the relief of the unfortunates in that section. In closing this report I would like to make acknowledgement of the very generous and noble response of the officers and employees of the Philadelphia mint who, immediately after receiving the news of the disaster, raised the sum of \$863.69 for the relief of the employees of this mint who met with losses in the fire, and also acknowledge the prompt tender of aid and relief from the people of the United States mint at Denver, Colo. Compiled and transcribed by the United States Mint, Office of the Historian.	en
converted_docs	354960	Beyond an Apple a Day: Providing Consumer Health Information At Your Library ![](media/image1.jpeg){width="3.0006944444444446in" height="2.986111111111111in"} Class Handout Approved for 2, 3 and 4 hours of MLA CE Class link: [http://nnlm.gov/training/consumer/apple](http://nnlm.gov/training/consumer/apple) Please contact editors, Michelle Eberle and Terri Ottosen with comments and questions: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]); [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Web sites you can trust... ![](media/image2.png){width="1.8645833333333333in" height="0.3645833333333333in"}MedlinePlus\ [www.medlineplus.gov](http://www.medlineplus.gov/) > Created by the National Library of Medicine, this is the first place > to go with ANY consumer health related question. Sites are current, > reviewed, reliable, and accurate. Includes an encyclopedia, > dictionary, drug database, several directories, and current news > items. ![](media/image3.png){width="1.375in" height="0.20833333333333334in"}NIHSeniorHealth [nihseniorhealth.gov](../nihseniorhealth.gov) > National Institutes of Health site for health information for senior > citizens. The site includes special capabilities such as changing the > text size, the contrast and turning on speech. The site also includes > a comprehensive list of videos in the site index. ClinicalTrials.gov\ [clinicaltrials.gov](../clinicaltrials.gov) > ClinicalTrials.gov provides regularly updated information about > federally and privately supported clinical research in human > volunteers. ClinicalTrials.gov gives you information about a trial's > purpose, who may participate, locations, and phone numbers for more > details. NCCAM: National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine\ [nccam.nih.gov](../nccam.nih.gov) > The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine > (NCCAM) is 1 of the 27 institutes and centers that make up the > National Institutes of Health (NIH). This site includes information > about treatments and therapies for Complementary and Alternative > Medicine. Learn about how to be an informed consumer of CAM and stay > informed on the latest new alerts. ![](media/image4.png){width="1.5104166666666667in" height="0.625in"} National Library of Medicine\ [nlm.nih.gov](../nlm.nih.gov) > Find a complete list of National Library of Medicine databases and > web resources on this site. # > American Heart Association\ > [www.americanheart.org](http://www.americanheart.org/) > > Many advocacy organizations have excellent websites, but one of the > best is from the American Heart Association. Covers all aspects of > heart disease and stroke. ## Cancer.gov > [cancer.gov](http://www.cancer.gov/) The National Cancer Institute is the Federal Government's principal agency for cancer research and training and is a component of the National Institutes of Health. The site provides quality cancer information on cancer topics including news, clinical trials, statistics, and research and funding. Dirline [dirline.nlm.nih.gov](../dirline.nlm.nih.gov) > Looking for a support groups or research organization? DIRLINE > (Directory of Information Resources Online) is an online directory of > over 8,400 health-related organizations and other resources that > covers it all: educational institutions, government agencies, and > advocacy groups. Search by keyword or MESH heading. DrugDigest.org > [www.drugdigest.org](http://www.drugdigest.org/) > > One of the best Internet sites for information on pharmaceuticals, > interactions and herbals. Includes photographs of drugs and > information for the physician and patient. ## Familydoctor.org > [familydoctor.org](http://www.familydoctor.org/) > > From the American Academy of Family Physicians, a national medical > organization representing more than 93,000 physicians, family practice > residents and medical students, this site provides information written > and reviewed by physicians and patient education professionals. ## ## Patientinform.org > [www.patientinform.org/](http://www.patientinform.org/) This site offers Up-to-date research about the diagnosis and treatment of cancer, heart disease and diabetes, which is provided by the American Cancer Society, the American Diabetes Association and the American Heart Association. The site also offers free access to selected medical journal articles and provides plain-language explanations of what the studies mean, how they compare with what's already known, and how patients should weigh them in making treatment decisions. These conditions account for nearly two out of every three deaths in the United States. More disease groups may join in the future. # # # Health Literacy What is health literacy? The ability to read, understand and act on health information \[Pfizer 2002\] The degree to which individual have the capacity to obtain, process and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions \[Healthy People 2010\] What is information literacy? A set of abilities enabling individuals to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate and use effectively the needed information \[ALA 1998\] Why is health literacy so critical? Health literacy is an essential life skill for individuals: It may help individual seek and use information and take control over their health. Health literacy is a public health imperative: Building health literacy improves overall population health. Health literacy is an essential part of social capital: Low health literacy is a strong contributor to health inequalities. Health literacy is a critical economic issue: A US study estimated that low health literacy const the US economy 73 billion dollars a year. "Somehow we need to determine how health information can translate into healthy behaviors." Source: "Navigating Health: The Role of Health Literacy" by Ilona Kickbusch, Susan Wait, Daniela Maag of the Alliance for Health and the Future <http://www.emhf.org/resource_images/NavigatingHealth_FINAL.pdf> MedlinePlus Easy to Read [http://medlineplus.gov](http://medlineplus.gov/) Click on Easy to read page on the Health topics page. Also note how to write easy to read page. Ask ME 3 <http://www.askme3.org/> Ask Me 3 is a program by the Partnership for Clear Health Communication to promote clear communication between health care providers and patients. Ask Me 3 teaches three questions that will help you have better communication with your health care provider. These are: 1. What is my main problem? 2. What do I need to do? 3. Why is it important for me to do this? Reference Interview for Health Information [Guidelines]{.underline} - ![](media/image5.wmf){width="1.9791666666666667in" height="0.9375in"}Be empathetic - Be an active listener - Open ended or neutral questions - Respect privacy / confidentiality - Be prepared for emotional reactions - Be aware of your body language - Do not be afraid to tell the person "I don't know" or "I can't get that information for you" - Do not be afraid to refer the person back to his/her health care provider. [Ethical Guidelines]{.underline} ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - Privacy / Confidentiality - Know the limits of your collection - Do not interpret medical information - Optional: Stamp a disclaimer or use a caution statement [Resources:]{.underline} InfoPeople -- Reference Interview Skills http://www.infopeople.org/training/past/2004/reference/ MLA Code of Ethics for Health Science Libarianship <http://www.mlanet.org/about/ethics.html> NN/LM Health Infoquest <http://nnlm.gov/archive/healthinfoquest/> Sample Disclaimers Information provided by Crandall Public Library and its employees has been gathered from a variety of consumer health resources. This information should not be interpreted as medical or professional advice. All medical information should be reviewed with your physician or other health care professional. The materials in the Cascade Valley Consumer Health Library are intended to provide comprehensive information for you. You may find material that contains information that is different in opinion from that of your physician or health care provider. Should any questions arise, please consult with your physician or healthcare provider for clarification about how this information may or may not apply to your unique clinical situation or overall health. The information provided in this website is offered for general\ informational and educational purposes only; it is not offered as and does\ not constitute medical advice. In no way are any of the materials\ presented meant to be a substitute for professional medical care or\ attention by a qualified practitioner, nor should they be construed as\ such.\ \ You should not act or rely upon any of the resources and information\ available in or from this website without seeking the advice of a\ physician or other healthcare provider. Materials in this Resource Center represent the opinions of the authors and are intended as a complement, not a substitute for, the advice of your healthcare providers. The material and links at this site are intended for educational purposes and should not be construed as medical advice or instruction. Consult your health professional for advice relating to a medical problem or condition. The Health Science Library staff is trained to assist callers, and provide other sources of information. However, because we are not healthcare professionals, the information we provide cannot substitute for the medical expertise and advice from your healthcare provider. Health Science Library staff do not provide medical advice to patients, nor provide referrals to healthcare practitioners. ####### Selected Resources for a Consumer Health Collection Book Core Lists CAPHIS Collection Development Lists [http://caphis.mlanet.org](http://caphis.mlanet.org/) <http://caphis.mlanet.org/chis/collection.html> UCONN Healthnet Core Bibliography of Consumer Health Books Last update March 2008 <http://library.uchc.edu/departm/hnet/corelist.html> Toronto Public Library -- Core Collection of Recommended Titles Books if you have \$1900 Last April 2006 <http://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/uni_chi_core.jsp> Toronto Public Library -- Health Navigator Guides to Health Information Services at the Library and on the Web <http://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/uni_chi_finder.jsp> [Article:]{.underline} Bibel, Barbara. (5/1/2007) Best Consumer Health Books of 2006. Library Journal <http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6435520.html?q=bibel> Bibel, Barbara. (2/1/2008) Best Consumer Health Books of 2007. Library Journal [http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6523448.html?q=bibel+2008](http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6523448.html?q=bibel%2B2008) Fuller, H. (2005). Consumer Health Collecting Made Easy: A Librarian Prescribes a Remedy for Understocked Medical-Advice Shelves. American Libraries, 36(5), 47-48. ####### ![](media/image6.jpeg){width="2.125in" height="2.3333333333333335in"} ####### ####### ####### ![](media/image7.wmf){width="0.9375in" height="0.9583333333333334in"}Suggested Consumer Health Journals The following journals cost between about 15 -- 40 dollars per yearly subscription with the exception of JAMA and NEJM. Arthritis Today ISSN: 0890-1120 Child Health Alert ISSN: 1064-4849 Consumer Reports on Health ISSN: 1058-0832 Coping with Cancer ISSN: 1043-8637 Diabetes Self-Management ISSN: 0741-6253 FDA Consumer ISSN: 0362-1332 Harvard Health Letter ISSN: 1052-1577 Harvard Heart Letter ISSN: 1051-5313 Harvard Men\'s Health Watch ISSN: 10891102 Harvard Mental Health Letter ISSN: 0884-3783 Harvard Women\'s Health Watch ISSN: 1070-910X Health ISSN: 1059-938X Health News ISSN: 1081-5880 Heart Advisor ISSN: 1523-9004 In Touch ISSN: 1522-7510 JAMA ISSN: 0098-7484 \$245 (institutions) Johns Hopkins Medical Letter Health After 50 ISSN: 1042-1882 Let\'s Live ISBN: 0024-1288 Mayo Clinic Health Letter ISSN: 0741-6245 Natural Health ISSN: 1067-9588 **\ New England Journal of Medicine ISSN: 0028-4793\ \$349 (institutions) Nutrition Action Health Letter ISSN: 0885-7792 Prevention ISBN: 0032-8006 Stroke Connection Magazine ISBN: 1047-014X Tufts University Health & Nutrition Letter University of California Berkeley Wellness Letter ISSN: 0748-9234 Women\'s Health Advisor ISSN: 1524-881X YOGA Journal ISSN: 0191-0965 Health-Related Video Vendors Aquarius Video <http://www.aquariusproductions.com/> ![](media/image8.wmf){width="1.625in" height="1.5520833333333333in"}888-440-2963 Channing-Bete Company <http://www.channing-bete.com/> 800-477-4776 Films for the Humanities and Sciences <http://www.films.com/> 800-257-5126 Milner-Fenwick <http://www.milner-fenwick.com/> 800-432-8433 Wired.md [http://wired.md](http://wired.md/) 800-wired-md Also check out various medical associations! Consumer Health Databases AltHealthWatch^®^\ *[www.epnet.com](http://www.epnet.com/) (Ebsco) > This database focuses on the many perspectives of complementary, > holistic and integrated approaches to health care and wellness. It > offers libraries an immediate resource of full text articles, from 140 > international, and often peer-reviewed, reports, proceedings and > association & consumer newsletters. In addition, there are hundreds of > pamphlets, booklets, special reports, original research and book > excerpts. Some full-text.* Health Source^®^: Consumer Edition\ [www.epnet.com](http://www.epnet.com/) (Ebsco) > This resource provides access to nearly 300 full text, consumer > health periodicals. This database also includes searchable full text > for more than 1,000 health-related pamphlets and more than 140 health > reference books, including books published by the People's Medical > Society. Additionally, Health Source: Consumer Edition contains 7,000 > Clinical Reference Systems reports (in English and Spanish); Clinical > Pharmacology, which provides access to 1,100 drug monograph entries > and 2,700 patient education fact sheets; and Stedman's Medical > Dictionary. This full text database covers topics such as AIDS, > cancer, diabetes, drugs & alcohol, aging, fitness, nutrition & > dietetics, children's health, women's health, etc. Health & Wellness Resource Center\ [www.gale.com](http://www.gale.com/) (Gale) > This resource answers the need for a fully integrated, ever-growing > electronic resource center for all levels of health research. Rely on > the Health & Wellness Resource Center for instant access to carefully > compiled medical reference and periodical materials that your users > can trust. Health & Wellness Resource Center - Alternative Health Module\ [www.gale.com](http://www.gale.com/) (Gale) > Available 24 hours a day via the Internet, Health & Wellness Resource > Center\'s Alternate Health Module provides a one stop, full-service > resource for alternative and complimentary therapies. It provides a > rich collection of books, journals, magazines and pamphlets for > consumers and health care professionals. Health Reference Center -- Academic\ [www.gale.com](http://www.gale.com/) (Gale) > How can you easily provide current, reliable health information for > your patrons \-- including your nursing and allied health students? > Give them access to Health Reference Center \-- Academic on InfoTrac® > Web. This multi-source database provides access to the full text of > nursing and allied health journals, plus the wide variety of personal > health information sources in InfoTrac\'s award-winning Health > Reference Center™ plus 40 full-text nursing and allied health > journals. Well-Connected\ [www.well-connected.com](http://www.well-connected.com/) (A.D.A.M, Inc) > WELL-CONNECTED is a library of about 100 reports on common diseases > and wellness issues. Each report is an in-depth discussion of the > latest information on treatments, risk factors, causes, diagnostic > tests, and preventative measures.\ > \ > All reports are written by experienced medical writers and reviewed > for accuracy and relevancy by a board of physicians at Harvard Medical > School and Massachusetts General Hospital. Yoursurgery.com\ [www.yoursurgery.com](http://www.yoursurgery.com/) > YourSurgery.Com® provides easy to understand information for common > and specific surgical procedures. YourSurgery.Com® organizes the > information so that you and your family can understand each procedure > and help you ask your physician questions. Below is a list of the > topics that will be explained for each procedure: - Anatomy of the operative site - Alternative surgical solutions - Pathology of the Illness - Possible complications of surgery - Symptoms associated with the condition - Post Operative Care - Methods of diagnosis - Innovations in surgical technique - Concise description of each surgery Rare Disease Database\ [www.rarediseases.org](http://www.rarediseases.org/) (National Organization for Rare Disorders) A rare or \"orphan\" disease affects fewer than 200,000 people in the United States. There are more than 6,000 rare disorders that, taken together, affect approximately 25 million Americans. One in every 10 individuals in this country has received a diagnosis of a rare disease. Some have familiar names (Lou Gehrig's Disease or ALS) and some have unusual names (Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis). This database contains reports for thousands of rare diseases and includes a general discussion of each disease as well as symptoms, affected populations, standard and investigational therapies and associations or organizations to contact for additional information. Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database\ [www.naturaldatabase.com](http://www.naturaldatabase.com/) (Therapeutic Research Faculty) > This database provides access to evidence-based information about > herbals and other natural medicines. This is the most comprehensive, > scientifically-based, and practical database on natural medicines > available anywhere. Patient Ed version available. Stat!Ref\ [www.statref.com](http://www.statref.com/) (Teton Data Systems) Stat!Ref facilitates access to the full-text of nearly 60 medical books! Subscribe to just the books you want, and have either web-based, Internet or Intranet access. ![](media/image9.jpeg){width="1.625in" height="1.46875in"} Hands on Exercises ![](media/image9.jpeg){width="1.832638888888889in" height="1.761111111111111in"} 1. My grandmother is taking Cardizem CD for blood pressure control. At her last doctor's appointment her pulse was dangerously slow. I know that she chews her pills rather than swallowing. Could this be related? 2. Find a video for caregiver support of Alzheimer's Disease. 3. I found a tick in my husband's back after we were at an outdoor concert. I removed it with tweezers and burned it with a match. How do we know if he is at risk for Lyme Disease? 4. What is Wilson's disease and how is it treated? 5. My daughter is attending college at Harvard. She is having trouble with blurred vision and pain in her neck and head. Our primary care doctor said we better get her an appointment with a neuroopthamologist. Can you help us find a good one in Boston, preferably someone who is published? 6. I heard that ginger will help with my morning sickness. Is it safe for pregnancy? 7. My son has two different sized feet. Are you aware of any exchange program for shoes? 8. My sister was just diagnosed with stage 3 breast cancer. Can you help me find information on treatment and also alternative therapies? 9. My friend has HIV. He is not comfortable looking information up on the Internet. Can you recommend some good books for him? 10. My mother decided it would be more efficient to put all of the pills she\'s taking into one jar. Now we need to know what each one is. Recommended Answers 1\) Sources: MedlinePlus -- drug information / Medmaster -- Swallow the capsules whole -- do not spit or chew. Also, see Institute for Safe Medication Practices article under Drug Safety in Health topics after entering drug name in MedlinePlus search box. 2\) Sources: NIHSeniorHealth.gov Search Strategy: Caring for Someone with Alzheimer's, Caregivers Support 3\) Removing it with tweezers was a good idea, burning it with a match is not a good idea, if you had preserved it in alcohol, your doctor could identify it as at risk for Lyme Disease or not. Never put petroleum jelly on or burn a tick bite with a match -- that only causes the tick to enter further. If you get a rash or sick after getting the bite, your doctor will prescribe an antibiotic. Source: MedlinePlus -- health topics, Family Doctor 4\) Wilson's disease is a possibly life threatening disorder where too much copper is accumulated in the liver, brain and other organs. Medication treatment (Penicillamine, Trientance, Zinc Acetate) and dietary restrictions including avoiding tap water high in copper are treatment for the disease. Source: MedlinePlus Drug Information, Health topic Search Strategy: Search box or browsing 5\) MedlinePlus Directories / Docfinder / Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine / search by specialty 6\) MedlinePlus -- Supplements -- Uses Based on Scientific Evidence -- Grade of B, see also pregnancy and breastfeeding information under Safety 7\) DIRLINE / National Odd Shoe Exchange 8\) Cancer.gov/ MedlinePlus 9\) CAPHIS core book lists 10) drugs.com / drugdigest.org ![](media/image10.jpeg){width="1.3333333333333333in" height="1.0in"}[MARKETING]{.underline} Marketing is not something you do once. [10 Reasons to Market Library Services]{.underline} This section is an excerpt from University of Illinois Current LIS Clips <http://clips.lis.uiuc.edu/2003_09.html> > Competition for customers -- Libraries are part of a highly > competitive service industry. Competition comes from mega-bookstores, > online book dealers, consultants, the Internet community, and > individual customers who feel they can go it alone. Libraries are no > longer the only information show in town. Free web access to > information is here to stay and non-library and fee access information > providers won\'t hesitate to market to library customers. > > Competition for resources - Libraries of all types have to compete > with other organizations or departments for funds. Public libraries > have to vie for public monies that provide for their existence. > Special libraries find their funding is frequently targeted during > parent organization budget cuts. Marketing library services benefits > the bottom line. > > Maintain your relevance - As noted by Zauha, Samson, and Christin, > libraries need to market themselves to remain connected with their > communities and have some bearing on real-world issues and present-day > events. > > Stop being taken for granted - Libraries need to convey what is > unique about the access and services they provide. Both customers and > librarians cannot assume that libraries will always be available. > > Promote an updated image - Librarians are not perceived as > well-trained, technologically savvy information experts. Most > customers do not see the demanding information management > responsibilities of a librarian. > > Visibility - Shamel believes that librarians are not on the radar > screens of many people who think of themselves as information > literate. People who are in positions to employ librarians are not > reading much in their professional literature about a librarian\'s > value. In A Place at the Table: Participating in Community Building > (ALA Editions, 2000), Kathleen de la Pena McCook found that libraries > were virtually invisible to the movers and shakers who wanted to > revitalize their communities. > > Valuable community resource - Libraries are and should be viewed > as essential and valuable community resources. Sass says that people > need to be made aware of the services and products that are provided > and their comparative value. Librarians should be the resource that > the local power structure goes to for information. > > Rising expectations - Library users expect recognition, attention, > and appreciation for their individual information needs. Customers > also have ever-changing needs and wants, which makes the library > market as dynamic as retail markets. Marketing helps to create an > environment in libraries that fosters customer consciousness among > employees. > > Survival - Libraries depend on the support of others for their > existence. A library must communicate and work with its customers and > governing/funding entities to provide information about what the > library is doing and to enable the library to learn about the > community it serves. > > Beneficial to library image - Effective marketing can among other > things: increase library funds, increase usage of services, educate > customers and non-customers, change perceptions, and enhance the clout > and reputation of the library and its staff. > > Sass, Rivkah K. \"Marketing the Worth of Your Library.\"Library > Journal June 15, 2002. > <http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA220888.html> > > Shamel, Cynthia L. \"Building a Brand: Got a Librarian?\" Searcher v10 > n7 Jul/Aug 2002 p60-71. > <http://www.infotoday.com/searcher/jul02/shamel.htm> > > Zauha, Jan, Sue Samson, and Cindy Christin. \"Relevancy and Libraries > in the Consumer Age.\" PNLA Quarterly v66 n1 Fall 2001 p8-14. ![](media/image11.wmf){width="1.40625in" height="2.0in"}Get Creative! > What are your ideas for getting the word out about your consumer > health services? > > Some that we have heard from librarians at our classes include: - Bookmarks, websites - press releases - lecture series - video in hospital room - screening clinics - health fairs - brochures in library/hospital/Dr. Offices/physical therapist offices/rehab facilities/grocery stores/ etc - library newsletter - churches -- parish nurses ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - speaking to groups: senior centers, clubs - pedometer program at the high school - offering a consumer health database searching series monthly that focuses on topics related to the national health observances National Health Observances -- Healthfinder <http://www.healthfinder.gov/nho> ![](media/image12.jpeg){width="2.5in" height="1.75in"} Marketing Resources - Subscribe via e-mail to a free newsletter with many examples and ideas. Marketing Treasures. Current issue and signup available at: [http://www.chrisolson.com/marketingtreasures/mtcurrent.html](http://www.chrisolson.com/marketingtreasures/mtcurrent.html) - The American Library Association\'s Campaign for America\'s Libraries web site has talking points sheets, advocacy tips, quotations, artwork, marketing plans, and more. [http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/hqops/pio/campaign/campaignamericas.cfm](http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/hqops/pio/campaign/campaignamericas.cfm) - The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions has a section on Management and Marketing that includes a glossary of marketing terms applied to the library field. Although it has not been updated since 1998, it is a useful resource. [http://www.ifla.org/VII/s34/pubs/glossary.htm](http://www.ifla.org/VII/s34/pubs/glossary.htm) ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - Marketing Library Services is a monthly newsletter that generally has one or more articles on marketing available to non-subscribers for free. MLS provides information professionals in all types of libraries with specific ideas for marketing your services, including suggestions for planning programs, making money, increasing business, and proving your value to your administrator. [http://www.infotoday.com/mls/mls.htm](http://www.infotoday.com/mls/mls.htm) (some material is available free) - The American Marketing Association has good general marketing information. [http://www.marketingpower.com](http://www.marketingpower.com/) - Library Support Staff.com - This site for library paraprofessional support staff, hosted by library technician Mary Niederlander, provides links to marketing resources including articles and courses. [http://www.librarysupportstaff.com/marketinglibs.html](http://www.librarysupportstaff.com/marketinglibs.html) - Library Marketing -- Thinking Outside the Book -- a blog that provides resources, readings, news and ideas for librarians seeking outside-the-book innovations for their library. [http://librarymarketing.blogspot.com/2007/04/davenport-public-library-gets-m-for.html](http://librarymarketing.blogspot.com/2007/04/davenport-public-library-gets-m-for.html) - Ohio Library Council - \"Marketing the Library\" is an online course with six modules: overview, planning, product, promotion, Internet, and Ohio. The purpose of this course is to introduce Ohio public librarians to marketing concepts, but it is applicable to librarians in all types of libraries. [http://www.olc.org/marketing/instructions.htm](http://www.olc.org/marketing/instructions.htm) - KnowThis.com -- Articles, news, tutorials and more is available on this site. Intended for a general audience, many resources are available to assist librarians with their marketing efforts. [http://www.knowthis.com](http://www.knowthis.com/) For further information CAPHIS -- Consumer and Patient Health Information Section of the Medical Library Association [http://caphis.mlanet.org](http://caphis.mlanet.org/) Site includes such topics as: - Collection development core lists - Listserv to communicate with other librarians providing health reference services for the public - "Librarian's Role in the Provision of Consumer Health Information and Patient Education" > <http://caphis.mlanet.org/resources/caphis_statement.html> - How do you set up and run a consumer health library? - Newsletter with book reviews Outreach Evaluation Resource Center <http://nnlm.gov/evaluation/> Links to three guides: - "Getting Started with Community-Based Outreach" - "Including Evaluation in Outreach Project Planning" - "Collecting and Analyzing Evaluation Data" Public Libraries and Community Partners: Working Together to Provide Health Information <http://nnlm.gov/outreach/community/> In Plain Language (Health Literacy): <http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/healthliteracy/overview.html> (Requires Real Player) Rand Report Summary: Consumer Use of Information When Making Treatment Decisions: <http://www.bcbs.com/blueresources/cost/Rand_Report_Summary.pdf> Healthy People Library Project: [http://healthlit.org](http://healthlit.org/) The Challenge of Providing Consumer Health Information Services in Public Libraries: <http://healthlit.org/pdfs/AAASFINAL.pdf> Books # Barclay, Donald A., Halsted, Deborah D. "Consumer Health Reference Service Handbook," Medical Library Association, 2001. Casini, Barbara, Kenyon, Andrea. "The Public Librarian's Guide to Providing Consumer Health Information". Chicago, IL: Public Library Association, 2002. McKinney, Julie & Kurtz-Rossi, Sabrina. "Family Health and Literacy, A Guide to Easy-to-Read Health Education Materials and Web Sites for Families". Boston, MA: World Education, 2006. Spatz, Michele. "Answering Consumer Health Questions." New York, NY: Neal-Schuman Publishers Inc, 2008.	en
converted_docs	350324	Session No. 1 # Course Title: Hazard Mapping and Modeling Session 1: INTRODUCTION TO AND EVOLUTION OF HAZARD MAPPING AND MODELING Prepared by Ute J. Dymon, Professor of Geography, Kent State University Nancy L. Winter, PhD ## Time: 3 hrs \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Overall Goal: This course is to contribute to the reduction of the growing toll (deaths and injuries, property loss, environmental degradation, etc.) of disasters in the United States by providing an understanding of the significant role of mapping and modeling in the management of hazards. Objectives: 1.1 Introduce instructor and students. 1.2 Review the overall goal of the course and the objectives of this session. 1.3 Review the student requirements, responsibilities and session assignments. 1.4 Review the criteria for a student evaluation in this session. 1.5 Clarify use of the terms "hazard" (a description) and "risk" (a measurement) to establish that they are not synonymous and should not be substituted for each other. 1.6 Clarify the definitions for and classify examples of natural hazards, technological hazards and intentional hazards and differentiate between a hazard and a disaster. 1.7 Introduce the concepts in "The Universe of Hazards" diagram. 1.8 Discuss the Causal Model for Technological Hazards. 1.9 Discuss the Hazard Management Mapping Model. 10. Consider the many roles of mapping in emergency management today. 11. Discuss the concepts central to hazard mapping and modeling and develop the supporting elements of the concepts considered including: frequency, magnitude, vulnerability, risk, adjustment, preparedness, mitigation, georeferenced data files and crisis mapping. 12. Review the historic development of hazard mapping and modeling from Dr. John Snow's 1855 map through the laws that increased U.S. hazard mapping from the 1960\'s to 2003. 1.13 Cooperatively evaluate this session through discussion questions. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Scope: The instructor and students will introduce themselves to the class and share information about their experiences with disasters and hazard mapping and modeling. This should lead to a discussion of the overall goal of the course, the objectives of this session and the criteria for a student evaluation in this Session 1. By welcoming student questions about the course syllabus, establish clear guidelines for: 1) expected student participation and conduct in class, 2) the number of out-of-class assignments to be submitted and 3) the number of lab assignments to be completed. Discussion of the difference between the definition for hazard and for risk is expected to aid students in avoiding using them synonymously. Through class discussion help students differentiate between the three major classes of hazards: natural, technological and intentional. To encompass the big picture of hazardousness in the world, encourage elicitations from students while exploring The Universe of Hazards diagram. Compare and contrast varying definitions for natural hazards with key terms and basic concepts such as natural disasters, risk, vulnerability, resilience, and adjustment. When presenting the model of Hazard Management Mapping, challenge students to identify within the model the four stages of emergency or disaster management - mitigation, preparedness planning, response and recovery. A timeline of the effects of legislation on the historic evolution of hazard mapping and modeling will be reviewed. Give students an opportunity to express their opinions about this session. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Readings: Instructor Reading: Cutter, Susan L. 1994. Environmental Risks and Hazards. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Dymon, Ute J. 1994. The Critical Role of Emergency Planning Maps. Risk: Issues of Health and Safety, Vol. 5 (4). Dymon, U. J. and Nancy L. Winter. 1993. Evacuation Mapping: The Utility of Guidelines. Disasters, Vol.17 (1). Kates, Robert W., Christoph Hohenemser and Jeanne X. Kasperson. 1985. Perilous Progress: Managing the Hazards of Technology. Boulder CO: Westview Press. International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) Secretariat. 2002. Living with Risk. Geneva: United Nations. Tobin, Graham A. and Burrell E. Montz. 1997. Natural Hazards. New York: Guilford Press. Required Student Reading: U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1997. Multihazard > Identification and Risk Assessment: A Cornerstone of the National > Mitigation Strategy. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. > http://www.fema.gov/fhm/ft mhira.shtm Student Reading: Cutter, Susan L. 1994. Environmental Risks and Hazards. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Dymon, U. J. and Nancy L. Winter. 1991. Emergency Mapping in Grass Roots America: A Derailment Evacuation Case Study. Geoforum, Vol. 22 (4). Monmonier, Mark. 1997. Cartographies of Danger: Mapping Hazards in America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Winter, Nancy L. and U. J. Dymon. 2000. Environmental Crime in Atlas of Crime. Phoenix: The Oryx Press. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ General Requirements: Power Point slides are provided for the instructor's use. The instructor's course syllabus should be distributed to the students following the instructor and student introductions. It is recommended that students with little or no knowledge of hazards acquire a general overview of the most common of the three general types of hazards: natural, technological and intentional. The websites for materials relating to these are listed at the end of this session plan. In addition, the FEMA publication "Multihazard Identification and Risk Assessment Report" provides detailed explanations for many of the hazards identified herein and the Required Student Readings cover both hazard information and key aspects of mapping them. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Objective 1.1 Conduct instructor and student introductions Requirements: Setting an example for the class, the instructor should introduce him/her self and share his/her insights and relevant experience with hazards. If deemed appropriate, the instructor may also share personal information about his/her hobbies, outside interests, where he/she is from, favorite sports teams, etc. Personal interchange between the students and between the students and instructor may promote the educational process by helping to form a friendly class environment. Remarks: I. Instructor introduction A. Briefly explain to the students how you became interested in hazards, disasters, and what to do about them, or "emergency management". Reveal how you acquired the qualifications to teach this course. B. For the benefit of students, describe any hazard, disaster or emergency management experience you have had. Or, in lieu of experience, explain your relevant research interests, writings, presentation, travels, volunteer work or other community involvement that may be pertinent. C. Briefly poll the class for experiences by asking: How many of you have a family member or friends who have experienced a disaster first-hand? II. Student introductions A. Invite students to: 1) introduce themselves, 2) explain why they are taking the course, and 3) reveal what their expectations are for the course. B. Have students share their relevant backgrounds and experiences, including disaster experience. Objective 1.2 Discuss the overall goal of the course and the objectives of this session Requirements: Supply each student with a course syllabus. Review the overall course goal and the objectives of this session. Remarks: I. Point out that the objectives of this session require mastery of the vocabulary and concepts of both hazards and mapping and that a basic historical timeline of development of this subject matter is presented. II. Discuss with students how many of the terms listed as part of this objective are unfamiliar to them. Objective 1.3 Review the student requirements, responsibilities and session assignments. Requirements: Refer the students to the course syllabus to specify student requirements and responsibilities. Remarks: I. Basic operating information a successful student needs A. Point out to students the following information listed in the syllabus: 1) the instructor's office location, 2) the instructor's office hours and 3) the policy regarding student contact with the instructor via telephone, fax and email. B. With the use of the syllabus, specify for students expected class behavior and degree of participation. C. All reading assignments are to be completed prior to the session indicated in the course syllabus. D. Students are expected to actively participate and contribute to group work and to take their turn reporting and presenting group products to the entire class. Objective 1.4 Review the criteria for a student evaluation in this session Requirements: Specify the criteria for a student evaluation and make sure the students understand them. Because a significant percentage of a student's performance will be judged by her/his participation in group work with in the class, the following general recommendations concerning groups are provided for the instructor. - Ideal groups are comprised of three to five students, with membership randomly assigned by the instructor to promote a diversity of opinions and ideas. - Groups should be given time to complete their task, present their work to the entire class and engage in discussion. - The role of group spokesperson should be rotated to provide every student in the group with the opportunity to present and defend the work of her/his group. - Guidelines for group behavior should be discussed and established. - The efforts of each group should be passively monitored with intervention by the instructor only necessary in the case of dysfunctional behavior. Remarks: I. Student evaluation criteria A. 50% of a student evaluation will be based on class preparation, class participation and contributions as an individual and participation and contributions to group work. B. 50% of a student evaluation will be based on the student's ability to process the Information presented by making sense of it and applying it to examples of real life situations in case studies and exercises presented in class and to past real world experiences of the student. Objective 1.5 Clarify use of the terms "hazard" (a description) and "risk" (a measurement) to establish that they are not synonymous and should not be substituted for each other. Requirements: Facilitate class discussion to foster an understanding of the difference between the role of a descriptive word such as "hazard" and a measurement term such as "risk". Use the PowerPoint slides provided. Proposed questions are suggested to stimulate discussion. Remarks: I. Define "hazard" and "risk" by building on existing definitions students have. A. Ask the Students - Write down your definitions for the words "hazard" and "risk". Discuss their definitions by asking students to articulate what is the difference between the definition of the term "hazard" and the term "risk". B. "Threats to humans and what they value" is the most succinct definition for a hazard that has been proposed by hazard scholars. (Power Point Slide 1)[^1] The phrase "what they value" is defined as "life, well-being, material goods, and environment."[^2] (Power Point Slide 2) This neat, "nutshell" definition, provided by Robert Kates et al. in 1985in Perilous Progress, covers all of the aspects of the myriad of other more detailed scholarly attempts to define the term "hazard". Some examples of these more wordy definitions include the key one from FEMA's Multihazard Identification and Assessment: "*events or physical conditions that have the potential* to cause fatalities, injuries, property damage, infrastructure damage, agricultural loss, damage to the environment, interruption of business, or other types of harm or loss". (Power Point Slides 3-4) [^3] C. The word "hazard" is commonly in use far less than the word "risk". Ask students what are some of the many ways we hear people speak about "risk" or how "risky" something is today. The term is used in dealing with insurance, opportunities or ventures, gambling and betting and everyday human activities from driving an SUV to skateboarding. D. Return to the issue of the difference between the term "hazard" and the term "risk" and contrast how "hazard" describes a potentially harmful event or condition while "risk" measures that event or condition in terms of the likelihood of the event happening multiplied by the consequence of that event. E. Thus, "risk" is defined by most risk managers as the mathematical formula: RISK = LIKELIHOOD X CONSEQUENCE[^4] (Power Point Slides 5-6) The likelihood of a hazardous event or condition occurring can be calculated as a probability or as a frequency, depending upon the analysis under consideration. F. To clarify further the difference between a hazard and a risk, discuss the likelihood and consequences of a blizzard in Washington, DC in July. G. Ask the students - "What are the consequences of a blizzard? Students should be able to list consequences such as power outages, road closings, highway accidents, etc. Discuss how these consequences have often caused the federal government to restrict its activities in Washington DC. Residents of Washington DC consider the potential for a blizzard as a hazard. Once the list is finished, consider the next question. H. Ask the students - "What is the likelihood of a blizzard in Washington, DC in July?" A discussion of the low likelihood of the Washington DC climate producing a blizzard in July should lead to the conclusion that the likelihood and consequence of a Washington DC blizzard in July defines the blizzard risk as very low. I. After these discussions, students should be able to articulate how a hazard and a risk are related, but are not the same. A hazard describes** the potential for an event or condition to occur while a risk *measures that hazard's likelihood and consequence. * Objective 1.6 Clarify the definitions for and classify examples of natural hazards, technological hazards and intentional hazards and differentiate between a hazard and a disaster. Requirements: After students work in groups to list the hazards they remember from their hometowns, contrast in open class discussion the definition of a natural hazard with a technological hazard, an intentional hazard and a disaster. Encourage students to develop a "working vocabulary" for the many definitions needed to discuss hazard issues in emergency management. Remarks: I. Comparing definitions for natural, technological and intentional hazards with the definition for a disaster. A. The possibility of human interaction with an extreme physical event produces the concept of a natural hazard.[^5] If humans are not involved, then the extreme geophysical event is only a phenomenon or event. B. In contrast, there are countless technological and intentional hazards in society today. Any technology that humans use has the potential to produce unintended negative consequences. A technological hazard arises from the potential of negative consequences resulting from the human use of technology. C. Human will and intentions define an intentional hazard. Human actions with intent to cause harm to other humans and what they value are termed intentional hazards. Today, terrorism is the source of most of the intentional hazards. D. To compare these hazard definitions with the definition for a disaster, emphasis should be put upon the differing time elements with the idea that the concept of a hazard is based upon the future potential for harm while in a disaster, the potential of a hazard has come to pass in the present as an actual event. E. Class Activity. a\. Assign students into groups and encourage them to recall the hazards that existed or exist today in their hometowns (where they grew up). Each group should organize their list of hazards under the three headings: natural hazard, technological hazard and intentional hazard. Any disagreements that arise should be shared with the entire class for discussion. b\. Each group should then write a definition for the term "disaster". The class should discuss these definitions and compare the difference between a hazard and a disaster. Consider the definition for a disaster in Power Point Slide \# 7. Objective 1.7 Introduce the concepts in "The Universe of Hazards" diagram. Requirements: The Universe of Hazards diagram outlines the hazardous physical and cultural elements affecting the environment that human society lives in today. It should be pointed out that natural hazards are organized on the chart by the length of time the extreme physical event exists and the names of 19 natural hazards are included on the list. In contrast to natural disasters, the number of technological hazards can be infinite since they can arise from any of the millions of kinds of technology human use. In this diagram, technological hazards are organized into a causal taxonomy with three major levels based on the dimensions of their dire consequences: hazards, extreme hazards and multiple extreme hazards, and there are delineations within the three major levels that expand the taxonomy into seven categories in all. Samples of thirty-six energy hazards (from household appliance fires to trampoline falls) and fifty-seven hazards caused by release of a material (from alcohol accidents to the toxic effects of water fluoridation) were analyzed according to five factors. Extreme hazards are extreme in one factor and multiple extreme hazards are extreme in more than one factor. For full understanding of this taxonomy of technological hazards, mastery of unfamiliar vocabulary is necessary including terms such as biocides. teratogens, recombinant DNA, diffuse, etc. For full background of this analysis of 93 technological hazards see Chapter 4 in Perilous Progress cited in Footnote 1. Narrowing this scholarly research approach to technological hazards to the mitigation and emergency management goals of FEMA, the list of technological hazards that warrant the most attention are these seven: 1) dam failures, 2) fires, 3) hazardous materials events, 4) nuclear accidents, 5) national security hazards, 6) power failures, and 7) telecommunications failures. Remarks: I. Display and discuss The Universe of Hazards diagram (Power Point Slide \# 8). A. Ask students: Why might objections be made to the conception of the environment in this diagram? (It is not a complete portrayal of the human environment; it only encompasses the hazardous elements in human life.) B. Explain the definition of "geophysical" events. Random House's Webster's Dictionary defines geophysics as "the branch of geology that deals with [the physics of the earth and its atmosphere,]{.underline} including oceanography, seismology, volcanology and geomagnetism". The Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary offers this definition for geophysics: "the physics of the earth including the fields of meteorology, hydrology, oceanography, seismology, volcanology, magnetism, radioactivity, and geodesy". C. Ask students: What is the basis for the natural hazards categories: intensive, pervasive and combined? (To categorize natural hazards by their duration or the amount of time they exist.) D. Encourage any questions about the technological hazards listed and for clarity make certain students understand the definition of terms such as biocides, teratogens, etc. (Power Point Slide \# 9). E. Ask the students: How do these technological hazard categories differ from the way tech hazards are depicted in FEMA's Multihazard Identification and Risk Assessment? (Use Power Point Slides #10 and #11 to compare the research categories in the Universe of Hazards diagram with the applied emergency management foci of FEMA's list.) Establish the overriding idea that despite the separation of natural hazards from technological hazards on this diagram, natural hazard events trigger technological problems and that the seven major technological hazards FEMA must pay attention to are the results of these interactions. Objective 1.8 Discuss the Causal Model of Technological Hazards Requirements: The Causal Model of Technological Hazards (Power Point Slide #12) traces a seven step sequence of connected events and conditions that lead to the harmful consequences of a technological hazard and thus help define its risk. All technological hazards derive from human needs and wants which results in humans choosing to use a technology, which causes an initiating event with its resulting release of materials or energy. The causal sequence continues as humans are exposed to those materials or energy with detrimental human and biological consequences. A full explanation of how 12 descriptors based on these causal stages were applied to classify technological hazards into the taxonomy shown in The Universe of Hazards diagram may be found in Chapter 4 of Perilous Progress[^6]. A range of key decisions for intervention to prevent or modify a given causal stage should be discussed using the example of the danger of human clothes catching fire from use of a fireplace in the home (Power Point slides #13 and #14). Power Point slides are provided to show societies attempts to intervene to control the dangers of automobile use from 1920 to 1980 (Power Point slide #15) and to intervene to control minamata disease from 1956 to 1980 (Power Point Slide #16). Remarks: I. Display and discuss the Causal Model of Technological Hazards (Power Point Slide #12). A. Ask students: At what point in this sequence does the potential of the technological hazard become a reality? (When the initiating event or condition takes place leading to a release of material or energy.) B. Ask students: Which stages in this model aid in deriving the risk from the technological hazard being modeled? (The list of harmful consequences to all living things, humans, animals, plants, etc. the complete biota.) C. Student Activity: Provide each student with a copy of Power Point Slide #12, the basic Causal Model and challenge them to think about the danger of human clothes catching fire from a rather old-fashioned technology, a fireplace. Students should try to fill in the information that fits an accident where human clothes catch fire. Work through the seven steps of the model with students contributing answers. Compare their analysis with Power Point Slide #13. Next, have them fill out on their models what interventions humans could bring about to lessen or remove the hazard depicted in this causal chain. Compare their answers with Power Point Slide 14. Explain that these interventions are akin to the mitigation efforts society performs on a larger scale through government agencies (use Power Point Slide \# 15.) D. Explain that the further "upstream" (to the left) in the causal sequence that a control action takes place compared to interventions farther "downstream" (to the right) in the sequence the more effective it will be. Point out that the ultimate control or intervention is to stop using or to ban the technology at the "choice of technology stage". E. Discuss the actions U.S. society took from 1920 to 1980 to lessen the hazards from the use of automobile technology (use Power Point Slide #16). Compare the interventions or mitigation the Japanese village of Minamata used from 1956 to 1980 to try to control Minamata disease, or the neurological problems from ingestion of methyl mercury-contaminated drinking water (use Power Point Slide #17). Note that the control strategies began downstream and over time moved upstream until the technology, use of mercury compounds as catalysts in a chemical plant, was eliminated from Japan by transfer of the offending factory to Thailand. (See Chapter 9 in Perilous Progress.) Objective 1-9: Discuss the Hazard Management Mapping Model Requirements: The Hazard Management Mapping Model[^7] by Nancy L. Winter has two major parts. The top of the diagram shows the three major hazard assessment and management efforts: hazard identification, risk assessment and resource allocation and evaluation and the types of mapping needed for these. The lower portion of the diagram presents in detail Emergency Management mapping which in the United States is the prime responsibility of local authorities such as a town or county. Jurisdiction over disastrous events shifts to federal control only when conditions reach overwhelming or mega-disaster magnitude. Remarks: I. Display the Hazard Management Mapping Model (Power Point Slide #18) to illustrate and discuss all the elements and processes it contains. A. The top portion of this model diagrams hazard assessment as conceived by R.W. Kates et al.[^8]. The bottom portion depicts the categories of maps needed for emergency management. Ask students to name and describe what these two major parts of this diagram portray. II. Shift to Power Point slide #19 showing only the top portion of the Model. Explain that society becomes alerted to modern hazards through the processes of hazard identification and risk estimation, both highly dependent on sufficient amounts of mapping. A. The four methods of hazard identification are based on hazard maps, which locate threats. These are intrinsic to hazard research. By putting data in a spatial context, valuable patterns can be identified. An example is the mapping in hurricane research which pinpointed the west coast of Africa as the source of the tropical cyclones that later develop into hurricanes menacing the east coast of the United States. B. The second approach to hazard identification, screening, is a kind of "fishing expedition" in which maps showing the spatial distribution of products, processes, natural hazard phenomena or persons with hazardous potential reveal threats. C. Monitoring of repetitious hazardous events or their consequences requires large numbers of time series maps. D. A diagnosis of the existence of a hazardous situation can come from analysis of the locations of an odd set of events or consequences. E. Contrast the simple task of mapping locations for hazard maps with the generally more sophisticated products called risk maps necessary for risk estimation. a\. Ask students: Why does the use of a hazard map for risk estimation require more mental energy on the part of the map user than use of a risk map? (Using a hazard map to reduce risk, the map reader must make mental judgments about how risky the hazardous situation revealed on the map appears to be. Technically, risk maps show the results of some sort of numerical calculation to determine the probability of occurrence and degree of risk, or at least some gross ranking of risk from low to high. Often this is established by extrapolation of data by enhancing the databases the map was built from with information from the past. Well-designed risk maps usually present quantities given in their legends in ranges rather than single numbers, or in probability percentages because uncertainty is inherent in risk estimation.) b. Ask students: Who in a given community will often discourage the use of risk maps that aggregate the risk estimates from more than one hazard? (Business and real estate interests reject such maps because of potential limits to land use and the negative publicity engendered for the community.) F. Point out that the actions society decides to take based on these processes of hazard identification and risk estimation guide resource allocation. Decisions must be made about how much will be spent on given hazards and the later evaluation needed to judge the degree of success of these attempts to manage them or their after effects. III. Power Point Slide #20 allows students to concentrate on the Emergency Management t Mapping presented in this Model. Mapping presented in this Model. A. Ask Students: What are georeferenced data files and why are they so important? (Georeferenced data files or digital files are files of data tied to latitude and longitude readings which allow exact locations to be found. Emphasize the advantage AFTER a disaster of being able to locate precisely where certain features were located before the disastrous event. An example was the need after Hurricane Andrew to locate where street signs, telephone poles and liquid gas outlets had been located before the storm.) Often it is difficult to convince local authorities to fund the cost of gathering of these georeferenced files or digital files. B. Be sure students understand that this model for emergency mapping is organized by the chronology of how maps are applied to handle a disastrous event from preparedness through production of planning maps, to crisis mapping during and immediately after the event, to meeting response needs to recovery operations and mitigation. C. As the media operates today, any emergency maps may be used in attempts to communicate risk. Session 8 will cover the tenets of risk communication in detail. Objective 1.10: Consider the many roles of mapping in emergency management today. Requirements: Query students for reasons: 1) why we need maps for emergency planning, 2) what the problems are with providing emergency maps to the public and 3) how we can improve communication between the public and government agencies tasked with managing emergencies. Remarks: I. Elicit from students the roles maps play in managing emergency situations. A. Ask students: what are the basic reasons we need to make maps for emergency planning? Emergencies, whether natural or technological, require movement over space of people, goods and services, and maps are the most efficient models for planning such future actions, which will take place over a spatial area. Maps require the planner to generalize data and put down the essentials. A well-designed map allows us to put information in a hierarchical form so the most important things stand out more and can be identified at a glance. In emergency planning, maps are one of the most appropriate and efficient models for future actions available to the planner. Thus, mapping is a process carried out in all stages of emergency management and in all levels of human involvement. In all four key aspects of emergency management - mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery - maps are needed to: 1) facilitate the flow of resources/services both before and during an emergency ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` 2) coordinate the efforts of emergency groups and services by use of a concrete, agreed upon model 3) be a concrete model or guide for possible action by the public, and 4) be the quickest method for tracking at a glance all of the elements at work in a specific geographic area without having to read reams of paragraphs. (Power Point Slide #21) ### The role maps can play in the emergency planning process in a larger sense shows emergency maps to be extensions of environmental mapping for resource allocation. Traditionally, maps are thought of as elements in the preparedness and response stages of an emergency, but the emergency map's contents are formed from the established geographic information system built from the available environmental information available for the region in question. {#the-role-maps-can-play-in-the-emergency-planning-process-in-a-larger-sense-shows-emergency-maps-to-be-extensions-of-environmental-mapping-for-resource-allocation.-traditionally-maps-are-thought-of-as-elements-in-the-preparedness-and-response-stages-of-an-emergency-but-the-emergency-maps-contents-are-formed-from-the-established-geographic-information-system-built-from-the-available-environmental-information-available-for-the-region-in-question. .unnumbered} ### {#section .unnumbered} ### In addition, in the more long-range mitigation and recovery phases of emergency planning, resource maps, environmental maps and hazard maps are employed. It is from this same geographic information that emergency maps emerge. Therefore, in the largest macro-scale, covering all four phases of emergency management, maps can serve as a model for both present and future actions. {#in-addition-in-the-more-long-range-mitigation-and-recovery-phases-of-emergency-planning-resource-maps-environmental-maps-and-hazard-maps-are-employed.-it-is-from-this-same-geographic-information-that-emergency-maps-emerge.-therefore-in-the-largest-macro-scale-covering-all-four-phases-of-emergency-management-maps-can-serve-as-a-model-for-both-present-and-future-actions. .unnumbered} B. Ask students: What are the problems in attempting to provide emergency maps to the public? 1\. how to distribute so there's availability 2\. how to keep maps up-to-date. and available after updating 3\. what information to include \- This requires assumptions to be made about a.) what level of education the user (the public) will have, especially about technical issues, b.) reading ability levels and map reading skills 4\. how technically trained is the public in map reading and use 5\. how to incorporate local knowledge - often this can't be put on the map but needs to considered when doing the planning for the emergency (this is one of the most problematic areas of emergency map design) (Power Point Slide \# 22) C. Ask students: How can we improve communication between the public and government agencies in case of an emergency and what role can maps play? Communication between the public and Homeland Security means the use of all available technical channels of communication, but the problem of improving communication with the public is a problem with mapping in general. Closeness and communication will grow if the public is involved in designing the maps and if their needs are considered and incorporated. Not just consultant firms should be involved in making the maps; public input should be sought early in the process. Realistically speaking, few people even know where their local emergency management agency is located. There are myriad reasons for this. It can be seen as one more aspect of the complexities of two-way communication with the public about risks. Objective 1.11: Review the concepts central to hazard mapping and modeling and develop the supporting elements of the concepts considered including: frequency, magnitude, vulnerability, adjustment, and crisis mapping. Requirements: Power Point slides #23 - #28 should be clarified for students as part of their developing further a "working vocabulary". Remarks: I. Encourage each student to enlarge her/his "working vocabulary" by mastering the following definitions: A. Define and discuss frequency Power Point Slide #23 B. Define and discuss magnitude Power Point Slide #24 C. Define and discuss vulnerability Power Point Slide #25 D. Define and discuss adjustment Power Point Slide #26 E. Define and discuss crisis mapping Power Point slide #27 Objective 1.12: Review the historic development of hazard mapping and modeling from Dr. John Snow's 1855 map through the laws that increased U.S. hazard mapping from the 1960\'s to 2003. Requirements: One of the first hazard maps was compiled by Dr. John Snow[^9] and released in 1855 to reveal his theory that contaminated drinking water was the source of the spread of cholera. When 500 deaths from Cholera occurred within 10 days in the London neighborhood at the intersection of Broad and Cambridge Streets, he plotted the location of the deaths (See Power Point Slide #28) to reveal the pump as the source of the neighborhood epidemic. Corroborating evidence was established when a bottle of water from the pump was carried to a widow in a neighborhood that had no cholera, and it infected both her and her daughter. Officials alarmed by Snow's findings, removed the handle on the Broad Street water pump, and the epidemic was stemmed. As a pioneer epidemiologist (see Power Point Slide \# 29), Snow used spatial analysis to identify the cause of cholera spread a full forty years before medical science proved it to be a bacterial infection. In the United States, key environmental legislation in the 1960\'s caused an increased need for hazard mapping which has continued through to today. A general timeline of this legislation is presented in Power Point Slide #30. Remarks: I. With the classical, historical case of Dr. John Snow's cholera map, help students to understand the power of spatial analysis for locating "threats to humans and what they value" A. Inquire whether any students were familiar with the name Dr. John Snow. B. With the aid of Power Point Slide #28 tell students about Dr. John Snow's map and its effects. Be sure students understand that all hazard maps are the same basic type of locational map. Use Power Point Slide #29 to define "epidemiology" and to help explain Dr. Snow's reputation as a "pioneer epidemiologist". II. With the aid of Power Point Slide \# 30, have students consider the impetus to a vast amount of increased mapping that occurred at all levels of government, local, state and federal, from passage of the following selective list of laws. Emphasize that many of these laws are continually being amended in an ongoing effort to improve the programs that resulted. 1966 Disaster Relief Act enacted 1969 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) established 1970 National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) enacted 1970 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) created 1972 Clean Water Act amended 1977 National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) enacted 1977 Executive Order #11988 Floodplain Management 1977 Executive Order #11990 Protection of Wetlands 1979 Executive Order #12148 Federal Emergency Management: FEMA created 1981 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA- Superfund) enacted 1986 Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act of 1986, also known as SARA Title III 1991 Amendments to the 1955 Air Pollution Control Act, 1996 Weapons of Mass Destruction (Nunn-Lugar-Domenici Act) enacted 2003 Homeland Security Act III. Discuss the kinds of mapping activities which are needed under the Homeland Security Act, and consider how this data is being gathered compared with the way John Snow gathered his information. Modern maps would be made from data assembled with remote sensing, GPS, GIS, metadata, etc. approaches. Encourage students to visit the Homeland Security website to check out the references to maps and mapping there. <http://www.fgdc.gov/HSWG/> Objective 1.13: Cooperatively evaluate this session through discussion questions. Requirements: Promote a free-wheeling discussion to evaluate this session. Remarks: I. Set the classroom atmosphere for a free exchange of opinions about this Session 1. II. Evaluative questions to pose to the class: A. What subjects covered in this Session 1 would you liked to have spent more time on? B. What other improvements can you suggest in the design of this Session 1? \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Suggested Websites for Information: <http://www.sarpy.com/ema/2001conf.htm> \"Where to Get Information and Software on the Internet\" - Lists websites for the CDC, EPA, FEMA and NOAA on these four topics 1) Chemicals 2) Hazardous Waste 3) Miscellaneous and 4) Terrorism <http://www.epa.gov/> US Environmental Protection Agency Home Page <http://www.fema.gov/> US Federal Emergency Management Agency Home Page [^1]: ^1^ Kates, Robert, Christoph Hohenemser and Jeanne X. Kasperson. 1985. Perilous Progress. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. [^2]: ^2^ Kates, Robert, Christoph Hohenemser, and Jeanne X. Kasperson. 1985. Perilous Progress. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. [^3]: ^3^ FEMA. 1997. Multi-Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment: A Cornerstone of the National Mitigation Strategy. Washington, DC. http://www.fema.gov/fhm/ft_mhira.shtm [^4]: ^4^ Ansell.J. and F. Wharton. 1992. Risk: Analysis, Assessment, and Management. John Wiley & Sons. Chichester. 100. [^5]: ^5^ Tobin Graham and Burrell Montz, 1997. Natural Hazards, The Guilford Press, New York/London. [^6]: ^6^ Kates, Robert W., Christoph Hohenemser and Jeanne X. Kasperson. 1985. Perilous Progress: Managing the Hazards of Technology. Boulder CO: Westview Press. [^7]: ^7^ Winter, Nancy L. 1997. Managing a Mega-Disaster: GIS Applications, Decision Making and Spatial Data Flow Between Local, State and Federal Levels in Hurricane Andrew Disaster Management. (unpublished dissertation) Worcester MA: Clark [^8]: ^8^ Kates, Robert W. 1985. Perilous Progress: Managing the Hazards of Technology. Boulder CO: Westview Press. 252. [^9]: ^9^ <http://www.csiss.org/classics/content/8>, http://www/sph.umich.edu/epid/GSS/pub.html	en
markdown	876524	# Presentation: 876524 ## Air Toxics in Allegheny County: Sources, Airborne Concentrations, and Human Exposure - Jennifer Logue, Andrew Lambe, Kara Huff-Hartz, Allen Robinson, Neil Donahue, Mitch Small, Cliff Davidson, Darrel Stern, Jason Maranche ## Project Objectives - What are the concentrations and health risks of air toxics in Allegheny County? - How do the concentrations and risks in Allegheny County compare to other U.S. Cities? - What are priority air toxics for Allegheny County? - What are the sources of these priority toxics? ## Baseline Monitoring (2/06-1/08) 32 organic air toxics 1 in 6 day sampling Methods TO-11A & TO-15 Flag Plaza (background) Regional background Heavily Industrialized Downtown Notes: Mention that Allegheny County is in Penn, add a map of PA (1in 6 sampling) ## Air toxics considered in analysis \| Acetaldehyde \| Ethyl benzene \| \| --- \| --- \| \| Acrolein \| Formaldehyde \| \| Benzene \| Hexachlorobutadiene \| \| Benzyl chloride \| Hexane \| \| Bromoform \| Methyl isobutyl ketone \| \| Bromomethane \| Methylene chloride \| \| Butadiene, 1,3- \| MTBE \| \| Carbon disulfide \| Propionaldehyde \| \| Carbon tetrachloride \| Styrene \| \| Chlorobenzene \| Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2- \| \| Chloroethane \| Tetrachloroethene \| \| Chloroform \| Toluene \| \| Chloromethane \| Trichlorobenzene, 1,2,4- \| \| Dibromoethane, 1,2- \| Trichloroethane, 1,1,1- \| \| Dichlorobenzene, 1,4- \| Trichloroethane,1,1,2- \| \| Dichloromethane, 1,1- \| Trichloroethene \| \| Dichloroethane,1,2- \| Vinyl chloride \| \| Dichloroethene, 1,1- \| Xylene, m/p \| \| Dichloropropane, 1,2- \| Xylene, o- \| \| Acetaldehyde \| Formaldehyde \| \| --- \| --- \| \| Benzene \| Hexachlorobutadiene \| \| Benzyl chloride \| Hexane \| \| Bromoform \| Methyl isobutyl ketone \| \| Bromomethane \| Methylene chloride \| \| Butadiene, 1,3- \| MTBE \| \| Carbon disulfide \| Styrene \| \| Carbon tetrachloride \| Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2- \| \| Chlorobenzene \| Tetrachloroethene \| \| Chloroethane \| Toluene \| \| Chloroform \| Trichlorobenzene, 1,2,4- \| \| Chloromethane \| Trichloroethane, 1,1,1- \| \| Dibromoethane, 1,2- \| Trichloroethane,1,1,2- \| \| Dichlorobenzene, 1,4- \| Trichloroethene \| \| Dichloroethane, 1,1- \| Vinyl chloride \| \| Dichloroethane,1,2- \| Xylene, m/p \| \| Dichloroethene, 1,1- \| Xylene, o- \| \| Dichloropropane, 1,2- \| Diesel particulate matter \| \| Ethyl benzene \| POM \| Baseline: 38 HAPs Intensives: 38 HAPs \| Antimony (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| --- \| \| Arsenic (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| Beryllium (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| Cadmium (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| Chromium (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| Cobalt (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| Lead (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| Manganese (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| Nickel (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| Dibenz(A-H)Anthracene (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| Selenium (PM10,PM2.5) \| \| POM \| Archive: ## Identifying Priority Toxics Large Local Sources High Concentrations Relative to National Data High Risk ## Comparisons with National Concentration Data - Sonoma Tech. provided national data ## Air Toxics with Elevated Concentrations ## Spatial variation and local sources Notes:* Describe the plot first and before explaining meaning Color code the sites with with the bars, rename sites downtown and background ## Cancer Risk - 3 toxics above 10-5 - Formaldehyde - Benzene - Trichloroethene - 12 toxics above 10-6 ## Additive Cancer LIR at Baseline Sites Flag Plaza Avalon Stowe South Fayette 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 Cancer LIR (x 10-4) Formaldehyde Benzene Trichloroethene ## Comparison of LIR in Select U.S. Cities ## Non-Cancer Risks - Chronic - Acrolein - No Acute ## Other Air Toxics - Downtown: - Diesel Particulate Matter - Avalon - metals - Archived CMU Supersite Data (regional background) - Diesel Particulate Matter - Metals - Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons ## Diesel particulate matter - Complex pollutant - 40-80% BC or EC - Organics - Sulfate - No way to directly measure - Estimate using source apportionment model - BC/EC - Hopanes & steranes - n-alkanes - aromatics ## Diesel Particulate Concentrations and Risks - Downtown - Greensburg - Hazelwood - Lawrenceville - Schenley Park - Florence BC or EC (g m-3) 0 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 2.5 Archived Data - Based on CA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment URE for DPM ## Risk of metals in different cities Risk of metals in different cities* 1 2 4 3 5 6 7 Cancer LIR (x 10-5) *** * * * * * ## Risks for Different Classes of Air Toxics ## Air Toxics of Interest _High Greatest Health Risks_ : diesel PM benzene formaldehyde _Medium Health Risks_ : carbon tetrachloride 1,3-butadiene tetrachloroethene acetaldehyde trichloroethene acrolein 1,4-dichlorobenzene metals _Potential Concerns_ : chloroform propionaldehyde styrene ethylbenzene toluene methylene chloride MIBK xylenes Notes: Update ## Intensive Monitoring Carnegie Mellon Heavily Industrialized Downtown Diamond Building Notes: Mention that Allegheny County is in Penn, add a map of PA (1in 6 sampling) ## Automated Field InstrumentGas Chromatograph Mass Spectrometer/ Flame Ionization Detector (GCMS/FID) - (Millet JGR, 2005) - 1 hour resolution - 70+ compounds - Low detection limit(<.2g/m3) ## High Time ResolvedMeasurements Neville Island** Downtown - High Time ResolvedMeasurements Notes: Better verbal transition ## High time resolved measurements - Concentration (g/m3) - Hour of the day - Concentration (g/m3) ## Source Apportionment 180 90 270 270 90 0 Coke Factor Notes: More about apportionment risk_> sources , wind directional temporal patterns, PMF factor to source profiles, example of benzene elements ## Benzene - Benzene ## Formaldehyde - Sources: - Secondary Formation - Mobile sources - Point Sources: 9 TPY - Predominately Secondary - Avalon is statistically significantly higher than other sites - 27% [0% 57%] increase from SF ## Tetrachloroethene - Avalon: ACSA - Downtown: Dry Cleaning - Downtown - Avalon - Background ACSA Avalon ## Risk Apportionment Notes: Secondary breakdown ## Industry Risk Apportionment ## Risk Apportionment ## Conclusions - Priority air toxics - Substantial risk from regional air toxics - Formaldehyde - Carbon tetrachloride - Local risk drivers - DPM - Benzene - Chlorinated compounds ## Acknowledgments - Funding - Clean Air Fund - EPA ## 1,4-dichlorobenzene - Downtown - Downtown - Background ## Trichloroethene:Unknown Source ## Acrolein - Sources - Mobile sources - Point Sources: 9 TPY - HQ>1 at all sites - Predominately Diesel emissions ## Regional Sources - Propionaldehyde is high throughout the county - Highest in Fall - Formaldehyde, Carbon Tetrachloride, and Chloromethane are on par with nation Notes: Break it up into a few different plots ## Small Local Sources - Benzene in Avalon - Neville Industry - Mobile sources - Toluene both sites - Industry - Mobile sources ## Large Regional Sources - Chlorinated Compounds downtown - Hydrogen sulfide and styrene at Avalon ## Air Toxics Health Risks Cancer Respiratory Problems Birth Defects Neurological issues Developmental Problems Other health issues Air Toxics - Two types of risk - Cancer: chronic - Non-Cancer: Acute, intermediate or chronic - Risks are modeled using a linear no-threshold model Notes: Put in what they stand for Table to graph Change to a graph Notes: Add acrolien ## Slide 40 ## Regional Pollutants: Formaldehyde Carbon Tetrachloride ## Local plumes contribute to elevated exposure Toluene Notes: Explain what drives the air toxic concentrations in the area, explain , time seiries of wind direction versus time- Slide after that shows what the same situation would look for 24 hour average ## Determining Sources: Increased Resolutions of Hourly measurements Notes: Add windrose to show wind direction ## Increases Measurement Resolution Notes: Explain what drives the air toxic concentrations in the area, explain , time seiries of wind direction versus time- Slide after that shows what the same situation would look for 24 hour average ## Plume events drive local exposure Neville Island Downtown ## Benzene - Mobile Sources - Industrial Sources - High Relative to the National Data ## Water Treatment Factor - PMF Factor - Factor Contribution vs. - Wind Direction - 0 - 30 - 60 - 90 - 120 - 150 - 180 - 210 - 240 - 270 - 330 - 300 ACSA - ACSA Emission Profile Tetrachloroethylene Toluene Notes: Need to repace this ## Inlet for GCMS/FID - Compound - traps - Automated Valve Assembly - Gas Chromatograph Mass Spectrometer Flame Ionization Detector Notes: Descibe how the instrument runs, detection limits, etc. Point out more the routine calibration ## Plume Events 40 Compounds were measured hourly Neville Island Downtown - Styrene - Toluene - Benzene Notes: Better verbal transition ## Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF) - Main issue: Identifying factor - Event profiles - Inventory profiles - PMF solves: - scores loadings - fs11 fs12 fs21 fs22 fs31 fs32 - a11 a12 a13 a21 a22 a23 - c11 c12 c13 c21 c22 c23 c31 c32 c33 - _Measured Data_ - time - compound - time - compound - source - source ## Measurement Intercomparison: Slopes varied from .3 to 2 ## Quantitative Source Apportionment - _Receptor Modeling_: - _Goal:_ To determine emissions rates/source contributions Notes: Define the terms on the slide, add in what I, j, add time You need to walk them through the equation. Mention that there are several methods, mention the limitations Test the fij assumption why do we need to constrain the model. Mention example , used for source types but we are trying to identify specific source contributions from the same source class, no distinct chemical tracer/profiles	en
converted_docs	604366	Enclosure 2B - HMO brochure examples This is the key for the \"Print size\" and \"Print style\". Follow the visual in making text: *bold, bold-italicized,*** and italicized, and for shading degrees. Times New Roman, 32-point Times New Roman, 14-point Times New Roman, 16-point Times New Roman, 13-point Times New Roman, 10 point {{Use Graphic for logo AND it\'s text}} Times New Roman, 11-point Times New Roman, 12-point Tahoma, 14-point (or equivalent) HMO name [http://www.planAddress.org](http://www.planAddress.org/) 2001 A Health Maintenance Organization with a point of service product ![](media/image2.png){width="1.1881944444444446in" height="1.2145833333333333in"}![](media/image2.png){width="1.1881944444444446in" height="1.2145833333333333in"} Serving: {insert general service area } Enrollment in this Plan is limited; see page 5 for requirements. Enrollment codes for this Plan: 001 Self Only 002 Self and Family ![](media/image3.png){width="1.2868055555555555in" height="0.9159722222222222in"} ![](media/image4.png){width="3.848611111111111in" height="0.7222222222222222in"} ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Table of Contents ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Introduction............................................................................ xx Plain Language........................................................................ xx Section 1. Facts about this HMO plan xx We also have point-of service (POS) benefits xx How we pay providers xx Who provides my health care? {Add ONLY if you have the header in text. xx Patients\' Bill of Rights xx Service Area xx Section 2. How we change for 2001............................................... xx Program-wide changes xx Changes to this Plan xx Section 3. How you get care ............\... xx Identification cards xx Where you get covered care xx Plan providers xx Plan facilities xx What you must do to get covered care xx Primary care xx Specialty care xx Hospital care xx Circumstances beyond our control xx Services requiring our prior approval xx Section 4. Your costs for covered services xx Copayments xx Deductible xx Coinsurance xx Your out-of-pocket maximum xx Section 5. Benefits.................................................................. xx Overview xx (a) Medical services and supplies provided by physicians and other health care professionals xx (b) Surgical and anesthesia services provided by physicians and other health care professionals xx (c) Services provided by a hospital or other facility, and ambulance services xx (d) Emergency services/accidents xx (e) Mental health and substance abuse benefits xx (f) Prescription drug benefits xx (g) Special features xx (h) Dental benefits xx (i) Point of service product {OPTIONAL; if none, delete & change (i) to (j)} xx (j) Non-FEHB benefits available to Plan members xx {delete above entry if you do not have a non-FHEB page) Section 6. General exclusions \-- things we don\'t cover xx Section 7. Filing a claim for covered services xx Section 8. The disputed claims process xx Section 9. Coordinating benefits with other coverage xx When you have... Other health coverage xx Original Medicare xx Medicare managed care plan xx TRICARE/Workers\' Compensation/Medicaid xx Other Government agencies xx When others are responsible for injuries xx Section 10. Definitions of terms we use in this brochure xx Section 11. FEHB facts xx Coverage information xx No pre-existing condition limitation xx Where you get information about enrolling in the FEHB Program xx Types of coverage available for you and your family xx When benefits and premiums start xx Your medical and claims records are confidential xx When you retire xx When you lose benefits xx When FEHB coverage ends xx Spouse equity coverage xx Temporary Continuation of Coverage (TCC) xx Converting to individual coverage xx Getting a Certificate of Group Health Plan Coverage xx Inspector General Advisory \[RV 8-7} xx Department of Defense/FEHB Demonstration Project xx Index xx Summary of benefits xx Rates..........................................................................................................................Back cover ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 2. How we change for 2001 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Program-wide changes - The plain language team reorganized the brochure and the way we describe our benefits. We hope this will make it easier for you to compare plans. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - This year, the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program is implementing network mental health and substance abuse parity. This means that your coverage for mental health, substance abuse, medical, surgical, and hospital services from providers in our {HMOs insert \"plan network\", and FFS insert \"our PPO network\"} will be the same with regard to deductibles, coinsurance, copays, and day and visit limitations when you follow a treatment plan that we approve. Previously, we placed {insert \"higher patient cost sharing\" or \"shorter day or visit limitations\"} on mental health and substance abuse services than we did on services to treat physical illness, injury, or disease. ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - Many healthcare organizations have turned their attention this past year to improving healthcare quality and patient safety. OPM asked all FEHB plans to join them in this effort. You can find specific information on our patient safety activities by calling {insert plan phone number and contact}, or checking our website {insert plan website}. You can find out more about patient safety on the OPM website, www.opm.gov/insure. To improve your healthcare, take these five steps: > Speak up if you have questions or concerns. > > Keep a list of all the medicines you take. > > Make sure you get the results of any test or procedure. > > Talk with your doctor and health care team about your options if you > need hospital care. > > Make sure you understand what will happen if you need surgery. - We clarified the language to show that anyone who needs a mastectomy may choose to have the procedure performed on an inpatient basis and remain in the hospital up to 48 hours after the procedure. Previously, the language referenced only women. Changes to this Plan ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - Your share of the non-Postal premium will \[decrease\]\[increase\] by xx% for Self Only or xx% for Self and Family. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 3. How you get care ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Identification cards We will send you an identification (ID) card. You should carry your ID card with you at all times. You must show it whenever you receive services from a Plan provider, or fill a prescription at a Plan pharmacy. Until you receive your ID card, use your copy of the Health Benefits Election Form, SF-2809, your health benefits enrollment confirmation (for annuitants), or your Employee Express confirmation letter. If you do not receive your ID card within 30 days after the effective date of your enrollment, or if you need replacement cards, call us at xxx. Where you get covered care You get care from "Plan providers" and "Plan facilities." You will only pay copayments, deductibles, and/or coinsurance, {Plan specific} and you will not have to file claims. {POS, if any, make plan specific:} If you use our point-of-service program, you can also get care from non-Plan providers, or from participating providers without a required referral, but it will cost you more. Plan providers Plan providers are physicians and other health care professionals in our service area that we contract with to provide covered services to our members. We credential Plan providers according to national standards. {Plan specific to modify entire paragraph, and add primary/specialist/etc} We list Plan providers in the provider directory, which we update periodically. The list is also on our website. {Plan specific to modify entire paragraph, and add primary/specialist/etc} Plan facilities Plan facilities are hospitals and other facilities in our service area that we contract with to provide covered services to our members. We list these in the provider directory, which we update periodically. The list is also on our website. {Plan specific - list optional} What you must do It depends on the type of care you need. First, you and each family member must choose a primary care physician. This decision is important since your primary care physician provides or arranges for most of your health care. {insert information here about how to select the physician.} Primary care Your primary care physician can be a {insert types, i.e. -- family practitioner, internist or pediatrician}. Your primary care physician will provide most of your health care, or give you a referral to see a specialist. If you want to change primary care physicians or if your primary care physician leaves the Plan, call us. We will help you select a new one. Specialty care Your primary care physician will refer you to a specialist for needed care. However, you may see {insert types/circumstances} without a referral. {text/list from 2000 brochure} Here are other things you should know about specialty care: +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| Section 5. Benefits \-- OVERVIEW \| \| \| \| *(See page xx for how our benefits changed this year and page xx \| \| for a benefits summary.)* \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ NOTE: This benefits section is divided into subsections. Please read the important things you should keep in mind at the beginning of each subsection. To obtain claims forms, claims filing advice, or more information about our benefits, contact us at {phone number} or at our website at [www.]() {insert web address}. (a) Medical services and supplies provided by physicians and other health care professionals xx-xx{page #\'s of section} +---------------------------------+------------------------------------+ \| Diagnostic and treatment \| Hearing services (testing, \| \| services \| treatment, and supplies) \| \| \| \| \| Lab, X-ray, and other \| Vision services (testing, \| \| diagnostic tests \| treatment, and supplies) \| \| \| \| \| Preventive care, adult \| Foot care \| \| \| \| \| Preventive care, children \| Orthopedic and prosthetic devices \| \| \| \| \| Maternity care \| Durable medical equipment (DME) \| \| \| \| \| Family planning \| Home health services \| \| \| \| \| Infertility services \| Alternative treatments \| \| \| \| \| Allergy care \| Educational classes and programs \| \| \| \| \| Treatment therapies \| \| \| \| \| \| Rehabilitative therapies \| \| +---------------------------------+------------------------------------+ (b) Surgical and anesthesia services provided by physicians and other health care professionals xx-xx +---------------------------------+------------------------------------+ \| Surgical procedures \| Oral and maxillofacial surgery \| \| \| \| \| Reconstructive surgery \| Organ/tissue transplants \| \| \| \| \| \| Anesthesia \| +---------------------------------+------------------------------------+ (c) Services provided by a hospital or other facility, and ambulance services xx-xx +---------------------------------+------------------------------------+ \| Inpatient hospital \| Extended care benefits/skilled \| \| \| nursing care facility benefits \| \| Outpatient hospital or \| \| \| ambulatory surgical center \| Hospice care \| \| \| \| \| \| Ambulance \| +---------------------------------+------------------------------------+ (d) Emergency services/accidents xx-xx > Medical emergency Ambulance {Note, if you STET Accidental injury in > the text, add it back here}} (e) Mental health and substance abuse benefits xx-xx (f) Prescription drug benefits xx (g) Special features xx {list your special features} (h) Dental benefits xx (i) Point of service benefits {If you don\'t have POS, remove t his and renumber j} xx (j) Non-FEHB benefits available to Plan members xx Summary of benefits xx {insert page \# for summary at back of brochure} +---+---+-------------------------+-------------------+--------+---+----+ \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| S \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| 5 \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ( \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ) \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| M \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| v \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| u \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| v \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| b \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| y \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| y \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| f \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +---+---+-------------------------+-------------------+--------+---+----+ \| \| * \| *Here are some \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| important things to \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| I \| keep in mind about \| \| \| I \| \| \| \| * \| these benefits:** \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| - Please remember \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| that all benefits \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| are subject to the \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| M \| definitions, \| \| \| M \| \| \| \| * \| limitations, and \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| exclusions in this \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| brochure and are \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| payable only when \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| we determine they \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| P \| are medically \| \| \| P \| \| \| \| * \| necessary. \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| - Plan physicians \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| must provide or \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| arrange your care. \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| O \| \| \| \| O \| \| \| \| * \| - The calendar year \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| deductible is: \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| {plan specific} \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \$275 per person \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| (\$550 per family). \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| R \| The calendar year \| \| \| R \| \| \| \| * \| deductible applies \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| to almost all \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| benefits in this \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| Section. We added \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| "(No deductible)" \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| T \| to show when the \| \| \| T \| \| \| \| * \| calendar year \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| deductible does not \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| apply. . {If you \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| want, you can say, \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| "We added \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| A \| asterisks - \* - to \| \| \| A \| \| \| \| * \| show when the \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| calendar year \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| deductible does not \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| apply."}. {If HMO \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| -- if you don't \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| N \| have deductible, \| \| \| N \| \| \| \| * \| remove this check \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| mark or say "We \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| have no calendar \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| year deductible.}* \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| T \| ```{=html} \| \| \| T \| \| \| \| * \| <!-- --> \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| * \| ``` \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| - Be sure to read \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Section 4, Your \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| costs for covered \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| services for \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| valuable \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| information about \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| how cost sharing \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| works. Also read \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Section 9 about \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| coordinating \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| benefits with other \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| coverage, including \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| with Medicare. \| \| \| \| \| +---+---+-------------------------+-------------------+--------+---+----+ \| > \| \| \| You pay \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| *After the \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| calendar year \| \| \| \| \| B \| \| \| deductible...** \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| f \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| D \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +---+---+-------------------------+-------------------+--------+---+----+ \| # \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| # \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| # \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| N \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| O \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| T \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| E \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| : \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| T \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| y \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| u \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| b \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| m \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| b \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| f \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| S \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| . \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| W \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| y \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| " \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| N \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| u \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| b \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| " \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| w \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| y \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| . \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| { \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| D \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| w \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| f \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| y \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| u \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ' \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ' \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| v \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| u \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| b \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| . \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| } \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +---+---+-------------------------+-------------------+--------+---+----+ \| # \| \| \| You pay - \| You \| \| \| \| # \| \| \| Standard Option** \| pay - \| \| \| \| # \| \| \| \| High \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| Op \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| tion** \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| D \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| g \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| d \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| m \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| t \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| v \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| * \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +---+---+-------------------------+-------------------+--------+---+----+ \| > \| \| \| \$10 per visit \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| P \| \| \| *{Minimum copay \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| for primary care \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| office visit is \| \| \| \| \| f \| \| \| \$10 per 2000 \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| negotiations.}* \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| {{When you have \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| different copay \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| for primary care \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| and specialty \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| care, say: \| \| \| \| \| l \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \$10 per visit to \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| your primary care \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| physician \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| r \| \| \| \$5 per visit to \| \| \| \| \| v \| \| \| a specialist \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| {Change copay \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| descriptions to \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| fit your \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| circumstances} \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| f \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| > \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| y \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| - \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| I \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| p \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| h \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| y \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| a \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| n \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ' \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| s \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| o \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| f \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| f \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| i \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| c \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| e \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +---+---+-------------------------+-------------------+--------+---+----+ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| > Section 6. General exclusions \-- things we don\'t cover \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ > The exclusions in this section apply to all benefits. Although we > may list a specific service as a benefit, we will not cover it unless > your Plan doctor determines it is medically necessary to prevent, > diagnose, or treat your illness, disease, injury, or condition. > > \[\[Alternate ending for plans with precertification/prior > approval:\]\] . . . or condition and we agree, as discussed under > What Services Require Our Prior Approval on page xx. > > We do not cover the following: - Care by non-Plan providers except for authorized referrals or emergencies (see Emergency Benefits); - Services, drugs, or supplies you receive while you are not enrolled in this Plan; - Services, drugs, or supplies that are not medically necessary; - Services, drugs, or supplies not required according to accepted standards of medical, dental, or psychiatric practice; - Experimental or investigational procedures, treatments, drugs or devices; - Services, drugs, or supplies related to abortions, except when the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or when the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest {plan specific---can vary; discuss with contract specialist }; - Services, drugs, or supplies related to sex transformations; or - Services, drugs, or supplies you receive from a provider or facility barred from the FEHB Program. {{Insert other "General Exclusions" from your 2000 brochure---your contract specialist will help you edit for plain language and necessity -- BE SURE TO PUT "; or" after the next to last entry and then a period after the last entry}} ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 7. Filing a claim for covered services ----------------------------------------------------------------------- When you see Plan physicians, receive services at Plan hospitals and facilities, or obtain your prescription drugs at Plan pharmacies, you will not have to file claims. Just present your identification card and pay your copayment, coinsurance, or deductible. You will only need to file a claim when you receive emergency services from non-plan providers. Sometimes these providers bill us directly. Check with the provider. If you need to file the claim, here is the process: Medical and hospital benefits In most cases, providers and facilities file claims for you. Physicians must file on the form HCFA-1500, Health Insurance Claim Form. Facilities will file on the UB-92 form. For claims questions and assistance, call us at xxx. When you must file a claim \-- such as for out-of-area care \-- submit it on the HCFA-1500 or a claim form that includes the information shown below. Bills and receipts should be itemized and show: - Covered member's name and ID number; - Name and address physician or facility that provided the service or supply; - Dates you received the services or supplies; - Diagnosis; - Type of each service or supply; - The charge for each service or supply; ```{=html} <!-- --> ``` - A copy of the explanation of benefits, payments, or denial from any primary payer \--such as the Medicare Summary Notice (MSN); and - Receipts, if you paid for your services. *Submit your claims to: {{insert Plan address}}* Prescription drugs** {Insert Plan-specific process; if same as above, change the header in the above to "Medical, Hospital and Drug benefits"} > Submit your claims to: {{insert plan address}} Other supplies or services {Insert Plan-specific process, such as dental, DME, vision, chiropractic; if same as above, don't put this header in}} > Submit your claims to: {{insert plan address}} Deadline for filing your claim Send us all of the documents for your claim as soon as possible. You must submit the claim by December 31 of the year after the year you received the service, unless timely filing was prevented by administrative operations of Government or legal incapacity, provided the claim was submitted as soon as reasonably possible. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 8. The disputed claims process ----------------------------------------------------------------------- {NOTE: For step numbers below, sample below is 16pt Tahoma. But as long as the numbers stand out and look balanced, it won\'t matter what type face you use.} Follow this Federal Employees Health Benefits Program disputed claims process if you disagree with our decision on your claim or request for services, drugs, or supplies -- including a request for preauthorization: +------+---------------------------------------------------------------+ \| St \| Description \| \| ep \| \| +------+---------------------------------------------------------------+ \| * \| Ask us in writing to reconsider our initial decision. You \| \| 1* \| must: \| \| \| \| \| \| (a) Write to us within 6 months from the date of our \| \| \| decision; and \| \| \| \| \| \| (b) Send your request to us at: {{Plan address}}; and \| \| \| \| \| \| (c) Include a statement about why you believe our initial \| \| \| decision was wrong, based on specific benefit provisions \| \| \| in this brochure; and \| \| \| \| \| \| (d) Include copies of documents that support your claim, such \| \| \| as physicians\' letters, operative reports, bills, \| \| \| medical records, and explanation of benefits (EOB) forms. \| +------+---------------------------------------------------------------+ \| * \| We have 30 days from the date we receive your request to: \| \| 2* \| \| \| \| (a) Pay the claim (or, if applicable, arrange for the health \| \| \| care provider to give you the care); or \| \| \| \| \| \| (b) Write to you and maintain our denial \-- go to step 4; or \| \| \| \| \| \| (c) Ask you or your medical provider for more information. If \| \| \| we ask your provider, we will send you a copy of our \| \| \| request---go to step 3. \| +------+---------------------------------------------------------------+ \| * \| You or your provider must send the information so that we \| \| 3* \| receive it within 60 days of our request. We will then decide \| \| \| within 30 more days. \| \| \| \| \| \| If we do not receive the information within 60 days, we will \| \| \| decide within 30 days of the date the information was due. We \| \| \| will base our decision on the information we already have. \| \| \| \| \| \| We will write to you with our decision. \| +------+---------------------------------------------------------------+ \| * \| If you do not agree with our decision, you may ask OPM to \| \| 4* \| review it. \| +------+---------------------------------------------------------------+ \| \| You must write to OPM within: \| \| \| \| \| \| - 90 days after the date of our letter upholding our \| \| \| initial decision; or \| \| \| \| \| \| - 120 days after you first wrote to us \-- if we did not \| \| \| answer that request in some way within 30 days; or \| \| \| \| \| \| - 120 days after we asked for additional information. \| +------+---------------------------------------------------------------+ \| \| Write to OPM at: Office of Personnel Management, Office of \| \| \| Insurance Programs, Contracts Division xx, P.O. Box 436, \| \| \| Washington, D.C. 20044-0436. \| +------+---------------------------------------------------------------+	en
markdown	476923	# Presentation: 476923 ## Slide 1 - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool ## INTRODUCTION - This Lead-based Paint Maintenance Planning Tool is a guide designed to develop a custom fit checklist to conduct lead-based paint maintenance activities in a safe manner. It provides basic information on proper and improper lead hazard work practices. You know how important it is to have and use proper tools. Use this tool to help you learn to “Work Smart, Work Clean, and Work Wet” which means to “Work Lead Safe.” - Use the guide to plan each job that may involve lead-based paint. The cards are laminated so that they can be used, erased, and reused. You can photocopy the cards with the filed assignments and completed measures “check-off” and save the completed copy for each job. To plan a specific job, answer the questions and circle the materials and equipment and work practices that are appropriate to the specific job to be performed. Below is a list of cards and an explanation of how to use them. Lead Job Check List – Use the job checklist to help you recognize risky activities; plan and perform your work; and protect yourself,fellow workers, the residents, and your family from lead hazards. Materials – Identify the materials (disposables) needed for the particular job by circling the picture or words. Equipment – Circle the equipment needed for the particular job. - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool ## INTRODUCTION Work Practices – Circle the work practices that are appropriate to the task. Prohibited and Unsafe Practices – Avoid these practices that jeopardize the health and safety of workers and residents. Cleanup – Circle the cleanup practices appropriate to the job. As Tasks are completed by the worker, the work practices are checked-off as used. For example, when you plan, circle “tape”, when you use it, cross it off. Carpet Removal – Follow the different work practices required for this commonly performed activity. Decontamination – Circle practices that are appropriate to the job. Quality Assurance – When the job is finished, do a “protecting” check. The job is complete when you can answer all of the questions by circling “Yes” or “NA” (Not Applicable). Note: Remember that in Federally Assisted Property, clearance is required and must be accomplished in compliance with 40 CFR Part 745 and 24 CFR Part 35 as these regulations apply to the project. In this case the job is not over until clearance is achieved. INTRODUCTION - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool ## If you don’t know when the building was built, treat the paint as lead-based paint. If the building was built after 1978, then lead-based paint is probably not present and this is not a lead job. - If the building was built before 1978, then treat the paint as lead-based paint, unless a paint inspection report says that no lead-based paint is present. 1. Was the building built before 1978? Yes No - Planning Tool Page 3 - Resident Name: _________________ Job # _____________ - Phone: ___________ Address/Apt.# ____________________ - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Arial Font 2. Could this job: (Y=Yes, N=No) - Create dust that may contain lead? Y N - Disturb known or suspected lead-based paint ? Y N - Require cleanup of dust or debris that may - contain lead? Y N - Disturb known or suspected lead contaminated soil? Y N - Planning Tool Page 3 - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Arial font ## 3. If “Yes” to any of the above, or if you don’t know the answer to any of the questions, assume you are dealing with lead-based paint, and circle the level of risk below. - Planning Tool Page 3 - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Arial Font ## 4. Who will do the job? Personnel must be properly trained and skilled, if they will have to wear a respirator, they must be medically qualified, fit-tested, and trained. Name ____________ Name _____________ - Planning Tool Page 4 - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Arial Font ## How will residents be notified and affected? Notification: Phone ______ Letter _____ Time_______ Date______ Work area instructions to residents Job scheduled: FROM: Time/Date ___TO: Time/ Date___ - Resident asked to leave unit: FROM: Time/Date ___TO: Time/ Date___ - Resident asked to move personal items? Yes No - Temporary accommodations needed for resident? Yes No - If “Yes” accommodation provided? Yes No If “Yes” WHERE ___________ PHONE # _______________ - Planning Tool Page 4 - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Arial Font ## 6. How will work be performed to minimize exposure to lead? Circle specific cards to use for this job: - Materials Card Cleanup Cards - Equipment Card Carpet Removal Card - Personal Protection Card Decontamination Card - Work Practices Card Quality Control Card - Prohibited and Unsafe Practices - Planning Tool Page 4 - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Arial Font ## Heavy Duty - All-Purpose Cleaner, or cleaner made specifically for lead - RAGS - Heavy Duty - Plastic Sheeting - Tape - Rags - Disposable Towels - Heavy Duty - Plastic Bags - Planning Tool Page 5 - Circle needed materials. (Note for high risk.) - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Arial Font Add graphics for mop and Towellettes ## Circle Needed equipment ( Note for high risk.) Circle Needed equipment ( Note for high risk.) - Spray Mister - Stapler - Scraper - Utility Knife - Broom - (Wet Sweep Only) - Dust Pan - HEPA Vacuum - Mop & Bucket - Mini - Containment - Signs & Barriers - WARNING - LEAD - HAZARD - Planning Tool Page 6 EQUIPMENT - Circle needed materials. (Note for high risk.) - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Add Mop Graphic and Barrier Tape Clean up edges on Mini-enclosure Circle needed protection (Note: for high risk) Protective Eye Wear Disposable Cotton Gloves Latex/ Rubber Gloves - Planning Tool Page 7 - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: The man looks like a midget. Please make him proportional. Add Rubber glove graphic. Respirators w/HEPA Filters Circle needed protection (Note: for high risk) - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Take out bullets and add header. ## Work Smart Protect and inform residents Wear proper personal protective clothing. Be alert to special situations. Shutdown HVAC and/or isolate vents. Remove and protect resident belongings. Install heavy duty plastic firmly and securely. Isolate area with heavy duty plastic sheeting - Protect and inform residents - Wear proper personal protective clothing. - Be alert to special situations. - Shutdown HVAC and/or isolate vents. - Remove and protect resident belongings. - Install heavy duty plastic firmly and securely. - Isolate area with heavy duty plastic sheeting - Planning Tool Page 9 WORK PRACTICES - Circle needed materials. (Note for high risk.) - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Air conditioner graphic or vent in wall. Plastic sheeting graphic needed “isolate the area...” needs to be Arial font See me about this one. Change font on Note at top – Arial font Make all fonts match previous page. ## Work Wet Mist work area with water Wet scrape, sand, pry, saw, plane, drill, and remove painted materials. Foam drilling area. - Mist work area with water - Wet scrape, sand, pry, saw, plane, drill, and remove painted materials. - Foam drilling area. - Planning Tool Page 10 WORK PRACTICES - Circle needed materials. (Note for high risk.) - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Air conditioner graphic or vent in wall. Plastic sheeting graphic needed “isolate the area...” needs to be Arial font See me about this one. Change font on Note at top – Arial font Make all fonts match previous page. ## Work Clean Use a tack pad. Install catch bags under work. Keep debris picked up. Control settled dust. Use mini-enclosures. Use a tack pad. Install catch bags under work. Keep debris picked up. Control settled dust. Use mini-enclosures. - Tack Pad - Clean As You Go - Minimize Dust Releases - Dust Containment - Planning Tool Page 10 WORK PRACTICES - Circle needed materials. (Note for high risk.) - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Air conditioner graphic or vent in wall. Plastic sheeting graphic needed “isolate the area...” needs to be Arial font See me about this one. Change font on Note at top – Arial font Make all fonts match previous page. ## NO MECHANICAL GRINDING/SANDING WITHOUT HEPA ATTACHMENTS NO EXTENSIVE DRY SANDING OR SCRAPING ABOVE DE MINIMUS LEVELS NO OPEN FLAME BURNING, HEAT GUN HOTTER THAN 1,100O F, OR WELDING/FLAME CUTTING NO METHYLENE CHLORIDE BASED STRIPPERS IN POORLY VENTILATED SPACES. NO MECHANICAL GRINDING/SANDING WITHOUT HEPA ATTACHMENTS NO EXTENSIVE DRY SANDING OR SCRAPING ABOVE DE MINIMUS LEVELS NO OPEN FLAME BURNING, HEAT GUN HOTTER THAN 1,100O F, OR WELDING/FLAME CUTTING NO METHYLENE CHLORIDE BASED STRIPPERS IN POORLY VENTILATED SPACES. Methylene Chloride Stripper - Planning Tool Page 11 PROHIBITED PRACTICES - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Add graphics for water or abrasive blasting; Add Torch ## NO VACUUMING WITH HOUSEHOLD VACUUM NO MISTING OF WATER NEAR ELECTRIC OUTLETS/FIXTURES NO WASHING IN RESIDENT’S SINK OR LAVATORY NO DISPOSAL OF WASTE IN RESIDENT TRASH NO DISPOSAL OF WATER IN RESIDENT SINKS/ BATHTUBS OR YARD AREAS NO MISTING OF WATER NEAR ELECTRIC OUTLETS/FIXTURES NO WASHING IN RESIDENT’S SINK OR LAVATORY NO DISPOSAL OF WASTE IN RESIDENT TRASH NO DISPOSAL OF WATER IN RESIDENT SINKS/ BATHTUBS OR YARD AREAS - Planning Tool Page 12 UNSAFE PRACTICES - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool ## Place large debris in heavy duty plastic bags. - Wet wipe tools - Mist debris on work area heavy duty plastic film. - Fold heavy duty plastic film “dirty side in”. Place in heavy duty plastic bag and label. - Wet wipe work area with cleaner. - Rinse work area with water. - Planning Tool Page 13 - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Arial font and resize ## Wet wipe with cleaner under and 2' beyond area that was covered with heavy duty plastic film. Rinse wipe with water under and 2' beyond area that was covered with heavy duty plastic film. Gooseneck seal and label heavy duty plastic bag. Remove all materials, tools and bagged debris from work area and residence. Properly dispose of bagged debris. - Rinse wipe with water under and 2' beyond area that was covered with heavy duty plastic film. - Gooseneck seal and label heavy duty plastic bag. - Remove all materials, tools and bagged debris from work area and residence. - Properly dispose of bagged debris. - Planning Tool Page 14 - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Continued – Header Arial font and resize ## Place large debris in heavy duty plastic bags. - Planning Tool Page 15 CLEANUP-HIGH RISK - Place contaminated tools/equipment in heavy duty plastic bag and seal. - Mist small debris on plastic film in the work area. - Remove mini containment and place on heavy duty plastic bag. - Properly remove coveralls. Place in heavy duty plastic bag. - Fold plastic film “dirty side in”. Place in heavy duty plastic bag and label. - Wet wipe with cleaner the area that was repaired. - Rinse wipe with water the area that was repaired. - HEPA vacuum under and 2' beyond area that was covered with plastic film. - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Arial font Numbers in straight column Move vacuum icon to other side ## Wet mop with cleaner under and 2’ beyond area that was covered with plastic sheeting. Wring mop in separate bucket. CLEANUP-HIGH RISK - Rinse mop with water under and 2’ beyond area that was covered with plastic sheeting. Wring mop in separate bucket. - HEPA vacuum under and 2’ beyond area that was covered with plastic sheeting again. - Gooseneck seal and label heavy duty plastic bag. - Remove all materials, tools and bagged debris from the work area and residence. - Properly dispose of bagged debris. - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool ## CARPET - Mist carpet. - Loosen wall to wall from tack strips or glued areas. - Cut carpet to manageable portions with utility knife. - Roll carpet “pile side in”, enclose in heavy duty plastic sheeting, seal with tape, and remove while misting carpet backing from area. PAD - Cut padding to manageable portions with utility knife. - Roll pad while misting. - Wrap carpet & padding in heavy duty plastic sheeting. - Planning Tool Page 17 CLEANUP-HIGH RISK - Circle needed work practices - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Font to arial ## FLOOR CLEANUP-HIGH RISK - Circle needed work practices FLOOR - HEPA vacuum floor area. - Rinse/mop floor area and baseboards with cleaner. - Wet mop floor area - HEPA vacuum floor and baseboards with area again. - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Add header/title Font to Arial ## PERSONAL DECONTAMINATION - Circle needed materials. (Note for high risk.) PERSONAL - Vacuum clothing with HEPA vacuum. - Wipe hands and face with disposable towels. - Wash face and hands with soap and water before eating, drinking, smoking, or applying cosmetics and at finish of job. - Shower with soap. - Recyclable coveralls go to the special laundry. - Launder clothes separately. EQUIPMENT - Clean tools and equipment away from the work area. - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes: Font to arial ## Did you do your part to inform and protect everyone from lead poisoning? - Work properly completed as requested Yes No N/A* - Work areas cleaned properly Yes No N/A - Contaminated debris properly bagged, sealed and labeled Yes No N/A - Contaminated debris, tools, materials, and equipment - removed from house. Yes No N/A - Residents notified of job completion Yes No N/A - Other lead “problems” noted Yes No N/A - If “Yes”,other lead problems reported Yes No N/A - Signature ______________ Name ______________ - Unit/Address ________________ _ N/A means not applicable.* - Planning Tool Page 20 QUALITY ASSURANCE - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool Notes:** Font to arial ## This Planning Tool is an important part of the Lead-Based Paint Maintenance Training Program developed for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by the National Environmental Training Association (NETA) under EPA grant CX-824712. The training package includes a training guide, 60 minutes of integrated video, the Planning Tool, and originals to copy for overheads and student handouts. It is designed for trainers and supervisors to train maintenance personnel on safe procedures to use when maintaining dwellings that contain lead-based paint. The Training Program provides basic instruction on proper and prohibited lead-based paint maintenance and control measures and explains how to use the Planning Tool. CAUTION: Completion of this course does not meet U.S. EPA requirements for lead-based paint abatement training. Additional training and State-certification are required to conduct lead-based paint abatement work safely. - This Planning Tool is an important part of the Lead-Based Paint Maintenance Training Program developed for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by the National Environmental Training Association (NETA) under EPA grant CX-824712. The training package includes a training guide, 60 minutes of integrated video, the Planning Tool, and originals to copy for overheads and student handouts. It is designed for trainers and supervisors to train maintenance personnel on safe procedures to use when maintaining dwellings that contain lead-based paint. The Training Program provides basic instruction on proper and prohibited lead-based paint maintenance and control measures and explains how to use the Planning Tool. CAUTION: Completion of this course does not meet U.S. EPA requirements for lead-based paint abatement training. Additional training and State-certification are required to conduct lead-based paint abatement work safely. - Information on how to obtain additional copies of this Planning Tool and the training package is available from the Lead Paint Compliance Assistance Center toll free at 1-866-HUD-1012 (1-866-483-1012). - Copies of the laminated Planning Tool may be purchased from NETA, phone number 602-956-6099, or by fax number 602-956-6692, or from HUD-USER, phone number 1-800-245-2691. Also available from HUD- USER is a free EPA brochure “Reducing Lead Hazards When Remodeling Your Home” (EPA Publication #747-R-94-002, April 1994). You may obtain more information on High Risk lead operations and maintenance practices for the U.S. Housing and Urban Development Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint in Housing, phone number 1-800-245-2691 or the National Institutes of Building Sciences (NIBS) – Lead-Based Paint: Operations and Maintenance Work Practices Manual for Homes & Buildings, phone number 202-289-7800. - HUD Lead Safe Work Practice Training - Planning Tool	en
all-txt-docs	808701	P_default_1_dud( File(p=0,x=0.05,y=0.0100041,Tt=default,To=default), Function(p=0,x=0.05,y=0.0100041,Tt=default,To=default), LogicalMask(p=0,x=0.05,y=0.0200083,Tt=default,To=default), Transform(p=0,x=0.05,y=0.0300031,Tt=default,To=default), source(p=0,x=0.05,y=0.720008,Tt=default,To=default), name(p=0,x=0.05,y=0.7,Tt=default,To=default), title(p=1,x=0.15,y=0.7,Tt=default,To=default), units(p=0,x=0.67,y=0.7,Tt=default,To=default), crdate(p=0,x=0.75,y=0.7,Tt=default,To=default), crtime(p=0,x=0.85,y=0.7,Tt=default,To=default), comment#1(p=0,x=0.05,y=0.738738,Tt=default,To=default), comment#2(p=0,x=0.1,y=0.730003,Tt=default,To=default), comment#3(p=0,x=0.1,y=0.740007,Tt=default,To=default), comment#4(p=0,x=0.1,y=0.750002,Tt=default,To=default), xname(p=0,x=0.5,y=0.21,Tt=default,To=defcenter), yname(p=0,x=0.02,y=0.4,Tt=default,To=defcentup), zname(p=1,x=0,y=0.82,Tt=default,To=default), tname(p=1,x=0,y=0.82,Tt=default,To=default), xunits(p=0,x=0.6,y=0.21,Tt=default,To=default), yunits(p=0,x=0.02,y=0.5,Tt=default,To=defcentup), zunits(p=1,x=0,y=0.82,Tt=default,To=default), tunits(p=1,x=0,y=0.82,Tt=default,To=default), xvalue(p=0,x=0.8,y=0.7,Th=default,Tt=default,To=default), yvalue(p=0,x=0.8,y=0.690005,Th=default,Tt=default,To=default), zvalue(p=0,x=0.8,y=0.680001,Th=default,Tt=default,To=default), tvalue(p=0,x=0.8,y=0.670006,Th=default,Tt=default,To=default), mean(p=0,x=0.05,y=0.680001,Th=default,Tt=default,To=default), max(p=0,x=0.45,y=0.680001,Th=default,Tt=default,To=default), min(p=0,x=0.25,y=0.680001,Th=default,Tt=default,To=default), xtic#1(p=1,y1=0.2,y2=0.19,Tl=default), xtic#2(p=1,y1=0.65,y2=0.66,Tl=default), xmintic#a(p=1,y1=0.2,y2=0.195,Tl=default), xmintic#b(p=1,y1=0.65,y2=0.655,Tl=default), ytic#1(p=1,x1=0.05,x2=0.04,Tl=default), ytic#2(p=1,x1=0.95,x2=0.96,Tl=default), ymintic#a(p=1,x1=0.05,x2=0.045,Tl=default), ymintic#b(p=1,x1=0.95,x2=0.955,Tl=default), xlabel#1(p=1,y=0.18,Tt=default,To=defcenter), xlabel#2(p=0,y=0,Tt=default,To=defcenter), ylabel#1(p=1,x=0.035,Tt=default,To=defright), ylabel#2(p=0,x=0,Tt=default,To=default), box#1(p=1,x1=0.05,y1=0.2,x2=0.95,y2=0.65,Tl=default), box#2(p=0,x1=0,y1=0.23,x2=0.92,y2=0.67,Tl=default), box#3(p=0,x1=0,y1=0.24,x2=0.91,y2=0.66,Tl=default), box#4(p=0,x1=0,y1=0,x2=0,y2=0,Tl=default), line#1(p=0,x1=0.05,y1=0.425,x2=0.95,y2=0.425,Tl=default), line#2(p=0,x1=0.5,y1=0.2,x2=0.5,y2=0.65,Tl=default), line#3(p=0,x1=0,y1=0.4,x2=0.9,y2=0.4,Tl=default), line#4(p=0,x1=0,y1=0.8,x2=0.9,y2=0.8,Tl=default), legend(p=0,x1=0.05,y1=0.100004,x2=0.95,y2=0.120003,Tt=default,To=defcenter,Tl=default), data(p=1,x1=0.05,y1=0.2,x2=0.95,y2=0.65) )	en
all-txt-docs	294502	Federal Trade Commission Recieved Documents Jan. 16, 1996 P894219 B18354900029 Department of the Treasury U.S. Customs Service Jan 16 1996 MAR-2 RR:TC:SM 559521 MLR Office of the Secretary Federal Trade Commission Room 159 Sixth and Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington D.C. 20580 RE: Made in USA Policy Comment, FTC File No. P894219 Dear Sir: This is in reference to the request for public comment regarding the use of "Made in USA" claims in product advertising and labeling, published October 18, 1995, in the Federal Register. The following comments are offered by the U.S. Customs Service ("Customs"). I. Consumer Perception of Made in USA Claims and the New Global Economy A. Direct Evidence of Consumer Perception The Commission states that it seeks to ensure that consumers can choose products on the basis of accurate information including claims regarding the country of origin of products, as required by 15 U.S.C. 45 which is the authority directing the Commission to prevent deceptive acts and practices. In determining whether a representation is deceptive, the Commission has evaluated the consumer's interpretation of an unqualified "Made in USA" claim, which historically has meant that an article contains "all or virtually all" domestic content. Customs is responsible for the enforcement of the marking statute, section 304, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304) which provides that, unless excepted, every article of foreign origin imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly, and permanently as the nature of the article (or container) will permit, in such a manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the English name of the country of origin of the article. Section 134.1(b), Customs Regulations {19 CFR 134.1(b)}, defines "country of origin" as the country of manufacture, production or growth of any article of foreign origin entering the U.S. Further work or material added to an article in another country must effect a substantial transformation of the article in order to render such other country the "country of origin" within the meaning of the marking laws and regulations. Such determinations are made on a case-by-case basis, but Customs relies on various court decisions which define the substantial transformation test. For example, in determining whether the combining of parts or materials constitutes a substantial transformation, the issue is the extent of operations performed and whether the parts lose their identity and become an integral part of the new article. Belcrest Linens v. United States, 573 F. Supp. 1149 (CIT 1983), aff'd, 741 F.2d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Section 134.35, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134.35), provides that for country of origin marking purposes, a substantial transformation of an imported article occurs when it is used in a process of manufacture, which results in an article having a name, character, or use differing from that of the imported article. Therefore, once Customs considers an article to be substantially transformed as a result of further processing in the U.S., Customs does not require such article to be marked with a country of origin after the further processing. At this point, as Customs consistently has so noted in its rulings, it is then within the jurisdiction of the FTC to decide whether an article may be labeled "Made in USA." Under the substantial transformation test, the origin of an imported article does not necessarily mean that "all or virtually all" of the article's content originates from one particular country, and Customs has not performed any public studies as to the perception of country of origin markings for imported articles. However, it is Customs opinion that the meaning of "Made in (foreign country)" and "Made in USA" for country of origin marking purposes should be the same unless the public is otherwise informed that it is not. Customs also allows an article to be marked with information in addition to the country of origin, such as "Made in (foreign country A) with (foreign country B) components," which for Customs' country of origin marking purposes has the same meaning as a marking without the supplemental information, unlike the FTC's qualified versus unqualified "Made in USA" claims. Accordingly, it is Customs opinion that while a "Made in USA" claim (meaning "all or virtually all" domestic content) is not deceptive and would satisfy the substantial transformation test, the different meanings attributed by Customs and the Commission are likely to confuse the consumer especially in circumstances where an imported article is substantially transformed for Customs' country of origin marking purposes, but does not satisfy the "all or virtually all" domestic content requirement, and, therefore, need not be marked at all. B. The Impact of Increased Globalization of Production on Consumer Perception. The Commission also assesses the "Made in USA" claim based upon the consumer's awareness of increased foreign manufacture. While Customs does not determine the country of origin based upon consumer knowledge of foreign sourcing for a particular product, in applying the substantial transformation test, a case-by-case examination may be made of facts regarding where the components of an article originate, where they are assembled, and the essence of the article. In order to make these case-by-case country of origin determinations more predictable, transparent, and objective for goods imported from a NAFTA country, Customs has codified and implemented the principles of the substantial transformation standard in interim regulations known as the "Marking Rules" (19 CFR Part 102) through the use in large part of a "change in tariff classification approach." Customs has proposed to utilize these interim regulations for importations from all countries. See 59 FR 141 (January 3, 1994) and 60 Fed. Reg. 22312 (May 5, 1995). II. The Costs and Benefits of an "All or Virtually All" Standard Compared to Other Standards A. Impact on Domestic Commerce The Commission seeks comment on the relative costs and benefits of an "all or virtually all" standard and a lower threshold, such as 50 percent. Customs' country of origin determinations based on the substantial transformation test, while influenced by an article's source of components, is not based on any percentage threshold. Customs only uses value-content criteria for purposes of some of its preferential tariff treatment programs, such as the Generalized System of Preferences, and only after it has been determined that the article is "a product" of the beneficiary developing country. It is Customs opinion that any percentage threshold basis for allowing "Made in USA" claims would be inconsistent with current Customs' practices, and practically unenforceable, especially when different percentage thresholds must be verified for markings such as "Made in USA of domestic and imported parts," "Made in USA with at least 70 percent U.S. parts and labor," "The most U.S. content of any leading brand," or "Assembled in USA." Additionally, percentage threshold limits would be in conflict with Customs' current country of origin marking requirements for U.S. articles assembled abroad. For example, under section 10.22 of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 10.22), products which are assembled abroad from U.S. fabricated components and are eligible for a partial duty exemption under subheading 9802.00.80, Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS), must be marked with the country of assembly as the country of origin, even when the assembled article is composed of 100 percent U.S. components and even when such assembly operation would not be considered as resulting in a substantial transformation of such components if they were not of U.S. origin. To eliminate the confusion created by the origin marking mandated by section 10.22, Customs has proposed the removal of this section so that the determination of the country of origin of all assembled articles would be made under the substantial transformation test (which includes the Part 102 rules). With the removal of 19 CFR 10.22, Customs proposes to allow the phrase "Assembled in" to be considered as synonymous with the country of origin indicators "Made in" or "Product of" when the country of origin of the article is the country of assembly. B. Impact on International Trade The conflict between the FTC's evaluation of "Made in USA" claims with the textile and apparel rules of origin under Section 334 of the Uruguay Rounds Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3592) is especially evident as it applies to certain textile articles, such as comforters, handkerchiefs, bed linen, scarves and bandannas. Customs has determined that pursuant to section 334, the country of origin of these articles is the origin where the fabric is made, not where the articles are assembled. See 19 CFR 102.21. It is also Customs' position that section 334 is applicable for determining country of origin for marking under 19 U.S.C. 1304. Therefore, if, for example, down comforter fabric of Chinese origin is imported into the U.S., to be stuffed with down and assembled in the U.S. into a finished down comforter (classified in subheading 9404.90 (HTSUS)), the origin of the comforter would be China, the origin of the fabric, and, accordingly, Customs would require that the comforter be marked to indicate "China" as the country of origin. We recognize that Customs' position regarding the application of section 334 rules of origin to the country of origin marking requirements under section 1304 has led to some apparent conflicts between Customs' and the FTC's origin labeling requirements for certain textile goods. Prior to the change in the origin rules by the enactment of section 334, Customs had considered the assembly of down comforters (including filling of down) to represent a substantial transformation of imported fabric, and when such assembly operation was performed in the U.S., the assembler was considered for purposes of the marking requirements under section 1304 as the ultimate purchaser of the imported fabric. We are advised that in the foregoing instances, the FTC had allowed the assembled down comforters to be labeled, "Made in the U.S. from imported fabric." In a recent congressional inquiry on behalf of a manufacturer of down comforters, Customs has been requested to allow the marking "Comforter Assembled in USA; Fabric Made in China," for down comforters imported after the effective date of the section 334 rules. However, since Customs will allow the phrase "Assembled in" to be considered as synonymous with "Made in" if the proposal to remove section 10.22 is adopted as a final rule, the marking proposed above will not be an acceptable origin marking under 19 U.S.C. 1304. Nevertheless, Customs is considering alternative origin markings, which would satisfy sections 334 and 19 U.S.C. 1304 and, at the same time, allow some kind of reference to the U.S. processing that is performed. The cost of an "all or virtually all" standard as opposed to the substantial transformation test is also exemplified for products of the U.S. returned to the U.S. duty-free under subheading 9801.00.10, HTSUS. If these articles do not satisfy the "all or virtually all" standard, but are marked "Made in USA" upon exportation from the U.S. as required by Canadian Customs for example, not only must separate sets of inventory be maintained for export purposes, but if these articles are returned to the U.S., they may be subject to detention or seizure for possible violation of 15 U.S.C. 1124 since they do not qualify to be marked "Made in USA" for purposes of the FTC. Therefore, the more difficult it is for Customs to verify a "Made in the USA" claim, the less enforceable such a marking becomes. For your further information on this issue, Customs has been informed that Canadian Customs accepts various forms of marking for goods of NAFTA parties, such as "Made in USA," "Produced in USA," "Assembled in USA," or "Made in USA with foreign components," unlike importations from non-NAFTA countries. The Commission suggests an option to permit sellers to place unqualified labels on products, such as "USA" for purposes of foreign markets as long as sellers disclose the foreign content to U.S. consumers by other means. However, U.S. Customs has been informed that while Canadian Customs accepts various forms of marking for goods imported from NAFTA parties, it is not acceptable to mark the good "U.S." or "USA" as this is considered misleading. C. The Costs and Benefits of Adopting the Country-of-Origin Rules of Other U.S. Government Agencies It should be noted that Customs utilizes the substantial transformation test not only for country of origin marking purposes under 19 U.S.C. 1304, but also for determining a country of origin for purposes of tariffs, quotas, enforcement of economic sanctions, etc. Additionally, under 19 CFR 177.21 et seq., which implement Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511 et seq.), Customs issues country of origin advisory rulings and final determinations on whether an article is or would be a product of a designated foreign country or instrumentality for the purpose of granting waivers of certain "Buy America" restrictions in U.S. law or practice for products offered for sale to the U.S. Government. As the Commission notes, the Buy American Act requires federal agencies only to purchase such products that are mined or produced in the U.S., or that are at least 50 percent domestic in value. However, Customs applies the same substantial transformation test used for determining country of origin for marking and other Customs purposes in making the advisory rulings for "Buy America" restrictions. The Commission also states that the Buy American Act is not concerned with advertising or labeling, and its definition does not appear to be tailored to consumer perception of "Made in USA" claims. However, it is Customs opinion that while 19 U.S.C. 1304 does not specifically cover advertising and consumer perception, this law does require the ultimate purchaser to know the country of origin of a foreign article which inherently appears to be dependent upon consumer perception. III. Issues Regarding the Computation of Domestic Content A. A Proposed Formula for Measuring Domestic Content The Commission suggests a formula for measuring the domestic content to substantiate "Made in USA" claims. The percentage would be computed by (i) dividing domestic content (purchase cost of U.S. parts + cost of U.S. labor and direct overhead in final assembly) by (ii) total product cost. In identifying what constitutes U.S. parts, the Commission discusses computations of all stages of production. In Customs opinion, this approach would be difficult to administer, especially if documents from numerous suppliers are necessary to establish the domestic content. Furthermore, it would be difficult to verify the correctness of the cost figures. A one- or two-step approach may be a simpler method for making "Made in USA" claims. For example, if under the substantial transformation test an imported good becomes a product of the U.S. with a new name, character and use different from that possessed by the good prior to processing, a marking "Made in USA with foreign components," or "Assembled in USA" would indicate to the consumer that the article is made with foreign components. However, if an unqualified "Made in USA" claim is to be made, Customs suggests that a system be instituted such as that used for several of Customs' preferential duty programs, such as the Generalized System of Preferences or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act. Under these programs, an article may be imported duty-free into the U.S. if it is a "product of" the beneficiary developing country and a 35 percent value-content requirement is satisfied. The full value of the materials imported into the beneficiary developing country and used to produce the finished article may be counted toward the 35 percent value-content requirement if the materials undergo what is known in customs law as a "double substantial transformation." Under this standard, foreign materials can be considered "materials produced in the beneficiary country," when those materials are substantially transformed in that country into a new or different article of commerce which is then used in the production or manufacture of yet another new or different article (the final product). If the FTC applies this method, the true proportion of U.S. labor would be considered if this is deemed important. If you have any further questions, please contact Sandra Gethers, Chief, Special Classification and Marking Branch, at (202) 482-6980. Sincerely, Stuart P. Seidel Assistant Commissioner Office of Regulations and Rulings	en
all-txt-docs	415049	CHAP. I.} OR SAINT DOMINGO. 15 The French division, though infinitely less ex- tensive than the Spanish part, and not containing a third of the whole island, has been considered the most valuable spot in the western world. The Spanish division however has greater natural re- sources, and affords greater facilities for agricultural operations: but the very extraordinary exertions of the French planter in the culture of the soil, com- pensated for the want of those advantages possessed by their Spanish neighbours, who, more indolently disposed, relied on the produce of their mines, which afforded, as they imagined, greater local riches than those which could be obtained from either agricul- ture or commerce, forgetting that these alone fur- nish the wealth which can render any country really and permanently prosperous and great. It appears from every authority, that the first colony established here by the French, was settled in the sixteenth century, having been attracted thither by the Buccaneers, who had previously ob- tained a footing in the island from excursions which they often made from Tortuga, for the purpose of hunting the bulls of the Spaniards. These hardy and predatory warriors attracted the French, who supplied them with such necessaries as they required, and even sent them many settlers, with arms and implements for defence and labour. The extreme fertility of the country invited them to make some efforts to gain a permanent footing in it, and by	en
converted_docs	555871	ATTACHMENT J-24 EV CREW SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS The following groundrules apply for establishing equipment quantities to support the EV crew. a\. Sufficient quantities of SSA equipment will be provided by NASA to assure a 90 percent probability of fitting an EV crew population of 101 members with HUTs and an 80 percent probability of fitting the same population with the other sized SSA equipment. In addition one (1) spare HUT of each size is to be provided. Spares for the other SSA sized equipment are to be selected by NASA on a non-dedicated basis. b\. NASA will provide sufficient flight SSA equipment to support the following flight and crew familiarization altitude chamber runs requirements. 1\) A flight rate of up to one (1) flight per month. 2\) Flight equipment quantities to support the same size items on three (3) back-to-back flights. 3\) A crew familiarization altitude chamber run rate of up to one (1) per month will be accommodated. c\. Hard upper torso (HUT) usage for flights are governed by the following: 1\) Extra-small HUTs are not to be provided or considered. 2\) A maximum of one (1) small HUT may be flown on any given flights. 3\) There is no restriction on the flight use or mix of uses for the remaining HUT sizes (Med., Large, and Extra Large). d\. EV crewmembers are to be identified a minimum of twelve (12) months prior to the launch of their assigned flights. e\. Glove quantities are to be based on the following: 1\) Twenty-five percent of the EV crewmembers will "re-fly" and have acceptable flight gloves. 2\) Seventy percent of the remaining 75 percent will require custom gloves consisting of one pair for training and one pair for flight. 3\) Backup gloves, if required, will be drawn on a best fit basis from existing inventories. f\. A quantity of 12 each, or pairs as applicable, of non-sized class I flight items and nine (9) each, or pairs, of class III WETF items as a minimum will be maintained in FEPC inventories. g\. NASA will provide EMU training equipment to support eight (8) training events in two (2) days at JSC with two (2) shifts between uses. Quantities will be available to obtain the same probability of fit as required for flight equipment. h\. No dedicated spares are to be provided for training equipment. i\. The usage rules of flight HUTs also apply to training HUTs. j\. A minimum of one (1) of each size will be provided as a sizing verification unit. --------------------- ------- ------- -- ----------- ----------- ----------- HUT \- XS \- \- 7 S 3 3 20 M 5 4 56 L 7 7 17 XL 5 3 UPPER ARM 3 SS 2 2 4 S 2 2 76 L 9 9 17 XL 5 3 LOWER ARM 5 SS 3 2 2 SXS 2 2 0 SL 0 0 10 LXS 4 3 51 LS 9 8 32 LL 6 5 LOWER TORSO \- 14S \- 1 \- 14L \- 1 51 15S 9 8 18 15L 5 4 22 16S 5 5 9 16L 3 2 BOOTS 18 S 4 4 82 L 9 9 BOOT INSERT 2 SS 2 2 7 SM 2 3 9 SL 4 3 35 LS 6 6 33 LM 6 6 14 LL 4 3 BSC 7 14\* 3 2 20 15\* 5 4 56 16\* 7 7 17 17\* 5 3 WST BRG -\Y-LIP 69 15\ 11 \8 SEE NOTE 31 16\ 6 \5 LCVG 11 XSL 4 3 16 SS 4 4 13 TML 4 3 27 MS 5 5 21 LL 5 4 12 XLL 3 3 --------------------- ------- ------- -- ----------- ----------- ----------- NOTE: ONLY THE CLASS III WAIST BEARINGS GET A Y-LIP SEAL; THE CLASS I WAIST BEARING ARE A DUAL-SEAL. --------------------- ------- -------- -- ----------- ----------- ----------- WAIST ASSEMBLY 3\ 15XS14 2 1 3 15S14 2 1 4 15M14 2 1 0 15L14 0 0 9\* 15XS15 1 3 \1 \"G\" ONLY 9 15S15 4 2 8 15M15 4 2 0 15L15 0 1 NOTE: DIST.% FOR 18\ 15S16 2 4 WAIST ASSY. 31 15M16 6 5 EXCEED 100% 12 15L16 4 1 DUE TO 1\"G\"/ 2\* 15S17 1 1 ZERO \"G\" RQMTS 3 15M17 2 2 4 15L17 2 1 2 16S15 2 1 2 16M15 2 1 0 16L15 0 1 3\* 16S16 1 2 9 16M16 4 3 7 16L16 2 1 1 16XL16 1 1 0 16S17 0 1 3 16M17 2 1 8 16L17 3 1 0 16XL17 0 1 BLVD 1 XXS 1 1 7 XS 3 3 15 S 4 4 40 M 6 6 36 L 6 6 1 XL 1 1 CCA 6 XS 3 2 10 S 3 4 30 M 6 5 33 L 6 6 21 XL 4 4 0 XXL 0 1 NONSIZED ITEMS \- N/A 12 9 --------------------- ------- -------- -- ----------- ----------- -----------	en
markdown	758077	# Presentation: 758077 ## Slide 1 ## Implementation of the Federal Perkins Loan Program Master Promissory Note (MPN) Gail McLarnon U.S. Department of Education Ralph Hosterman Penn State University Gail McLarnon U.S. Department of Education Ralph Hosterman Penn State University ## Implementation of the Federal Perkins Loan MPN - This presentation covers Department of Education policy on the use of the Federal Perkins Loan Program Master Promissory Note (MPN) and the implementation of a multi-year, electronic MPN at Penn State University ## ED Policy Guidance on Perkins MPN - Spring 2002 Negotiated Rulemaking provided for use of Perkins MPN - Section 674.2 – Definitions - Modified definition of “making of a loan” – “when the institution makes the first disbursement of a loan to a student for an award year - Add definition of “MPN” – “A promissory note under which the borrower may receive loans for a single award year of multiple award years ## ED Policy Guidance on Perkins MPN - Spring 2002 Negotiated Rulemaking - Sec. 674.16 – Making and disbursing loans - Modified Sec. 674.16(d) to require “legally enforceable promissory note for each loan” and eliminated requirement for the borrower’s signature each award year - Added Sec. 674.16(d)(3) – conditions under which Perkins MPN expires ## ED Policy Guidance on Perkins MPN - Spring 2002 Negotiated Rulemaking - Sec. 674.19 – Fiscal procedures & records - Sec. 674.19(e)(4) requires an institution to electronically store e-signed notes and be able to retrieve an electronically stored note in a coherent format - Requires institution to return the original or a true and exact copy of note marked “paid in full” or otherwise notify borrower in writing that the loan is paid in full ## ED Policy Guidance on Perkins MPN - NPRM – August 6, 20002 - _[http://ifap.ed.gov/fregisters/FR0806200205.html](http://ifap.ed.gov/fregisters/FR0806200205.html)_ - Final regulations – November 1, 2002 - _[http://ifap.ed.gov/fregisters/FR1101200203.html](http://ifap.ed.gov/fregisters/FR1101200203.html)_ - Effective date July 1, 2003 ## ED Policy Guidance on Perkins MPN - MPN approved by OMB-June 12, 2003 - Expiration June 30, 2006 - MPN Posted to IFAP website - Dear Colleague CB-03-11, July 17, 2003 - _[http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/CB0311.html](http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/CB0311.html)_ - Dear Colleague CB-03-13, Aug. 17, 2003 (electronic MPN) - _[http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/CB0313.html](http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/CB0313.html)_ ## ED Policy Guidance on Perkins MPN - Implementation Guidance - Dear Colleague CB-03-14, Aug. 8, 2003 - _[http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/CB0314.html](http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/CB0314.html)_ - Replaces current note after transition - Implementation Dates: - Optional for new loans on or after 7/1/03 - Required for new loans made on or after 11/1/04 ## ED Policy Guidance on Perkins MPN - Perkins MPN does not change the lending process: - Determine borrower eligibility - Ensure a signed prom note covers loan - Provide loan disclosures/notices under Sec. 674.16(a) and Sec. 668.165(a) (can be provided electronically through a secure website) - Disburse, service and collect ## ED Policy Guidance on Perkins MPN - Options for MPN Use: - School chooses annual or multi-year use - Annual note: Borrower signs once each year for all loans made that year - Multi-year: Borrower signs on MPN for all loans made until the note expires - Borrower must notify school in writing if s/he wants no further loans under multi-year MPN ## ED Policy Guidance on Perkins MPN - MPN Expiration Provisions-No further loans made under MPN after earliest of: - The date school receives borrower’s written request for no further MPN loans - 12 months after signature date if no disbursement has been made under MPN - 10 years after signature date or date of school’s receipt of MPN ## ED Policy Guidance on Perkins MPN - MPN format and text cannot be changed [except bracketed text] - MPN requires subsidiary record of disbursements and adjustments - Use of electronic MPN in accordance with ED E-Signature Standards - Dear Colleague GEN-01-06, May 2001 - _[http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/gen0106.html](http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/gen0106.html)_ ## Implementation of the Federal Perkins Loan Program Master Promissory Note Ralph Hosterman Penn State University Ralph Hosterman Penn State University ## Standards for Electronic Signature - Document – “Standards for Electronic Signature” (revised as of July 25, 2001) - http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/attachments/gen0106Arevised.pdf ## Standards for Electronic Signature - Worked with the following Penn State offices in obtaining policies & procedures to determine if PSU met the standards: - Admissions - Center for Academic Computing (CAC) - Office of Student Aid - Registrar - Security Office - Student ID Office - Office IT Staff - Central IT Staff - Internal Auditors ## Standards for Electronic Signature - Gathered information and policies and procedures from offices in regards to the process of verifying or changing Name, SSN, and date of birth - Admissions - Registrar - Office of Student Aid ## Penn State Authentication Process - Student ID Card process: - Freshmen Testing – students directed to Student ID Office - Must bring photo ID (Driver’s License, Passport) - Students asked for social security number - Photo is taken for the Student ID. Image is stored on database - Student issued ID. ID has photo and student’s name on front of card. Magnetic stripe on back of card has SSN embedded ## Penn State Authentication Process - Computer Access Account Process - Student is directed to computer access account signature station - Student swipes Student ID and is prompted to enter date of birth - If date of birth matches our database the student is prompted to sign an agreement accepting electronic services and agreeing to computer usage and security policies - Not to share their password - Notify officials if password is compromised - Consequences if policy is violated - The agreement and signature is electronically imaged - The student is issued a User ID and Password ## Perkins Master Promissory Notes Signed - 2003-04 ## Mainframe Changes - Awarding – Future semester awards for students who signed master prom note - eLion Student Aid Summary – Direct students to electronic signature web-site - Promissory Note creation process: - To not create paper notes for students - To invite students with Penn State accounts to choose method of signing (Paper/e-Note) - To create Master Promissory Notes (MPN) for Perkins - Manually print paper notes for students choosing not to sign electronically - Control reports revised for updating student signature ## Mainframe Changes - MPN Dates - Created - Signed - Expires - MPN expiration procedure - Cancel Create Date - Loan Disclosure Notice - Regulation 34 CFR 674.16(a) - Notification of Disbursement – Regulation 34 CFR 668.165(a) - Loan Disbursement (System disbursements and manual disbursements) - Loan Decreases/Cancels - Paid in Full/Assignments – (Future enhancement) ## Penn State eSignature Perkins Master Promissory Note Process ## Awarding / Aid Summary - Awarding procedure reviews MPN Signed date and Expiration date - MPN is signed and expiration date is greater than current date + 3 months - award is processed for disbursement - MPN is not signed or expiration date is less than current date + 3 months - award is processed for note creation. ## Loan Disclosure Notice - email sent to students directing them to web-site (different: signed MPN / unsigned MPN) - Web-site provides information specific to their Perkins Loan –Regulation 34 CFR 674.16(a) - Student Loan Disclosure Statement - Repayment Schedule ## Note Creation - Nightly procedure extracts loan information - Create date updated - Email invitation generated ## Promissory Note Invitation - e-mail sent to students with an active Penn State Access Account inviting them to sign their promissory note electronically - Student notified to have specific information ready before beginning the e-Note process: - Borrower’s permanent address, e-mail address, and phone number - Borrower’s drivers license number - Names, addresses, and phone numbers of two other adults, etc. ## e-Sign Web Application - http://www.studentloans.psu.edu/pdf/enote.pdf ## Comments, Feedback and Contact Information - Name: Ralph Hosterman - Phone: (814) 865-4924 - Fax: (814) 865-6535 (fax) - Email: _[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])_ ## Comments, Feedback and Contact Information - Name: Gail McLarnon - Phone: (212) 219-7048 - Fax: (212) 502-7874 - Email: _[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])_	en
converted_docs	915773	![](media/image1.png){width="7.8125in" height="0.7291666666666666in"} [John Ridgely III,]{.underline} 1911-1990 *Financial and Legal Documents* *Subseries: Legal Papers* 1975 Court Summons re: cutting grass Box 3, Folder 41 HAMP MS 1 Ridgely Family Papers *Journals, Diaries & Scrapbooks* 1990 John Ridgely III/Memorial Service Guest Book Box 1, Folder 14 HAMP MS 2 John (III) & Lillian Ketcham Ridgely *Land & Property Records* *Subseries: Tax Documents* 1964 Tax Assessments of various lots Box 1, Folder 4 HAMP MS 2 John (III) & Lillian Ketcham Ridgely *Subseries: Appraisals* 1965 Hampton Company/Real Estate Appraisal Box 1, Folder 3 HAMP MS 2 John (III) & Lillian Ketcham Ridgely *Subseries: Deeds & Grants* 1975 Deed of J. Ridgely III, et al. to SPMA FC1-4/21 HAMP MS 1 Ridgely Family Papers *Correspondence* 1941-45 Outgoing to John Ridgely, Jr. FC2-5/202 HAMP MS 1 Ridgely Family Papers 1944 Outgoing to David S. and Dorothy Ridgely FC2-5/203 HAMP MS 1 1944-45, 1980 Incoming and Outgoing Box 2, Folder 21 HAMP MS 2 John (III) & Lillian Ketcham Ridgely 1959 Correspondence from J. Elmer Weisheit re: analysis of FC1-4/47 HAMP MS 1 Ridgely Family Papers Will of John Ridgely, Jr. *Personal Papers and Items* 1860-1955 Stamp Collection (International) SW4/4-4/6 HAMP MS 2 John (III) & Lillian Ketcham Ridgely 1941-49 Military Service Records Box 3, Folders 5-12 HAMP MS 2 1943-45 ca. WWII Souvenirs - Pacific Theatre, Occupied Japan Box 3, Folder 36 HAMP MS 2 1944-45 ca. WWII Souvenirs: American propaganda leaflet in SW4/4-11 HAMP MS 2 John (III) & Lillian Ketcham Ridgely Japanese 1945 Military Documents Box 16, Folders HAMP MS 1 Ridgely Family Papers 18-19 1945 ca. Personal Writings, Notes Box 3, Folder 15 HAMP MS 2 John (III) & Lillian Ketcham Ridgely 1960-90 Identification Documents Box 3, Folder 4 HAMP MS 2 *Printed Material* 1950-59 Newspapers: Hampton clippings Box 8, Folder 1 HAMP MS 1 Ridgely Family Papers *Historic Research* 1910-20 Manuscripts, Notes: Hampton/Ridgely Family History Box 3, Folder 16 HAMP MS 2 John (III) & Lillian Ketcham Ridgely	en
markdown	510294	# Presentation: 510294 ## Online Systems Tutorial - 24-Jan-2003 - S. Fuess ## Contents - Online subsystems - Complicated figure, but useful for reference - Node, disk assignments - Accounts - Access controls - Monitoring - Big Brother - Web servers - Control Room consoles ## Online subsystems – a network view d0olcluster d0ola d0olb d0olc JBOD buffer disks: * */buffer/bufNNN RAID disks: * */home * */online * */projects * *etc Control Room d0olNN Monitoring d0olNN to FCC Level 3 d0lxNNN Controls d0ol<det>NN Ethernet Switch s-d0-dab2cr-online Readout d0sbcNNN Ethernet Switch s-d0-dab2cr-l3 ACNET gateway d0olgwNN MCH Ethernet Switch s-d0-ol-1 MCH Ethernet Switches s-d0-dabmchN to Offline Router Firewall Terminal Servers t-d0-mchN Subnet Key: - Interactive * *Level 2 * *Level 3 * *Event * *SAM * *Beams * *Offline ACNET X-terms Ethernet Switch Beams net Level 2 d0l2alphaNN MCH Ethernet Switch s-d0-ol-2 - Direct Attached - Or SAN disks ## Assignments - Node assignments_[http://www-d0online.fnal.gov/www/sys/operations/node_assignments.txt](http://www-d0online.fnal.gov/www/sys/operations/node_assignments.txt)_ - Disk assignments_[http://www-d0online.fnal.gov/www/sys/operations/disk_assignments.txt](http://www-d0online.fnal.gov/www/sys/operations/disk_assignments.txt)_ ## Accounts - Two important factors: - Authorization – that an account is present for a user on a node - Granted to any DO user with need - Access to group account may be sufficient - Authentication – that one can demonstrate knowledge of a password - The only allowed mode of access originating from outside of the Online system is by - Kerberos, for UNIX systems - NTLMv2 for Windows systems - eventually – Windows users should be aware of pending changes ## Accounts - On the “interactive” (Control Room, Monitoring, Host) systems - Authorization - Local accounts for system use only - NIS accounts for personal and group users - NIS domain server is d0olcluster - Personal accounts are “locked out” from non-Kerberos authentication - Authentication - Only root account has a local password - Kerberos .k5login access for remote logins - Personal Kerberos credentials (i.e. [email protected]) - Group NIS accounts - NIS password only for local logins - Kerberos .k5login access for remote logins - Personal Kerberos credentials (i.e. [email protected]) - Keytab Kerberos credentials (i.e. d0cap/d0/[email protected]) - Personal NIS accounts - Kerberos password for local logins (on most nodes) - Kerberos or .k5login access for remote logins - If a .k5login exists, then must include own credentials ## Accounts - On the “DAQ” (Readout, Level 2, Level 3) systems - Authorization - Local accounts for system, DAQ, and expert users - Authentication - Only root account has (should have) a local password - Kerberos .k5login access for remote logins - Personal Kerberos credentials (i.e. [email protected]) - DAQ local accounts - Kerberos .k5login access for remote logins - Personal Kerberos credentials (i.e. [email protected]) - Keytab Kerberos credentials (i.e. d0run/d0/[email protected]) - Expert user local accounts - Kerberos or .k5login access for remote logins - Personal Kerberos credentials (i.e. [email protected]) ## Accounts - On the Controls systems - Authorization - Local accounts for expert users - Authentication - Expert user local accounts - Local password for local login - No Kerberos! Remote logins are not allowed, and blockedby Online router ## Accounts - Some useful commands - To check group account access, e.g. - cat /home/d0cap/.k5login - To see if a user has an NIS account, e.g. - ypcat passwd \| grep fuess - To remotely log in to group account on an Online node, e.g. - kinit fuess - ssh –l d0cap d0ol04 - To log in to another node from a group account, e.g. as d0run - setup d0online - d0ssh –l d0cap d0ol04 ## Access controls - Essential components of the computer security plan for the Online system are that: - The detector can operate with the Online system completely isolated from the external world - Well-defined isolation points - Can isolate from Offline, FCC, or both - Local versions of essential services - DNS server - KDC - Sufficient space to buffer event data for > 24 hours - Network access to the Online system is tightly controlled - Enforced by router module in Online switch acting as a “firewall” - Policy is “default deny” All this leads to functional limitations and operational confusion... ## Access controls - Access lists are set for each VLAN (subnet) boundary for each direction of network packets - Format example: - [permit\|deny] protocol source-host [eq port] destination-host [eq port] - “Incoming” examples: - permit tcp any any eq 22 permit tcp host odsoem host d0ola eq 1521 - “Outgoing” examples: - permit ip any any reflect allow-231-out ## Access controls - “Reflective” access - Allowed outgoing packets create a temporary hole in the firewall, allowing return traffic between the specific node/port pairs - Lifetime of 5 minutes - Lifetime reset on each outgoing packet - Normal example: Online access to Offline web page - Web client on dynamically assigned port  port 80 on web server - Opens hole for return traffic - Port 80 from web server  web client port - Each new request “reopens” the hole - Note: automatically updating page will work, as tcp acknowledgement packet will reset timer ## Access controls - “Reflective” access (cont’d) - Catch #1: telnet from Online to Offline - telnet client on dynamically assigned port  port 23 on Offline server - Opens hole for return traffic - Port 23 from Offline server  telnet client port - Allowed within timeout period for return traffic - If > 5 minutes inactivity, then initiate activity from Online client side - Works, opens new hole - If > 5 minutes inactivity, but then new activity from Offline server side - Blocked! Hole has expired - For example, output from long-running program on Offline server * *Solution: there is none ## Access controls - “Reflective” access (cont’d) - Catch #2: telnet from Offline to Online - Offline telnet client on dynamically assigned port  port 23 on Online server - Explicitly allowed in Access Control Lists (ACLs) - Port 23 from Online server  Offline telnet client port - Explicitly allowed in ACLs - Start X application on Online server:Online X client on dynamically assigned port  port 6000 on Offline X server - Works, opens new hole for return traffic - Port 6000 from Offline X server  Online X client port - Allowed within timeout period for return traffic - If > 5 minutes inactivity, then initiate activity from Offline (X server) side - Blocked! Hole has expired - For example, attempting input into GUI * Solution: tunnel X through an ssh connection* ## Access controls - “Reflective” access (cont’d) - Recommendation: ssh from Offline to Online (configured to forward X!) - Offline ssh client on dynamically assigned port  port 22 on Online server - Explicitly allowed in Access Control Lists (ACLs) - Port 22 from Online server  Offline ssh client port - Explicitly allowed in ACLs - Start X application on Online server:Online X client on dynamically assigned port  port 6010 on OnlineAccepted by Online sshd daemon, forwarded to Offline ssh client port - Through explicitly allowed ssh hole already in use - Received by Offline ssh client, forwarded to Offline port 6000 (X server) - All subsequent X communication tunneled through open ssh hole - sshd server port 22 - ssh client dynamic port - X client GUI - X server Display - Online - Offline ## Access controls - Some useful commands - To see if X forwarding is on by default (UNIX) - cat /etc/ssh_config - Should see - ForwardX11 yes - To see if X forwarding is on for own account (UNIX) - cat ~/.ssh/config - Should see - ForwardX11 yes - To check that X is forwarded: - Echo $DISPLAY - Should see the remote node with a server number 10 or higher ## Monitoring – Big Brother - Big Brother main display * *click buttons for more info - http://www-d0online/bb ## Monitoring – Big Brother - Summary display * * * *click button ## Monitoring – Big Brother - Big Brother larrd display * *CPU, memory, disk usage ## Monitoring – Big Brother - Big Brother topp display - Warning: all BB updates are synchronized, so often report themselves as current major user! ## Monitoring – Big Brother - Big Brother disk display * *Local disk usage * *See d0ola/b/c for cluster disks ## Monitoring – Big Brother - Big Brother procs display ## Web Servers - There are several “internal” and “external” servers - Internal : visible only from within Online system - External : visible from anywhere - One strategy is to mount / display from same disks - NFS mounted from a central server - Read-only mount to external servers - Appropriate ACL holes in router - Internal server: - _[http://www-d0ol.fnal.gov](http://www-d0ol.fnal.gov/)_ (alias for d0ol01) - External server: - _[http://www-d0online.fnal.gov](http://www-d0online.fnal.gov/)_ (alias for d0online2) - Other strategy is for server to act as client of internal node - Appropriate ACL holes in router - External server: - _[http://www-d0l3mon.fnal.](http://www-d0l3mon.fnal.gov/)__[gov](http://www-d0l3mon.fnal.gov/)_ ## Control Room consoles - Linux provides, by default, 6 serial and 1 graphical sessions - Graphical session is default - Switch among them with CTRL-ALT-F1 through CTRL-ALT-F7 keys - CTRL-ALT-F7 is the graphical session - X is the windowing system for Linux - Ref: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/x11.html - As opposed to Windows, where X has to be run “on top of” the native windowing system - The windowing system is the function of the “X server” - /etc/X11/X - Configured by /etc/X11/XF86config-4 - Sets properties of graphics cards and monitors - Manages the DISPLAYs - Restart with CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE – logs you out! - The X “display manager” runs to manage graphical logins - /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm - The X “window manager” runs upon login; we use fvwm - /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fvwm2 - Configured to set virtual windows, menus, etc - Restartable “hot” from menu	en
markdown	748669	# Presentation: 748669 ## FEDSIM Director - Lisa Akers Operations Director - Karen Kopf Civilian Group I - Chris Hamm - 703-605-3591 - USAID - DHS - Education - EOP - State Dept. - Transportation - FAA - DNI - CIA Civilian Group III - Pete Burr - 703-605-3593 - DOC - FDIC - GAO - Labor - NASA - SEC - USDA - OMB - Treasury Air Force Group - Bobby McKenzie - 703-306-7631 Army Group - Pattie Buel - 703-605-3596 DoD /Navy Group - Bill Kreykenbohm - 703-605-3599 Army HR Group - Jeannie Lee - 703-605-3598 Closeout Group Defense Acquisition Group - Jim Hayes* - 703-605-3600 Civilian Acquisition Group - Lisa Grant - 703-605-3589 Civilian Group II - Rian Block - 703-605-3590 - CDC - DOJ - DOI - EPA - HHS/HUD - LOC - SBA - SSA - NPS VA Acquisition PMs Acquisition PMs Planning, Performance and Operations - Karen Kopf - 703-605-3581 Program Mgmt Office Defense Sector - Ken Evans - 703-605-3595 Civilian Sector - Steve Viar - 703-605-3594 - * - Acting	en
markdown	499279	# Presentation: 499279 ## Academic Competitiveness Grant and National SMART Grant Academic Competitiveness Grant and National SMART Grant General Session Overview David Bergeron Jeff Baker Kay Jacks ## The Higher Education Reconciliation Act of 2005 (HERA) National Science and Mathematics Access to Retain Talent Grant (National SMART Grant) Academic Competitiveness Grant (ACG) ## Other Sessions - Session # 5 - ACG and National SMART Grant - Student Eligibility and Academic Year Issues - Session # 6 - ACG and National SMART Grant - Transfer Student, Secondary School Program of Academic Rigor, and Academic Major Issues. - Session # 17 - ACG and National SMART Grant - Reporting from CPS to COD. - General Session - Federal Update (Friday) ## Authorization and Funding - Funding for these programs is not subject to the annual appropriations process: - 2006-07 -- $790 million - 2007-08 -- $850 million - 2008-09 -- $920 million - 2009-10 -- $960 million - 2010-11 -- $1.01 billion Notes: Turning to Budget Reconciliation. This slide shows a brief chronology. The Conference Report passed the House by a narrow margin in December 212-206. It passed the Senate in slightly different form by a vote of 51-50 with Vice President Cheney casting the deciding vote. Since there were differences, it had to go back to the House who passed the Senate version on February 1 by an even narrower margin of . President Bush signed the bill into law on Wednesday, February 8, 2006. The law makes $39.7 billion in budget cuts to mandatory programs, including $12.7 billion from student loans. The Administration is happy with HERA—particularly with the new programs that supplement the Pell Grant Program by providing additional grant aid to the neediest students, and the reduction of excess subsidies in the FFEL program. HERA generally achieves the Administration’s key objectives for reauthorization of the HEA as set forth in last year’s budget proposals of— Making the student loan programs more efficient and cost-effective, increasing student benefits, and reducing cost to the taxpayer through expanded risk-sharing with schools and lenders. ## Rules and Regulations - Interim Final Regulations for the 2006-2007 award year published on July 3, 2006 - Invitation to comment through August 17, 2006 for possible changes for the 2007-2008 award year - Received 80 comments - Final Regulations for the 2007-2008 award year published on November 1, 2006 - Institutions may implement changes made in the final regulation for the 2006-2007 award year ## Rules and Regulations - One Significant Change: - July 3 interim final rule required student to have received a Pell Grant in the same payment period (e.g., term) to receive an ACG or National SMART Grant - November 1 final rule requires student to have received a Pell Grant sometime in the same award year to receive an ACG or National SMART Grant ## Rules and Regulations - Tentative Calendar - Sessions: December 2006, February and - March 2007 - NPRM: May 2007 - Comments: July 2007 - Final Rule: November 1, 2007 - Effective Date: July 1, 2008 with possible - early implementation - Negotiated Rulemaking for the 2008-2009 Award Year and Beyond ## Institutional Responsibilities - Institutions are responsible for implementing the new programs within the guidance provided - The Secretary recognizes that institutions will face significant challenges in implementing the programs with virtually no lead time for the 2006-2007 award year - These facts will be considered during reviews of an institution’s implementation of the programs ## Basic Program Requirements Notes: Turning to Budget Reconciliation. This slide shows a brief chronology. The Conference Report passed the House by a narrow margin in December 212-206. It passed the Senate in slightly different form by a vote of 51-50 with Vice President Cheney casting the deciding vote. Since there were differences, it had to go back to the House who passed the Senate version on February 1 by an even narrower margin of . President Bush signed the bill into law on Wednesday, February 8, 2006. The law makes $39.7 billion in budget cuts to mandatory programs, including $12.7 billion from student loans. The Administration is happy with HERA—particularly with the new programs that supplement the Pell Grant Program by providing additional grant aid to the neediest students, and the reduction of excess subsidies in the FFEL program. HERA generally achieves the Administration’s key objectives for reauthorization of the HEA as set forth in last year’s budget proposals of— Making the student loan programs more efficient and cost-effective, increasing student benefits, and reducing cost to the taxpayer through expanded risk-sharing with schools and lenders. ## Programs Are Similar in Some Ways \| Student Eligibility \| \| --- \| \| U.S. Citizen Only – Eligible Non-Citizens Do Not Qualify \| \| Pell Grant Recipient During Same Award Year \| \| Full-time Enrollment for Payment Period \| \| Enrolled in Degree Program \| \| Progression by Student Academic Year \| \| Only One Scheduled Award for Each Academic Year \| ## Separate and Distinct Programs \| ACG \| National SMART \| \| --- \| --- \| \| 1st & 2nd academic years of a two or four-year degree program \| 3rd & 4th academic years of a four-year degree program \| \| Requires completion of rigorous secondary school program of study \| Requires student to be in a designated major \| \| 1st Academic Year - $ 7502nd Academic Year - $1,300 \| 3rd Academic Year - $4,000 4th Academic Year - $4,000 \| \| GPA of at least 3.0 as of the end of 1st academic year only \| GPA of at least 3.0 at each disbursement \| ## Duration of Student Eligibility - For ACG, students are restricted to: - one grant for the student’s first academic year and - one grant for the student’s second academic year - For National SMART Grant, students are restricted to: - one grant for each of the student’s third and fourth academic years ## Academic Competitiveness Grant (ACG) Competitiveness Grant (ACG) Notes: there were differences, it had to go back to the House who passed the Senate version on February 1 by an even narrower margin of . President Bush signed the bill into law on Wednesday, February 8, 2006. The law makes $39.7 billion in budget cuts to mandatory programs, including $12.7 billion from student loans. The Administration is happy with HERA—particularly with the new programs that supplement the Pell Grant Program by providing additional grant aid to the neediest students, and the reduction of excess subsidies in the FFEL program. HERA generally achieves the Administration’s key objectives for reauthorization of the HEA as set forth in last year’s budget proposals of— Making the student loan programs more efficient and cost-effective, increasing student benefits, and reducing cost to the taxpayer through expanded risk-sharing with schools and lenders. ## ACG Eligibility Requirements - _1__st__-year students_ - Have completed a rigorous secondary school program of study after _January 1, 2006_ - May not have been previously enrolled while in high school as a _regular student_ in an ACG eligible program - _2__nd__-year students_ - Have completed a rigorous secondary school program of study after _January 1, 2005_ - Have a 3.0 or higher GPA at the end of 1st year ## Previous Enrollment Restriction for 1st- Year ACG While in High School - Not eligible if enrolled as a “regular student” in an ACG eligible program - May be eligible if not enrolled as a “regular student” in an ACG eligible program After High School - No previous enrollment restriction for a student enrolled after high school ## State-Designated Program State-submitted program An advanced or honors program established by a state and in existence for the 2004-2005 or 2005-2006 school year State Scholars Initiative (SSI) Programs - State-submitted program - An advanced or honors program established by a state and in existence for the 2004-2005 or 2005-2006 school year - State Scholars Initiative (SSI) Programs ACG: Options for Rigorous Program ## States were given the option of retaining, modifying or adding rigorous programs of study by submitting those for review by November 1, 2006 for high school seniors graduating in 2007 for 2007-08 Several states – Kentucky, Minnesota, & South Carolina -- submitted programs that will be approved Most states made no changes A few states have made minor changes to previously approved plans - Several states – Kentucky, Minnesota, & South Carolina -- submitted programs that will be approved - Most states made no changes - A few states have made minor changes to previously approved plans ACG: Options for Rigorous Program ## A set of courses as outlined in the final regulations Completion of at least two Advanced Placement (AP) courses with passing test score of 3 or two International Baccalaureate (IB) courses with passing test score of 4 - Completion of at least two Advanced Placement (AP) courses with passing test score of 3 or two International Baccalaureate (IB) courses with passing test score of 4 ACG: Documenting Rigorous Program ## ACG: Options for Rigorous ProgramSet of Courses - 4 years of English - 3 years of math - Two of which must be algebra I and above. - 3 years of science - Two of which must be biology, chemistry, or physics - 3 years of social studies - 1 year of a language other than English ## ACG: Documenting Rigorous Program - Institutions are responsible for determining the eligibility of students who self-identified on at least the standard(s) selected by the student - Institutions are encouraged to identify all eligible students based on records they have (e.g., high school transcripts, test scores) - Institutions are also responsible for determining eligibility if student informs the institution directly ## ACG: Documenting Rigorous Program - Documentation from cognizant authority - For home-schooled students, the parent or guardian is the cognizant authority - For transfer students, an institution may rely on another school’s determination that the student completed a rigorous program - NSLDS will store the data ## ACG: Grade Point Average - For second academic year, student must have a cumulative Grade Point Average (GPA) of at least 3.0 from the first academic year - GPA determined one time, after completion of first academic year - For a student who transfers after completing first academic year, the new institution *must* calculate GPA using the grades from all coursework accepted from prior schools National Science and Mathematics Access to Retain Talent Grant (National SMART Grant) Notes: there were differences, it had to go back to the House who passed the Senate version on February 1 by an even narrower margin of . President Bush signed the bill into law on Wednesday, February 8, 2006. The law makes $39.7 billion in budget cuts to mandatory programs, including $12.7 billion from student loans. The Administration is happy with HERA—particularly with the new programs that supplement the Pell Grant Program by providing additional grant aid to the neediest students, and the reduction of excess subsidies in the FFEL program. HERA generally achieves the Administration’s key objectives for reauthorization of the HEA as set forth in last year’s budget proposals of— Making the student loan programs more efficient and cost-effective, increasing student benefits, and reducing cost to the taxpayer through expanded risk-sharing with schools and lenders. ## National SMART GrantMajor Fields of Study - Computer Science - Engineering - Technology - Life Sciences - Mathematics - Physical Sciences - Designated Critical Foreign Languages - Identified by CIP* code in DCLs GEN-06-06 and - GEN-06-15 - Classification of Instructional Program ## National SMART Grant Major Fields of Study - Requires that a recipient: - Declare an eligible major; or - Show intent to declare eligible major if school policy does not yet allow a major to be declared - Institution must have a process for monitoring that the student is making progress toward completion of the program with that eligible major ## National SMART Grant Grade Point Average - For each payment period, a student must have a cumulative grade point average (GPA) of at least 3.0 that: - Includes all coursework required for degree in approved major - Is calculated through last completed payment period - Is reviewed prior to each disbursement Other * General Requirements Notes: Turning to Budget Reconciliation. This slide shows a brief chronology. The Conference Report passed the House by a narrow margin in December 212-206. It passed the Senate in slightly different form by a vote of 51-50 with Vice President Cheney casting the deciding vote. Since there were differences, it had to go back to the House who passed the Senate version on February 1 by an even narrower margin of . President Bush signed the bill into law on Wednesday, February 8, 2006. The law makes $39.7 billion in budget cuts to mandatory programs, including $12.7 billion from student loans. The Administration is happy with HERA—particularly with the new programs that supplement the Pell Grant Program by providing additional grant aid to the neediest students, and the reduction of excess subsidies in the FFEL program. HERA generally achieves the Administration’s key objectives for reauthorization of the HEA as set forth in last year’s budget proposals of— Making the student loan programs more efficient and cost-effective, increasing student benefits, and reducing cost to the taxpayer through expanded risk-sharing with schools and lenders. ## Both ProgramsGrade Point Average (GPA) & Incompletes - All coursework taken in the payment period *must* be used in the calculation of a student’s GPA - If a complete GPA for the payment period is not available, school can make an interim disbursement at its risk. Includes: - When the GPA has not yet been officially calculated for the payment period - When there is one or more grades of “incomplete” for courses taken in the payment period ## Both ProgramsNeed-Based Grants - Total of ACG/National SMART Grant, EFC, Pell, and all estimated financial aid cannot exceed cost of attendance - ACG and National SMART Grant may not replace EFC in need equation - To avoid an over-award, an institution may reduce other aid, including FSEOG, or it may reduce the ACG or National SMART Grant ## Both Programs Determining Enrollment Status - Schools must have the same policy for determining enrollment status for Pell Grants and for ACGs and National SMART Grants - Schools must use same recalculation policy, such as recalculation date (census date) that is used for Pell Grants ## Both ProgramsDisbursements - Funds maintained and disbursed according to Title IV cash management rules - Disbursements made on payment period basis - If disbursement is for a cross-over payment period, Pell Grant and ACG/National SMART Grant must be assigned to same award year - Student may not receive ACG or National SMART Grant concurrently from more than one school - All R2T4 requirements apply to the new grant programs ## Both ProgramsRemaining Eligibility - Determination of remaining eligibility based on percent of scheduled award remaining - Example: Student with second year ACG for two quarters for a total of $866 has received 66.7% of the 2006-07 scheduled award of $1,300. Student is only eligible, as a second-year student, for the remaining 33.3% of the ACG scheduled award ($434 of $1,300) *Note:* Scheduled award may be different if balance of an academic year is in a new award year ## Both ProgramsAcademic Year - Student’s progress and duration of eligibility in an eligible program is measured in Title IV academic years. A Title IV academic year is defined in the HEA to be: - A minimum of either: - Twenty-four semester credit hours, or - Thirty-six quarter credit hours, or - 900 clock hours. - *--AND--* - A minimum of 30 weeks of instructional time (26 weeks for clock-hour programs) ## Both ProgramsAcademic Year - Credit Hours - An institution’s Title IV Academic Year will often be different from the grade level progression used for most institutional purposes and for loan limits for FFEL and Direct Loans (e.g., 30 credit hours to progress from grade level 1 to grade level 2) - Regardless of how many credit hours an institution uses to define a program’s academic year, full time for an undergraduate is a minimum of: - 12 semester hour credits for a semester or trimester; - *--or--* - 12 quarter hour credits for a quarter ## Both ProgramsAcademic Year - Credit Hours - 24 Credit Hour Definition – - First Academic Year is 0 to 24 credits - Second Academic Year is 25 to 48 credits - Third Academic Year is 49 to 72 credits - Fourth Academic Year is 73 to 96 credits - 30 Credit Hour Definition - First Academic Year is 0 to 30 credits - Second Academic Year is 31 to 60 credits - Third Academic Year is 61 to 90 credits - Fourth Academic Year is 91 to 120 credits ## ACGAssociate’s Degree Second Academic Year - For the 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 Award Years - For a student enrolled in an associate’s degree program, the second academic year ends when the student has completed the credits required for completion of that academic program, as published in the institution’s official academic publications - For example, for an AA program that requires 65 credits, the second academic year is from 31 credits to 65 credits - See DCL GEN-06-18 ## National SMART GrantBachelor’s Degree Fourth Academic Year - For the 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 award years - For a student enrolled in a bachelor’s degree program, the fourth academic year ends when the student has completed the credits required for completion of that academic program, as published in the institution’s official academic publications - For example, for an BA/BS program that requires 130 credits, the fourth academic year is from 91 credits to 130 credits - See DCL GEN-06-18 ## Determine the actual number of weeks of instructional time that were included for the student to complete the number of credit hours in the institution’s Title IV academic year definition - Assume that there were 30 weeks of instructional time for each increment of credit hours that comprises the institution’s Title IV academic year definition - OR - Both ProgramsAcademic Year – Weeks of Instructional Time - For the 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 award years, an institution with a 30-week academic year and standard terms ( Formula 1) may: ## Both ProgramsAcademic Year – Weeks of Instructional Time - May exercise option - On a student by student basis; - For same student for different terms; - For transfer credits differently than for home-earned credits - NOTE: An institution must determine the actual number of weeks of instructional time for a student who requests that such a determination be made or questions whether they have completed an academic year - See DCL GEN-06-18 Business Processes Notes: there were differences, it had to go back to the House who passed the Senate version on February 1 by an even narrower margin of . President Bush signed the bill into law on Wednesday, February 8, 2006. The law makes $39.7 billion in budget cuts to mandatory programs, including $12.7 billion from student loans. The Administration is happy with HERA—particularly with the new programs that supplement the Pell Grant Program by providing additional grant aid to the neediest students, and the reduction of excess subsidies in the FFEL program. HERA generally achieves the Administration’s key objectives for reauthorization of the HEA as set forth in last year’s budget proposals of— Making the student loan programs more efficient and cost-effective, increasing student benefits, and reducing cost to the taxpayer through expanded risk-sharing with schools and lenders. ## ACG: Documenting Rigorous Program - Documentation from cognizant authority - For home-schooled students, the parent or guardian is the cognizant authority - For transfer students, an institution may rely on another school’s determination that the student completed a rigorous program - NSLDS will store the data ## ACG Applicant Self-Identification Process - Starting July 1, 2006, the Department began notifying potentially eligible students about the ACG program - Changed the FOTW to ask questions about high school and rigorous programs - Offered a “call-in option” for non-electronic filers ## ACGApplicant Self-Identification Process - After July 1, 2006 - _FOTW Filers_: Potential ACG recipients will submit the additional information at the time they complete their FAFSA - _Paper Filers_: Potential ACG recipients will receive a SAR comment directing them to the web site and toll-free number ## ACGApplicant Self-Identification Process - Student presented with questions on their high school curriculum - High school completed after January 1, 2005 - State where high school curriculum completed - Drop-down box with state designated programs - AP/IB course and test completion question - Listed courses question ## Slide 45 Notes: As you can see, the student will have a series of questions and will be prompted to respond. A student is presented with questions on their high school curriculum. Date HS curriculum completed State where HS curriculum completed Drop down box with site designated programs Advanced Placement/International Baccalaureate course and test completion question Listed course question ## ACGApplicant Self-Identification Process - As of November 10, 2006, 681,986 students have self- identified themselves - Clearly some students do not meet minimum criteria - Institutions can use other data such as age to “screen” applicants....no follow-up necessary - See Electronic Announcement dated October 24, 2006 ## ACGRecognized State Rigorous Programs Quick Reference to the Recognized State Rigorous Secondary School Programs of Study - http://www.ifap.ed.gov/eannouncements/attachments/0713HERAOperGuidanceAttachA.xls ## Slide 48 ## Slide 49 ## Slide 50 ## ACGApplicant Self-Identification Process - Results of student self-identification will be sent to all schools listed on student’s record - CPS will send ISIRs with new comment codes - If no other changes, message class will be IGAA07AP - Special “flat file” with separate message class of ED2007OP - Student-specific information available using FAA Access ## ACGApplicant Self-Identification Process - Comment codes will be provided on SAR for student and ISIR for schools - Comment codes can be found in ISIR positions 1677 to 1736 - Multiple comment codes - one for each rigorous criterion selected by student ## ACGApplicant Self-Identification Process - For 2007-2008 Award Year, a criterion will be added that approximates the date of high school graduation - For 2008-2009: - Likely, add graduation from high school question to the paper form - Same for FOTW ## Availability of Funds - Initial authorizations in GAPS and COD with Electronic Statements of Account (ESOA) on July 29, 2006 - Not like campus-based - No institutional allocation - Allocation more like Pell - Funds have been available in GAPS since early August - Separate authorization for each program ## Status of Funds - As of November 17, 2006 - 762 schools out of 3,351 schools have drawn $45 million for ACG - 484 schools out of 1,944 schools have drawn $41 million for National SMART Grant ## Data Suggest - Schools are using their own money - Institutions have not made awards - Burden too great, given time frame - Uncertainty - Are not aware they must make awards - Think they can wait until next year - Students do not qualify - Risk is we leave a large portion of $790 million designated for needy students on the table ## Reporting of Awards and Payments - Schools report student-specific awards and disbursements with COD Release 5.2, beginning December 16, 2006 - COD can handle one grade level for Direct Loans and a different academic year for new grants ## NSLDS and ACG/SMART - NSLDS will begin: - Receiving ACG/SMART Grants from COD on December 17, 2006 - Displaying ACG/SMART Grants on the web site on December 18, 2006 - Using a new file format for Transfer Student Monitoring/Financial Aid History on January 1, 2007 ## NSLDS and ACG/SMART - No ACG/SMART Grant award data will appear on 2006-2007 ISIRs - Beginning on January 1, 2007: - 2007-08 ACG/SMART Grant disbursement data will appear on 2007-08 ISIRs - ISIR Financial Aid History will display up to three ACG and three SMART Grant disbursements ## Upcoming HERA Training - Stand Up Training - More than 50 sites across country - Began late September - Will also offer a Spring series ## Other Sessions - Session # 5 - ACG and National SMART Grant – Student Eligibility and Academic Year Issues - Session # 6 - ACG and National SMART Grant – Transfer Student, Secondary School Program of Academic Rigor, and Academic Major Issues - Session # 17 - ACG and National SMART Grant – Reporting from CPS to COD - General Session - Federal Update (Friday) Words to Live By Notes: there were differences, it had to go back to the House who passed the Senate version on February 1 by an even narrower margin of . President Bush signed the bill into law on Wednesday, February 8, 2006. The law makes $39.7 billion in budget cuts to mandatory programs, including $12.7 billion from student loans. The Administration is happy with HERA—particularly with the new programs that supplement the Pell Grant Program by providing additional grant aid to the neediest students, and the reduction of excess subsidies in the FFEL program. HERA generally achieves the Administration’s key objectives for reauthorization of the HEA as set forth in last year’s budget proposals of— Making the student loan programs more efficient and cost-effective, increasing student benefits, and reducing cost to the taxpayer through expanded risk-sharing with schools and lenders. ## Aristotle – "To give away money is an easy matter and in any man's power. But to decide to whom to give it, and how large and when, for what purpose and how, is neither in every man's power nor an easy matter. Hence it is that such excellence is rare, praiseworthy and noble." *"To give away money is an easy matter and in any man's power. But to decide to whom to give it, and how large and when, for what purpose and how, is neither in every man's power nor an easy matter. Hence it is that such excellence is rare, praiseworthy and noble."* ## Baker – “If it was easy, anyone could do it.” *“**If it was easy, anyone could do it.” * ## Other Sessions - Session # 5 - ACG and National SMART Grant – Student Eligibility and Academic Year Issues - Session # 6 - ACG and National SMART Grant – Transfer Student, Secondary School Program of Academic Rigor, and Academic Major Issues - Session # 17 - ACG and National SMART Grant – Reporting from CPS to COD - General Session - Federal Update (Friday)	en
converted_docs	300803	National Irrigation Water Quality Program\ U.S. Department of the Interior Department of the Interior National Irrigation Water Quality Program Summary, FY 1986-91 Richard A. Engberg ABSTRACT The Department of the Interior National Irrigation Water Quality Program was started in 1985 in response to concerns about contamination of water, bottom sediment and biota in National Wildlife Refuges or migratory bird use areas by trace constituents or pesticides in drainwater from Department of the Interior constructed or managed irrigation projects. The\ Program has five phases. In site identification (phase 1), over 600 irrigation projects were aggregated, studied, and categorized. Thirty-one aggregated areas were selected for further study. By 1991, reconnaissance investigations (phase 2) have been or are being carried out in 25 areas and detailed studies (phase 3) have been or are being carried out in 7 areas. Planning for remediation (phase 4) studies began in 1991 for 4 areas. Remediation (phase 5) is not yet underway for any area. Through FY 1991, Program expenditures have been \$15,376,100. The Program has achieved great success owing to interbureau cooperation. Funding is provided by the Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Study teams comprised of scientists from these bureaus conduct field studies. The U.S. Geological Survey is lead agency for phases 2 and 3 studies and the Bureau of Reclamation is lead agency for phases 4 and 5 studies. Because of program structure within some of the bureaus, time schedules for phases 2 and 3 report preparation and review have slipped. Slow turn-around time for laboratory analyses contributed to delays early in the Program. Phase 1 of the Program is complete and phases 2 and 3 will be completed by about 1995. Phases 4 and 5 may continue for several years.	en
markdown	518917	# Presentation: 518917 ## caGrid Version 0.5 Architecture OverviewAdvertisement & DiscoverycaBIG Architecture Workspace Face to FaceGeorgetown UniversityAugust 16, 2005 - Scott Oster - Ohio State University - [email protected] - Manav Kher - SAIC - [email protected] ## Outline - Overview - Service Metadata - Core Services Involved - Advertisement Process - Discovery Process - Discovery Tools ## Definitions of terms Advertisement - The caGrid Grid Service Owner composes service metadata describing the service to the grid and publishes it to grid. The service metadata describes properties of the grid services that caGrid users and other grid services may query. Discovery - A caGrid Researcher specifies search criteria describing a service. The research submits the discovery request to a discovery service, which identifies a list of services matching the criteria, and returns the list to the researcher. ## Service Metadata - Service Data Elements (SDEs) represent a service’s dynamic state or metadata. - They represent the entry point for clients to introspect services to discover what they do - SDEs are described by XML Schemas and represented to clients and services as Objects or XML documents - Can be statically defined in a service’s GWSDL or dynamically created ## Object view of Service Data Elements - By describing our service metadata in XML Schema, Globus provides the tooling to create corresponding Java Beans to facilitate client and service use - Service Data is defined under a unique name, and its value can be viewed as an XML document conforming to the schema, or an appropriately populated Java Bean - Image Source: http://gdp.globus.org/gt3-tutorial/singlehtml/images/schema.png ## Service Data Attributes minOccurs : The minimum number of values that this SDE can have. maxOccurs : The maximum number of values that this SDE can have. The value of this attribute can be unbounded, which indicates an array with no size limit. modifiable : True or false. Specifies if the value of this SDE can be changed by a client. nillable : True or false. Specifies if the value of this SDE can be NULL. mutability : This attribute can have the following values: - static: The value of the SDE is provided in the GWSDL description. - constant: The value of the SDE is set when the Grid Service is created, but remains constant after that. - extendable: New elements can be added to the SDE, but not removed. - mutable: New elements can be added and removed. ## caGrid Standard Service Metadata caGrid Standard Service Metadata - Common Metadata describes generic information about service providing Cancer Center - Data Service Metadata describes the data exposed using terminology and objects from caDSR/EVS - Analytical Service Metadata describes the supported operations and their inputs and outputs using terminology and objects from caDSR/EVS Common Service Metadata Analytical Service Metadata Data Service Metadata ## Overview of Service Metadata Registration and Discovery - All services register their GSH and SDE subscription information to an Index Service - The Index Service subscribes to the standardized SDEs and aggregates their contents - Clients can discover services using a discovery API which facilitates inspection of data types - Leveraging semantic information in EVS (from which SDEs are drawn), services can be discovered by the semantics of their data types ## Services related to Service Metadata Cancer Data Standards Repository (caDSR) - caBIG projects register their data models as Common Data Elements (CDEs) which are semantically harmonized and then centrally stored and managed the caDSR Enterprise Vocabulary Services (EVS) - EVS is set of services and resources that address the need for controlled vocabulary - caDSR data models are defined by terminology in the EVS Thesaurus: a biomedical thesaurus Metathesaurus: based on NLM's Unified Medical Language System Metathesaurus supplemented with additional cancer-centric vocabulary Global Model Exchange (GME) - GME is a DNS-like data definition registry and exchange service that is responsible for storing and linking together data models in the form of XML schema. - caDSR data objects which travel the grid as XML do so in the format described in GME-registered schemas Globus Information Services (Index Service) - The Globus Information Services infrastructure provides a generic framework for aggregation of service data, a registry of Grid services, and a dynamic data-generating and indexing node, suitable for use in a hierarchy or federation of services ## caGrid Advertisement caGrid Advertisement - All caBIG services are expected to provide caGrid standard Common Service Metadata - All caBIG Analytical services are expected to provide caGrid standard Analytical Service Metadata - All caBIG Data services are expected to provide caGrid standard Data service Metadata - Services are also permitted to provide their own more specialized metadata - All caBIG services are expected to register their service “address” to the caGrid Index Service which will aggregate their standard metadata ## caGrid Deployer - caGrid provides a graphical deployer that facilitates the deployment of caBIG services - Facilitates the creation of caGrid standard metadata for the type of service being deployed - Automatically configures the service to maintain registration with the caGrid Index Service ## caGrid Deployer – Common Service Metadata - The deployer prompts the developer to enter the information needed to populate the Common Service Metadata - The deployer uses this information to populate a template of the metadata - The appropriate service configuration files are then configured to create and publish this metadata ## caGrid Deployer – caDSR Metadata - The deployer displays a tree view of the caDSR domain model selected for the service (for data services) - The developer can select a subset of the model - The deployer uses this information to populate a template of the metadata - The appropriate service configuration files are then configured to create and publish this metadata ## caGrid Deployer – Advertisement - The deployer allows the developer to select the Index Service to register to, defaults to the caGrid registry - The appropriate service configuration files are then configured to register to the specified Index Service and specify the previously configured service metadata ## caGrid Advertisement - caGrid deployer configures underlying components through the use of configuration files - Later talks will detail the specifics - Registry Publish Provider - Service Data Provider Manager - Notification Source Provider ## Discovery Process - Clients formulate a query over the caGrid standard metadata - Examples: - “Find me all the services from Cancer Center X” - “Which Analytical services take Genes as input?” - “Find me all the services with some metadata mentioning the string ‘macromolecules’” - This query is sent to the caGrid Index Service which returns the Grid Service Handle (address) of the services satisfying the query. - The client can then further interrogate the satisfying services by asking for all of their metadata or service descriptions - Finally the client invokes the desired services as appropriate ## Discovery and Metadata API - Globus provides the basic APIs necessary to query the Index Service and ask services for their metadata. - caGrid provides a Discovery and Metadata API to make this easier to use and to specialize it for caGrid standard metadata - Provides Java Bean representation of service metadata and higher level discovery methods such as discoverServicesByConceptCode(String code) - Details are provided in a later talk ## Future Structures from the Building Blocks - The semantic data registration, data type registration, standard service metadata aggregation and registration, and service interface description provide the building blocks for interesting higher level applications and services - Workflow/Data Pathway Discovery - Create a graph of potential data flow scenarios from one service to another from a starting data type (type matching) - Identify Semantically compatible Services - Identify services which work with the same EVS concepts, but use different data models (create a data mapping, prompt for harmonization) - Dynamic Graphical Invocation - Starting with an EVS concept, find Data Services providing data types based on that concept, query for data from one, find Analytical Services operating on that data type, request the WSDL/XSD of the operation, create a GUI dynamically from that information to fill out the additional parameters, invoke the service ## EVS Based Discovery on the Grid - EVS (NCI Thesaurus) can be queried through caCORE API - Component Interaction Diagram ## Discovery Tools - Graphical User Interfaces built on discovery API facilitate end user discovery - Result in a list of services which can be used externally or invoked directly from the tools - Discovery Web Application (no client download necessary) - Part of the caGrid Browser - Discovery Client Application - Part of Grid Portal client application ## Discovery Web Portal - Web application provides user interface for Discovery API methods, and provides ability to search multiple fields - Provides EVS concept discovery - Discovered services can be collected in a “Service Cart” for future use - Standard caGrid metadata can be viewed - Data Services can be queried - Integrated with Security ## Discovery Client Application - Java Swing Application provides user interface for all Discovery API methods - Discovered services are presented in a list - Service data can be browsed with custom renderers for standard caGrid metadata - Data Services can be queried - Integrated with security	en
converted_docs	195460	![](media/image1.png){width="5.96875in" height="0.41944444444444445in"} Top of Form ## Complete Summary #### GUIDELINE TITLE Cardiovascular health promotion in the schools: a statement for health and education professionals and child health advocates from the Committee on Atherosclerosis, Hypertension, and Obesity in Youth (AHOY) of the Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, American Heart Association. #### BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCE(S) Hayman LL, Williams CL, Daniels SR, Steinberger J, Paridon S, Dennison BA, McCrindle BW. Cardiovascular health promotion in the schools: a statement for health and education professionals and child health advocates from the Committee on Atherosclerosis, Hypertension, and Obesity in Youth (AHOY) \[trunc\]. Circulation 2004 Oct 12;110(15):2266-75. \[66 references\] [PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15477426) #### GUIDELINE STATUS This is the current release of the guideline. ### COMPLETE SUMMARY CONTENT SCOPE\ METHODOLOGY - including Rating Scheme and Cost Analysis\ RECOMMENDATIONS\ EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS\ BENEFITS/HARMS OF IMPLEMENTING THE GUIDELINE RECOMMENDATIONS\ IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GUIDELINE\ INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE (IOM) NATIONAL HEALTHCARE QUALITY REPORT CATEGORIES\ IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AND AVAILABILITY\ DISCLAIMER ### SCOPE #### DISEASE/CONDITION(S) Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) #### GUIDELINE CATEGORY Prevention #### CLINICAL SPECIALTY Cardiology\ Family Practice\ Pediatrics #### INTENDED USERS Health Care Providers\ Public Health Departments #### GUIDELINE OBJECTIVE(S) To optimize the school environment as an integral part of population-based strategies designed to promote cardiovascular health for all US children and youth and reduce the risk and public health burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) #### TARGET POPULATION School-age children (kindergarten through grade 12) #### INTERVENTIONS AND PRACTICES CONSIDERED 1. School-based (including preschools and after-school programs) educational programs aimed at promoting cardiovascular health for children and youth emphasizing: - Healthy dietary intake - Physical activity - Smoking behavior - Education about risk factors for cardiovascular disease 2. Establishment of school policies that promote physical activity and healthy patterns of nutrition including: - Heart-healthy school lunches and snacks - Physical education programs - Tobacco-free environments in schools - School-community links to promote cardiovascular health #### MAJOR OUTCOMES CONSIDERED - Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor knowledge - Total fat intake - Salt/sodium intake - Total/high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol - Systolic/diastolic blood pressure - Indices of obesity - Pulse rate - Total fat content of school lunch menus - Saturated fat content of school lunch menus - Amount of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) in physical education (PE) programs - Changes in fat content of food lunch offerings - Body mass index (BMI) - PV~O2~max ### METHODOLOGY #### METHODS USED TO COLLECT/SELECT EVIDENCE Searches of Electronic Databases #### DESCRIPTION OF METHODS USED TO COLLECT/SELECT THE EVIDENCE Not stated #### NUMBER OF SOURCE DOCUMENTS Not stated #### METHODS USED TO ASSESS THE QUALITY AND STRENGTH OF THE EVIDENCE Expert Consensus #### RATING SCHEME FOR THE STRENGTH OF THE EVIDENCE Not applicable #### METHODS USED TO ANALYZE THE EVIDENCE Systematic Review with Evidence Tables #### DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODS USED TO ANALYZE THE EVIDENCE Not stated #### METHODS USED TO FORMULATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS Expert Consensus #### DESCRIPTION OF METHODS USED TO FORMULATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS Not stated #### RATING SCHEME FOR THE STRENGTH OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS Not applicable #### COST ANALYSIS A formal cost analysis was not performed and published cost analyses were not reviewed. #### METHOD OF GUIDELINE VALIDATION Peer Review #### DESCRIPTION OF METHOD OF GUIDELINE VALIDATION This statement was approved by the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee on July 19, 2004. ### RECOMMENDATIONS #### MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS [Recommendations]{.underline} The American Heart Association\'s (AHA\'s) Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young (CVDY) supports the need for both high-risk and population-based approaches to cardiovascular health promotion and risk reduction beginning in early childhood. Consistent with the AHA\'s Guide for Improving Cardiovascular Health at the Community Level, CVDY endorses the role of schools and school health programs as central and essential components of population-based strategies. To this end, goals and recommendations that are designed to optimize the school environment (including preschools and after-school programs) in promoting cardiovascular health for children and youth are listed below. Information that is relevant to these recommendations is included in the Guidelines and School Health Objectives portion of the Suggested Reading section. Heart Health Education and Health Behaviors Goals - All schools should implement evidence-based, comprehensive, age-appropriate curricula about cardiovascular health, methods for improving health behaviors, and the reduction of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. - All schools should implement age-appropriate and culturally sensitive curricula on changing students\' patterns of dietary intake, physical activity, and smoking behaviors. Recommendations - School curricula should include general content about the major risk factors for cardiovascular disease and content specific to the sociodemographic, ethnic, and cultural characteristics of the school and the community. - School curricula should include research-based content about the effective methods of changing cardiovascular disease-related health behaviors. - Schools should provide the behavioral skill training necessary for students to achieve the regular practice of healthy behaviors. - Physical education (PE) class should be required at least 3 times per week from kindergarten through grade 12, with an emphasis on increasing the participation of all students in age-appropriate moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). The American Heart Association advocates 150 minutes of PE during each school week for elementary school students and at least 225 minutes per week for middle school students. - Meals provided in schools should be conducive to cardiovascular health and conform to current recommendations for macronutrient and micronutrient content. - School buildings and surrounding environments should be designated tobacco-free settings. School Policies Goals - All schools should institute policies that enforce the implementation of the current national recommendations for physical activity and nutrition for children and youth, including the modification of food services and physical education programs. - All schools should institute policies that they be maintained as tobacco-free environments. Recommendations - School policies should address all foods and snacks consumed on- and off-premises during school hours. - After-school programs should institute policies that are conducive to the consumption of nutritious healthy snacks and an appropriate level of physical activity for all children in their programs. These policies should take into account the stocking of vending machines and the marketing of foods. School and Community Linkages Goal - All schools should establish links with the community resources and infrastructures necessary to support cardiovascular health promotion and risk reduction for children and youth. Recommendation - As community thought leaders, schools should make the promotion of healthy patterns of dietary intake and physical activity behaviors in their community a priority. #### CLINICAL ALGORITHM(S) None provided ### EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS #### TYPE OF EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS The type of evidence supporting each recommendation is not specifically stated. ### BENEFITS/HARMS OF IMPLEMENTING THE GUIDELINE RECOMMENDATIONS #### POTENTIAL BENEFITS School health programs initiated in preschool and extending through high school have the potential to influence the cardiovascular health of the majority of US children and youth. #### POTENTIAL HARMS Not stated ### IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GUIDELINE #### DESCRIPTION OF IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY An implementation strategy was not provided. ### INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE (IOM) NATIONAL HEALTHCARE QUALITY REPORT CATEGORIES #### IOM CARE NEED Staying Healthy #### IOM DOMAIN Effectiveness\ Patient-centeredness ### IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AND AVAILABILITY #### BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCE(S) Hayman LL, Williams CL, Daniels SR, Steinberger J, Paridon S, Dennison BA, McCrindle BW. Cardiovascular health promotion in the schools: a statement for health and education professionals and child health advocates from the Committee on Atherosclerosis, Hypertension, and Obesity in Youth (AHOY) \[trunc\]. Circulation 2004 Oct 12;110(15):2266-75. \[66 references\] [PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15477426) #### ADAPTATION Not applicable: The guideline was not adapted from another source. #### DATE RELEASED 2004 Oct 12 #### GUIDELINE DEVELOPER(S) American Heart Association - Professional Association #### SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING American Heart Association #### GUIDELINE COMMITTEE Working Groups of the American Heart Association Committee on Atherosclerosis, Hypertension Obesity in Youth (AHOY) of the Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, American Heart Association #### COMPOSITION OF GROUP THAT AUTHORED THE GUIDELINE Committee Members: Laura L. Hayman, PhD, RN (Cochair); Christine L. Williams, MD, MPH (Cochair); Stephen R. Daniels, MD, PhD; Julia Steinberger, MD, MS; Steve Paridon, MD; Barbara A. Dennison, MD; Brian W. McCrindle, MD, MPH #### FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The American Heart Association makes every effort to avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may arise as a result of an outside relationship or a personal, professional, or business interest of a member of the writing panel. Specifically, all members of the writing group are required to complete and submit a Disclosure Questionnaire showing all such relationships that might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest. Disclosure - Dr Laura L. Hayman reported no financial relationships to disclose. - Dr Christine L. Williams reported no financial relationships to disclose. - Dr Stephen R. Daniels reported no financial relationships to disclose. - Dr Julia Steinberger reported serving as a consultant for American Phytotherapy Research Laboratory, Inc. - Dr Steve Paridon reported no financial relationships to disclose. - Dr Barbara A. Dennison reported no financial relationships to disclose. - Dr Brian W. McCrindle reported no financial relationships to disclose. This represents the relationships of writing group members that may be perceived as actual or reasonably perceived conflicts of interest as reported on the Disclosure Questionnaire, which all members of the writing group are required to complete and submit. #### GUIDELINE STATUS This is the current release of the guideline. #### GUIDELINE AVAILABILITY Electronic copies: Available from the [American Heart Association Web site](http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/110/15/2266). Print copies: Available from the American Heart Association, Public Information, 7272 Greenville Ave, Dallas, TX 75231-4596; Phone: 800-242-8721 #### AVAILABILITY OF COMPANION DOCUMENTS None available #### PATIENT RESOURCES None available #### NGC STATUS This NGC summary was completed by ECRI on January 21, 2005. #### COPYRIGHT STATEMENT Copyright to the original guideline is owned by the American Heart Association, Inc. (AHA). Reproduction of the AHA Guideline without permission is prohibited. Single reprint is available by calling 800-242-8721 (US only) or writing the American Heart Association, Public Information, 7272 Greenville Ave., Dallas, TX 75231-4596. Ask for reprint No. 71-0276. To purchase additional reprints: up to 999 copies, call 800-611-6083 (US only) or fax 413-665-2671; 1000 or more copies, call 410-528-4121, fax 410-528-4264, or email [email protected]. To make photocopies for personal or educational use, call the Copyright Clearance Center, 978-750-8400. ### DISCLAIMER #### NGC DISCLAIMER The National Guideline Clearinghouse™ (NGC) does not develop, produce, approve, or endorse the guidelines represented on this site. All guidelines summarized by NGC and hosted on our site are produced under the auspices of medical specialty societies, relevant professional associations, public or private organizations, other government agencies, health care organizations or plans, and similar entities. Guidelines represented on the NGC Web site are submitted by guideline developers, and are screened solely to determine that they meet the NGC Inclusion Criteria which may be found at <http://www.guideline.gov/about/inclusion.aspx> . NGC, AHRQ, and its contractor ECRI Institute make no warranties concerning the content or clinical efficacy or effectiveness of the clinical practice guidelines and related materials represented on this site. Moreover, the views and opinions of developers or authors of guidelines represented on this site do not necessarily state or reflect those of NGC, AHRQ, or its contractor ECRI Institute, and inclusion or hosting of guidelines in NGC may not be used for advertising or commercial endorsement purposes. Readers with questions regarding guideline content are directed to contact the guideline developer. Bottom of Form © 1998-2008 National Guideline Clearinghouse Date Modified: 11/3/2008	en
markdown	151458	# Presentation: 151458 ## The HEASARC - Coordinate data, software, and media standards with other astrophysics sites. Established December 1990 - _The HEASARC Charter:_ - Maintain and disseminate data from previous and concurrent high-energy astrophysics missions - Provide software and data analysis support for these data sets - Maintain and provide the necessary scientific and technical expertise for the processing and interpretation of the data holding - Develop and maintain multi-mission analysis and support tools - Provide catalogs of observations and ancillary information for the data holdings ## Active Mission Support ## The Physical Archive - _Active Missions_ - RXTE (1995- ) - BeppoSAX (1997- ) - Chandra (1999- ) [data at CXC] - XMM-Newton (1999- ) - HETE-II (2000- ) - _Past Missions_ - Ariel 5 EXOSAT - ASCA Ginga - BBXRT HEAO 1 - CGRO HEAO 3 - Copernicus OSO 8 - COS B ROSAT - DXS SAS 2 - Einstein SAS 3 - EUVE Vela 5B - • Data from 25 missions currently in the archive - • About 280 astronomical catalogs & mission tables - • The archive volume was - 2500 Gigabytes as of the end - of 2001 - _Upcoming Missions_ - Integral (2002 Launch) - Swift (2003 Launch) - GLAST (2006 Launch) ## Data Restoration ## The HEASARC Web - Assist astrophysicists in all stages - of their archival research: - Information and latest news about HEASARC Catalogs - • Mission information - • Search catalogs & retrieve data - • Download analysis software - • Access documentation - • Astronomical Web site links - • Public outreach & education ## Education & Public Outreach A service of the High Energy Astrophysics Learning Center - http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/ - Multi-level discussion of astronomy - Lesson plans using actual satellite data - CD-ROM’s, posters, support teacher conferences - Created by HEASARC scientists and programmers collaborating with teachers - NCTM and NSTS standards listed - Ask A High Energy Astronomer service ## HEASARC CD-ROM’s - The HEASARC publishes CD-ROM’s containing - selections of important data products (images, - spectra, and light curves). - Thirteen CDs have been published for a variety - of high-energy astrophysics missions (CGRO, - ROSAT, EXOSAT, and Einstein. - CD-ROM’s contain URL links directly back to - the data archives at the HEASARC. - CD-ROM’s are distributed by the HEASARC at - AAS and other astronomical meetings, and are - also available free of charge on request. ## Software: Ftools & Xanadu - FTOOLS is a general software package which can manipulate any type of FITS files, and can do selection, analysis, and other scientifically useful tasks on FITS files from high-energy astrophysics missions. Currently supported missions include ASCA, ASTRO-E, CGRO, Einstein, EXOSAT, OSO-8, ROSAT, RXTE, and Vela 5B. - XANADU is a software package comprising high-level programs for spectral (XSPEC), timing (XRONOS), and imaging (XIMAGE) analysis of X-ray and gamma-ray astronomy data files. - In early 2000, FTOOLS and XANADU will work in an integrated common environment and be distributed (either together or separately, according to the user’s requirement) on a common release schedule. ## Software: Xanadu - Multi-mission analysis software - Spectral analysis: XSPEC - Timing analysis: XRONOS - • Image analysis: XIMAGE ## Software: Ftools - All code written in ANSI standard C or FORTRAN. Machine-independent and portable. - All data input/output is in the form of FITS files via the CFITSIO subroutine interface, or occasionally, ASCII files. - All user input to the task is done via a parameter file. ## Data Format Standards - The HEASARC develops, coordinates and promotes standardized FITS formats for use within the High-Energy Astrophysics community. - These standards allow multi-mission analysis packages and encourage recycling of software at considerable cost savings. - The HEASARC publishes these standards on the Web and in its journal, Legacy. It also collaborates with new missions to ensure that their data products conform to these standards. ## The HEASARC Customers - Investigators selected to use the ASCA, ASTRO-E, BeppoSAX, CGRO, ROSAT, and RXTE observatories which include scientists - - at US universities - - at NASA’s GSFC and other government labs - - from around the world - Archival researchers - The general public, who are interested in what NASA is doing - Teachers, parents, and school children for education and outreach - The HEASARC has 4 groups of users: ## Usage & Data Statistics - Gigabytes (GB) transferred by ftp per year: - _1998_ _1999__ _ _2000_ _2001_ - 842 GB 1391 GB 1846 GB 2251 GB - Gigabytes (GB) transferred by the www (http) per year: - _1998_ _1999__ _ _2000_ _2001_ - 424 GB 603 GB 1083 GB 1428 GB - Gigabytes retrieved per quarter	en
markdown	701814	# Presentation: 701814 *Parker-Davis Project * *Small Contractor Flexibility** ** ** ** ** **April 8, 2004* ## RECAP - Received request to implement PDP Post 2008 allocations early for Wickenburg and Thatcher. - Western evaluated the request - Sent out summary to all PDP customers describing near term hydrological conditions, capacity impacts and estimated PDP generation. ## RECAP - Provided several alternatives of how we could fulfill the request. - Requested/Received comments - Early implementation ok as long as it does not negatively impact the other PDP customers. - Host a meeting to further explain hydrology projections and energy/capacity assumptions. ## Agenda - Dennis to share his request and entertain questions - Brian will give a synopsis of the hydrology and the probabilities of capacity/excess energy. - Open Discussion - Next Steps ## Capacity - Current Contracted Capacity: 283 MW - Additional Capacity for Rounded Allocations: 1 MW - Total Capacity Required: 284 MW ## Capacity - Current marketed capacity was based upon total generator capacity of 300 MW. - Addition of 1 MW of capacity to serve the rounded up allocations would be available. ## Energy - Current Annual Contracted Energy: - 1345.8 GWh - Additional Energy for Rounded Allocations: - 6.1 GWh - Total Annual Energy Required: - 1351.9 GWh ## Expected Generation - By Water Year Type: - Normal – 1338 GWh (+/- 1%) - Partial Surplus – 1355.4 GWh (+/- 1%) - Full Surplus - >1375 GWh ## Slide 9 ## Slide 10 ## Slide 11	en
all-txt-docs	794066	<DOC> [DOCID: f:c97-164r.wais] ASSOCIATED ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. April 10, 1998 CENT 97-164-R FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES 2 SKYLINE, 10TH FLOOR 5203 LEESBURG PIKE FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA 22041 April 10, 1998 ASSOCIATED ELECTRIC : CONTEST PROCEEDINGS COOPERATIVE, INC., : Contestant : Docket No. CENT 97-164-R v. : Citation No. 4264782; 6/23/97 : SECRETARY OF LABOR, : Docket No. CENT 97-165-R MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH : Order No. 4264783; 6/23/97 ADMINISTRATION, (MSHA), : Respondent : Thos. Hill Energy Center : Mine ID 23-02155 DECISION Before: Judge Feldman These contest proceedings concern Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc.'s (AECI's), refusal to allow the entry of a Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) inspector into AECI's electric power generating facilities at Thomas Hill located in Randolph County, Missouri. At issue is whether AECI's coal handling operations at its Thomas Hill facilities constitute the "work of preparing coal" as contemplated by section 3(h)(1) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the Mine Act), 30 U.S.C. 802(h)(1), thus subjecting AECI to Mine Act jurisdiction. Section 3(h)(2)(i) of the Mine Act defines the "work of preparing coal" as ". . . the breaking, crushing, sizing, cleaning, washing, drying, mixing, storage, and loading of bituminous coal, lignite, or anthracite, and such other work of preparing coal as is usually done by the operator of a coal mine." The nature of the coal preparation process performed by AECI at Thomas Hill is not in dispute and is set forth in the parties' stipulations. Briefly stated, AECI's Thomas Hill power plant receives by rail approximately 83,000 tons of coal weekly from mines located in the State of Wyoming operated by Powder River Coal Company, a subsidiary of Peabody Holding Company. Coal extracted from the Wyoming mines is crushed prior to shipment to a size such that the largest pieces of coal will pass through a 2-1/2 inch hole. Upon arrival from Wyoming, each trainload of coal passes through AECI's "Car Dumper Building" where coal is dumped into hoppers one carload at a time. At the top of each hopper a "grizzly", or grate, removes large clumps of coal or other material that could block the hoppers. From the dump hoppers, coal is transported through the Sample Building, Transfer House No. 3 and, ultimately, Transfer House No. 1, by means of a conveyor system with a series of electromagnets installed to remove any scrap metal and other impurities from the coal. It is important to remove metal debris such as tools, bulldozer bucket teeth, railroad spikes, etc., so that AECI's equipment used later in the process, e.g., coal crackers, crushers, pulverizers and burner units, is not damaged. After moving through Transfer House No. 1 the coal is directed by conveyor in one of two directions for final coal preparation tailored for the requirements of three of Thomas Hill's individual generating units. At Units 1 and 2, coal is conveyed to the Crusher House where two Pennsylvania hammer mill crushers crush the coal to a size of 1/4 inch. At Unit 3 the coal is initially conveyed through coal crackers that break larger clumps of coal into smaller sizes. The coal is then conveyed into a granulator (ring crusher) to ensure sizes no greater than 1-1/2 to 2 inches. The sized coal is then stored in silos for the different generating units. The storage silos are located in the power generation building. In September 1995, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) received a complaint from a Thomas Hill Energy Center employee concerning hazards associated with the inhalation of suspended coal dust as well as hazards related to potential combustion of accumulated coal dust at the track hopper feeder and in conveyor belt tunnels. After visiting Thomas Hill, OSHA informed AECI that it was referring the complaint to MSHA. As a result of OSHA's referral, in March 1977, MSHA, after several consultations with AECI officials, issued a jurisdictional determination citing the boundary between OSHA and MSHA jurisdiction at the point where coal is unloaded using the rotary car dumper onto conveyors that ultimately transport coal into the power generation building. In June 1977, MSHA offered to meet with AECI for the purpose of discussing the Mine Act and regulations. However, AECI informed MSHA that it would refuse to permit an inspection because it objected to MSHA jurisdiction. On June 23, 1997, MSHA Inspector Larry G. Maloney was refused entry to the Thomas Hill power plant. Maloney issued Citation No. 4264782 alleging a violation of section 103(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. 813(a), which requires mine operators to permit MSHA representatives to enter mine property. AECI was given 30 minutes to abate the alleged violation. Having failed to do so, Order No. 4264783 was issued pursuant to the provisions of section 104(b) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. 814(b), that require timely abatement of cited violations by mine operators. As a consequence of AECI's continued refusal to submit to an MSHA inspection, on July 3, 1997, pursuant to section 108(a)(1)(D) of the Act, 30 U.S.C. 818(a)(1)(D), the Secretary filed a civil action for injunctive relief with The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.[1] Unaware of the initiation of the civil action, on July 16, 1997, AECI mailed its Notice of Contest with respect to the subject citation and order. On September 15, 1997, AECI filed a motion to stay these contest proceedings, asserting the pending civil injunctive action and these proceedings create a "multiplicity of litigation." AECI's stay request was denied by the undersigned on October 8, 1997. The stay was denied because the issue before the District Court, i.e., whether temporary injunctive relief should be granted, was distinguishable from the ultimate jurisdictional issue before me. In view of the extensive and detailed stipulations filed by the parties and the absence of outstanding unresolved material issues of fact, I had anticipated disposing of this case by summary decision. However, on February 24, 1998, the Secretary furnished the February 18, 1998, decision of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri permanently enjoining AECI from refusing to permit MSHA inspections at the Thomas Hill Energy Center. Herman v. Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc., No. 2:97CV39-DJS (E.D. Mo. Feb. 18, 1998). The District Court noted section 108(a) of the Mine Act expressly provides primary district court jurisdiction when the Secretary seeks injunctive relief to enjoin habitual violations of health and safety standards. Slip op. at 2. The District Court also concluded it had concurrent jurisdiction with this Commission with respect to the underlying jurisdictional issue because disposition of this matter rests upon stipulated facts, and resolution of this case is "largely controlled by precedent of both the [Federal Mine Safety and Health Review] Commission and Courts of Appeals." Id. at 4. In view of its primary and concurrent jurisdiction, the court declined to defer to the Commission by issuing a preliminary injunction pending the disposition of this administrative proceeding. Rather, the court exercised its jurisdiction by consolidating its consideration of the preliminary and permanent injunctions, and, permanently enjoined AECI from refusing to permit MSHA inspections at its Thomas Hill facility. Id. at 15. AECI has filed a Notice of Appeal of the District Court judgement. I construed the Secretary's February 24, 1998, submission of the District Court's decision as an assertion that the doctrine of collateral estoppel applies in these matters. Consequently, on March 6, 1998, AECI was ordered to show cause why it should not be precluded from prosecuting its contests of the subject citation and order given the District Court's resolution of the jurisdictional issue. AECI responded to the order to show cause on March 27, 1998. AECI, citing case law that collateral estoppel is only applicable where the original judgement was rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction, asserts the court did not have jurisdiction to issue a permanent injunction in this case. Consequently, AECI urges this Commission to address, prior to applying the doctrine of collateral estoppel, whether the District Court was a court of competent jurisdiction. Alternatively, notwithstanding the question of district court jurisdiction, AECI contends the Commission should exercise its discretion and not apply collateral estoppel in this matter because AECI did not have "a full and fair opportunity to litigate the ultimate [jurisdictional] fact issue . . ." that is now before the Commission because it believed the only pending issue before the District Court was a preliminary injunction. Finally, AECI requests this matter be stayed pending the outcome of its appeal of the District Court's decision if the Commission declines to issue a decision on the merits. The Secretary responded to AECI's response to the order to show cause on April 2, 1998. The Secretary asserts collateral estoppel should apply because the District Court had the discretion to permanently enjoin AECI from refusing to allow MSHA inspections rather than delaying its issuance of a permanent injunction until a Commission decision on the merits. With respect to AECI's claim that it did not have a full opportunity to be heard in district court, the Secretary points out that the detailed stipulations filed in this proceeding are identical to the stipulations filed in the injunctive relief matter. Moreover, the parties filed extensive briefs devoted to the "merits" question in district court. Discussion The doctrine of collateral estoppel provides that, once an issue is actually and necessarily determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, the determination is conclusive in subsequent suits based on a different cause of action involving a party to the prior litigation." Montana v. United States, 440 U.S. 147, 153 (1979). Collateral estoppel serves "the dual purpose of protecting litigants from the burden of relitigating an identical issue with the same party . . . and of promoting judicial economy by preventing needless litigation." Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 439 U.S. 322, 326 (1979) citing Blonder-Tongue Lab, Inc., v. University of Ill. Found., 402 U.S. 313, 328-29 (1971). As a threshold matter, AECI's assertion that the District Court decision is not dispositive is in stark contrast with its September 15, 1997, motion to stay this administrative proceeding wherein it stated: Contestant did not intend to cause a multiplicity of litigation and may not have filed the Notice of Contest [initiating this administrative contest proceeding] if it had been aware of the fact that the [Secretary had] already [filed in] District Court. The [Secretary] has correctly stated to the District Court that resolution of this matter will turn chiefly on the court's determination of issues of law. It is anticipated that the issues of law will be submitted to the court on an agreed or substantially stipulated record of facts. The court will not require this [Commission's] expertise to find the facts and will not be bound by the [Commission's] conclusions of law. For judicial and administrative economy and to spare expense to the government and this citizen, this administrative proceeding should be stayed. (Contestant's Stay Motion, pp. 1-2). Undaunted by the above cost-benefit analysis advanced in support of its motion for stay concerning unnecessary multiplicity of litigation, AECI now argues the Commission should not give recognition to the court's adverse decision. AECI, however, has provided no adequate justification to preclude the applicability of collateral estoppel. While, as AECI contends, a party may collaterally attack the validity of a judgement for lack of subject matter or personal jurisdiction, it is clear that these deficiencies were not present in the court proceeding. In addition, an administrative proceeding is not the proper forum for collaterally attacking a federal court decision. Rather, the jurisdictional issue in this matter is where it belongs -- in the Eighth Circuit. Moreover, as proceedings under the Mine Act are subject to federal appellate review, it would be inappropriate for this Commission to substitute its judgement for that of a court of appeals as to whether a district court had jurisdiction to render permanent injunctive relief. In addition, section 106 (a)(1) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. 816(a)(1), provides that Commission decisions are reviewable in the circuit in which the violation allegedly occurred, or, in the D.C. Circuit. Thus, given the pending appeal in the Eighth Circuit, a Commission decision on the merits in this case could result in appeal of the same issue in different appellate circuits. Finally, I am not persuaded by AECI's contention that the Commission should exercise its discretion and decide this case on the merits despite the court decision because AECI did not have "a full and fair opportunity" to be heard. As noted above, AECI has previously opined before this Commission that the court was fully capable of resolving this jurisdictional question. Moreover, the court relied on the same stipulations and arguments that have been presented by the parties in this matter. Contrary to AECI's assertion, the court's decision, which sets forth the pertinent, well settled Commission and federal case law, reflects this jurisdictional question was fully presented and thoroughly considered. Finally, AECI has presented no basis for staying this matter pending its Eighth Circuit appeal of the permanent injunction as long as the permanent injunction remains in force. ORDER Accordingly, the doctrine of collateral estoppel applies in this contest matter. Consequently, IT IS ORDERED that Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc.'s contests of 103(a) Citation No. 4264782 in Docket No. CENT 97-164-R, and 104(b) Order No. 4264783 in Docket No. CENT 97-165-R, on the basis of its assertion that it is not subject to Mine Act jurisdiction, ARE DISMISSED with prejudice, as long as the attached judgement permanently enjoining AECI from refusing to permit MSHA inspections at its Thomas Hill power plant remains in effect. Jerold Feldman Administrative Law Judge Distribution: Rodrick A. Widger, Esq., Andereck, Evans, Milne, Peace & Baumhoer, 1111 S. Glenstone, Springfield, MO 65808 (Certified Mail) Edward Falkowski, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, 1999 Broadway, Suite 1600, Denver, CO 80202-5716 (Certified Mail) /mh FOOTNOTES [1]: Section 108(a)(1)(D) authorizes the Secretary to seek permanent or temporary injunctive relief in the district court of the United States for the district in which the coal mine is located whenever an operator refuses to permit inspection.	en
markdown	730638	# Presentation: 730638 ## Chelsea Fallon Special Advisor Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Federal Communications Commission FCC/USDA Rural Broadband Educational Workshop April 30, 2008 Chelsea Fallon Special Advisor Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Federal Communications Commission FCC/USDA Rural Broadband Educational Workshop April 30, 2008 FCC Data on Broadband Deployment (Form 477) Notes: Thank you, Julie. I’m now going to give a brief overview of the data on broadband deployment that is collected by the FCC. The FCC required by the statute, by Section 706 of the Communications Act, to “examine whether advanced telecommunications capability, or broadband, is being made available to all Americans on a reasonable and timely basis.” In order to fulfill with this requirement, the FCC began collecting data from the industry on broadband deployment in March 2000, and it has modified and improved these data collection efforts over time. The data is collected from broadband providers across the country, who required to periodically provide certain information to the FCC through file what is known as Form 477. ## Who Files? Any facilities-based broadband provider Speeds of +200 kbps in at least one direction Forms filed on a state-by-state basis Data submitted semi-annually March 1 (December 31 data) September 1 (June 30 data) Data is confidential Notes: So, who has to file Form 477? -- Any facilities-based provider of broadband service, with “broadband” being defined, for purposes of this requirement, as data transfer speeds exceeding 200 kilobits per second in at least one direction, uplink or downlink. -- The forms are filed on a state-by-state basis, so each provider must fill out one form for each state in which they offer service. If they provide service in all 50 states, they would submit 50 forms. -- They submit the data twice a year. The data as of December 31 is due by March 1, and the mid-year data as of June 30 is due by September 1. -- The data filed by individual carriers is kept confidential, although the Commission does release the data on an aggregated basis periodically. ## What Is Reported? - DSL - Cable - Fiber - T1 Speed tiers for services +200 kbps in both directions - 200 kbps – 2.5 Mbps - 2.5 – 10 Mbps What Is Reported? - Fixed Wireless - Mobile Wireless - Satellite - BPL - 10-25 Mbps - 25-100 Mbps - +100 Mbps Notes: So, what information do broadband providers report? -- each form must include number of broadband connections in the state broken down by technology -- these technologies include the various broadband platforms: DSL, cable, fiber to the home, T1 line, fixed wireless, mobile wireless, satellite, and broadband over power lines -- One connection to a home or office is counted as one connection. The number of users of a single connection is not captured by this data. However, filers must also report the percentage of total connections, for each technology, provided to residential customers. -- In addition, for any services that offered at over 200 kilobits per second in both directions, filers must do a further break out of the speed tiers in which the service is offered. -- There are currently five different speed tiers with the first tier including connections that are between 200 kilobits per second and 2.5 Megabits per second, and the highest tier including services that are over 100 megabits per second ## What Is Reported? - One list for each technology - For mobile wireless services, zip codes where broadband networks available Data on fixed/mobile telephone service also collected FCC releases aggregated data in semi-annual reports What Is Reported? Notes: In addition to listing the number of connections by technology and speed tier, Form 477 filers must also attach a list of all of the zip codes in the state where they have at least one broadband connection. And if a single provides broadband service over more than one technology platform in the state, it must attach a separate list for each technology. Providers of mobile wireless service have a slightly different requirement. They attach a list of all of the zip codes covered by their mobile broadband networks – since their customers are not in a fixed location when they are online like cable or DSL customers. (Availability vs. deployment for wireless). In addition to broadband data, the Form 477 also asks for data on local telephone competition, including telephone service provided over various platforms such as cable and mobile phone networks. After the FCC collects and analyzes the semi-annual data, it releases a report with aggregate statistics on broadband deployment, including the number of subscribers by technology, and the number of broadband providers per zip code. ## Broadband Deployment Notes: Here’s a map of the number of broadband providers by zip code across the country. The peach areas show 1 to 3 providers, the orange areas show 4-6, and the blue areas show 7 or more. ## Recent Improvements Number of speed tiers expanded from 5 to 8. Providers will report number of subscribers by Census Tract, broken down by speed tier and technology. Improved accuracy of information on mobile wireless deployment. Recent Improvements Notes: As I mentioned earlier, the Commission has made efforts to improve the accuracy and granularity of the broadband data it collects over time. In recent years, the Commission has recognized that additional improvements to its broadband data collection can be made, particularly by including more detailed information on speed tiers and a more detailed measurement of deployment using smaller geographic areas. In March, the Commission adopted an order modifying and improving the Form 477 requirements. The full text of the order has not yet been released, but a few key changes were announced when the order was adopted. First, the Commission will expand the number of speed tiers from 5 to 8. This includes creating a tier from 200-768 kbps that will be called “first generation data.” The 7 levels above that will be labeled broadband tiers one through seven. This will allow the Commission to get a better picture of services offered in the large 200 kbps to 2.5 Megabits per second range, which was previously a single tier. The Commission will also require filers to list the Census Tracts, rather than a zip codes, where they offer service, which will significantly improve the granularity of the geographic data on broadband deployment, since there are roughly twice as many census tracts as zip codes in the U.S. In addition, filers will be required to provide the number of subscribers in each census tract, broken down by the type of technology and the speed tier. Finally, the Commission also adopted rules to improve the accuracy of the data it collects on mobile wireless deployment, which currently includes the number of connections to wireless devices that are capable of receiving or transmitting data at broadband speeds, regardless of whether the user subscribes to a particular data plan. The Order also included a further notice in which the Commission is seeking data on broadband pricing and availability.	en
converted_docs	509724	Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia Implementing Section 215 and Section 216 of the Compact, as Amended Regarding a Trust Fund The Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia (hereafter the Original Parties); Desiring to contribute to the long-term budgetary self-reliance of the Federated States of Micronesia by establishing a trust fund to provide the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia with an ongoing source of revenue after Fiscal Year 2023; Recognizing that it is the mutual intention of the Governments of the United States and the Federated States of Micronesia that the Government of the United States discontinue Annual Grant Assistance beyond fiscal year 2023; Have agreed as follows: Part I Definitions Article 1 Definitions of Terms For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms shall have the following meanings when capitalized: "[A Account]{.underline}" has the meaning assigned to such term in Article 16, paragraph 2. "[Agreement]{.underline}" means this Agreement Between the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia and the Government of the United States of America Implementing Section 215 and Section 216 of the Compact, as Amended, Regarding a Trust Fund. "[Allowable Expenses]{.underline}" means expenses related to rental of hotel meeting space, and incidentals thereto, but does not include salaries, honoraria, travel or per diem expenses. "[Annual Income]{.underline}" means the Income credited to any given Fiscal Year. "[Annual Grant Assistance]{.underline}" means annual monetary assistance provided by the Government of the United States to the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia for the purposes set forth in section 211 of the Compact, as amended. "[Auditor]{.underline}" has the meaning assigned to such term in Article 19, paragraph 1. "[B Account]{.underline}" has the meaning assigned to such term in Article 16, paragraph 4. "[C Account]{.underline}" has the meaning assigned to such term in Article 16, paragraph 5. "[Compact]{.underline}" means the Compact of Free Association Between the United States and the Federated States of Micronesia and the Marshall Islands, that was approved by the United States Congress in section 201 of Public Law 99-239 (Jan. 14, 1986) and went into effect with respect to the Federated States of Micronesia on November 3, 1986. "[Compact, as amended]{.underline}" means the Compact of Free Association Between the United States and the Federated States of Micronesia, as amended. The effective date of the Compact, as amended, shall be on a date to be determined by the President of the United States, and agreed to by the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia, following formal approval of the Compact, as amended, in accordance with section 411 of this Compact, as amended. "[Contributor]{.underline}" means a government, international organization, financial institution, or other entity or person who grants, not lends, funds into the Fund. "[Corpus]{.underline}" means a collection of bonds, stocks or other holdings which form the Principal. It also includes all accumulated Income that has been reinvested and not available for distribution. "[Cumulative Full Inflation]{.underline}" means the Full Inflation applied each Fiscal Year up to the specified Fiscal Year. "[Depository]{.underline}" means the office or bureau within the United States Department of State which retains copies of all international agreements, and documents of withdrawal from agreements. "[Distribution]{.underline}" means the transfer of funds from the Fund to the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia. "[Fiscal Year]{.underline}" means each one year period beginning October 1 and ending on the next following September 30. Each Fiscal Year shall be designated by the number of the calendar year in which such Fiscal Year ends. For example, "Fiscal Year 2022" means the Fiscal Year ending in calendar year 2022. "[Full Inflation]{.underline}" means the full percent change in the United States Gross Domestic Product implicit price deflator in the applicable Fiscal Year compared to the immediate preceding Fiscal Year. "[Fund]{.underline}" has the meaning assigned to such term in Article 2, paragraph 1. "[Government of the Federated States of Micronesia]{.underline}" means the Government established and organized by the Constitution of the Federated States of Micronesia including all the political subdivisions and entities comprising that Government. "[Government of the United States]{.underline}" means the federal government of the United States of America. "[Gross Domestic Product Implicit Price Deflator]{.underline}" means the "Gross Domestic Product Implicit Price Deflator" as published from time to time in the Survey of Current Business by the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the United States Department of Commerce, or any successor thereto. It is a weighted average of the detailed price indices used in the deflation of the United States Gross Domestic Product. In each period, it uses as weights the composition of constant dollar output in that period. Changes in the implicit price deflator reflect both changes in prices and changes in the composition of output. "[Income]{.underline}" means the profit or increase in market value of the Fund, including dividends and interest and other special items allocated to income. "[Investment Adviser]{.underline}" means the individual or firm responsible for: providing investment advice to the Joint Trust Fund Committee; taking direction from the Joint Trust Fund Committee regarding investments; and, overseeing day-to-day investments by the money managers. "[Joint Trust Fund Committee]{.underline}" means the governing body of the Fund. "[Majority Vote]{.underline}" means controlling vote on the Joint Trust Fund Committee. "[Money Manager]{.underline}" means the individual or firm who contracts with the Joint Trust Fund Committee to invest funds in a particular investment vehicle or category. "[Original Party]{.underline}" means the Government of the United States or the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia, "[Original Parties]{.underline}" means, collectively, the Government of the United States and the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia. "[Party]{.underline}" means any one of the Original Parties or a Subsequent Contributor granted membership in the Joint Trust Fund Committee. "[Present Market Value]{.underline}" means, as of any time, the value of the Fund assets if those assets were liquidated or sold at such time. "[Principal]{.underline}" means the contributions to the Fund by the Parties, that are invested in bonds, stocks, or other holdings. "[Qualified Instruments]{.underline}" means all stocks, bonds, and other securities issued or recognized in any United States stock exchange, or other Trust Fund Committee-approved instruments. "[Special Needs]{.underline}" means projects that the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia deems necessary as a supplement to that portion of an annual budget to be financed by the Fund, so long as the project(s) are for the purposes of Section 211 of the Compact, as amended. "[Subsequent Contributor]{.underline}" means any government, international organization, financial institution, or other entity or person who grants, not lends, funds into the Fund, not including the Original Parties. "[Trustee]{.underline}" means the financial institution holding legal custody of the Fund. "[Trust Fund Period]{.underline}" means the period that begins twenty (20) years after the effective date of the Compact, as amended. "[United States]{.underline}" means the United States of America. Part II Establishment Article 2 Establishment of a Trust Fund for the People of the Federated States of Micronesia 1\. A trust fund known as the "Trust Fund for the People of the Federated States of Micronesia" (in this Agreement called the \"Fund\") shall be established: > $a$ by the Government of the United States in consultation with the > Government of the Federated States of Micronesia pending Joint Trust > Fund Committee operations; or, > > $b$ by the Joint Trust Fund Committee, if the Joint Trust Fund > Committee is operational when the Compact, as amended, takes effect. 2\. The Fund shall be governed by the provisions of this Agreement. 3\. The situs of the Fund shall be within the United States. The governing law of the Fund shall be the law from any appropriate jurisdiction within the United States. 4\. The Original Parties to this Agreement shall be the Government of the United States and the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia. The Original Parties shall contribute to the Fund in accordance with section 215 and section 216 of the Compact, as amended. 5\. Subsequent Contributors to the Fund shall be approved by the Joint Trust Fund Committee. Article 3 Purpose of the Fund The purpose of the Fund is to contribute to the economic advancement and long‑term budgetary self-reliance of the Federated States of Micronesia by providing an annual source of revenue, after Fiscal Year 2023, for assistance in the sectors described in Section 211 of the Compact, as amended, or other sectors as mutually agreed by the Original Parties, with priorities in education and health care. Article 4 Powers of the Fund The Fund shall have all powers necessary, consistent with this Agreement, to fulfill its purpose. Article 5 Limitation of Liability 1\. No Party to the Fund shall be liable, by reason of being a Party or for acts or obligations of the Fund. 2\. Obligations of the Fund are not obligations of the Governments of the Federated States of Micronesia, the United States of America, or any other Party. 3\. Members of the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall have a fiduciary relationship to the Fund. No member of the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall be responsible for any loss or depreciation in value of any assets held in the Fund, except by reason of such member's gross negligence or willful default. Every decision made by a member of the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall be deemed to have been made with reasonable care and diligence unless the contrary is proved by affirmative evidence and any such action shall be conclusively binding upon all parties interested in the Fund. Article 6 Legal Status, Privileges and Immunities 1. To enable the Fund to carry out its purpose, each Party shall accord to the Fund in its territory, the legal status, privileges and immunities set out in this Article. 2. The Fund shall possess juridical personality and in particular capacity to: > $a$ contract; > > $b$ acquire and dispose of immovable and movable property; > > $c$ institute legal proceedings; and, > > $d$ take other action to protect the Fund. 3. The Fund shall be exempt from any exchange control regulations, restriction or moratoria. 4. In accordance with section 215 of the Compact, as amended, within the scope of its official activities, the Fund, its property, and its assets shall be exempt from taxation. Part III Joint Trust Fund Committee Article 7 Joint Trust Fund Committee 1\. There shall be a Joint Trust Fund Committee composed of voting and, when applicable, non-voting members to administer the Fund. 2\. Unless otherwise amended in accordance with Article 23, the composition of the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall be: > $a$ three voting members appointed by the Government of the United > States, which shall include the Chairman of the Joint Trust Fund > Committee; and, two voting members appointed by the Federated States > of Micronesia. The Government of the United States shall consult with > the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia in appointing the > Chairman, and the Federated States of Micronesia shall have an > opportunity to present its views, which shall be considered; and, > > $b$ in addition, by a Majority Vote of the Joint Trust Fund > Committee, other voting or non-voting members may be appointed from > Subsequent Contributors that contribute to the Fund from time to time, > provided that the United States maintains the Majority Vote in the > Joint Trust Fund Committee*.* > > $c$ after the initial twenty (20) years (beginning October 1, 2023), > the Original Parties will consult regarding the future composition of > the Joint Trust Fund Committee. The Joint Trust Fund Committee shall > remain the same, unless otherwise agreed by the Original Parties. 3\. If a voting member is temporarily unable to attend a meeting of the Joint Trust Fund Committee, an alternate shall be designated by the Party appointing the voting member under paragraph 2 of this Article, and the designated alternate shall participate and vote in such meeting of the Joint Trust Fund Committee. # 4\. All the powers of the Fund shall be vested in and exercisable by the Joint Trust Fund Committee. 5\. The functions of the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall include overseeing: > $a$ the operation, supervision, and management of the Fund; > > $b$ the investment and distribution of resources of the Fund; and > > $c$ the conclusion of agreements and arrangements with Subsequent > Contributors and other organizations. 6\. Voting and non-voting members shall serve as such without payment of salaries, honoraria, or expenses, including travel, from the Fund. Allowable expenses, as defined, may be covered from the Income, but not from the Corpus, except as provided in Article 16, paragraph 3. 7\. The Joint Trust Fund Committee shall meet at least annually or as necessary, and reasonable notice shall be given of meetings. 8\. For the purposes of meetings, all voting members of the Joint Trust Fund Committee, or their designated alternates when a voting member may be unable to attend, shall constitute a quorum. Meetings may be in person, via video conferencing or by other technological means. 9\. Except where otherwise provided in this Agreement, questions before the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall be decided by a Majority Vote of all the voting members or their designated alternate(s). 10\. The Joint Trust Fund Committee shall establish rules of procedure consistent with this Agreement. Article 8 Technical Assistance From time to time, the Joint Trust Fund Committee may obtain technical advisory services as needed and appropriate. Part IV Resources of the Fund Article 9 Resources The resources of the Fund shall consist of all contributions to the Fund, from whatever sources, and all Income. The resources of the Fund shall be held in trust and administered by the Joint Trust Fund Committee and used only for the purpose of, and in accordance with, this Agreement. Article 10 Initial Contributions by Parties 1\. Each Original Party agrees to contribute to the Fund at least the amounts specified in section 215 and 216 of the Compact, as amended, subject to the provisions of Article 5 of Title IV of the Compact, as (sections 451(b), 452(b), and 453(c)). 2\. Any Subsequent Contributor that accedes to this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Article 26 shall make contributions to the Fund in accordance with arrangements agreed by the Joint Trust Fund Committee with the agreement of all voting members. 3\. The Fund may accept additional contributions from Subsequent Contributors, in accordance with Article 11, in the form of a grant. 4\. The Joint Trust Fund Committee may refuse a contribution if it considers that it would not be in the interest of the Fund, the United States, or the Federated States of Micronesia. 5\. The Fund shall not issue negotiable or transferable obligations evidencing indebtedness for contributions received under paragraph 3 of this Article. Further, the Corpus may not be encumbered in any way. Article 1I Conditions Governing Contributions 1\. No contributions to the Fund shall be refunded except in accordance with Articles 21 and 22. 2\. The provisions of sections 451 through 453, inclusive, of the Compact, as amended, and Article 22 of this Agreement, in the event the Compact, as amended, is terminated, shall govern treatment of any Government of the United States contributions to the Fund and accrued interest thereon. 3\. The Original Parties shall seek contributions to the Fund from other sources. Part V Trustee(s), Investment Adviser(s), Money Manager(s) Article 12 Appointment of Trustee(s) 1\. [Appointment of Trustee(s)]{.underline} > $a$ If, pursuant to Article 2, paragraph 1(a), the Government of the > United States establishes the Fund, the Government of the United > States shall appoint one or more Trustees. Thereafter, the Joint Trust > Fund Committee may appoint and employ, pursuant to the terms of this > Agreement, a successor Trustee(s). > > $b$ If, pursuant to Article 2, paragraph 1(b), the Joint Trust Fund > Committee establishes the Fund, the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall > appoint and employ the initial Trustee(s), pursuant to the terms of > this Agreement. 2\. The Joint Trust Fund Committee shall be empowered to remove any Trustee acting hereunder or to appoint or select a successor Trustee(s). Any Trustee hereunder may, for cause, be removed by the Joint Trust Fund Committee by giving thirty (30) days written notice to the Trustee. 3\. The Trustee(s) and any successor Trustee(s) shall: $a$ be selected from among trust institutions organized in the United States; > $b$ have a net worth in excess of \$100 million; $c$ have at least 10 years experience as a custodian of financial assets; and > $d$ have experience in managing trust funds of at least \$500 > million. 4\. When applicable, upon the appointment of a successor Trustee(s), the resigning or removed Trustee(s) shall transfer and deliver the Fund and any such records pertaining thereto to the successor Trustee(s) after reserving, as Trustee(s), such reasonable amount from the Income to provide for his expenses in the settlement of the Fund account and the amount of any compensation due to him. However, any such amounts so reserved by, and eventually paid to, the resigning or removed Trustee(s) shall be subject to the written approval of the Joint Trust Fund Committee. 5\. The Trustee(s) may resign by filing with the Joint Trust Fund Committee and the Original Parties his written resignation. No such resignation shall take effect until sixty (60) days from the date said resignation is filed with the Joint Trust Fund Committee and the Original Parties unless prior thereto a successor Trustee(s) shall have been appointed by the Joint Trust Fund Committee. 6\. The Trustee(s) shall hold the Corpus, in trust, for the use and benefit of the people of the Federated States of Micronesia in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement and the Compact, as amended. Article 13 Trustee's Powers and Duties 1\. The Trustee shall use reasonable and prudent care and reasonable and prudent diligence in the exercise of his/her powers and the performance of his/her duties as Trustee. 2\. With respect to the Fund, the Trustee shall have the following duties and powers, in addition to and not in limitation of the powers granted or conferred by law, all of which shall be exercised in a fiduciary capacity: > $a$ To collect and receive any and all money and other property of > whatever kind or nature due or owing or belonging to the Fund and to > give full discharge and acquittance therefor, and to extend for a > reasonable period of time, the time of payment of any obligation at > any time owing to the Fund. > > $b$ To disburse Income or Corpus only pursuant to the conditions set > forth in Articles 16, 21, and 22 of this Agreement. 3\. The Trustee shall follow the written directions of the Joint Trust Fund Committee with respect to the retention, purchase, sale or encumbrance of trust property and the investment and reinvestment of Principal and Income held hereunder, the sole authority and discretion for which shall belong to the Joint Trust Fund Committee (provided, however, that the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall not be authorized to direct the Trustee to purchase any asset that would violate federal, state or local law, or the provisions of this Agreement). The Joint Trust Fund Committee shall have full authority to direct the Trustee to take any action with respect to the trust assets that the Trustee is authorized to take under this Agreement. 4\. The Trustee shall not be accountable for any loss or depreciation in value sustained by reason of action taken pursuant to direction of the Joint Trust Fund Committee. 5\. The Trustee shall have the entire care and custody of all of the assets comprising the Fund and shall have sole responsibility for: > $a$ making all payment of liabilities and administration expenses; > and, > > $b$ effecting all distributions pursuant to the instruction of the > Joint Trust Fund Committee, whether of Principal or of Income, to the > Federated States of Micronesia under this Agreement. 6\. The Trustee shall maintain full and accurate books of account and records of all financial transactions relative to the Fund, which shall be available at all reasonable times for inspection by the Joint Trust Fund Committee or its representatives. 7\. The Trustee shall be entitled to reasonable fees and expenses as compensation for his services as Trustee hereunder. Such fees shall be subject to the prior written agreement and approval by the Joint Trust Fund Committee. Such fees and expenses shall be paid from Income or, when necessary, from the Corpus, pursuant to the terms of Article 16. ## ## Article 14 ## Investment Adviser(s) and Money Manager(s) 1\. The Joint Trust Fund Committee, at any time and from time to time, shall have the power and authority to: > $a$ select one or more Investment Adviser(s), including the > corporate Trustee(s) or any of its affiliates; > > $b$ negotiate the terms of, and execute management agreements with, > such Investment Advisers; and > > $c$ direct the Trustee to pay the compensation and costs of such > Investment Advisers(s) from the assets of the Fund, in accordance with > Article 16 of this Agreement. 2\. The Investment Adviser(s) shall advise and recommend to the Joint Trust Fund Committee, one or more Money Managers who will invest the assets of the Fund to produce a diversified portfolio. The Investment Adviser(s) shall provide the Joint Trust Fund Committee with data relating to any prospective Money Manager, indicating performance and relevant comparisons with similar money managers, to assist the Joint Trust Fund Committee in evaluating the performance of the prospective Money Managers. 3\. Money Managers shall enter into separate agreements with the Joint Trust Fund Committee. 4\. The Joint Trust Fund Committee, at any time and from time to time, shall have the power and authority to direct brokerage instructions through the Investment Adviser(s) for any security transactions executed with respect to the Fund. In connection therewith, the Joint Trust Fund Committee may: > $a$ enter into such contracts, agreements or other arrangements as > the Joint Trust Fund Committee deems appropriate with such Investment > Adviser(s) and Money Manager(s). > > $b$ direct the Trustee, in writing, to pay the compensation and > costs of brokers, as previously negotiated and agreed, from the Fund > assets, in accordance with Article 16. 5\. The rights and powers herein conferred on the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall be exercisable only in a fiduciary capacity, and any Investment Adviser(s) accepting the delegation of a discretionary function of the Joint Trust Fund Committee also shall be considered to be acting in a fiduciary capacity. Part VI Operation of the Fund Article 15 Investment and Distribution Policy 1\. The Joint Trust Fund Committee shall establish and revise from time to time, an investment and distribution policy consistent with this Agreement, with the intent that on October 1, 2023, and thereafter the Income shall be used for the purposes described in Article 3 of this Agreement. 2\. The Investment Adviser(s) and Money Manager(s) shall cause to have the Fund invested only in Qualified Instruments that are identified from time to time by the Joint Trust Fund Committee. Issues of bonds, notes, or other redeemable instruments of the Government of the United States shall be considered Qualified Instruments and the Money Manager(s), under direction of the Joint Trust Fund Committee and the Investment Adviser(s), may invest the Fund in such issues without transaction fees or intermediary charges imposed by the Government of the United States. 3\. The Fund and any Income derived from it shall not be taxable by the governments of the Parties to this Agreement to the extent that Income is derived from investment of the Fund in instruments of the Government of the United States or other Qualified Instruments. Article 16 Investment and Distribution to the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia 1\. The Fund shall consist of three accounts to be referred to hereinafter as the "A Account," the "B Account" and the "C Account," respectively (collectively, the "Accounts"). Each Account shall become effective as described in this Article. 2\. The A Account, which shall be established upon the effective date of the Compact, as amended, shall form the Corpus and consist of contributions from the Original Parties, and Subsequent Contributors. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, it also consists of the Income from the investments made from the Principal, and transfers from the B Account and C Account in accordance with this Article. 3\. Through September 30, 2022, payment of Allowable Expenses of the Fund shall be made from the A Account. During this period, the amount, if any, of Fund Income in each Fiscal Year which remains after such payment of expenses shall be reinvested into the A Account. Except as provided in this Article, or under Article 13 paragraph 7, or Article 14 paragraph 1(c), or Article 14 paragraph 4(b), or upon withdrawal of contributions under Article 21, or upon termination of the Fund under Article 22, no funds may be removed from the A Account. 4\. [The B Account]{.underline}: (a) On October 1, 2022 the B Account shall be created. > $b$ During Fiscal Year 2023, all Income earned in Fiscal Year 2023 > shall be deposited into the B Account for disbursement, in accordance > with this Article, in Fiscal Year 2024. > > $c$ For Fiscal Year 2024, and thereafter, the B Account shall > consist of the prior year's Income from investment of funds in the A > Account. 5\. [The C Account]{.underline}: > $a$ shall be created at the same time as the A Account and, > beginning in Fiscal Year 2004, through Fiscal Year 2022, any annual > Income on the Fund over six percent (6%) shall be deposited in the C > Account, up to the limit specified in (b) below. Beginning in Fiscal > Year 2023, the C Account shall be replenished from the B Account in > accordance with paragraph 8 below; > > $b$ shall contain no more than three times the estimated equivalent > of the fiscal year 2023 Annual Grant Assistance, including estimated > inflation calculated in accordance with section 217 of the Compact, as > amended. Any excess above the estimated amount shall return to the A > Account; and, > > $c$ may be drawn on, to the extent it contains sufficient funds, to > address any shortfall in the B Account after Fiscal Year 2023, if > Income on the A Account falls below the previous year's distribution > (not including any amount distributed that year for Special Needs) > adjusted for inflation, to the Government of the Federated States of > Micronesia, and for Special Needs agreed to by the Joint Trust Fund > Committee. 6\. After Fiscal Year 2023, if the Income in the B Account is less than the previous year's distribution to the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia, and the C Account cannot cover the shortfall in the B Account, then the Corpus shall not be accessed to compensate for the shortfall. 7\. The Joint Trust Fund Committee may disburse to the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia, from the B Account (supplemented from the C Account if the B Account is insufficient): > $a$ in Fiscal Year 2024, an amount equal to the Annual Grant > Assistance in Fiscal Year 2023, plus Full Inflation; and > > $b$ beginning in Fiscal Year 2025, and thereafter, an amount of > funds no more than the amount equal to the Annual Grant Assistance in > Fiscal Year 2023 plus Cumulative Full Inflation thereon, plus any > additional amounts for Special Needs approved under paragraph 5(c) > above. 8. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2023, the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall transfer to the A Account any funds in the B Account in excess of the amount approved for disbursement in the following Fiscal Year, in accordance with paragraph 7 of this Article, unless such excess funds are needed to bring the C Account to the level specified in paragraph 5(b) of this Article. 9\. A special account, hereinafter referred to as the D account, may be established to allow contribution by the Federated States of Micronesia for revenues or income from unanticipated sources. This account shall not be mixed with the Fund, but shall have a separate account number. The Federated States of Micronesia shall have access to funds in this account for unanticipated shortfalls or other purposes. Funds in this account are not part of the Corpus. # 10. Accountability $a$ [Implementing procedures]{.underline} > $1$ The Joint Trust Fund Committee shall determine the fiscal > procedures, including remedies, to be used in implementing this > Agreement, provided that the Fiscal Procedures Agreement, referred to > in sections 211 and 212 of the Compact, as amended, together with any > amendments to it over the 20-year Compact, as amended, period, shall > be the basis for such fiscal procedures, unless otherwise agreed by > the Original Parties. $2$ No disbursements shall be made to the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia under this Article, from the Fund, until fiscal procedures have been agreed to under sub-clause (1) of this sub-paragraph (a). $b$ In the event that the remedies determined under sub-clause (1) of this sub-paragraph (a) of this paragraph do not correct any misuse of Income by the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia continues to use, or causes to be used, Income or the Corpus for other than agreed purposes, remedies may be taken as provided in Article 21, paragraph 1 (a) of this Agreement. 11\. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no funds shall be distributed from the A Account, the B Account or the C Account to the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia prior to October 1, 2023. Article 17 Financial Year The financial year of the Fund is the Fiscal Year. Part VII Accounts, Audit, and Reports Article 18 Accounts 1\. The Joint Trust Fund Committee shall cause the Trustee to keep all proper books and records of account of the assets, property, liabilities, income expenditure, and transactions of the Fund and to produce these promptly in order to facilitate audit. 2\. The Trustee shall create one sub-fund for each Party, reflecting that Party's share of the Principal and Income. The Trustee shall keep all records for each sub-fund. 3\. All records and reports of Fund returns shall clearly segregate and identify gross Income, management fees, and net Income. 4\. The Government of the Federated States of Micronesia will provide to the Joint Trust Fund Committee full information and documents concerning its national budget and accounts, and any report of its public auditor. Article 19 Audit 1\. From its establishment and through Fiscal Year 2023, the Fund shall be audited at appropriate intervals by an independent auditor appointed by the Joint Trust Fund Committee (the "Auditor"). Thereafter the Fund shall be audited annually by the Auditor. 2\. The Auditor shall satisfy himself that the accounts of the Fund have been properly prepared in accordance with United States accounting standards and he shall either: > $a$ state in his report that: > > $1$ the accounts have been properly prepared in accordance with the > books and records of the Fund; > > $2$ the books and records of the Fund have been properly kept and > contain information adequate for the purposes of his audit; > > $3$ the balance sheet and income and expenditure account of the Fund > give a true and fair view of the Fund\'s financial position; and > > $4$ the financial affairs of the Fund have been properly conducted > in accordance with this Agreement; or > > $b$ notify the Joint Trust Fund Committee that he is unable to > complete his report as provided in sub‑paragraph (a) of this paragraph > 2 giving his reasons. 3\. The Auditor shall include in his/her report information on the performance of the Trustee and Money Manager(s) in the investment of the Fund in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Joint Trust Fund Committee with comparative references to the performance of managers of other funds of a similar size and nature. 4\. The Auditor shall submit his/her report to the Joint Trust Fund Committee. Article 20 Annual Reports Within six months of the end of each Fiscal Year, the Joint Trust Fund Committee shall publish and shall submit to the Government of the United States and to the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia: $a$ an annual report on the activities and management of the Fund, including on the operations of the Accounts described in Article 16 of this Agreement, and on the effectiveness of the fund to accomplish its purpose as described in Article 3 of this Agreement, which annual report may include recommendations regarding improving the effectiveness of the Fund to accomplish that purpose; $b$ the accounts of the Fund for that year audited in accordance with Article 19; and, $c$ reports of the Auditor under Article 19. Part VIII Withdrawal and Termination Article 21 Withdrawal of Contributions 1\. The Government of the United States may withdraw the Present Market Value of its contributions to the Fund, and any undistributed Income therefrom: > $a$ in the event the Government of the United States determines, > after consultation with the Government of the Federated States of > Micronesia that the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia > grossly failed to use the Income for the purposes described in Article > 2 of this Agreement; > > $b$ should the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia fail > to fulfill its obligations under the separate agreement regarding > mutual security concluded pursuant to sections 321 and 323 of the > Compact, as amended, or take any action which the Government of the > United States determines after appropriate consultation with the > Government of the Federated States of Micronesia, to be incompatible > with the Government of the United States' responsibility for security > and defense matters in or relating to the Federated States of > Micronesia, as set forth in such agreement(s). 2\. Except as provided in paragraph 1 of this Article, any other Party may withdraw from this Agreement by depositing an instrument of withdrawal with the Depository. 3\. In the event of withdrawal by a Party, no distribution of assets shall be made to that Party until that Party discharges its proportionate share of operating expenses, fees, and other administrative costs. Subsequently, the Present Market Value of the remaining Principal and Income attributable to that Party, shall be paid back to that Party. 4\. A Party that withdraws from this Agreement shall have no rights under this Agreement except as provided in this Article and Article 24 and no refund of its contributions shall be made to it except as a distribution of assets under this Article and Article 22. Article 22 Termination and Distribution of Assets 1\. The Fund\'s operations may be terminated by written agreement of the Original Parties. 2\. Upon termination of operations the Fund shall immediately cease all activities, except those incidental to the orderly realization and conservation of its assets and the settlement of its obligations. 3\. On final settlement of the obligations of the Fund and the distribution of its assets this Agreement shall terminate. Until then, the Fund shall remain in existence and all rights and obligations for the Fund and the Parties and Subsequent Contributors under this Agreement shall continue unimpaired. 4\. In the event of termination, no distribution of assets shall be made until all liabilities have been discharged. Subsequently, the assets of the Fund shall be distributed as follows: > $a$ the Present Market Value of the Principal and Income > attributable to the Government of the United States shall be paid back > to that Government; and, > > $b$ the Present Market Value of the Principal and Income > attributable to the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia > shall be paid back to that Government. > > $c$ the Present Market Value of the Principal and Income > attributable to Subsequent Contributors shall be paid back to those > Subsequent Contributors, unless such Subsequent Contributors agree > otherwise. Part IX Miscellaneous Provisions Article 23 Amendments The Agreement may be amended at any time in writing by mutual consent of the Original Parties. Article 24 Dispute Resolution 1. Any dispute arising out of this Agreement between the Original Parties, whether during the life of the Fund or on its termination of its operations, that cannot be resolved by the Joint Trust Fund Committee: > $a$ shall, if the dispute involves Articles 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, > 15, 17, 19, 23, 25, and 26, be referred for resolution to the Original > Parties. The Original Parties shall confer and resolve the dispute. If > either government feels it is necessary, it may give written > notification to the other government that it wants the issue to be > referred to the Under Secretary of State (or equivalent) of the other > Government. > > $b$ All other disputes may be resolved in accordance with the > procedure described in sub-paragraph 1(a) above, or through the > conference and dispute resolution process set forth in Article II of > Title Four of the Compact, as amended. 2. Disputes involving Subsequent Contributors should be handled as mutually agreed by the Original Parties and Subsequent Contributors. Article 25 Depository The Depository for this Agreement shall be the Government of the United States. Article 26 Final Provisions 1\. This Agreement shall be open for signature by the Governments of the Federated States of Micronesia and the United States. 2\. This Agreement shall enter into force on the effective date of the Compact, as amended. 3\. After entry into force, this Agreement shall be open for accession by Subsequent Contributors, other than the Original Parties, at the invitation of the Joint Trust Fund Committee and in accordance with such arrangements including an initial contribution to the Fund as may be agreed by the Joint Trust Fund Committee. 4\. For a Subsequent Contributor which accedes to this Agreement, the Agreement shall enter into force 30 days after the deposit of its instrument of accession. 5\. [Interpretation]{.underline}. In this Agreement, all references herein to Articles, paragraphs, sub-paragraphs, clauses, and sections shall be deemed references to this Agreement unless the context shall otherwise require. References to statutes or regulations are to be construed as including all statutory or regulatory provisions, as applicable, consolidating, amending or replacing the statute or regulation referred to. All references to agreements and other documents shall be to such documents as amended, modified, supplemented or restated from time to time in a manner consistent with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all terms of an accounting or financial nature shall be construed in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, as in effect from time to time in the United States of America. DONE at \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, in duplicate, this\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ day of \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, 2003, each text being equally authentic. FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA:	en
all-txt-docs	359949	----------------------------------------------------------------- Thursday, June 7, 1990 Audio Service: 202/755-1788 ----------------------------------------------------------------- This is NASA Headline News for Thursday, June 7........ A news conference is scheduled today to discuss yesterday's liquid hydrogen leak test on the orbiter Columbia. Kennedy Space Center technicians have isolated the location of the leak that caused last week's delay in the launch of Astro-1. A decision to roll the Space Shuttle Columbia off launch pad 39-A and back to the Vehicle Assembly Building will be addressed as well as the potential impact on launch dates for STS-35 and future missions. The conference is scheduled for 2:00 P.M. EDT. ****** The China Council for the Promotion of International Trade and its Chamber of International Commerce will sponsor Asia's largest telecommunications conference this November, according to Space Fax Daily. Expo Comm China 90 will include developments in communications satellites, maritime satellite systems and related equipment. The story reports the minister for the People's Republic of China Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications said, the China market is projected by mid-1990 to grow at a rate of 10 percent annually. The government is reported to have a $22 billion budget package to continue modernization of China's communications infrastructure. **** The unmanned Soviet "Kristall" module carrying supplies for the two cosmonauts failed to dock with the Mir space station yesterday, the Reuters wire service reports. It appears a computer automatically shut down the docking maneuver about two hours ahead of schedule, according to the story. The Soviet Tass news agency said the computer may have pinpointed a malfunction in one of the engines of the Kristall module's orientation system. A second attempt may occur tomorrow. **** Columnist Jack Anderson's column discusses space debris and says "U.S. and Soviet officials are quietly conducting junk-reduction talks." Anderson says NASA is handling the negotiation with the Soviets" in hopes of keeping politics out of it." ****** --------------------------------------------------------------- Here's the broadcast schedule for Public Affairs events on NASA Select TV. All times are Eastern. Thursday, June 7........ 11:30 A.M. NASA Update will be transmitted. 12:00 P.M. Mission of Apollo/Soyuz 12:30 P.M. COBE 12:45 P.M. C.A.S.I.S. Workshop (Center of Atmospheric and Space Information Sciences) 2:00 P.M. STS Operations-Live Press Briefing Launch Schedules and Priorities ----------------------------------------------------------------- All events and times are subject to change without notice. These reports are filed daily, Monday through Friday, at 12:00 P.M. EDT. This is a service of the Internal Communications Branch, NASA HQ. Contact: JSTANHOPE on NASAmail or at 202/453-8425. ----------------------------------------------------------------- NASA Select TV: Satcom F2R, Transponder 13, C-Band 72 Degrees West Longitude, Audio 6.8, Frequency 3960 MHz. -----------------------------------------------------------------	en
all-txt-docs	083748	No. 97-601 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 1996 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, PETITIONER v. LARRY R. WILLIAMS ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI LAWRENCE M. NOBLE General Counsel RICHARD B. BADER Associate General Counsel DAVID KOLKER Attorney Federal Election Commission Washington, D.C. 20463 SETH P. WAXMAN Acting Solicitor General EDWIN S. KNEEDLER Deputy Solicitor General KENT L. JONES Assistant to the Solicitor General Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 20530-0001 (202) 514-2217 ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether a suit by the Federal Election Com- mission to obtain an injunction against future violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act is subject to the statute of limitations that applies to an "action, suit or proceeding for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture" (28 U. S. Cl. 2462). 2. Whether, when a defendant fraudulently con- ceals willful violations of federal campaign contri- bution Imitations, the Federal Election Commission is deemed, as a matter of law, to have notice sufficient to commence the running of the statute of limitations from routine reports filed with it that do not disclose the violations. (I) ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Opinions below . . . . 1 Jurisdiction . . . . 1 Statutory provision involved . . . . 2 Statement . . . . 3 Reasons for granting the petition . . . . 10 Conclusion . . . . 25 Appendix A . . . . 1a Appendix B . . . . 15a Appendix C . . . . 21a Appendix D . . . . 23a Appendix E . . . . 33a TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Badaracco v. Commissioner, 464 U.S. 386 (1984) . . . . 11 Bailey v. Glover, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 342 (1874) . . . . 20 Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1 (1976) . . . . 4 Cope v. Anderson, 331 U.S. 461 (1947) . . . . 14, 15, 17, 18 Crown Coat Front Co. v. United States, 386 U.S. 503 (1967) . . . . 23 E.I. Dupont Nemours & Co. v. Davis, 264 U.S. 456 (1924) . . . . 11 Exploration Co. v. United States, 247 U. S. 435 (1918) . . . . 20 FEC v. Christian Coalition, 965 F.Supp. 66 (D.D.C. 1997) . . . . 18, 19 FEC v. Machinists Non-Partisan Political League, 655 F.2d 380 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 897 (1981) . . . . 24, 25 FEC v. National Republican Senatorial Comm., 877 F. Supp. 15 (D.D.C. 1995) . . . . 11 (III) ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- IV Cases-Continued: Page FEC v. National Rifle Ass'n, 553 F. Supp. 1331 (D.D.C. 1983) . . . . 23 FEC v. National Right to Work Comm., Inc., 916 F. Supp. 10 (D.D.C. 1996) . . . . 19 (Gruca v. United Slates Steel Corp., 495 F.2d 1252 (3d Cir. 1974) . . . . 18 Holmberg v. Armbrecht, 327 U.S. 392 (1946) . . . . 8, 13, 17, 18, 20 Klehr v. A.O. Smith Corp., 117 S. Ct. 1984 (1997) . . . . 24-25 Nemkov v. O'Hare Chicago Corp., 592 F.2d 351 (7th Cir. 1979) . . . . 18 Republican National Comm. v. FEC, 76 F.3d 400 (D.C. Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 682 (1997) . . . . 21 Russell v. Todd, 309 U.S. 280 (1940) . . . . 17, 18 Sierra Club v. Chevron U. S.A., Inc., 834 F.2d 1517 (9th Cir. 1987) . . . . 23 Swan v. Board of Higher Educ., 319 F.2d 56 (2d Cir. 1963) . . . . 18 UA Local 343 v. Nor-Cal Plumbing, Inc., 48 F.3d 1465 (9th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 297 (1995) . . . . 22 United States v. Banks, 115 F.3d 916 (11th Cir. 1997) . . . . 10-11, 12, 15 United States v. Hobbs, 736 F. Supp. 1406 (E.D. Va. 1990), aff'd, 947 F.2d 941 (4th Cir. 1991) . . . . 19 United States v. Telluride Co., 884 F. Supp. 404 (D. Colo. 1995) . . . . 19 United States v. Whited & Wheless, 246 U.S. 552 (1918) . . . . 12 ,13 ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- V Statutes and regulation: Page Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, 2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.: 2 U.S.C. 431(13) . . . . 21 2 U.S.C. 432(l) . . . . 21 2 U.S.C. 434(b)(3)(A) . . . . 21 2 U.S.C. 437d(a)(9) . . . . 23 2 U.S.C. 437g(a) . . . . 23 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(2) . . . . 4, 6, 24 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(4)(A) . . . . 10 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(4)(A)(i) . . . . 4 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(6)(A) . . . . 2, 4, 6, 12 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(6)(C) . . . . 2, 4, 6, 7 2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)(A) . . . . 3 2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(8) . . . . 3 2 U.S.C. 441f . . . . 3, 5 2 U.S.C. 455 . . . . 6, 12 15 U.S.C. 45(l) . . . . 19 21 U.S.C. 134e . . . . 19 28 U.S.C. 2462 . . . . passim 29 U.S.C. 212(I)) . . . . 19 29 U.S.C. 216(e) . . . . 19 29 U.S.C. 217 . . . . 19 42 U.S.C. 2280 . . . . 19 42 U.S.C. 2282 . . . . 19 11 C.F.R. 110.4(b)(2)(i) . . . . 3 Miscellaneous: 1 Pomeroy's Equity Jurisprudence (5th ed. 1941) . . . . 16, 17 ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 1996 No. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, PETITIONER v. LARRY R. WILLLAMS ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI The Acting Solicitor General, on behalf of the Federal Election Commission, respectfully petitions for a writ of certiorari to review the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in this case. OPINIONS BELOW The opinion of the court of appeals (App., infra, 1a- 14a) is reported at 104 F.3d 237. The opinions of the district court (App., infra, 15a-20a, 21a-22a) are unreported. JURISDICTION The judgment of the court of appeals was entered on December 26, 1996. A petition for rehearing was denied on June 5, 1997. On August 15, 1997, Justice (1) ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 2 O'Connor extended the time for filing a petition for a writ of certiorari to October 3, 1997. The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under 28 U.S.C. 1254(1). STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED 1. 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(6)(A) provides, in relevant part: If the Commission is unable to correct or prevent any violation of this Act * * * by the I [conciliation] methods specified in paragraph I (4)(A), the Commission may, upon an affirmative vote of 4 of its members, institute a civil action for relief, including a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or any other ap- propriate order (including an order for a civil penalty which does not exceed the greater of $5,000 or an amount equal to any contribution or expenditure involved in such violation) in the district court of the United States for the district in which the person against whom such action is brought is found, resides, or transacts business. 2. 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(6)(C) provides, in relevant part: In any civil action for relief instituted by the Commission under subparagraph (A), if the court determines that the Commission has established that the person involved in such civil action has committed a knowing and willful violation of this Act 1 * * , the court may impose a civil penalty which does not exceed the greater of $10,000 or an amount equal to 200 percent of any contribution or expenditure involved in such violation. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 3 3. 28 U.S.C. 2462 provides: Except as otherwise provided by Act of Con- gress, an action, suit or proceeding for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfei- ture, pecuniary or otherwise, shall not be enter- tained unless commenced within five years from the date when the claim first accrued if, within the same period, the offender or the property is found within the United States in order that proper service may be made thereon. STATEMENT 1. The Federal Election Campaign Act prohibits individuals from making contributions "to any candi- date and his authorized political committees with respect to any election for Federal office which, in the aggregate, exceed $1,000." 2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)(A). The Act further prohibits individuals from "mak[ing] a contribution in the name of another person or know- ingly permitting] his name to be used to effect such a contribution." 2 U.S.C. 441f. A "contribution[] in the name of another" includes "[g]iving money * * * which was provided to the contributor by another person * * * without disclosing the source of [the] money." 11 C.F.R. 110.4(b)(2)(i). In applying these limitations, "all contributions made by a person, either directly or indirectly, on behalf of a particular candidate, including contributions which are * * * directed through an intermediary or conduit to such candidate, shall be treated as contributions from such person to such candidate." 2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(8). The Federal Election Commission is an independ- ent agency that Congress has vested with "primary and substantial responsibility for administering and ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 4 enforcing the Act." Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 109 (1976). The Commission is authorized to institute investigations when "it has reason to believe that a person has committed, or is about to commit, a violation" of the Act. 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(2). If the Com- mission determines that a violation of the Act has been committed, or is about to be committed, the Commission is then to attempt, "for a period of at least 30 days, to correct or prevent such violation by informal methods of conference, conciliation, and persuasion" (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(4)(A)(i)). If the Com- mission is unable to correct or prevent any violation of the Act through such informal conciliation, it may then commence an action in federal district court seeking any of the following relief (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(6)(A)): a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or any other appropriate order (including an order for a civil penalty which does not exceed the greater of $5,000 or an amount equal to any contribution or expenditure involved in such violation) * * * . In any case involving a willful violation of the Act, "the court may impose a civil penalty which does not exceed the greater of $10,000 or an amount equal to 200 percent of any contribution or expenditure involved in such violation." 2 U.S.C. 431 2. In an effort to raise funds for the presidential campaign of Jack Kemp in 1987, respondent Larry Williams devised a scheme to circumvent the federal limitations on campaign contributions. The Kemp campaign was sponsoring a fundraising promotion that allowed any individual who contributed $1,000 to purchase a ticket to the Super Bowl for $100. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 5 Respondent purchased a large number of Super Bowl tickets at $100 apiece and "gave those tickets to people whom he persuaded to contribute $1000 to Kemp's campaign" (App., infra, 2a). In 22 instances, however, "Williams 'advanced' $1000 to the con- tributor" and then "later resold the tickets and re- covered the sums advanced" (ibid.). Respondent thus violated 2 U.S.C. 441f by personally contributing in excess of $22,000 to the Kemp campaign through the use of others as his proxies (App., infra, 18a-19a), In arranging and executing this scheme, respondent was aware of the federal campaign contribution limita- tions and knowingly violated them (id. at 18a-19a & n.1). Respondent's scheme required the contribution checks to the Kemp campaign to be issued by the individuals who Williams reimbursed, rather than by Williams himself. The disclosure reports filed with the Federal Election Commission by the Kemp campaign committee thus revealed the names and addresses of the 22 donors but provided no indication that Williams had reimbursed these individuals for the contributions. See S.E.R. 109-134. 1. 3. On September 12, 1988, a former employee' of respondent named Richard Hooton filed a sworn administrative complaint with the Federal Election Commission. The complaint alleged that respondent had made illegal campaign contributions. Prior to receiving that complaint, the Commission had no "reason to suspect Williams's involvement in [the 22 individual] contributions" (App., infra, 1la (Fletcher, J., dissenting)). When informed of Hooton's charges, ___________________(footnotes) 1 "S.E.R." refers to the Supplemental Excerpts of Record filed with the Commission's brief in the court of appeals. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 6 respondent denied them, stating that they were the "wild allegations" of a "disgruntled" former employee (S.E.R. 11-17). 4. a. After an investigation and attempted con- ciliation of the violations-as required by 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(2) and (4)-the Commission brought this civil enforcement action against respondent in federal district court on October 19, 1993. The Commission sought a monetary civil penalty for respondent's past willful violations of the Act (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(6)(C)) and an injunction barring any future violations (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(6)(A)). b. Respondent moved to dismiss the complaint, contending that the Commission's suit was barred by 28 U.S.C. 2462. That statute specifies that, "[e]xcept as otherwise provided by Act of Congress, an action, suit or proceeding for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture, pecuniary or otherwise, shall not be entertained unless commenced within five years from the date when the claim first accrued" (ibid.). The district court denied the motion to dismiss. The court noted that Congress had provided a three-year limitation period for criminal enforcement actions under the Federal Election Campaign Act (2 U.S.C. 455) but had specified "no time limit for civil actions" (App., infra, 25a). The court stated that this "was not a mistake or an oversight" but instead reflected a legislative intent that there be "no time limit on FECA civil actions" (ibid.). The court con- cluded that "the catch all statute of limitations" of 28 U.S.C. 2462 is therefore inapplicable to civil suits to enforce the federal campaign contribution laws (App., infra, 26a). ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 7 c. On the merits, the district court granted judg- ment to the Commission. The court found that respondent's scheme plainly violated the campaign contribution limitations and that "there is no doubt [respondent] knew of the Act's prohibitions" (App., infra, 19a). The court concluded that "[t]his is sufficient to establish willfulness under the Act" and therefore imposed a civil penalty against respondent "in the amount of $10,000" (ibid.). See 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(6)(C). Noting that respondent, in the face of clear evidence of his actions, expressed the "con- tinuing belief he committed no wrong-doing," the court also enjoined respondent "from similar vio- lations of the Act for a period of 10 years" (App., infra, 19a-20a). 5. a. The court of appeals reversed (App., infra, 1a- 9a), with one judge dissenting (id. at 9a-14a). The majority held (id. at 3a-5a) that the statute of limitations contained in 28 U.S.C. 2462 applies to this case because the Commission's suit is an "action * * * for the enforcement of [a] civil * * * penalty" (ibid.). The majority rejected the Commission's contention that this statute of limitations-which, by its terms, applies to suits to enforce civil penalties- "does not apply to actions for injunctive relief" (App., infra, 5a). The court stated (ibid.): This assertion runs directly contrary to the Supreme Court's holding in Cope v. Anderson, 331 U.S. 461,464 (1947). Cope holds that "equity will withhold its relief in such a case where the applicable statute of limitations would bar the concurrent legal remedy." In other words, be- cause the claim for injunctive relief is connected ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 8 to the claim for legal relief, the statute of limitations applies to both. The majority also rejected the Commission's argu- ment that, if this statute of limitations applies to this case, it was nonetheless tolled by respondent's fraudulent concealment of his unlawful acts. The majority agreed that the limitations period imposed by 28 U.S.C. 2462 "is subject to equitable tolling" when the material facts have been fraudulently concealed by the defendant (App., infra, 7a, citing Holmberg v. Ambrecht, 327 U.S. 392 (1946)). The court also did not doubt that respondent's scheme involved a fraudulent concealment of the facts. The court stated, however, that a plaintiff relying on this tolling doctrine must establish that it exercised "due diligence" to discover the facts. The court concluded that the Commission could not meet that requirement in this case because, in the court's view, the federal "campaign finance reporting requirements are, as a matter of law, sufficient to give FEC 'notice of facts that, if investigated, would indicate the elements of a cause of action'" (App., infra, 7a). The court stated that there is "no allegation" that the campaign finance reports filed in connection with respondent's activities "contained false information," and it con- cluded that the Commission, "through a duly diligent exercise of its investigatory power, * * * could have discovered the operative facts giving rise to this suit" (id. at 8a). See note 6, infra. b. Judge Fletcher dissented (App., infra, 9a-14a). She accepted without comment the conclusion of the majority that the statute of limitations in 28 U.S.C. 2462 applies to actions to impose civil penalties under the Federal Election Campaign Act. She also did not ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 9 address the majority's conclusion that this statute of limitations applies equally to the Commission's request for an injunction as to its request for civil penalties. She disagreed with the majority, however, in the application of the doctrine of equitable tolling to this case. Judge Fletcher concluded (i) that the statute of limitations was tolled in this case by the fraudulent concealment of facts by respondent and (ii) that the disclosure reports on which the majority relied could not commence the running of the limitations period because those reports, in fact, "prevented] discovery of that violation" by the Commission (App., infra, 10a). Judge Fletcher noted that the majority's con- trary conclusion "in effect imposes a duty on the FEC to investigate every report even though nothing on its face indicates illegal activity, or else risk being barred by the statute of limitations when a violation comes to light" (id. at 1 la). She stated (id. at 12a): If the statute of limitations is not equitably tolled in penalty proceedings involving the kind of violation that was committed in this case, the result will be a perverse reward for violators of the campaign-finance laws: those who are most clever in deceiving the FEC and concealing their illegal contributions will be the least likely to be prosecuted successfully, since their violations will take the longest time to come to light. Judge Fletcher concluded that "[equitable tolling is proper in this case" because, "'without any fault or want of diligence or care', the FEC did not discover Williams's fraud until the complaint against him was made to the FEC in September 1988" (App., infra, ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 10 10a). She explained that the action was timely because the statute of limitations (i) was first tolled by respondent's fraudulent concealment of the facts until the administrative complaint was filed and (ii) was then further tolled during the period that manda- tory notice and conciliation efforts were conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(4)(A) (App., infra, 12a- 14a). REASONS FOR GRANTING THE PETITION The decision of the court of appeals creates a con- flict among the circuits on recurring issues of sub- stantial importance to the enforcement of numerous federal laws. The decision also creates significant obstacles to enforcing the Federal Election Campaign Act against persons who evade its requirements and conceal their conduct by causing the filing of reports that disclose what appear to be lawful contributions. Review by this Court is therefore warranted. 1. Congress has specified that "an action, suit or proceeding for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture, pecuniary or otherwise, shall not be entertained unless commenced within five years from the date when the claim first accrued" (28 U.S.C. 2462). This case involves whether that statute of limitations applies to suits in equity brought by the United States to obtain an injunction barring future violations of a substantive statutory prohibition. The Ninth Circuit held in this case that, when the "claim for injunctive relief is connected to the claim for legal relief, the statute of limitations applies to both" (App., infra, 5a). The Eleventh Circuit, by contrast, has expressly rejected the reasoning of the Ninth Circuit in this case and has concluded that "[t]he plain language of section 2462 does not apply to equitable ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 11 remedies." United States v. Banks, 115 F.3d 916,919 & n.6 (1997). The decision in the present case thus creates a conflict on a recurring, important question of federal law. Moreover, in holding that 28 U.S.C. 2462 applies not only to suits brought to obtain "enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture" (ibid.) but also to suits in equity to enjoin future violations of the law, the court of appeals has fundamentally misapplied the decisions of this Court. a. The plain language of 28 U.S.C. 2462 provides a limitations period only "for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture" (ibid.). Nothing in that text states or implies that the statute governs the availability of injunctive relief. As the Eleventh Circuit correctly concluded, "[t]he plain language of section 2462 does not apply to equitable remedies." United States v. Banks, 115 F.3d at 919. Accord, FEC v. National Republican Senatorial Comm., 877 F. Supp. 15, 21 (D.D.C. 1995) ("appl[ying] the 2462 statute of limitations to both legal and equitable relief * * * is contrary to the express language of the statute"). The fact that the statute of limitations does not apply by its terms to suits for injunctive relief is dispositive of the question whether it bars such suits by implication. This Court "long ago pronounced the standard: 'Statutes of limitation sought to be applied to bar rights of the Government, must receive a strict construction in favor of the Government.'" Badaracco v. Commissioner, 464 U.S. 386,391 (1984), quoting E.I. Dupont de Nemours & Co. v. Davis, 264 U.S. 456, 462 (1924). As the Eleventh Circuit concluded in United States v. Banks, the "canon of statutory construction that any statute of limitations ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 12 sought to be applied against the United States must receive a strict construction in favor of the Government'' requires the conclusion that 28 U.S.C 2462 applies, as its text reflects, "only to civil penal- ties" and does not bar claims for injunctive relief. 115 F.3d at 919. The principle that a statute of limitations must be express in limiting suits by the government applies even when, as in the present case, the government has two remedies that stem from the same substantive right. 2. This Court has consistently held that, when a statute of limitations expressly limits only one of two alternative remedies, the other is not barred by implication. United States v. Whited & Wheless, 246 U.S. 552, 564 (1918). The doctrine "that where there are two remedies for the protection of a right one may be barred and the other not, is no novelty in the law." Id. at 564. The Court has emphasized that this general principle has particular force in cases involving the remedies of the United States, for it is (id. at 561) (citation omitted) settled "as a great principle of public policy" that the "United States, asserting rights vested in them as a sovereign government, are not bound by any statute of limitations, unless Congress has ___________________(footnotes) 2 The Commission is authorized by 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(6)(A) to "institute a civil action for relief, including a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or any other appro- priate order (including an order for a civil penalty * * * )." The Federal Election Campaign Act contains a statute of limitations on criminal enforcement, 2 U.S.C. 455, but contains no limitation for civil actions brought to obtain either the injunctive relief or the civil penalties authorized by Sec- tion 437g(a)(6)(A). See App., infra, 26a. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 13 clearly manifested its intention that they should be so bound" * * * . The rule requiring "a restrictive, a strict, con- struction" of statutes that "bar the rights of the Government" (United States v. Whited & Wheless, 246 U.S. at 561) thus requires that 28 U.S.C. 2462 not be interpreted to exclude remedies other than those that the statute particularly and expressly encom- passes. This statute of limitations is directed, by its terms, only to suits "for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture" (ibid.). An injunction against future violations of law is not a "fine, penalty or forfeiture" for past violations and therefore does not fall within the plain language of the statute. In the present case, as in Whited & Wheless, because the "statute of limitations did not create the right of action * * * or either of the remedies * * * and in terns applies only to one remedy; the second remedy is not barred (246 U.S. at 561, 564). This conclusion would seem especially obvious when, as in the present case, the alternative remedy is an equitable one. It has long been established that statutes of limitation govern only legal rights; they do not control the availability of equitable relief. As this Court explained in Holmberg v. Armbrecht, 327 U.S. 392,396 (1946) (emphasis added): Traditionally and for good reasons, statutes of limitation are not controlling measures of equitable relief. Such statutes have been drawn upon by equity solely for the light they may shed in determining that which is decisive for the chancellor's intervention, namely, whether the plaintiff has inexcusably slept on his rights so as ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 14 to make a decree against the defendant unfair. *** Equity eschews mechanical rules; it depends on flexibility. Equity has acted on the principle that "lathes is not like limitation, a mere matter of time; but principally a question of the inequity of permitting the claim to be enforced-an inequity I founded upon some change in the condition or relations of the property or the parties." * * * And so, a suit in equity may lie though a comparable cause of action at law would be bar- red. b. In concluding that 28 U.S.C. 2462 governs equi- table relief, as well as suits "for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture," the court of appeals did not discuss (or even cite) any of these decisions of this Court. Instead, the court of appeals relied exclusively on the statement in this Court's decision in Cope v. Anderson, 331 U.S. at 464, that "equity will withhold its relief in such a case where the applicable statute of limitations would bar the concurrent legal remedy" (App., infra, 5a). The court of appeals believed that, under the "concurrent" remedy doctrine, because the claim for injunctive relief is connected to the claim for legal relief, the of limitations is applicable to both" (ibid.). The court of appeals erred in its understanding of Cope and of the "concurrent" remedy doctrine. In Cope, the receiver of a failed national bank brought an action in equity for monetary relief, seeking to enforce the assessed liability of the bank's stock- holders pursuant to the National Bank Act. Although the receiver could have brought multiple suits at law against each individual stockholder, he was permitted ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 15 to bring a single action in equity that consolidated the claims against all of the shareholders. 331 U.S. at 463. The Court concluded in Cope that this "con- current" equitable proceeding should not be per- mitted to proceed because the statute of limitations would bar the same relief if sought in separate legal actions against the individuals. Id. at 464. The court of appeals erred for two reasons in rely- ing on Cope in this case. First, Cope involved litiga- tion between private parties in which the rule of strict construction of statutes of limitation asserted against the government was not implicated. As the Eleventh Circuit stated in criticizing the opinion in the present case, the court of appeals erred in relying on Cope by "fail[ing] to distinguish between the application of the statute of limitations to the United States in its private versus its sovereign capacity." United States v. Banks, 115 F.3d at 919 n.6. The court of appeals also erred in assuming that the "concurrent" remedy doctrine discussed in Cope has any application to this case. That doctrine does not, as the court of appeals incorrectly stated, apply to the ordinary situation in which "the claim for injunctive relief is connected to the claim for legal relief" (App., infra, 5a) simply in the sense that the two remedies are available for the same misconduct. Instead, the "concurrent" remedy doctrine describes the situation in which, as in Cope, the equity court acts merely in aid of the legal remedy and is not exercising its "exclusive" equitable jurisdiction. Equity courts have long recognized a distinction between their "concurrent jurisdiction" and their "exclusive jurisdiction." The "concurrent jurisdic- tion" of equity courts refers to those situations in which the "law must, through its judicial procedure, ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 16 give some remedy of the same general nature as that given by equity, but this legal remedy is not, under the circumstances, full, adequate, and com- plete." 1 Pomeroy's Equity Jurisprudence 139, at 191-192 (5th ed. 1941). By contrast, injunctive relief of the type sought in the present case is part of equity's "exclusive jurisdiction," not its "concurrent jurisdic- tion" (id. 136, at 186 id. 5138, at 189): This distinction or opposition between the "exclusive" and the "concurrent" relates wholly to the nature and form of the remedies which are administered by equity courts * * . [R]emedies granted may be of a kind which are peculiar to equity courts, such as reformation, cancellation, injunction * * . * * * Cases in which the remedy sought and obtained is one which equity courts alone are able to confer must * * * belong to the exclusive jurisdiction of equity, even though the primary fight * * * is one which courts of law recognize, and * * * give some remedy. * * * [T]he parti- cular fact or event which occasions the peculiar equitable remedy * * * may also be the occasion of a legal remedy * * * . These * * * cases cannot, however, be regarded or treated as belonging to the concurrent jurisdiction * * * . The criterion which I have given is always simple and certain in referring to the exclusive jurisdic- tion all cases in which the remedy is given by courts of equity alone, without regard to the nature of the substantive right which forms the basis of the action * * * . ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 17 This Court has recognized and applied this distinc- tion between the concurrent and exclusive jurisdic- tion of equity courts. In Russell v. Todd, 309 U.S. 280,289 (1940), the Court explained that "when * * * the suit is brought in aid of a legal right, equity will withhold its remedy if the legal right is barred by the * * * statute of limitations. " "But where the equity jurisdiction is exclusive and is not exercised in aid or support of a legal right, * * * statutes of limitations barring actions at law are inapplicable." Ibid. See also Holmberg v. Armbrecht, 327 U.S. at 396. In the present case, as in Russell v. Todd, 309 U.S. at 289, "the equity jurisdiction is exclusive" because the remedy sought is not available at law. The "statutes of limitations barring actions at law are [therefore] inapplicable." Ibid. The "concurrent" remedy doctrine described in Cope thus has no application to the action brought by the Commission to obtain prospective injunctive relief in this case. In Cope, the Court explained that "it is only the scope of the relief sought and the multitude of parties sued which give equity con- current jurisdiction to enforce the legal obligation." 331 U.S. at 463-464 (emphasis added). The claim at issue in that case-involving the assessed monetary liability of the stockholders-did not arise in equity. Instead, it involved enforcement of a legal right. The jurisdiction of the equity court in Cope derived solely from its ability to bring the entire class of stock- holders into a single proceeding. See 1 Pomeroy's Equity Jurisprudence, supra, 174, 175, 181, 243. Equity was invoked in Cope to "enforce the legal obligation" (331 U.S. at 464), not to provide a remedy that was exclusively within its jurisdiction. It is only when equitable jurisdiction is invoked to "enforce the ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 18 legal obligation" that the equity court is to "withhold its relief" when the statute of limitations on the legal claim has expired. Ibid. Accord, Russell v. Todd, 309 U.S. at 289. In the present case, the prospective injunctive relief sought by the government was an exclusively equitable, rather than concurrent, remedy. The government's "suit in equity [therefore] may lie though a comparable cause of action at law would be barred." Holrnberg v. Armbrecht, 327 U.S. at 396. 3. c. The question presented in this case has sub- stantial recurring importance. Numerous statutes specifically authorize government agencies to obtain civil penalties for past violations and injunctive relief ___________________(footnotes) 3 The courts of appeals are divided m their understanding of this traditional distinction between the concurrent and ex- clusive jurisdiction of equity courts. Some circuits have applied the same erroneous understanding of the "concurrent" remedy doctrine that the court of appeals adopted in this case. See, e.g., Nemkov v. O'Hare Chicago Corp., 592 F.2d 351, 355 (7th Cir. 1979) (if the "sole remedy is not in equity and an action at law can be brought on the same facts, the remedies are concurrent"); Swan v. Board of Higher Educ., 319 F.2d 56, 59-60 n.5 (2d Cir. 1963) (plaintiff "is not here asserting 'a federal right for which the sole remedy is in equity,' * * * and hence the situation is one of 'concurrent' legal and equitable jurisdiction"). Other courts, however, have correctly applied the "concur- rent" remedy rule. See Gruca v. United States Steel Corp., 495 F.2d 1252, 1257-1258 (3d Cir. 1974) ("although plaintiff's demand for legal and equitable relief arises out of the same factual complex, it does not necessarily follow that the jurisdiction of equity is 'concurrent' with that of law, as that word is used in Russell v. Todd); FEC v. Christian Coalition, 965 F.Supp. 66, 70-72 (D.D.C. 1997) (under the principles of Cope and Russell, 28 U.S.C. 2462 does not bar the government's claim for equitable relief). ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 19 barring future violations. 4. The proper application of the statute of limitations for actions to enforce a "civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture" (28 U.S.C. 2462) to the injunctive relief authorized by these statutes is an issue that is frequently litigated and on which the courts have frequently disagreed. Compare, e.g., FEC v. Christian Coalition, 965 F. Supp. 66 (D.D.C. 1997) (Section 2462 does not bar agency claim for injunctive relief); United States v. Hobbs, 736 F. Supp. 1406 (E.D. Va. 1990) (same), with FEC v. National Right To Work Committee, 916 F. Supp. 10 (D.D.C. 1996) (Section 2462 does bar agency claim for injunctive relief); United States v. Telluride Co., 884 F. Supp. 404 (D. Colo. 1995) (same). Review by this Court is warranted to resolve the conflict that exists among the courts of appeals on this important recurring question. 2. The court of appeals correctly acknowledged that, to the extent that 28 U.S.C. 2462 applies to this case, the statute of limitations "is subject to equitable tolling" because of the fraudulent con- cealment of facts by respondent (App., infra, 7a). As the court explained (id. at 6a-7a): The doctrine of equitable tolling provides that "where a plaintiff has been injured by fraud and remains in ignorance of it without any fault or ___________________(footnotes) 4 Many statutes authorize government agencies to obtain both civil penalties and injunctive relief to protect the public. See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. 45(l) (Federal Trade Commission to prevent unfair trade practices); 21 U.S.C. 134e (Secretary of Agricul- ture to prevent spread of disease); 29 U.S.C. 212(b), 216(e), 217 (Secretary of Labor to enjoin and punish violations of child labor laws); 42 U.S.C. 2280, 2282 (Nuclear Regulatory Com- mission to enforce rules concerning the handling of nuclear material). ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 20 want of diligence or care on his part, the bar of the statute does not begin to run until the fraud is discovered . . . . " Holmberg v. Armbrecht, 327 U.S. 392,-397 (1946) (internal quotations omitted). "This equitable doctrine is read into every federal statute of limitation." Id. See also Exploration Co. v. United States, 247 U.S. 435 (1918); Bailey v. Glover, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 342 (1874). 5. The court of appeals erred, however, in its appli- cation of the doctrine of equitable tolling to the present case. The court noted that a party that contends that the statute of limitations is tolled by fraudulent concealment of facts must-establish that it exercised "due diligence" to discover those facts (App., infra, 7a). The court held that the Commission could not meet that requirement in this case because, in the court's view, the federal "campaign finance reporting requirements are, as a matter of law, sufficient to give FEC 'notice of facts that, if investi- gated, would indicate the- elements of a cause of action'" (ibid.). The court concluded that, "through a duly diligent exercise of its investigatory power, [the Commissional could have discovered the operative facts giving rise to this suit" (id. at 8a). This holding is premised upon "a fundamental mis- understanding of the investigatory powers of the ___________________(footnotes) 5 In Bailey v. Glover, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) at 349-350, the Court stated that "when there has been no negligence or lathes on the part of a plaintiff in coming to the knowledge of the fraud which is the foundation of the suit, and when the fraud has been concealed, or is of such character as to conceal itself, the statute does not begin to run until the fraud is discovered *** ." ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 21 Commission. It incorrectly presupposes that the Commission has the authority, and the resources, "to investigate every report, even though nothing on its face indicates illegal activity" (App., infra, 11a) (Fletcher, J., dissenting). Moreover, the court's holding would provide "a perverse reward for vio- lators * * * who are most clever in deceiving the [Commission] and concealing their illegal con- tributions" (id. at 12a) (Fletcher, J., dissenting). Review by this Court is warranted to avert the substantial threat that this holding creates for the legitimate enforcement activity of the Commission. a. The Federal Election Campaign Act imposes an obligation on the treasurer of a political committee to report the name, address, occupation, and employer of any donor who gives more than $200 in a single year. 2 U.S.C. 431(13), 434(b)(3)(A). "Neither the Act nor any other law * * * requires donors [themselves] to disclose this information." Republican National Comm. v. FEC, 76 F.3d 400, 403 (D.C. Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 682 (1997). If the treasurer exer- cises "best efforts" to obtain and report this in- formation, the committee's disclosure reports will comply with the Act even if identifying information is missing. 2 U.S.C. 432(i). When, as in the present case, an unlawful contribution is made through a conduit, the treasurer of the recipient committee may have no reason to suspect the violation. In the absence of any reason for the treasurer to believe that the conduit was not the actual source of the con- tribution, the disclosure report will reflect an apparently lawful contribution from the conduit. In the present case, for example, the Kemp com- mittee's reports disclosed the names and addresses of the 22 individuals but contained no information that ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 22 would cast suspicion on the lawfulness of the contri butions. S.E.R. 109-134. If, as the court of appeals held in this case, such routine and uninformative reports preclude tolling of the statute of limitations, it is difficult to imagine circumstances in which the fraudulent concealment doctrine could be applied to campaign contribution violations. 6. As the dissent correctly concluded, the statute of limitations was tolled by respondent's fraudulent concealment of the truth because, "'without any fault or want of dili- gence or care', the [Commission] did not discover Williams's fraud until the [administrative] complaint against him was made * * * in September 1988" (App., infra, 10a). 7. ___________________(footnotes) 6 The court of appeals stated, without any explanation, that "[t]here is no allegation that the 22 contributions by Williams' employees and friends were not listed in the campaign reports, or otherwise contained false information" (App., infra, 8a) (emphasis added). It is the very essence of the Commission's position, however, that reporting the contributions as if they were from the 22 individuals when, in fact, they were from respondent is "false information." That the Kemp committee was presumably unaware of the false facts contained in its reports does not mean that the reports did not "contain[] false information." 7 Under the doctrine of fraudulent concealment, the period of limitations was further tolled when, in response to the administrative complaint, Williams urged the Commission to take no action because Hooton was a "former, and disgruntled, employee" who filed a "sour grapes" complaint (S.E.R. 11-13). A year later in September 1989, Willliams asserted that Hooton would "recant his previous testimony: which Williams characterized as "wild allegations" (S.E.R. 16-17). "Where a plaintiff suspects the truth but investigates unsuccessfully, fraudulent concealment will toll the statute." UA Local 343 v. Nor-Cal Plumbing, Inc., 48 F.3d 1465, 1475 (9th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 297 (1995). ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 23 The statute of limitations was then further tolled "during those periods in which the [Commission was required to] follow mandatory notice and conciliation procedures" (App., infra, 12a (Fletcher, J., dissent- ing), citing Sierra Club v. Chveron U. S. A., Inc., 834 F.2d 1517 (9th Cir. 1987)), The Federal Election Cam- paign Act contains elaborate administrative proce- dures-including two levels of formal findings and briefing, an investigation, and mandatory concilia- tion-that the Commission must satisfy before it may bring a civil enforcement suit. 2 U.S.C. 437g(a). An action filed by the Commission before it exhausts these mandatory procedures would be dismissed as premature. FEC v. National Rifle Ass'n, 553 F. Supp. 1331, 1337-1339 (D.D.C. 1983). Cf. Crown Coat Front Co, v. United States, 386 U.S. 503, 511-512 (1967) (cause of action does not accrue until "completion of the administrative proceedings con- templated and required" by applicable law because, until those proceedings are completed, the plaintiff has no "right to resort to the courts"). As Judge Fletcher noted, a minimum of 65 days were required for the mandatory administrative procedures to be performed under the Act (App., infra, 12a). The action filed by the Comission in this case was therefore timely (ibid.). b. The court of appeals fundamentally misappre- hended the statutory powers of the Comission in concluding that, through a "diligent exercise of its investigatory power, [the Commission] could have discovered the operative facts" involved in re- spondent's fraudulent concealment of the truth (App., infra, 8a). Although the Commission is empowered to conduct investigations, 2 U.S.C. 437d(a)(9), it is not authorized to investigate potential violations of the ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 24 Act until at least four of its six members determine that there is "reason to believe that a person" has violated the Act. 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(2). The disclosure reports filed by the Kemp committee in this case provided no information that would have supported such a finding. Moreover, a vote to find "reason to believe" can take place only "upon receiving a complaint" filed with the Commission or "on the basis of information ascertained in the normal course of carrying out its supervisory responsibilities" (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(2)). Unlike other government agencies that have broad discretion to gather information and conduct periodic investigations, the "FEC has no such roving statu- tory functions." FEC v. Machinists Non-Partisan Political League, 655 F.2d 380, 387 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 897 (1981). In most instances, inves- tigations "may begin only if an individual first files a signed, sworn, notarized complaint with the Com- mission." Ibid. "[M]ere 'official curiosity' will not suffice as the basis for FEC investigations, as it might in others." Id. at 387-388. In view of the limited nature of the disclosures required by the Act and the significant statutory restrictions on the Commission's authority to in- vestigate violations of the Act, the court of appeals seriously erred in concluding that the "reports required by FECA provide sufficient information to FEC that through a duly diligent exercise of its investigatory power, it could have discovered the operative facts giving rise to this suit" (App., infra, 8a). Application of the due diligence requirement for tolling the statute of limitations in cases of fraudulent concealment must take account of the particular statutory scheme. See Klehr v. A.O. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 25 Smith Corp, 117 S. Ct. 1984, 1993 (1997). As Judge Fletcher explained in dissent, the court's holding would improperly "impose[] a duty on the FE C to investigate every report, even though nothing on its face indicates illegal activity" (App., infra, ha). The Comission lacks any such "roving" authority (FEC v. Machinists Non-Partisan Political League, 655 F.2d at 387), however, and the holding in this case thus provides "a perverse reward" for those "who are most clever in * * * concealing their illegal contri- butions" (App., infra, 12a) (Fletcher, J., dissenting). The decision of the court of appeals threatens substantially to impair the important enforcement functions that Congress has assigned to the Commiss- ion. Review by this Court is therefore warranted. CONCLUSION The petition for a writ of certiorari should be granted. Respectfully submitted. SETH P. WAXMAN Acting Solicitor General LAWRENCE M. NOBLE General Counsel EDWIN S. KNEEDLER Deputy Solicitor General RICHARD B. BADER Associate General Counsel KENT L. JONES Assistant to the Solicitor General DAVID KOLKER Attorney Federal Election Commission OCTOBER 1997 ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX A UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NINTH CIRCUIT D.C. No. CV-93-06321 ER No. 95-55320 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE v. LARRY R. WILLIAMS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Presiding: EDWARD RAFEEDIE, District Judge [Argued and Submitted June 5, 1996] [Decided Dec. 26, 1996] Before: FLETCHER, BEEZER and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. BEEZER, Circuit Judge: Larry R. Williams appeals the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss and grant of a motion for summary judgment in favor of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). Williams argues, inter alia, that the FEC action is time-barred under 28 (la) ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 2a U.S.C. 2462, and that he is not liable for civil penalties under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), 2 U.S.C. 431-455. The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 51331. Williams timely filed a notice of appeal. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291. We hold that 28 U.S.C. 2462 applies, and we reverse. I Jack Kemp sought the 1988 Republican Presiden- tial nomination. At the end of 1987, his campaign com- mittee engaged in a fundraising promotion involving tickets to the Superbowl. The Philadelphia Eagles made a number of tickets available to Kemp's cam- paign for $100 each. Donors who contributed $ 1000 to the Kemp campaign were given the right to purchase one of these $100 tickets. Williams purchased 40 of these tickets from the Philadelphia Eagles for $4000. He then gave those tickets to people whom he persuaded to contribute $1000 to Kemp's campaign, including a number of Williams' friends and employees. In 22 cases, Williams "advanced" $1000 to the contributor as the resale price of the ticket. Williams later resold these tick- ets and recovered the sums advanced. The fate of the other 18 tickets is not relevant to this case. These events occurred between the autumn of 1987 and the end of January, 1988. On September 12, 1988, Richard Hooton, a former Williams employee, filed an administrative complaint with FEC. FEC notified Williams, provided a copy of the complaint and offered him an opportunity to respond. On September 13, 1989, FEC found reason to believe that Williams violated 2 U.S.C. 441f and 441a(a)(1)(A). ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 3a After an investigation and finding probable cause to believe that Williams had violated FECA. FEC con- ducted a statutorily mandated attempt at conciliation from May 24, 1993 to July 20, 1993. Conciliation failed. FEC filed suit on October 19, 1993, seeking the imposition of civil penalties as well as declaratory and injunctive relief. The district court denied Williams' motion to dismiss on limitations grounds and par- tially granted FEC's motion for summary judgment on January 31, 1995. The district court fixed a $10,000 civil penalty and enjoined Williams from similar viola- tions of FECA for 10 years. After a stipulated dis- missal of the remaining count, the court entered final judgment on March 7, 1995. Williams filed a timely notice of appeal. II We review de novo a grant of summary judgment. Warren v. City of Carlsbad, 58 F.3d 439, 441 (9th Cir.1995), cert. denied, ----U.S.---- , 116 S. Ct. 1261, 134 L.Ed.2d 209 (1996). A FECA does not contain an explicit statute of limita- tions for the bringing of actions for civil penalties. Williams argues that the default statute of limita- tions, 28 U.S.C. 2462, applies. It provides: Except as otherwise provided by Act of Congress, an action, suit or proceeding for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture, pecuniary or otherwise, shall not be entertained unless com- menced within five years from the date when the claim first accrued if, within the same period, the offender or the property is found within the ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 4a United States in order that proper service maybe made thereon. Williams argues that this provision applies on its face to FEC suits to impose civil penalties. FEC argues that 2462 is not applicable to suits to impose penalties; that by its terms it applies only to suits to enforce penalties that have previously been imposed. We disagree. We have previously held that "enforcement" in- cludes "assessment." United States v. Walsh, 8 F.3d 659,662-63 (9th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1081, 114 S. Ct. 1830, 128 L.Ed.2d 459 (1994). In Walsh, the government brought an action for civil penalties and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. 57413, the Clean Air Act. The Clean Air Act gives the government the option of issuing administrative penalty orders or bringing a civil action. The government did the latter in Walsh. The relevant statutory provision states: The Administrator [shall or may, depending on the violator] commence a civil action for a permanent or temporary injunction, or to assess and recover a civil penalty . . . 42 U.S.C. 7413(b) (emphasis added). We held in Walsh: Walsh contends that the action of the United States is an action for money damages brought by the United States and founded on a tort, so that the three-year tort statute of limitations applies, 28 U.S.C. 2415(b). Walsh is in error. The gov- ernment's action does not sound in tort but is for ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 5a the enforcement of a civil penalty. The appropri- ate statute is the five-year statute of limitations. 28 U.S.C. 32462. Walsh, 8 F.3d at 662 (emphasis added). It is the law of this circuit that, for the purposes of $2462, "enforce- ment" comprises "assessment." See also 3M Co. (Minnesota Mining and Mfg.) v. Browner, 17 F.3d 1453 (D.C. Cir.1994) (discussing the drafting history of 2462 and concluding that "enforcement" com- prises "imposition"). Two recent cases from the District of the Dis- trict of Columbia also hold that actions for civil penal- ties under FECA are subject to 2462's limitations period. FEC v. National Republican Senatorial Committee, 877 F. Supp. 15 (D.D.C.1995); FEC v. Na- tional Right to Work Committee, Inc., 916 F. Supp. 10 (D.D.C.1996). These cases specifically hold that 2462 applies" to FEC actions for the assessment of civil penalties, and that the limitations period begins to run at the time the alleged offense is committed. We hold that 2462 applies to FEC actions for the assessment or imposition of civil penalties under FECA. B FEC argues that 2462 does not apply to actions for injunctive relief. This assertion runs directly contrary to the Supreme Court's holding in Cope v. Anderson, 331 U.S. 461, 464, 67 S. Ct. 1340, 1341, 91 L. Ed. 1602 (1947). Cope holds that "equity will with- hold its relief in such a case where the applicable statute of limitations would bar the concurrent legal remedy." In other words, because the claim for in- junctive relief is connected to the claim for legal relief, the statute of limitations applies to both. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 6a C FEC next argues that the running of the statute of limitations was tolled during the time that Williams allegedly fraudulently concealed his illegal payments. FEC cites In re United Insurance Management, Inc., 14 F.3d 1380, 1384 (9th Cir. 1994). FEC `also argues that the related "discovery rule" applies, citing No. Calif Retail Clerks Unions v. Jumbo Markets, Inc., 906 F.2d 1371, 1372 (9th Cir.1990). Neither of these cases involves 2462's limitations period. In 3M Co., 17 F.3d at 1460-1463, the D.C. Circuit specifically rejected the application of the discovery rule to the running of limitations periods under 2462. 3M Co. states: [W]e hold that an action, suit or proceeding to assess or impose a civil penalty must be com- menced within five years of the date of the viola- tion giving rise to the penalty. We reject the discovery of violation rule [respondent] advocates as unworkable; outside the language of the statute; inconsistent with judicial interpreta- tions of 2462; unsupported by the discovery of injury rule adopted in non-enforcement, remedial cases; and incompatible with the functions served by a statute of limitations in penalty cases. 17 F.3d at 1462-1463. We agree. 3M Co. is silent on the application of the doctrine of equitable tolling for fraudulent concealment. The doctrine of equitable tolling provides that "where a plaintiff has been injured by fraud and remains in ignorance of it without any fault or want of diligence or care on his part, the bar of the statute does not begin to run until the fraud is discovered . . . . " ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 7a Holmberg v. Armbrecht, 327 U.S. 392, 397, 66 S. Ct. 582, 585, 90 L.Ed. 743 (1946) (internal quotations omitted). "This equitable doctrine is read into every federal statute of limitation." Id . We have found only two cases that have addressed the application of equi- table tolling to 2462's limitations period. United States v. Core Laboratories, Inc., 759 F.2d 480, 484 (5th Cir.1985); United States v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 518 F.Supp. 1021, 1036 (N.D. Ohio 1981). Both cases applied equitable tolling to 2462's limita- tions period. We are compelled by Holmberg to agree; section 2462 is subject to equitable tolling. To establish that equitable tolling applies, a plain- tiff must prove the following elements: fraudulent conduct by the defendant resulting in concealment of the operative facts, failure of the plaintiff to discover the operative facts that are the basis of its cause of action within the limitations period, and due diligence by the plaintiff until discovery of those facts. See, e.g., King & King Enterprises v. Champlin Petro- leum Co., 657 F.2d 1147, 1154 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1164, 102 S. Ct. 1038, 71 L.Ed.2d 320 (1982); Dayco Corp. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 523 F.2d 389,394 (6th Cir.1975). These elements are not met in this case. FECA'S campaign finance reporting requirements are, as a matter of law, sufficient to give FEC "notice of facts that, if investigated, would indicate the elements of a cause of action." Calvin W. Corman, Limitation of Actions 9.7.1 (1991) (citing United Klans of American ica v. McGovern, 621 F.2d 152 (5th Cir. 1980); Jablon v. Dean Witter & Co., 614 F.2d 677 (9th Cir.1980)). FECA specifies that a political committee must file reports that disclose "(the identification of each . . . person . . . who makes a contribution . . . in excess ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 8a of $200." 2 U.S.C. 434(b)(3). The term "identifica- tion" means "in the case of any individual, the name, mailing address, and the occupation of such individual, as well as the name of his or her employer." 2 U.S.C. 431(13)(A). The 22 contributions in this case came from employees and friends of Williams. There is no allegation that the 22 contributions by Williams' em- ployees and friends were not listed in the campaign reports, or otherwise contained false information. FEC is specifically empowered to conduct investiga- tions expeditiously, 2 U.S.C. 437d(a)(9). The reports required by FECA provide sufficient information to FEC that through a duly diligent exercise of its investigatory power, it could have discovered the operative facts giving rise to this suit. Neither the discovery rule nor equitable tolling for fraudulent concealment tolls the running of the limitations period in this case. D Finally, FEC argues that the pendency of adminis- trative proceedings tolled the statute of limitations for the duration of the administrative proceedings, citing Sierra Club v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., 834 F.2d 1517, 1523 (9th Cir.1987). Because it makes no differ- ence to- our conclusion in this case, we do not address the application of Sierra Club. Aggregating all of FECA's mandatory time periods for notice (35 days total) and conciliation (30-90 days), see 2 U.S.C 437g(a), and tolling the running of the statute of limitations for all these time periods, FEC's action would still not be timely. The limita- tions period commenced at the latest on January 31, 1988, and the five-year period expired on January 31, 1993. The maximum 125 days of statutorily mandated ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 9a time for notice and conciliation in FECA would not render timely FEC'S action, which was filed on October 19, 1993. We make no holding as to whether any of these FE CA-mandated time periods fall within the rationale of Sierra Club. III Because we conclude that FEC's suit was untimely and should have been dismissed, we do not address the remaining issues raised by the parties. REVERSED. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge, dissenting: The majority correctly determines that the equita- ble tolling doctrine applies to 28 U.S.C. 2462. How- ever, I cannot agree with the majority's conclusion that the doctrine does not apply to toll the running of the statute in this case. To support its conclusion that the statute of limita- tions began to run as soon as the violation occurred, the majority relies on 3M Co. v. Browner, 17 F.3d 1453 (D. C. Cir. 1994), a decision that is neither the law of our circuit nor directly on point, nor does it deal with the statute involved in this case. In 3M Co., the D.C. Circuit held that a plaintiff's failure to discover a violation of the law in question should not toll the statute of limitations. 17 F.3d at 1463. But in holding that the discovery rule should not apply to 2462, the 3M Co. court had no occasion to consider the "vener- able principle" of equitable tolling. Lampf Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson, 501 U.S. 350, 360-62, 111 S. Ct. 2773, 2781, 115 L.Ed. 2d 321 (1991). 3M Co. simply does not address the situation we face here, in which the very nature of the offense at issue-making a political contribution in the name of another person in order to exceed the $1,000 limit ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 10a on contributions-involves using deceptive methods to conceal violations of the campaign-finance laws. It seems only logical that the discovery rule apply when the defendant's deception in the course of committing a violation prevents discovery of that violation. Equitable tolling prevents a defendant from fraudu- lently depriving a plaintiff of the opportunity to bring a cause of action due to the running of the statute of limitations. "[W]here a plaintiff has been injured by fraud and `remains in ignorance of it without any fault or want of diligence or care on his part, the bar of the statute does not begin to run until the fraud is discov- ered, though there be no special circumstances or efforts on the part of the party committing the fraud to conceal it from the knowledge of the other party.' "Holmberg v. Armbrecht, 327 U.S. 392, 397, 66 S.Ct. 582, 585, 90 L.Ed. 743 (1946) (quoting Bailey V. Glove, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 342; 348, 22 L.Ed. 636 (1874)). Equi- table tolling is proper in this case: "without any fault or want of diligence or care", the FEC did not dis- cover Williams's fraud until the complaint against him was made to the FEC in September 1988. The running of the statute should be tolled at least until that time. Equitable tolling requires both that the defendant engage in fraudulent conduct resulting in conceal- ment of the operative facts giving rise to the violation and that the plaintiff fail to discover the violation within the limitations period despite due diligence. See King & King Enterprises v. Champlin Petro- leum Co., 657 F.2d 1147, 1154 (10th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1164, 102 S. Ct. 1038, 71 L.Ed. 2d 320 (1982); see also In re United Ins. Management, Inc., 14 F.3d 1380, 1385 (9th Cir. 1994) (discussing plain- tiff's duty to diligently investigate potential cause of ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 11a action). The majority states that the FEC "should have discovered the operative facts giving rise to this suit" merely because the names of the 22 persons in whose names Williams made contributions were listed in the campaign reports. Yet nothing before us indi- cates that the FEC had any reason to suspect Wil- liams's involvement in those contributions until it received Richard Hooton's complaint. The majority in effect imposes a duty on the FEC to investigate every report, even though nothing on its face indi- cates illegal activity, or else risk being barred by the statute of limitations when a violation comes to light. Here, the very information contained in the report was used to lull the FEC into believing that no single contributor gave more than the $1,000 limit. I con- clude that the earliest date on which the statute of limitations could have commenced running in this case was September 12, 1988, the date of Hooton's complaint. Moreover, upon receiving Hooton's complaint, the FEC promptly notified Williams and began investigat- ing whether Williams had in fact violated FE CA. The FEC did not find reason to believe that Williams had violated FECA until September 13, 1989, and did not find probable cause to support its suspicions until some time later. There is no indication that the FEC was less than diligent in investigating Williams' al- leged violations. This court faced a similar situation in UA Local 343 v. Nor-Cal Plumbing, Inc., 48 F.3d 1465 (9th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, ----U.S.---- , 116 S. Ct. 297, 133 L.Ed. 2d 203 (1995). There, the National Labor Re- lations Board failed to file suit against the defendant within California's four-year statute of limitations for breach of contract. The NLRB argued that the ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 12a statute was equitably tolled because even though it had reason to suspect the defendant of illegal conduct as early as 1980 and repeatedly sought information from him, it did not have sufficient evidence to sup- port a complaint until the limitations period had run. See id. at 1474-75. The court agreed: "Where a plain- tiff suspects the truth but investigates unsuccess- fully, fraudulent concealment will toll the statute." Id. at 1475. The majority's refusal to apply equitable tolling here raises distressing policy concerns. If the statute of limitations. is not equitably tolled in pen- alty proceedings involving the Kind of violation that was committed in this case, the result will be a per- verse reward for violators of the campaign-finance laws: those who are most clever in deceiving the FEC and concealing their illegal contributions will be the least likely to be prosecuted successfully, since their violations will take the longest time to come to light. Finally, I disagree with the majority's refusal to apply the principles of Sierra Club v. Chevron, U. S.A., Inc., 834 F.2d 1517 (9th Cir. 1987), in de- termining the timeliness of the FEC'S action. The FEC received Hooton's administrative complaint on September 12,1988, and filed suit on October 19,1993. Running the five-year statute of limitations from the filing of Hooton's complaint with the FEC puts the FEC's filing of the suit 37 days after the running of the statute. Application of Sierra Club, however, would toll the statute during those periods in which the agency must follow mandatory notice and con- ciliation procedures. FECA provides a range of 65-125 days for such procedures. The FEC was involved in conciliation efforts with Williams from May 24, 1993, to July 20, 1993, Thus, Sierra Club strongly sug- ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 13a gests that the complaint was timely even without applying equitable tolling. Furthermore, the rationale of Sierra Club high- lights the inappropriateness of reliance on 3M Co. Because the FEC must follow statutorily mandated administrative procedures before it may bring a civil action, running the statute of limitations from the date of the violation would gravely limit the FEC'S ability to fulfill its statutory mandate. Applying the 3M Co. "date of the violation" rule to this case contra- venes both the language and the legislative history of FECA. The Act's enforcement provisions are tied to the receipt of an administrative complaint. They require that the FEC, after receiving an administra- tive complaint, notify the alleged violator and provide him or her with opportunity to respond. 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(1). Only after determining that it has rea- son to believe that the person named in the complaint has violated the Act may the FEC undertake a full investigation of the alleged violation. Id. 437g(a)(2). If it finds probable cause to believe that the person violated the Act, the FEC must engage in conciliation efforts. Id. 437g(a)(4)(A). The FEC may initiate a civil action against the alleged' violator only after conciliation efforts have failed. Id. 437g(a)(5)(D). Congress adopted the notice and conciliation re- quirements of 437g in order to encourage informal resolution of apparent FECA violations. Congress intended the FEC to bring civil actions only "where its informal methods of obtaining compliance fail to correct violations." Joint Explanatory Statement, Conf. Rep. No. 1237, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. (1974), re- printed in 1974 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5618,5662. The statute of limitations should be tolled while the FEC fulfills ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 14a its statutory obligation to resolve informally an alleged FECA violation. I would affirm the District Court's grant of summary judgment to the FEC. I therefore dissent. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 15a APPENDIX B UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA No. CV 93-6321-ER (BX) FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, PLAINTIFF v. LARRY R. WILLIAMS, DEFENDANT ORDER RE: CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT [Filed: Jan. 31, 1995] The parties cross-Motions for Summary Judge- ment came before the Honorable Edward Rafeedie on January 26, 1995. The parties stipulated to waive oral argument on these motions, which Stipulation was approved by the Court. The Court, having considered the Motions, the op- posing and reply papers, and all other matters pre- sented to the Court, HEREBY ORDERS, as follows: 1. The Defendants's Motion for Summary Judge- ment is DENIED and the Plaintiff's Motion for Sum- mary Judgement is GRANTED, for the reasons stated below ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 16a a) The Court does not believe the presence of ex officio members on the Commission makes the Commission's actions constitutionally infirm under the separation of power doctrine. Under the reasoning of Buckley v. Valeo, 96 S. Ct. 612 (1976), the 2 ex officio members do not hold an "Office Under the United States" and therefore there is no violation of Art. I, 6, cl. 2 of the Constitution-which prohibits members of either the House or the Senate from holding such an Office. Moreover, the Court believes that the presence of those members on the Commission does not violate separation of powers principles, because `they were entrusted with an advisory role-and could not vote on Commission action. Although the Court is cognizant of the D.C. Cir- cuit's decision in FEC v. NRA Political Victory Fund, 6 F.3d 821 (D.C. Cir. 1993), cert. dismissed (Dec. 1994), the Ninth Circuit's decision in Lear Siegler, Inc. v. Lehman, 842 F.2d 1102 (9th Cir. 1977) compels a different result. Because the ex officio members do not vote, it does not appear Congress" sought to usurp an executive function. Thus, the focus of the separation of powers in- quiry must shift to whether their presence on the Commission "impermissible undermines" the executive branch's role. Commodi ties Futures Trading Commission v. Schor 106 S. Ct. 3245, 3261 (1986). Quite simply, it does not appear that this is the case. b) Further, even if it were, the de facto author- ity doctrine would permit the Commission's acts to stand. The Supreme Court implemented this doctrine with respect to an earlier version of the ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 17a Act in Buckley, and there appears to be no reason to depart from its reasoning. As a result, even if the Commission's actions were constitutionally defective, the de facto doctrine would permit them to stand. c) The Court does not believe that the Act's provisions are unconstitutionally vague. The Court believes that the statutory provisions are not so vague that "the ordinary person exercising ordinary person common sense [could not] suffi- ciently understand and comply with" them. U.S. Civil Serv. Comm'n v. Nat'l Ass'n of letter Car - riens, 413 U.S. 548 (1978). d) Nor does the Court find merit in Defen- dant's position that because the Commission did not seek an estimation of its claims in Bankruptcy Court, it has waived its right to enforce a civil penalty or is estopped from doing so. There seems to be no dispute that the penalties would be would be non-dischargeable in Defendant's bankruptcy. Thus, this situation seems analogous to In re Hanna 872 F.2d 829 (8th Cir. 1988), in which the Eighth Circuit held that postpetition interest on a non-dischargeable tax debt was collectible, despite the failure to have the amount estimated by the bankruptcy court. e) Finally, the Court is not persuaded that Defendant has suffered prejudice as a result of an excessive delay in the prosecution of the action. f) With respect to the issue of whether Defen- dant's conduct violated the Act, the underlying facts are not disputed: Defendant purchased 40 ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 18a Super Bowl tickets, for $100 each or a total of $4,000, from the Philadelphia Eagles and made them available to a campaign committee for Jack Kemp's 1988 presidential campaign. The tickets were to be used as part of a promotion to obtain contributions: in return for a $1000 contribution, a contributor would receive a free ticket. Similarly, there is no dispute that Defendant either advanced or reimbursed $1,000 to 22 in- dividuals who made $1,000 contributions to the Kemp campaign. Finally, there appears to be no dispute that Defendant contributed $1,694 on his own behalf to the Kemp campaign. g) The Act prohibits both making contribu- tions in another person's name and individual con- tributions in excess of $1,000. 2 U.S.C. 441a(a) (l)(A), 441f. It appears clear to the Court that Defendant's conduct in either advancing or reimbursing the $1,000 to the 22 individuals violates the prohibition of making contributions- including loans, advances or gifts for the pm-pose of influencing an election-in another person's name. This constitutes a violation of 2 U.S.C. 441f, in that Defendant made 22 contributions totalling $22,000 in the names of others to the Jack Kemp for President Committee and Victory '88. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 19a Similarly, by virtue of the fact his total contributions-through his own and others' names-total $27, 694, 1. it is clear that Defendant contributed $26,694 in excess of the statutory limit of $1,000. Further, there is no doubt Defendant knew of the Act's prohibitions. This is sufficient to estab- lish willfulness under the Act, because a defen- dant's belief that he did not violate the Act is not a defense. Defendant's citation to Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991) is inapposite because that case dealt with criminal penalties for tax evasion. More to the point is Davis v. United States, 961 F.2d 867,871 (9th Cir. 1992), which held that in a civil context, willfulness is a voluntary, conscious and intentional act and that bad faith need not be proven. 2. Accordingly, the Court believes civil penalties under 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(6)(C) should be imposed in the amount of $10,000.00. In addition, the Court en- joins Defendant from similar violations of the Act for ___________________(footnotes) 1 Defendant Williams apparently does not dispute the fact that he made actual and in-kind contributions totalling $5,694 (the $4,000 for the tickets $1,694 of other contributions); added to the $22,000, his total contributions were $27,694. The Court notes that even if the $1,000 advances/ reimburse- ments to the 22 individuals did not constitute a violation of 2 U.S.C. 441f, the $22,000 would still be included with. respect to the excess contributions made in Defendant's own name. If the transactions were viewed as re-sales-i.e., that Defendant's purchased a ticket worth $1,000 from each individual-Defen- dant's contribution of the tickets to the campaign committees should be valued at fair market value, which based on the re- sale to Defendant, would be a least $1,000. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 20a a period of 10 years form the date of this Order, based on Defendant's continuing belief he committed no wrong-doing. IT IS SO ORDERED IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall serve, by United States mail, copies of this Order on counsel for the parties in this matter. Dated: January 31, 1995 /s/ EDWARD RAFEEDIE Edward Rafeedie United States District Court Judge ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 21a APPENDIX C UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA No. CV 93-6321-ER (BX) FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, PLAINTIFF v. LARRY R. WILLIAMS, DEFENDANT ORDER RE: MAY 17, 1994 RULING ON MOTION TO .DISMISS [Filed: Oct. 27, 1994] Plaintiff Federal Election Commission's (the "Commission") motion to clarify came before the Honorable Edward Rafeedie on October 24,1994. The Court, having considered the moving papers and all other matters presented to the Court, HERBY ORDERS, as follows: 1. That Plaintiff's motion to clarify is GRANTED; and 2. That, as ordered by the Court on May 17, 1994, "unless [the parties] receive [d] a written order to the contrary," the Court stood by its tentative ruling to DENY the defendant's motion for the reasons stated in open court. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 22a IT IS SO ORDERED IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall serve, by United States mail, copies of this Order on counsel for the parties in this matter. Dated: October 27, 1994 /s/ EDWARD RAFEEDIE Edward Rafeedie ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 23a APPENDIX D UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. CV 93-6321-ER FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, PLAINTIFF v. LARRY R. WILLIAMS, DEFENDANT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS HONORABLE EDWARD RAFEEDIE, JUDGE PRESIDING [1] APPEARANCES: For the Plaintiff: FRANIA MONARSKI Federal Election Office of General Counsel 999 E Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20463 For the Defendant: W. JAMES KNOWLES 790 West 3000 South Heber City, Utah 84032 ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 24a Official Court Reporter: MARY TUCKER, CSR 9308 429-D U.S. Courthouse 312 North Spring Street Los Angeles, Calif. 90012 213/687-0530 [2] ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 25a [3] LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; TUESDAY, MAY 17,1994 (10:00 A.M.) THE CLERK: Civil 93-6321, Federal Election Commission v. Larry R. Williams. Counsel, please state your names for the record. MS. MONARSKI: Good morning, your Honor. Frania Monarski representing the Federal Election Commission. MR. KNOWLES: Good morning, sir. I am James Knowles representing Larry Williams. THE COURT: Yes. This is a motion by the defendant to dismiss this action brought by the Federal Election Commission on the grounds that the statute of limitations has run. The court has read and considered all of the papers that have been submitted in this matter, and tenta- tively conclude as follows: The defendant asserts that this suit is time barred by the statute of limitations and 28 United States Code, section 2462. But the court finds that that section is not applicable to civil suits brought by the FEC under section 437(G) of the Federal Election and Campaign Act. The FECA contains no time limit for civil actions, instead adopting procedural requirements before a civil action may be brought. The existence of a three- year time limit for criminal action suggests that this omission was [4] not a mistake or an oversight, but that congress intended no time limit on FECA civil actions. In making this determination, the court relies on the case of Occidental Life Insurance. v. EEOC, from the Supreme Court in 1977. In that case, although it ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 26a dealt with analyzing the Equal Opportunity Act, the Supreme Court has held that there is not time limit on the EEOC suits that are brought under title vii. Like the EEOC, the FECA requires that if the commission does find probable cause to believe the charges, it must attempt to resolve the matter through informal method of conference or concilia tin, 2 United States Code, section 437(G)(A), 4(A)1. Only if these informal methods fail can the commis- sion bring suit in a Federal District Court. The administrative requirements of notice and in- formal resolution supply adequate protection to the defendant. Accordingly, the absence of the statute of limitations in the FECA should be interpreted as an intention to put no time limits on the FEC's ability [5] to bring suit in a district court. And the catchall statute of limitations of 2462 does not apply. In this case, a defendant has been given all the notice required by the FECA and he has not alleged any prejudice from the delay by the FEC. Therefore, the FEC suit is not barred by the statute of limita- tions and the court would deny the motion to dismiss. MR. KNOWLES: Your Honor, you indicated a tentative conclusion. Does that mean I may respond? THE COURT: You may. MR. KNOWLES: Thank you, your Honor. I would like to call the court's attention to the great divergence of fact and law applicable in the Occi- dental case, the EEOC matter. First of all that type of a case, sir, is a case involv - ing the vindication of a personal right, not a sovereign right. That's the first difference. In our case, it is the FEC attempting to vindicate what it conceives to be a violation of the sovereign ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 27a position of the government relative to what they call corrupt election campaign activities. The second very significant difference is this, Sir: In the Occidental EEOC case you-do not an enforcement proceeding. You have a damage proceed- ing to vindicate that individual. It would never had fallen under [6] 28 section 2462 for that very simple reason. It's not the type of case which would fall in there. Incidentally, your Honor, I should point out, that in the Occidental case, even if the statute did apply, if I recall my case correctly, it was brought well within the five-year period from the event complained of. The Occidental case is different in all area from the case before the court today. The reference to preju- dice, you honor, I cited the Baldwin case in my reply brief, which pointed out that absence of prejudice is merely a factor to be considered in a tolling situation, when you have a tolling situation. When the tolling situation otherwise appears to decide whether you will toll. We do not have a tolling situation. The mere fact that the Federal Election, the Act, made references to a criminal penalty would not abro- gate the application of the enforcement statute. THE COURT: You are asking us to read into a statute of limitations where congress did not include one. Why would we do that? MR. KNOWLES: Because of the language of the statute itself, your Honor. The language which I quoted verbatim in my original motion, clearly states-it starts out "except as otherwise provided by act of congress," "except as otherwise provided." Those are the very first [7] words of the statute under which I have brought this motion. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 28a The reply that I have submitted to your Honor indi- cated that there is no otherwise provided by act of congress. Therefore, by its expressed language, this statute applies, because this is an action or a suit for the enforcement of a civil fine. It couldn't be more clearly stated. THE COURT: It is not an action or suit for enforcement of a civil claim. MR. KNOWLES: No. It is an action for a civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture. That is what this action today is. That is the very language of the statute of limitations which I read to your Honor. It says that is the five-year application which we are seeking. 1 am not at a loss to imagine where it would apply otherwise except in that. The very first point that counsel for the FEC raises: well, this isn't really an action, this is just an assessment. Well, your Honor, the act - THE COURT: What is the " relief that's sought? MR. KNOWLES: The relief that is sought is the relief that is authorized by the Federal Election Act. It's the relief to have an order for a civil penalty. There is nothing in there that authorizes the court to [8] access a civil penalty, which is the way the prayer is worded. The language is to order a civil penalty. Nothing could be more specifically applicable as I read the plain language of both the federal election code provisions and this statue. This is a civil penalty action. This is a request for an order to impose a civil penalty. THE COURT: Isn't that what the other case, the EEOC case was? MR. KNOWLES: No, sir. THE COURT: That was the agency suing, not the individual. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 29a MR. KNOWLES: The agency was bringing that action to vindicate the right of the individual and was not seeking a penalty. It was a damage action, sir. It would never fall under this statue. I submit, sir, that because of that great difference, the individual right versus the sovereign right, and the penalty versus the damage, that is not applicable to this type of an action, and it falls squarely under that. I respectfully submit that that is the appropri ate view. THE COURT: Why shouldn't you be held to the statute? Why didn't you file it sooner than you did? MS. MONARSKI: Well, your Honor, I think the EEOC case does apply here because the same analysis apples. [9] The purpose of the statute of limitations is to assure fairness to the defendant and make sure that he has notice of the charges. THE COURT: Well, the purpose of the statute of limitations to is avoid state claims. MS. MONARSKI: Yes, your Honor. THE COURT: That's the basic purpose. This is a state claim. This conduct occurred in 1988. MS. MONARSKI: Yes, your Honor. But we didn't know about it until the complaint was filed with us and then the commission- THE COURT: When was that? MS. MONARSKI: The complaint was filed in September of '88, and in September of '88 - THE COURT: Well, even that's over five years. MS. MONARSKI: Yes, your Honor, but the com- mission initially had to make a decision whether to investigate the complaint. THE COURT: You brought it to the attention of the defendant. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 30a MS. MONARSKI: Yes. In September of 1988, your Honor, we brought it to the attention of the defendant. We notified him and we also provided him with a copy of the complaint and an opportunity to respond to the complaint. THE COURT: What happened after that? [10] MS. MONARSKI: Then the commission looked at the information. And in September of 1989 found rea- son to believe that a violation had occurred and instit- uted an investigation. THE COURT: And when was that culminated? MS. MONARSKI: That was culminated in March of 1993. THE COURT: Was there any effort to resolve this with the defendant. MS. MONARSKI: Yes, your Honor. In March of 1993, the general counsel of the com- mission notified the defendant that he was going to recommend probable cause to believe that the defen- dant violated the Federal Election Campaign Act. Provided the defendant with a copy of a brief on a legal and factual analysis of the case and provided the defendant with an opportunity to respond. After that time, the general counsel-after the defendant responded, the general counsel submitted a report to the comimion, and on May 18, the commis- sion found probable cause to believe - THE COURT: May 18 of what year? MS. MONARSKI: 1993. THE COURT: 1993? MS. MONARSKI: Yes. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 31a [11] THE COURT: When was the report submitted? MS. MONARSKI: Sometime between March '93 and May of 1993. The Commission's investigation occurred between when it made it's reason to believe findings in September of 1989 through 1993. THE COURT. It took four years to investigate this claim? MS. MONARSKI: Yes, your Honor. It involved a reimbursement scheme. It involved 22 other individuals. THE COURT: I understand what it involved. Well, the Court is going to stand by its tentative ruling unless you receive written order to the con- trary. I will reconsider the matter. MS. MONARSKI Your Honor, will we get a copy of your tentative ruling? THE COURT: Yes. MS. MONARSKI: There is one more administra- tive question, your Honor. We filed a status report in April of-just recently. And we were not in touch with the defendant and at that point. He has now sub- mitted a joint status report to us. But you have al- ready filed an order setting a discovery schedule. And I wanted to know whether we still need to fide a joint status report. [12] THE COURT: If the order scheduling the case has already been filed, there is no need to. MR. KNOWLES: I prepared and sent to counsel a form of joint status report after I heard from her secretary indicating that was preferred over the unilateral ex parte report, your Honor. THE COURT: Yes. Okay. Well, that's fine. ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- MR. KNOWLES: "Your Honor, this matter is a dispositive matter. THE COURT.- If the matter is dismissed you can forget about the rest of it. MR. KNOWLES: Yes, your Honor. THE COURT: You will know very shortly. MR. KNOWLES: Thank you, your Honor. I ap- preciate it. MS. MONARSKI: I just have one more question, your Honor. Can the Commission begin it's discovery prior to receiving- THE COURT: I would suggest that_ you not do so. You are going to receive it very soon. MS. MONARSKI: Thank you very much, your Honor. MR. KNOWLES: Thank you, your Honor. (Proceedings adjourned.) [13] ****** I, Mary Tucker, CSR, do hereby certify that the foregoing transcript is true and correct. /s/ MARY TUCKER 11-17-94 MARY TUCKER, CSR DATE ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 33a APPENDIX E UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. CV 93-6321-ER(BX) FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION v. LARRY R. WILLIAMS [May 17, 1994] CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL MOTION DEFENDANT FOR DISMISSAL OF ACTION HONORABLE EDWARD RAFEEDIE JUDY MATTHEWS Courtroom Clerk MARY TUCKER Court Reporter ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS: Frania Monarski ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS: W. James Knowles ---------------------------------------- Page Break ---------------------------------------- 34a The Court having read and considered all pleadings submitted and having heard statement of counsel, motion defendant for dismissal of action is denied. Initials of Deputy Clerk Minutes Form 11 Civil - Gen	en
converted_docs	430415	FAQs: Federal Acquisition Certification in Contracting (FAC-C) Program *1. What is the Federal Acquisition Certification in Contracting (FAC-C) Program?* > The FAC-C Program establishes the minimum education, training, and > experience requirements for contracting professionals in civilian > agencies. It was established by OFPP's [Policy Letter > 05-01](http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/procurement/policy_letters/05-01_041505.html) > and OMB > [Memorandum](http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/procurement/acq_wk/fac_contracting_program.pdf), > The Federal Acquisition Certification in Contracting Program, dated > January 20, 2006. The intent of the FAC-C Program is to ensure that > all contracting professionals throughout the Government are properly > trained and qualified to effectively conduct the acquisition business > of the Government. A similar program has existed in the Department of > Defense for over a decade and is now being implemented in the civilian > agencies. One must be FAC-C certified in order to be appointed as a > Contracting Officer. *2. Who needs to be FAC-C certified?* - Anyone, regardless of series, who wants to be appointed a Contracting Officer - Procurement/Policy Analysts at the GS-13 level and above **3. Who may apply for a FAC-C? In accordance with OFPP Policy Letter 05-01, anyone in the acquisition workforce can apply. The first priority is COs in the GS-1102 contracting series. See the FAC-C Program Manual for additional guidance. 4. How does an individual qualify for FAC-C certification? There is a three-part qualification: - education - training requirements - experience > Qualified persons may apply for certification by following the > procedures in the FAC-C Program Manual. 5. I haven't been to college. How can I get a FAC-C certification? > There are two education exceptions for 1102s, sometimes called > "grandfathering provisions": > > a\. If you were an 1102 at the GS 5 - 12 level on January 1, 2000, you > are assumed to have met the education requirement of a bachelor's > degree or 24 hours of business-related courses. > > b\. If you were an 1102 at the GS 13 or higher level on January 2, > 2000, you are assumed to have met the education requirement of a > bachelor's degree and 24 hours of business-related courses. > > If you are any other series, and held a warrant on January 1, 2000 and > have continuously maintained a warrant since then with no break longer > than 90 days, you are assumed to have met the education requirement of > a bachelor's degree or 24 hours of business-related courses needed for > Level I certification. 6. When do existing contracting officers need to be FAC-C certified? > Certification for existing contracting officers is required by: - January 1, 2007, for anyone to hold a COA Level III of \$100 million or above - January 1, 2008, for anyone to hold a COA Level III of \$10 million to 100 million - January 1, 2009, for anyone to hold a COA Level 1A, 1B and II up to \$10 million 7. When do new contracting officers need to be FAC-C certified? - October 1, 2006 8. My office has little or no budget to send employees to extra training. How will we meet this new requirement? Offices should include training for the acquisition workforce in their budgets. Contact your Bureau Acquisition Training Coordinator (BATC) for a list of resources for low or no cost training. Appendix 5 of the FAC-C Program Manual also describes less formal ways to satisfy the training requirement. 9. Will I have to maintain my FAC-C certification? Yes, you are required to complete 80 continuous learning points (CLPs) of acquisition related training every 2 years from the anniversary of your original certification. 10. Do I have to spread the training out equally over two years or can I obtain it all in one year? Training can be taken at any time during the two year period. Taking training early will not change the anniversary date by which the training needs to be completed. 11. I would like to retake some of the acquisition courses (CON 210: Contract Law, for example) as refresher courses. Will retaking courses count toward my training/skills currency requirement? > Yes, retaking these courses will apply towards your CLPs. 13. What does "acquisition related training" mean? How will I know if the training I am taking counts toward the requirement? Training should cover concepts that will assist you in the duties you perform as an acquisition workforce member. For the FAC-C Program, the training does not have to be so narrow as to only cover acquisition. Other topics might include project management, leadership, or other business-related topics. Your supervisor must approve your training using either the guidance provided in the FAC-C Program Manual or your own bureau policy. 14. What are CEUs and CLPs? How many hours are they worth? Continuing Education Units (CEUs) and Continuous Learning Points (CLPs) are forms of measurement for training. CEUs are usually given for college courses or in-depth, long-term training. Each academic quarter or semester hour equals one CEU. One CEU equals ten CLPs. CLPs are usually given for less formal training or conferences, and are roughly equivalent to the number of hours of training. 15. How is the hour or point value of the training determined? The training provider usually supplies the value. There is basic guidance on CLPs in Appendix 5 of the FAC-C Program Manual. 16. Will on-line training count toward my continuous learning requirement? > Yes. On-line training is a great, often free, way to meet some of your > continuous learning requirements. Defense Acquisition University > ([www.dau.mil](http://www.dau.mil/)) offers many on-line acquisition > related courses. 17. Where can I find more information on all of the acceptable ways to meet my continuous learning requirement? > Please review the FAC-C Program Manual and contact your Bureau > Acquisition Training Coordinator (BATC). 18. What will happen if I haven't met the continuous learning requirement at the end of the two-year cycle? > If the 80 CLP requirement is not met, the FAC-C certification will > lapse. A COA based on that certification will be automatically > suspended. 19. If I don't apply for the FAC-C, what will happen to my current job? You can continue to perform contract specialist duties but without the ability to sign and obligate actions as a CO. If you are a procurement/policy analyst at Grade 13 or above, your duties will need to be re-evaluated by your supervisor. 20. Who makes the final decision on FAC-C certification? > The Senior Procurement Executive (SPE). At DOI, the SPE is the > Director, Office of Acquisition and Property Management. 21. What are the differences between the DoD DAWIA certification and the FAC-C certification? > DoD has a different qualification standard for GS-1102 grades 5-12 > than the civilian agencies. All of DoD's GS-1102s must have both a > bachelor's degree and 24 hours in business-related courses. Civilian > agencies do not require both until GS-13 level. > > At this time, civilian agencies recognize DAWIA certification, but DoD > does not recognize FAC-C certification. 22. When can I apply for a FAC-C? > The program is effective October 1, 2006. The DOI PAM website will > have updates announcing the acceptance of applications, or contact > your Bureau Acquisition Career Coordinator (BACC) for additional > information. 23. If the FAC-C is a Federal program, to whom do I apply? > Your application will be processed at your bureau and subsequently > forwarded to the SPE for approval. 24. What do I need in order to apply for a FAC-C? > You must have training certificates, transcripts, and/or other > evidence of your education, training, and experience before you can > apply. Please refer to the FAC-C Program Manual under Application > Process in Part III for additional information. 25. I took the required training but I don't have any of my certificates. Can I still apply? > Yes, you can also provide a copy of a signed official training record > or you can use the Fulfillment Process. More information about the > Fulfillment Process can be found in the FAC-C Manual in Part III, or > contact your Bureau Acquisition Career Coordinator for additional > information. 26. How will agencies track continuous learning? > The Federal Acquisition Institute (FAI) has developed the Acquisition > Career Management Information System (ACMIS). Your Bureau ACMIS > Administrator will provide information to assist you in accessing the > ACMIS system. Employees and supervisors will use the system to manage > their individual education, training, and experience data. The system > is web based making it "portable" if an employee moves to another > agency. 27. Is ACMIS mandatory for the entire acquisition workforce? > Yes. OFPP Policy Letter 05-01 mandates that all Federal agencies must > use ACMIS. At DOI, each individual in the 1102/1105 series, > procurement/policy analysts, other COs above the micro-purchase > threshold, and all CORs must maintain records in ACMIS. Individuals > must establish and maintain their records in ACMIS, or their FAC-C > certification, COA, or COR status may be jeopardized. 28. How can I access ACMIS?** > The website is [www.acmis.gov](http://www.acmis.gov/). *29. Where can I find out how to register in ACMIS?* > The FAI web site has instructions at > [www.fai.gov/workforce/acmis.htm](http://www.fai.gov/workforce/acmis.htm). > The ACMIS site has instructions at > [www.acmis.gov](http://www.acmis.gov/). *30. I am an 1102 but I don't hold a COA. Do I have to use ACMIS?* Yes. If you are a member of the acquisition workforce, as defined in OFPP Policy Letter 05-01, you are required to have an ACMIS record. *31. My office uses another tracking system. Do I still have to use ACMIS?* > Yes. Some offices might decide to continue using their system in > addition to ACMIS. *32. I was at another Federal agency and used ACMIS. How do I update my account?* > Since ACMIS is web-based, it is easy to update your account. Please > contact your Bureau ACMIS Administrator for further information. *33. I tried to register myself in ACMIS and the system has no record for me.* > Please contact your Bureau ACMIS Administrator for further > information. *34. Who has access to my ACMIS record and personal information?* > The DOI ACMIS Administrator and your Bureau ACMIS Administrator can > view portions of your record (Sensitive information, e.g., SSN, is > only viewable by you.). Your supervisor, identified by you in ACMIS, > is limited to viewing the training/skills currency you enter. *35. I have a question that is not answered here or in the manual.* Contact your Bureau Acquisition Career Coordinator (BACC), Bureau ACMIS Administrator, or Bureau Acquisition Training Coordinator (BATC). 36. Can college classes taken a long time ago count as electives for FAC-C purposes? Older training classes may be acceptable as elective training, provided that the applicant's supervisor agrees that the classes are reasonably relevant to the employee's current job, necessary for career development, or suitable cross training. Examples of acceptable classes: an engineering class in college that included blueprint reading, when the applicant now does construction contracting; a leadership class taken in an MBA program, when the applicant will be a team leader or supervisor; or a Networking IT class taken in the past, when the applicant will working on a large IT procurement involving networking. To sum up, the date of training proposed as an elective is not the determining factor, rather reasonableness and relevancy are. 37. Can courses in core subjects be used as electives if they are not used to meet the core training requirement? For example, if the candidate has completed the legacy curriculum for CON 101 using the ALMC Basic Management of Defense Acquisition Contracts, and also took the 3 week Contract Administration course from AFIT, can we count the Contract Administration class as an elective? Yes, this is an accurate interpretation of the FAC-C Manual. 38. Can the 3 day Appropriation Law course be used as an elective?** Yes.	en
log-files	644730	This is TeX, Version 3.14159 (Web2C 7.4.5) (format=latex 2003.8.8) 10 AUG 2004 15:42 **d0conf_btag_v2.2.tex (./d0conf_btag_v2.2.tex LaTeX2e <2001/06/01> Babel <v3.7h> and hyphenation patterns for american, french, german, ngerman, n ohyphenation, loaded. (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/revtex4/revtex4.cls Document Class: revtex4 2001/08/03 v4.0 (http://publish.aps.org/revtex4/ for do cumentation) Copyright (c) 2001 The American Physical Society. mailto:[email protected] Licensed under the LPPL: http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/macros/latex/base/lppl.txt Arthur Ogawa <[email protected]> Based on work by David Carlisle <[email protected]>. ltxutil: portions licensed from W. E. Baxter ([email protected]) Class revtex4 Info: Repairing broken LateX \@sect on input line 596. \intertabularlinepenalty=\count79 \@tbpen=\count80 \@arstrutbox@hline=\box26 Class revtex4 Info: Repairing broken LaTeX \@xbitor on input line 1610. ltxgrid: portions licensed from W. E. Baxter ([email protected]) \c@linecount=\count81 \output=\toks14 \@protection@box=\box27 \@topmark@saved=\toks15 \footins@saved=\box28 \pagesofar=\box29 \footbox=\box30 \pagegrid@col=\count82 Class revtex4 Info: Incorporating package {textcase} [1998/11/12 v0.06 Text on ly upper/lower case changing (DPC)]. on input line 3682. (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/html/url.sty Package: url 1999/03/02 ver 1.4 Verb mode for urls, email addresses, and file names ) \c@affil=\count83 \absbox=\box31 \c@part=\count84 \c@section=\count85 \c@subsection=\count86 \c@subsubsection=\count87 \c@paragraph=\count88 \c@subparagraph=\count89 \abovecaptionskip=\skip41 \belowcaptionskip=\skip42 \c@figure=\count90 \c@table=\count91 (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/natbib/natbib.sty Package: natbib 2000/07/24 7.0a (PWD) \bibhang=\skip43 \bibsep=\skip44 LaTeX Info: Redefining \cite on input line 508. \c@NAT@ctr=\count92 ) \widetext@top=\box32 \widetext@bot=\box33 (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/revtex4/revsymb.sty Package: revsymb 2001/08/03 v4.0 (http://publish.aps.org/revtex4/ for documenta tion) LaTeX Info: Redefining \REV@mathfrak on input line 118. )) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/amsfonts/amssymb.sty Package: amssymb 2002/01/22 v2.2d (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/amsfonts/amsfonts.sty Package: amsfonts 2001/10/25 v2.2f \@emptytoks=\toks16 \symAMSa=\mathgroup4 \symAMSb=\mathgroup5 LaTeX Font Info: Overwriting math alphabet `\mathfrak' in version `bold' (Font) U/euf/m/n --> U/euf/b/n on input line 132. LaTeX Info: Redefining \frak on input line 135. LaTeX Info: Redefining \Bbb on input line 137. )) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/amsmath/amsmath.sty Package: amsmath 2000/07/18 v2.13 AMS math features \@mathmargin=\skip45 For additional information on amsmath, use the `?' option. (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/amsmath/amstext.sty Package: amstext 2000/06/29 v2.01 (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/amsmath/amsgen.sty File: amsgen.sty 1999/11/30 v2.0 \@emptytoks=\toks17 \ex@=\dimen102 )) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/amsmath/amsbsy.sty Package: amsbsy 1999/11/29 v1.2d \pmbraise@=\dimen103 ) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/amsmath/amsopn.sty Package: amsopn 1999/12/14 v2.01 operator names ) \inf@bad=\count93 LaTeX Info: Redefining \frac on input line 211. \uproot@=\count94 \leftroot@=\count95 LaTeX Info: Redefining \overline on input line 307. \classnum@=\count96 \DOTSCASE@=\count97 LaTeX Info: Redefining \ldots on input line 379. LaTeX Info: Redefining \dots on input line 382. LaTeX Info: Redefining \cdots on input line 467. \Mathstrutbox@=\box34 \strutbox@=\box35 \big@size=\dimen104 LaTeX Font Info: Redeclaring font encoding OML on input line 567. LaTeX Font Info: Redeclaring font encoding OMS on input line 568. \macc@depth=\count98 \c@MaxMatrixCols=\count99 \dotsspace@=\muskip10 \c@parentequation=\count100 \dspbrk@lvl=\count101 \tag@help=\toks18 \row@=\count102 \column@=\count103 \maxfields@=\count104 \andhelp@=\toks19 \eqnshift@=\dimen105 \alignsep@=\dimen106 \tagshift@=\dimen107 \tagwidth@=\dimen108 \totwidth@=\dimen109 \lineht@=\dimen110 \@envbody=\toks20 \multlinegap=\skip46 \multlinetaggap=\skip47 \mathdisplay@stack=\toks21 LaTeX Info: Redefining \[ on input line 2666. LaTeX Info: Redefining \] on input line 2667. ) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/revtex4/aps.rtx File: aps.rtx 2001/08/03 v4.0 (http://publish.aps.org/revtex4/ for documentatio n) ) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/revtex4/10pt.rtx File: 10pt.rtx 2001/08/03 v4.0 (http://publish.aps.org/revtex4/ for documentati on) ) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/graphics/graphicx.sty Package: graphicx 1999/02/16 v1.0f Enhanced LaTeX Graphics (DPC,SPQR) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/graphics/keyval.sty Package: keyval 1999/03/16 v1.13 key=value parser (DPC) \KV@toks@=\toks22 ) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/graphics/graphics.sty Package: graphics 2001/07/07 v1.0n Standard LaTeX Graphics (DPC,SPQR) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/graphics/trig.sty Package: trig 1999/03/16 v1.09 sin cos tan (DPC) ) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/config/graphics.cfg File: graphics.cfg 2001/08/31 v1.1 graphics configuration of teTeX/TeXLive ) Package graphics Info: Driver file: dvips.def on input line 80. (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/graphics/dvips.def File: dvips.def 1999/02/16 v3.0i Driver-dependant file (DPC,SPQR) )) \Gin@req@height=\dimen111 \Gin@req@width=\dimen112 ) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/tools/dcolumn.sty Package: dcolumn 2001/05/28 v1.06 decimal alignment package (DPC) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/tools/array.sty Package: array 1998/05/13 v2.3m Tabular extension package (FMi) \col@sep=\dimen113 \extrarowheight=\dimen114 \NC@list=\toks23 \extratabsurround=\skip48 \backup@length=\skip49 )) (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/tools/bm.sty Package: bm 1999/07/05 v1.0g Bold Symbol Support (DPC/FMi) \symboldoperators=\mathgroup6 \symboldletters=\mathgroup7 \symboldsymbols=\mathgroup8 LaTeX Font Info: Redeclaring math alphabet \mathbf on input line 137. LaTeX Info: Redefining \bm on input line 195. ) (./d0conf_btag_v2.2.aux) \openout1 = `d0conf_btag_v2.2.aux'. LaTeX Font Info: Checking defaults for OML/cmm/m/it on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: ... okay on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: Checking defaults for T1/cmr/m/n on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: ... okay on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: Checking defaults for OT1/cmr/m/n on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: ... okay on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: Checking defaults for OMS/cmsy/m/n on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: ... okay on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: Checking defaults for OMX/cmex/m/n on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: ... okay on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: Checking defaults for U/cmr/m/n on input line 24. LaTeX Font Info: ... okay on input line 24. Class revtex4 Info: Patching array package. on input line 24. Class revtex4 Info: cite was not loaded (OK!) on input line 24. Class revtex4 Info: multicol was not loaded (OK!) on input line 24. File: d0logo.eps Graphic file (type eps) <d0logo.eps> LaTeX Font Info: Try loading font information for U+msa on input line 68. (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/amsfonts/umsa.fd File: umsa.fd 2002/01/19 v2.2g AMS font definitions ) LaTeX Font Info: Try loading font information for U+msb on input line 68. (/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/amsfonts/umsb.fd File: umsb.fd 2002/01/19 v2.2g AMS font definitions ) Underfull \hbox (badness 10000) in paragraph at lines 68--71 [] Class revtex4 Warning: Assuming \noaffiliation for The D\O \ Collaboration. [1] Package natbib Warning: Citation `topdisc' on page 2 undefined on input line 93 . Package natbib Warning: Citation `theorxsect' on page 2 undefined on input line 99. Package natbib Warning: Citation `theorNP' on page 2 undefined on input line 10 1. Package natbib Warning: Citation `TeVRunI' on page 2 undefined on input line 11 1. Package natbib Warning: Citation `CDFdilep' on page 2 undefined on input line 1 15. Package natbib Warning: Citation `d0track' on page 2 undefined on input line 14 4. Package natbib Warning: Citation `d0run1' on page 2 undefined on input line 148 . Package natbib Warning: Citation `d0run1' on page 2 undefined on input line 153 . Package natbib Warning: Citation `MM' on page 2 undefined on input line 173. LaTeX Warning: Reference `tab:ljets' on page 2 undefined on input line 174. (./tables/ljets.tex [2]) [3] Package natbib Warning: Citation `ALPGEN' on page 4 undefined on input line 238 . Package natbib Warning: Citation `CTEQ' on page 4 undefined on input line 238. Package natbib Warning: Citation `PYTHIA' on page 4 undefined on input line 239 . LaTeX Warning: Reference `CSIP_combined_table_1' on page 4 undefined on input l ine 260. LaTeX Warning: Reference `SVT_combined_table_2' on page 4 undefined on input li ne 260. LaTeX Warning: Reference `fig:CSIP' on page 4 undefined on input line 264. LaTeX Warning: Reference `fig:SVT' on page 4 undefined on input line 264. LaTeX Warning: Reference `fig:CSIP_syst' on page 4 undefined on input line 266. LaTeX Warning: Reference `fig:SVT_syst' on page 4 undefined on input line 266. (./tables/CSIP_comb.tex) (./tables/SVT_comb.tex) File: plots/plot_csip_st.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/plot_csip_st.eps> File: plots/plot_csip_dt.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/plot_csip_dt.eps> File: plots/pl_obs_pred_combo_st.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/pl_obs_pred_combo_st.eps> File: plots/pl_obs_pred_combo_dt.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/pl_obs_pred_combo_dt.eps> File: plots/plot_svt_st.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/plot_svt_st.eps> File: plots/plot_svt_dt.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/plot_svt_dt.eps> File: plots/Boxes_Ljets_pos.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/Boxes_Ljets_pos.eps> File: plots/Boxes_Ljets_dbl.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/Boxes_Ljets_dbl.eps> [4] [5] LaTeX Warning: Reference `likelihood' on page 6 undefined on input line 383. File: plots/SVT-emu.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/SVT-emu.eps> File: plots/CSIP-emu.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/CSIP-emu.eps> Overfull \hbox (8.0pt too wide) in paragraph at lines 387--392 []$ [] LaTeX Warning: Reference `sys_CSIP' on page 6 undefined on input line 401. LaTeX Warning: Reference `sys_SVT' on page 6 undefined on input line 401. (./tables/systCSIP.tex [6]) (./tables/systSVT.tex LaTeX Warning: `!h' float specifier changed to `!ht'. ) [7] [8] [9] LaTeX Warning: Reference `csip_sanity_checks_nj4' on page 10 undefined on input line 456. LaTeX Warning: Reference `svt_sanity_checks_nj4' on page 10 undefined on input line 457. File: plots/xc_pt_j0_comb_4.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/xc_pt_j0_comb_4.eps> File: plots/xc_eta_j0_comb_4.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/xc_eta_j0_comb_4.eps> File: plots/xc_mt_comb_4.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/xc_mt_comb_4.eps> File: plots/xc_ht20_comb_4.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/xc_ht20_comb_4.eps> File: plots/xc_apla_comb_4.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/xc_apla_comb_4.eps> File: plots/xc_sphe_comb_4.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/xc_sphe_comb_4.eps> File: plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_JPt.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_JPt.eps> File: plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_JEta.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_JEta.eps> File: plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_MTW.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_MTW.eps> File: plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_HT.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_HT.eps> File: plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_Apla.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_Apla.eps> File: plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_Spher.eps Graphic file (type eps) <plots/validationPlots_Ljets_4jets_Spher.eps> [10] LaTeX Warning: Reference `LastBibItem' on page 11 undefined on input line 491. Class revtex4 Warning: Endnote numbers changed: rerun LaTeX. Package natbib Warning: There were undefined citations. [11] (./d0conf_btag_v2.2.aux Package natbib Warning: Citation(s) may have changed. (natbib) Rerun to get citations correct. ) LaTeX Warning: There were undefined references. LaTeX Warning: Label(s) may have changed. Rerun to get cross-references right . ) Here is how much of TeX's memory you used: 3122 strings out of 95847 37247 string characters out of 1193875 110740 words of memory out of 1000001 5979 multiletter control sequences out of 10000+50000 18944 words of font info for 70 fonts, out of 500000 for 1000 14 hyphenation exceptions out of 1000 32i,11n,26p,309b,490s stack positions out of 1500i,500n,5000p,200000b,5000s Output written on d0conf_btag_v2.2.dvi (11 pages, 44900 bytes).	en
log-files	611350	File Type: SAMMC Data File File Name: 72342.W+3run7.1.io.dat File ID: 3688369 File Size: 584488 [KB] CRC Data: 893997185L [adler 32 crc type] File Start Time: 01/13/2004 08:15:38 File End Time: 01/13/2004 08:16:23 Physical Stream: notstreamed File Format Info: unknown file format First Event: 1 Last Event: 25000 Total Events: 25000 Application Family: generator Application Name: pythia_madgraph Application Version: p14.05.01 Import Process ID: 0 Node Name: d0mino.fnal.gov Work Group: dzero User Name: muanza Produced For: muanza Produced By: muanza Origin Location: cd mc database Origin Facility: d0mino Physics Channel: Description: p14.05.01 Processing of Pythia_MadGraph W+jets Sample Produced by S. Mrenna MC Phase: mcp14 Run Number: 366622 Run Type: monte carlo Run Start Time: 01/13/2004 08:15:38 Run End Time: 01/13/2004 08:16:23 Run Description: p14.05.01 Processing of Pythia_MadGraph W+jets Sample Produced by S. Mrenna Run CM Energy: 0.0 Parent Files: [] Split: 0 Merge: 0 Key: alpgeninputfile = null (Category: generated) Key: alpgenlinktoinput = on (Category: generated) Key: appfamily = generator (Category: generated) Key: appname = pythia_madgraph (Category: generated) Key: appversion = p14.05.01 (Category: generated) Key: cardfiledir = null (Category: generated) Key: cardfileversion = null (Category: generated) Key: chtechnipimass = 85.0 (Category: generated) Key: chtechnirhomass = 175.0 (Category: generated) Key: collisionenergy = 1960.0 (Category: generated) Key: d0release = p14.05.01 (Category: generated) Key: decay = enue+3j (Category: generated) Key: etagt = -10.0 (Category: generated) Key: etalt = 10.0 (Category: generated) Key: firstevent = 1 (Category: generated) Key: frameworkrcpname = runMCstdhep.rcp (Category: generated) Key: frameworkrcppackage = None (Category: generated) Key: gravitonmass = -9999999.0 (Category: generated) Key: higgsmass = 115.0 (Category: generated) Key: hppmass = 200.0 (Category: generated) Key: inputfilesperfile = 1 (Category: generated) Key: kinmassgt = 10.0 (Category: generated) Key: kinmasslt = 99999.0 (Category: generated) Key: lastevent = 25000 (Category: generated) Key: leptoquarkmass = 250.0 (Category: generated) Key: multiplepartoninteractions = on (Category: generated) Key: numrecords = 25000 (Category: generated) Key: onetoponlytop = 0 (Category: generated) Key: onetopprocess = 13 (Category: generated) Key: pdflibfunc = CTEQ5L (Category: generated) Key: production = W+3j (Category: generated) Key: ptgt = 20.0 (Category: generated) Key: ptlt = 99999.0 (Category: generated) Key: ranseed1 = 1068359165 (Category: generated) Key: ranseed2 = 2143145981 (Category: generated) Key: rscoupling = -9999999.0 (Category: generated) Key: synchronise = off (Category: generated) Key: techniomega0mass = 175.0 (Category: generated) Key: technipi0mass = 85.0 (Category: generated) Key: technipi0primemass = 85.0 (Category: generated) Key: technirho0mass = 175.0 (Category: generated) Key: topmass = 175.0 (Category: generated) Key: totalevents = 25000 (Category: generated) Key: usealpgen = off (Category: generated) Key: usecomphep = off (Category: generated) Key: useevtgen = off (Category: generated) Key: useonetop = off (Category: generated) Key: usepmcs = off (Category: generated) Key: useqq = off (Category: generated) Key: wprimemass = 750.0 (Category: generated) Key: zcompinterfsign = -9999999.0 (Category: generated) Key: zcompscale = -9999999.0 (Category: generated) Key: zprimemass = 700.0 (Category: generated) Key: facilityname = d0mino (Category: global) Key: groupname = dzero (Category: global) Key: originname = CD MC Database (Category: global) Key: phase = mcp14 (Category: global) Key: producedbyname = muanza (Category: global) Key: producedforname = muanza (Category: global) Key: workrequestid = 0123456789 (Category: global) Request ID: 0 Data Tier: generated	en
all-txt-docs	406470	Daily SPTR Usage Summary ------------------------ 16087 Total Seconds of S-Band Service 112065102 Total Bytes Received via S-Band 55.7 Average S-Band Input Rate (Kbps) 521.6 Peak S-Band Input Rate (Kbps) 133214035 Total Sent via S-Band Service 66.2 Average S-Band Output Rate (Kbps) 815.2 Peak S-Band Output Rate (Kbps) 1421182825 Total Bytes Sent via K-Band Service 306:00:00:06 New Logfile Started 306:18:24:24 SSAF AOS 306:18:24:28 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Green 306:18:24:44 Upconverter Mute switched to Off 306:18:24:47 Satellite Modem TX On 306:18:25:01 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Red 306:18:36:25 SSAF LOS 0:12:02 Total Event Duration No router data 306:18:36:57 SSAF AOS 306:18:37:04 SSAF LOS 0:00:07 Total Event Duration No router data 306:18:37:40 SSAF AOS 306:18:37:42 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Green 306:18:38:13 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Red 306:18:50:37 SSAF LOS 0:12:57 Total Event Duration No router data 306:18:51:46 SSAF AOS 306:18:51:56 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Green 306:18:52:18 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Red 306:20:12:47 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Green 306:20:13:19 K-Band File Transfer Start 306:21:46:07 K-Band File Transfer Stop File Transfer started at 306:20:10:37 File Transfer ended at 306:21:43:31 35 files sent 1341300585 total bytes sent 3.84E+5 bps Average Throughput Files Sent: s130ab.941495147 57210880 s130ab.941500216 22743040 s130ab.941504264 61829120 s130ab.941508144 57405440 s130ab.941512078 36003840 s130ab.941515259 57292800 s130ab.941520182 57282560 s130ab.941524267 62238720 s130ab.941528548 20172800 s130ab.941532648 61675520 s130ab.941537713 57262080 s130ab.941541778 56934400 s130ab.941546830 22538240 s130ab.941550152 61470720 s130ab.941554291 61736960 s130ab.941558446 18135040 s130ab.941562673 57118720 s130ab.941566873 57169920 s130ab.941571018 59412480 s130tl.941541807 10240 s132e.Nov02.154915. 22216378 s132e.Nov02.165606. 21843538 s132e.Nov02.173646. 27135596 s132e.Nov02.181722. 26984177 s132e.Nov02.185722. 27048746 s132e.Nov02.193727. 27183705 s132e.Nov02.201757. 27155250 s132e.Nov02.205818. 27153873 s132e.Nov02.213806. 26030393 s132e.Nov02.221804. 27170040 s132e.Nov02.225807. 27105567 s132e.Nov02.233814. 27142070 s132e.Nov03.001826. 27166764 s132e.Nov03.005824. 27169284 s132e.Nov03.013827. 27151684 306:21:46:50 K-Band File Transfer Start 306:21:52:26 K-Band File Transfer Stop File Transfer started at 306:21:44:10 File Transfer ended at 306:21:49:42 2 files sent 79882240 total bytes sent 1.92E+6 bps Average Throughput Files Sent: s130ab.941575133 22743040 s130ab.941579328 57139200 306:22:30:01 SSAF LOS 3:38:15 Total Event Duration 130844763 Bytes Sent 79.9 Kbps Average Output 815.2 Kbps Peak Output at 306:21:16:22 100201019 Bytes Received 61.2 Kbps Average Input 521.6 Kbps Peak Input at 306:20:36:19 306:22:30:07 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Red 306:22:30:28 SSAF AOS 306:22:30:39 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Green 306:22:43:06 SSAF LOS 0:12:38 Total Event Duration 1125103 Bytes Sent 11.9 Kbps Average Output 28.9 Kbps Peak Output at 306:22:40:30 7204671 Bytes Received 76.0 Kbps Average Input 339.6 Kbps Peak Input at 306:22:33:12 306:22:43:11 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Red 306:22:43:38 SSAF AOS 306:22:43:43 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Green 306:22:44:03 SSAF LOS 0:00:25 Total Event Duration 4325 Bytes Sent 1.4 Kbps Average Output 3.0 Kbps Peak Output at 306:22:43:53 3848 Bytes Received 1.2 Kbps Average Input 3.0 Kbps Peak Input at 306:22:43:53 306:22:44:04 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Red 306:22:44:25 SSAF AOS 306:22:44:37 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Green 306:22:53:49 K-Band File Transfer Start 306:22:56:08 SSAF LOS 0:11:43 Total Event Duration 1239844 Bytes Sent 14.1 Kbps Average Output 29.1 Kbps Peak Output at 306:22:56:04 4655564 Bytes Received 53.0 Kbps Average Input 126.0 Kbps Peak Input at 306:22:49:09 306:22:56:14 Router TDRSS Link Status Changed to Red 306:22:58:18 K-Band File Transfer Stop File Transfer started at 306:22:51:09 File Transfer ended at 306:22:55:38 0 files sent 0 total bytes sent 0.00E+0 bps Average Throughput Files Sent: 306:23:01:10 Upconverter Mute switched to On 306:23:01:12 Satellite Modem TX Off 306:23:01:13 Satellite Modem Modem Status changed to Red 306:23:01:14 Satellite Modem Modem Status changed to Green	en
all-txt-docs	422303	"""high-level initialization routines. These routines provide high level interfaces to initialize potential terms and to set up minimization and dynamics calculations. """ from xplor import command from atomSel import AtomSel #default topology/parameter files parameters={} parametersInitialized={} topology={} topologyInitialized={} parameters['protein'] = "protein.par" parametersInitialized['protein']=0 topology['protein'] = "protein.top" topologyInitialized['protein']=0 parameters['nucleic'] = "nucleic.par" parametersInitialized['nucleic']=0 topology['nucleic'] = "nucleic.top" topologyInitialized['nucleic']=0 parameters['water'] = "tip3p.parameter" parametersInitialized['water']=0 topology['water'] = "tip3p.topology" topologyInitialized['water']=0 def initParams(files, reset=0, weak_omega=0): """file is a structure type or filename or a list of a combination of these two. valid structure types are: protein, nucleic, and water If the argument is a filename, the current directory is first searched for the file, and then the TOPPAR directory is searched. XPLOR parameters are documented <l http://nmr.cit.nih.gov/xplor-nih/xplorMan/node48.html#SECTION00420000000000000000 here>. If reset is true, all previous parameter settings are discarded If weak_omega is true, improper force constants associated with the peptide bond are reduced by 1/2 to allow a small amount of flexibility. """ import os from os import environ as env if reset: command("param reset end") for key in parametersInitialized.keys(): parametersInitialized[key]=0 pass pass if weak_omega: command('eval ($weak_omega=1)') def addParams(file): if parameters.has_key(file): if parametersInitialized[file]: return parametersInitialized[file]=1 file = parameters[file] pass if file in os.listdir('.'): pass elif file in os.listdir(env['TOPPAR']): file = 'TOPPAR:' + file else: raise """initParams: could not find name %s as a structure type or as file in the current dir, or in TOPPAR""" % file command("param @%s end" %file) return if type(files)==type("string"): files=[files] pass for file in files: addParams(file) pass return def initTopology(files, reset=0): """file is a structure type or filename or a list of a combination of these two. valid structure types are: protein, nucleic, and water First the current directory is searched for the file, and then TOPPAR is searched. XPLOR topology is documented <l http://nmr.cit.nih.gov/xplor-nih/doc/current/xplor/node45.html#SECTION00410000000000000000 here>. If reset is true, all previous topology settings are discarded """ import os from os import environ as env if reset: command("rtf reset end") for key in topologyInitialized.keys(): topologyInitialized[key]=0 pass pass def addTopology(file): if topology.has_key(file): if topologyInitialized[file]: return topologyInitialized[file]=1 file = topology[file] pass if file in os.listdir('.'): pass elif file in os.listdir(env['TOPPAR']): file = 'TOPPAR:' + file else: raise """initTopology: could not find name %s as a structure type or as file in the current dir, or in TOPPAR""" % file command("rtf @%s end" %file) return if type(files)==type("string"): files=[files] pass for file in files: addTopology(file) pass return def initStruct(files=0, erase=1): """read XPLOR PSF files. the file argument is a filename or list of filenames to read. First the current directory is searched for the file, and then TOPPAR is searched. Alternatively, a psf entry (starting with PSF...) can be directly passed as the files argument. Any pre-existing structure information is erased unless the erase argument is cleared. """ if erase: command("struct reset end") if not files: return import re, os if type(files)==type("string"): if re.search("PSF\s\n",files): command("struct %s end" % files) return else: files=[files] pass pass for file in files: try: os.stat(file) command("struct @%s end" %file) except OSError: from os import environ as env tfile = env['TOPPAR'] + '/' + file try: os.stat(tfile) command("struct @TOPPAR:%s end" %file) except OSError: raise "initStruct: could not find file " + file +\ " in current dir, or in TOPPAR"; pass pass return def initCoords(files=[],string=""): """ Initialize coordinates from one of more pdb file, or from a string containing a PDB entry. """ if type(files)==type("string"): files=[files] pass if not files and not string: raise "initCoords: a file or a string must be specified." from pdbTool import PDBTool pdb = PDBTool() for file in files: pdb.setFilename(file) pdb.read() pass pdb.setContents(string) pdb.read() return def addDisulfideBond(sel1,sel2): """ add a disulfide bond between the two atom selections Should be called after PSF information is generated. """ from atomSel import AtomSel if isinstance(sel1,str): sel1 = AtomSel(sel1) if isinstance(sel2,str): sel2 = AtomSel(sel2) if len(AtomSel('segid "%s" and resid %d and name SG'% (sel1[0].segmentName(),sel1[0].residueNum())))==0: raise "No sulfur atom in "+sel1.string() if len(AtomSel('segid "%s" and resid %d and name SG'% (sel2[0].segmentName(),sel2[0].residueNum())))==0: raise "No sulfur atom in "+sel2.string() import xplor xplor.command("""patch DISU reference=1=( segid "%s" and resid %d ) reference=2=( segid "%s" and resid %d ) end""" % (sel1[0].segmentName(),sel1[0].residueNum(), sel2[0].segmentName(),sel2[0].residueNum())) return def initNBond(cutnb=4.5, rcon=1.0, nbxmod=3, tolerance=0.5, repel=0.9, onlyCA=0): """standard initialization of the non-bonded repel potential. The XPLOR nonbonded potential term is described <l http://nmr.cit.nih.gov/xplor-nih/xplorMan/node116.html#SECTION00530000000000000000 here> If onlyCA is True, the nonbonded potential only acts between CA atoms. """ if onlyCA: command(""" constraints interaction (not name ca) (all) weights 1 angl 0.4 impr 0.1 vdw 0 end interaction (name ca) (name ca) weights * 1 angl 0.4 impr 0.1 vdw 1.0 end end""") else: command(""" constraints interaction (all) (all) weights * 1 end end""") pass command(""" parameters nbonds atom nbxmod %d wmin = 0.01 ! warning off cutnb = %f ! nonbonded cutoff tolerance %f repel= %f ! scale factor for vdW radii = 1 ( L-J radii) rexp = 2 ! exponents in (r^irex - R0^irex)^rexp irex = 2 rcon=%f ! actually set the vdW weight end end """ % (nbxmod,cutnb,tolerance,repel,rcon) ) def initRamaDatabase(type='protein'): """standard initialization of the <l http://nmr.cit.nih.gov/xplor-nih/xplorMan/node373k.html rama torsion-angle database potential>. """ (mess,echo) = command("set message off echo off end", ('prev_messages','prev_echo')) command(""" eval ($krama=1.) rama nres=10000 end """) if type=='protein': command(""" rama @QUARTS:2D_quarts_new.tbl @QUARTS:3D_quarts_new.tbl @QUARTS:forces_torsion_prot_quarts_intra.tbl end @QUARTS:setup_quarts_torsions_intra_2D3D.tbl set message %s echo %s end """ % (mess,echo) ) elif type=='nucleic': command(""" evaluate ($knuc=1.0) rama @QUARTS:nucleic_deltor_quarts2d.tbl @QUARTS:nucleic_deltor_quarts3d.tbl @QUARTS:nucleic_deltor_quarts4d.tbl @QUARTS:force_nucleic_quarts2d.tbl @QUARTS:force_nucleic_quarts3d.tbl @QUARTS:force_nucleic_quarts4d.tbl end @QUARTS:setup_nucleic_2d3d.tbl @QUARTS:setup_nucleic_4d.tbl set message %s echo %s end """ % (mess, echo)) else: raise "initRamaDatabase: unknown database type:", type return def initDihedrals(filenames=[], scale=1, useDefaults=1): """initialize the XPLOR <l http://nmr.cit.nih.gov/xplor-nih/xplorMan/node369.html#SECTION001970000000000000000 restraints dihe (CDIH) potential term>. parameters are: filenames - either a single filename, or a sequence of filenames of dihedral restraint assignment tables. scale - scale factor (defaults to 1). useDefaults - use the default sidechain restraints (default: TRUE) """ command("set echo off mess off end") command(""" restraints dihed reset scale %f nass = 10000 end""" % scale) if type(filenames)==type("string"): filenames = [filenames] for file in filenames: command("restraints dihed @%s end" % file) pass if useDefaults: command(""" ! ! phe_angles.tbl ! ! constrains the chi2 angles of phe, tyr, asp, and glu ! in a protein to 0..180 degrees ! ! JJK 3/10/97 ! for $res in id (name ca and (resn phe or resn tyr)) loop ang restraints dihedral assign (byresidue id $res and name ca) (byresidue id $res and name cb) (byresidue id $res and name cg) (byresidue id $res and name cd1) 1.0 90.0 30.0 2 end end loop ang for $res in id (name ca and resn asp) loop ang restraints dihedral assign (byresidue id $res and name ca) (byresidue id $res and name cb) (byresidue id $res and name cg) (byresidue id $res and name od1) 10.0 0.0 90.0 2 end end loop ang for $res in id (name ca and resn glu) loop ang restraints dihedral assign (byresidue id $res and name cb) (byresidue id $res and name cg) (byresidue id $res and name cd) (byresidue id $res and name oe1) 10.0 0.0 90.0 2 end end loop ang """) pass command("set echo on mess on end") return def initCollapse(sel ="all", Rtarget=-1, scale =1): """initialize the XPLOR <l http://nmr.cit.nih.gov/xplor-nih/xplorMan/node373n.html radius of gyration potential term>. parameters are: sel - string or atom selection specifying atoms in include in the Rgyr calculation. If this is omitted, all atoms are included. Rtarget - target radius. If this is omitted, the target Rgyr is calculated as Rgyr = 2.2numResidues^0.38 -1 [angstrom] scale - scale factor. If omitted, it defaults to 1. Note that the per-assignment scale is always 100, so the energy is actually scaled by 100scale. """ if type(sel)==type("string"): sel = AtomSel(sel) from selectTools import numResidues numResidues = numResidues(sel) if Rtarget<0: Rtarget = (2.2 * numResidues*0.38 -1) pass command(""" collapse assign (%s) 100.0 %f scale %f end""" % (sel.string(), Rtarget, scale)) return def initHBDA(filename, scale=500): """initialize the XPLOR hbda potential term """ lines=open(filename).readlines() nres = len(filter(lambda x: x.strip().lower().startswith('assi'),lines)) command(""" set echo off mess off end hbda nres %d class back @%s force %f set echo $prev_echo mess $prev_messages end end """ % (nres,filename,scale)) return def initMinimize(ivm, potList=0, printInterval=10, numSteps=500, maxCalls=20000, dEPred=0.001): """initialize an IVM object (from the <m ivm> module) for Powell minimization. In addition to the function arguments, the following IVM parameters are initialized: constrainLengths maxDeltaE eTolerance gTolerance """ ivm.resetReuse() # ivm.setConstrainLengths(0) ivm.setMaxDeltaE( 10000 ) ivm.setStepType("powell") ivm.setNumSteps( numSteps ) ivm.setMaxCalls( maxCalls ) ivm.setPrintInterval( printInterval ) ivm.setETolerance(1e-7) ivm.setGTolerance(1e-8) ivm.setDEpred(dEPred) if potList: ivm.setPotList( potList ) return def initDynamics(ivm, bathTemp=-1, finalTime=0.2, numSteps=0, stepsize=0.001, potList=0, printInterval=50, initVelocities=0 ): """ initialize an IVM object (from the <m ivm> module) for PC6 (6th order predictor-corrector) dynamics. In addition to the function arguments, the following IVM parameters are initialized: constraintLengths maxDeltaE responseTime eTolerance adjustStepsize scaleVel resetCMInterval additionally, if initVelocities!=0, the initial velocities will be randomized """ from atomAction import randomizeVelocities ivm.resetReuse() if bathTemp>=0: ivm.setBathTemp(bathTemp) if initVelocities: randomizeVelocities( bathTemp ) pass # ivm.setConstrainLengths(0) ivm.setMaxDeltaE( 10000 ) ivm.setStepType("pc6") ivm.setResponseTime(5) ivm.setStepsize( stepsize ) #initial stepsize value ivm.setETolerance( ivm.bathTemp()/1000 ) ivm.setPrintInterval( printInterval ) ivm.setAdjustStepsize(1) ivm.setScaleVel(1) ivm.setResetCMInterval( 10 ) ivm.setFinalTime(finalTime) ivm.setNumSteps(numSteps) if potList: ivm.setPotList( potList ) return def torsionTopology(ivm,fixedOmega=0): """configure the <m ivm>.IVM tolopogy for standard torsion angle setup: group rigid sidechains and break proline, ribose rings in the appropriate places. Disulfide bonds are also broken. This function sets all groupings and hinge types which are not already specified, so it must be called last in the setup of an IVM's topology. If fixedOmega is set, also fix protein omega backbone angles. """ import selectTools if fixedOmega: selectTools.IVM_groupRigidBackbone(ivm) selectTools.IVM_groupRigidSidechain(ivm) selectTools.IVM_breakProlines(ivm) selectTools.IVM_breakRiboses(ivm) selectTools.IVM_breakDisulfides(ivm) ivm.autoTorsion() return def cartesianTopology(ivm, sel="known"): """configure the <m ivm>.IVM tolopogy for Cartesian dynamics/minimization - for the specified selection. This consists of breaking topological bonds, and specifying that all atoms are tree ``bases.'' This function should be called after any custom changes are made to the ivm's topology setup, but before torsionTopology(). """ ivm.breakAllBondsIn(sel) ivm.setBaseAtoms(sel) return def covalentMinimize(numSteps=100, dEpred=1. ): """perform gradient optimization including only covalent terms (bonds, angles, impropers) """ import xplor xplor.command(""" flags exclude include bonds angles impr end mini powell nstep=%d step=%f end """ % (numSteps,dEpred)) def fixupCovalentGeom(sel=0, useVDW=0, useDynamics=1, dynRatio=5, maxIters=40, verbose=0, ): """given the atoms in selection sel, perform, minimization and (optionally) dynamics to remove all bond, angle, and improper violations. If useVDW is set, the nonbonded term will be used 1/4 of the time. if useDynamics is set, dynamics will be used 1/dynRatio of the time. maxIters is the total maximum number of iterations. This function changes the XPLOR constraints settings. """ from atomSel import AtomSel import xplor (old_mess,old_echo) = xplor.command("set mess=off print=off echo=off end", ('prev_messages','prev_echo')) if isinstance(sel,str): sel = AtomSel(sel) if not sel: sel = AtomSel("known") xplor.command("""constraints fix (not (%s)) interaction (%s) (not (%s)) interaction (%s) (%s) end""" % (sel.string(),sel.string(),sel.string(), sel.string(),sel.string())) xplor.command("flags exclude * include scripting end") def covalentViols(): ret = map(lambda (name,thresh): int(xplor.command("print threshold %f %s end"%(thresh,name), "violations")[0]), (("bonds",0.01), ("angles",5.0), ("impropers",5.0))) return ret potCombinations = [("bond",), ("bond","angl"), ("bond","impr"), ("bond","angl","impr")] if useVDW: initNBond(nbxmod=2,cutnb=6.5,tolerance=2.0,repel=0.8,rcon=0.01) potCombinations.append(("bond","angl","impr","vdw")) pass import random from xplorPot import XplorPot potCombinations = map(lambda list:map(lambda name:XplorPot(name),list), potCombinations) from atomAction import SetProperty actions = ["min"](dynRatio-1) if useDynamics: sel.apply(SetProperty("mass",100.)) sel.apply(SetProperty("fric",10.)) actions.append("dyn") pass minNumViols=1e30 for iter in range(0,maxIters): viols=covalentViols() if verbose: print iter, viols numViols=reduce(lambda x,y:x+y,viols) if numViols==0: break if numViols<minNumViols: minNumViols=numViols minViols=viols minCoords=xplor.simulation.atomPosArr() pass # # randomly choose which minimization scheme to apply # pots = random.choice(potCombinations) xplor.simulation.potList().removeAll() for pot in pots: xplor.simulation.potList().add( pot ) pass action = random.choice(actions) if action=="min": xplor.command("mini powell nstep 500 nprint 600 drop 10 end") else: xplor.command("""dynamics verlet nstep 500 time 0.001 nprint 600 iprfrq 0 iasvel maxwell firsttemp 1000 tbath 1000 end""") pass pass xplor.command("set mess=%s print=OUTPUT echo=%s end"%(old_mess,old_echo)) if numViols>0: print "fixupCovalentGeom: Covalent geometry still violated at exit." print "using best structure:" xplor.simulation.setAtomPosArr( minCoords ) print " (%d bond viols, %d angle viols, %d improper viols)\n" % \ tuple(covalentViols()) mess = "Covalent geometry still violated after fixupCovalentGeom\n" mess += ("(%d bond viols, %d angle viols, %d improper viols)\n" % tuple(viols)) if not useVDW: mess += "Try increasing maxIters or enabling the useVdw flag." else: mess += "Try increasing maxIters." pass raise mess pass return def addUnknownAtoms(dyn_stepsize=0.02, dyn_numStepMul=1, verbose=0): """add in unknown atoms so that covalent and vdw terms are satisfied. This routine is slow, but it is rather robust. dyn_stepsize specifies the timestep size during the MD phase. Reduce this if you have convergence problems. dyn_numStepMul is a multiplier for the number of molecular dynamics steps taken. Increase this to get better convergence. if verbose=True, details of the minimization procedure are printed. """ import xplor (old_mess,old_echo) = xplor.command("set mess=off echo=off end", ('prev_messages','prev_echo')) if not verbose: xplor.command("set print=off end") dyn_numStep = 500 dyn_numStepMul dyn_ramp_numStep = 100 * dyn_numStepMul xplor.command(" evaluate ($timestep = %f)" % dyn_stepsize) xplor.command(" evaluate ($ramp_nstep = %f)" % dyn_ramp_numStep) xplor.command(" evaluate ($nstep = %f)" % dyn_numStep) xplor.command(r""" vector do (fbeta=10) (not known) {Friction coefficient for MD heatbath.} vector do (q=mass) (all) {* Save the real masses for later } vector do (mass=100) (not known) {Uniform heavy masses to speed} vector do (fbeta=0) (known) {Friction coefficient for MD heatbath.} vector do (mass=0) (known) {Uniform heavy masses to speed} eval ($knoe=0.1) constraints fix (known) end vector do (vx = 0) (known) vector do (vy = 0) (known) vector do (vz = 0) (known) evaluate ($init_t = 1000 ) { Initial simulated annealing temperature.} vector do (vx = maxwell($init_t)) (attr mass>0) vector do (vy = maxwell($init_t)) (attr mass>0) vector do (vz = maxwell($init_t)) (attr mass>0) vector do (x=(random()-0.5)20) (attr mass>0) vector do (y=(random()-0.5)20) (attr mass>0) vector do (z=(random()-0.5)20) (attr mass>0) !try bonds first flags exclude * include bond end constraints interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass=0) interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass>0) end !mini powell ! drop=1e5 ! nprint=1 ! tolg=1e-5 ! nstep=1000 !end flags exclude * include bond angle dihe cdihe impr vdw end !energy end !mini powell ! drop=1e5 ! nprint=1 ! tolg=1e-5 ! nstep=1000 !end evaluate ($kbon = 0.00005 ) {* Bonds. } evaluate ($kang = 0.00005 ) { Angles. } !constraints ! interaction (all) (all) ! weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0 elec 0 end !end !dynamics verlet ! nstep=5000 timestep=$timestep iasvel=current ! tcoupling=true tbath=$init_t nprint=50 iprfrq=0 !end while ($kbon < 0.01) loop stage1 evaluate ($kbon = min(0.25, $kbon 1.25)) evaluate ($kang = $kbon) evaluate ($kimp = $kbon/10) noe scale * $knoe end !restraints dihed scale 0. end constraints interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass=0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 5e-4 elec 0 end interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass>0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 5e-4 elec 0 end end dynamics verlet nstep=$ramp_nstep timestep=$timestep iasvel=current tcoupling=true tbath=$init_t nprint=50 iprfrq=0 end end loop stage1 parameter {* Parameters for the repulsive energy term. } nbonds repel=0.9 { Initial value for repel - modified later. } nbxmod=-3 { Initial value for nbxmod - modified later. } wmin=0.01 cutnb=4.5 ctonnb=2.99 ctofnb=3. tolerance=0.5 end end ! add vdw and slowly increase its weight parameter nbonds atom cutnb 100 tolerance 45 repel=1.2 rexp=2 irexp=2 rcon=1.0 nbxmod 4 end end flags exclude include bond angle impr dihe cdihe vdw end constraints interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass=0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0.002 elec 0 end interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass>0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0.002 elec 0 end end dynamics verlet nstep=$nstep timestep=$timestep iasvel=current tcoupling=true tbath=$init_t nprint=50 iprfrq=0 end constraints interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass=0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0.005 elec 0 end interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass>0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0.005 elec 0 end end dynamics verlet nstep=$nstep timestep=$timestep iasvel=current tcoupling=true tbath=$init_t nprint=50 iprfrq=0 end constraints interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass=0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0.01 elec 0 end interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass>0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0.01 elec 0 end end dynamics verlet nstep=$nstep timestep=$timestep iasvel=current tcoupling=true tbath=$init_t nprint=50 iprfrq=0 end constraints interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass=0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0.5 elec 0 end interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass>0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0.5 elec 0 end end dynamics verlet nstep=$nstep timestep=$timestep iasvel=current tcoupling=true tbath=$init_t nprint=50 iprfrq=0 end !flags exclude * include bond angle end energy end mini powell drop=100 nprint=1 tolg=1e-5 nstep=10000 end constraints interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass=0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0.1 elec 0 end interaction (attr mass>0) (attr mass>0) weights bond $kbon angl $kang impr $kimp vdw 0.1 elec 0 end end mini powell drop=100 nprint=1 tolg=1e-5 nstep=10000 end vector do (mass=q) (all) {* Return the masses to sane values *} """) xplor.command("set mess=%s print=OUTPUT echo=%s end"%(old_mess,old_echo)) return def genExtendedStructure(pdbFilename=0, sel=0, verbose=0, ): """ This assigns X, Y, and Z coordinates to each atom, and then calls <m protocol>.fixupCovalentGeom() to correct the covalent geometry. The Y and Z coordinates are random (but small enough (within a range of -0.5 to 0.5) to allow bonded atoms to form their bonds) and the X coordinate is the atom number divided by 10. This will result in an extended configuration along the X axis. If pdbFilename is nonnull, the file will be read if it exists, and that structure wil be used as a starting point (an attempt will be made to fix the the covalent geom). Whether it exists or not, it will be written to before returning. """ from atomSel import AtomSel if not sel: sel = AtomSel("all") if type(sel)==type('string'): sel = AtomSel(sel) from pdbTool import PDBTool import os if pdbFilename and os.path.exists(pdbFilename): PDBTool(pdbFilename,sel).read() else: from atomAction import SetProperty import random from vec3 import Vec3 for atom in sel: atom.setPos( Vec3(float(atom.index())/10, random.uniform(-0.5,0.5), random.uniform(-0.5,0.5)) ) pass pass if verbose: print "fixing covalent geometry..." pass fixupCovalentGeom(useVDW=1,maxIters=500,sel=sel,dynRatio=10, verbose=verbose) if pdbFilename: PDBTool(pdbFilename,sel).write() return	en
markdown	948590	# Presentation: 948590 ## Data Management: GPS for Fire Management & ICS Course and Incident Standard Notes: Its important to have a plan for saving your GPS and GIS data. In other words, how will you manage your data on the computer? We are going to review the directory structure and naming convention used for this class. We will also talk briefly about the GIS Standard Operating Procedures on Incidents ## Objectives Class Data Management Incident Standards ## Data Management Directory Structure File Names Notes: Data Management comes in two parts... 1.) The directory structure or files on the computer 2.) The way we name our files and which folders we put them in. ## GPS for Fire Management & ICS Directory Structure raster (images) vector (points, lines, polygons) YYYYMMDD_Restoration YYYYMMDD_RxWUI YYYYMMDD_Oops 2008_Incidents base_data incident_data (gps .txt, waypoints & points, lines, polygons) _*GPS for Fire Management & ICS_* Directory Structure Notes: Here is the basic structure developed for this course... Main folder is called 2008_Incidents Inside that folder are two sub-folders or directories. One is base_data Base_data contains all permanent or static data. It usually contains the data from the local units GIS data library. Those data are separated by data types, raster and vector. The raster folder contains grid and image data. Examples would include digital USGS topos, also called DRGs, and aerial photos. The vector folder contains point line and polygon data such as roads, trails, ownership boundaries, structures, etc. Incident Data is where you would store all data that was collected or created during the incident. This includes all GPS data and GIS data created from the GPS data. There are subfolders or directories by date and incident name within this folder. ## GPS for Fire Management & ICS Naming Convention ** 20080318_rest_allwpts.shp 20080318_rest_dzline.shp 20080318_rest_perim.shp _*GPS for Fire Management & ICS_* **Naming Convention Notes: Here is how files should be named within the incident folders. They should be named by date, incident name or abbreviation of incident name, feature identifier of some sort. You may also add military time if time is important for some reason. An example would be fire perimeters collected 2 or 3 times a day. In this case you should add military time just after date. ## Example Example - Incident Name - Feature Identifier - Date: YYYYMMDD ## Incident Directory Structure base_data incident_data (gps .txt, waypoints & points, lines, polygons) raster (images) vector (points, lines, polygons) YYYYMMDD YYYYMMDD 2008_Incidents _Incident_ Directory Structure Notes: The standard incident directory is very close to what we will be using but they just build a base_data and incident_data under each incident. We have our individual incidents under the incident data because all three will use the same base data. ## IncidentFileNameStandard *...**Translation: On **5/16/2005** a file was started at **2230** hrs for the **RXWUII** fire to collect a fire **per**imeter by the **field observer**. It was saved as a **polygon** in **UTM, Zone15, NAD83** in **shapefile** format... * _Incident_FileNameStandard yyyymmdd_ Time_ IncidentName_ FeatureIdentifier_ Source_ GISType_ ProjectionDatum Notes: Here is where what we are doing and what is standard differs greatly. They name files with so much information that its like having built in metadata. ...Translation: On 5/16/2005 a file was started at 2230 hrs for the RXWUII fire to collect a fire perimeter by the field observer. It was saved as a polygon in UTM, Zone15, NAD83 in shapefile format... This is VERY helpful when working on an incident because everything you need to know about the file is obvious without even having to open it up in ArcMap. BUT... it very time consuming and tedious naming all the files like this. You don’t get the hang of it until you have worked 3-4 15 hour days!!!! We have decided not to ask you to follow the SOP but as an FYI, you may see this on your next large incident. ## Example Example - Incident Name - Date: YYYYMMDD - Time: 2400 clock - Feature Identifier - GIS Type - Projection & Datum - Source (Collector) Notes: Here is an example of the directory and files within. ## Source of Standards - GSTOP GIS STandard Operating Procedures on Incidents http:// gis.nwcg.gov/ gstop_sop.htm ## Questions? Questions?	en
converted_docs	264466	9 May 2005 Page 1 MRSI CINCINNATI, OHIO AUTOMOTIVE PAINT SURVEY (MRSI# 05-9743-054) Page Table Title Base Total \-\-\-- \-\-\-\-- \-\-\-\-- \-\-\-- \-\-\-\-- 1 1 Q.1 CURRENTLY USING A HIGH TRANSFER EFFICIENCY 38 PAINT SPRAY GUN 2 2 Q.2 LENGTH OF TIME USING HIGH TRANSFER 34 EFFICIENCY PAINT GUN 3 3 Q.3 WHETHER OR NOT FOLLOWING MANUFACTURERS\' 34 RECOMMENDED INSTRUCTIONS USING HVLP NOZZLES 4 4 Q.4 WHETHER OR NOT SAVING MONEY IN PAINT COSTS 34 Page 1 MRSI CINCINNATI, OHIO AUTOMOTIVE PAINT SURVEY (MRSI# 05-9743-054) 9 May 2005 Table 1 Q.1 CURRENTLY USING A HIGH TRANSFER EFFICIENCY PAINT SPRAY GUN TOTAL \-\-\-\-\-- BASE: TOTAL 38 YES 34 89.5 NO 4 10.5 Page 2 MRSI CINCINNATI, OHIO AUTOMOTIVE PAINT SURVEY (MRSI# 05-9743-054) 9 May 2005 Table 2 Q.2 LENGTH OF TIME USING HIGH TRANSFER EFFICIENCY PAINT GUN TOTAL \-\-\-\-\-- BASE: CURRENTLY 34 USE A HIGH TRANSFER EFFICIENCY PAINT GUN 1-2 YEARS 4 11.8 3-4 YEARS 8 23.5 5 OR MORE YEARS 21 61.8 DON\'T KNOW 1 2.9 Page 3 MRSI CINCINNATI, OHIO AUTOMOTIVE PAINT SURVEY (MRSI# 05-9743-054) 9 May 2005 Table 3 Q.3 WHETHER OR NOT FOLLOWING MANUFACTURERS\' RECOMMENDED INSTRUCTIONS USING HVLP NOZZLES TOTAL \-\-\-\-\-- BASE: CURRENTLY 34 USE A HIGH TRANSFER EFFICIENCY PAINT GUN YES 34 100.0 NO 0 0 Page 4 MRSI CINCINNATI, OHIO AUTOMOTIVE PAINT SURVEY (MRSI# 05-9743-054) 9 May 2005 Table 4 Q.4 WHETHER OR NOT SAVING MONEY IN PAINT COSTS TOTAL \-\-\-\-\-- BASE: CURRENTLY 34 USE A HIGH TRANSFER EFFICIENCY PAINT GUN YES 29 85.3 NO 2 5.9 DON\'T KNOW 3 8.8	en
converted_docs	003347	## Part 542.1 Terms Commonly Used in Plant Materials Work (Glossary) The following list of terms, although not complete, defines some terms commonly used by plant scientists. 9 million numbers - NRCS numbers used to identify plant accessions; i.e., 9056783 900 numbers - NRCS numbers used to identify plant accessions, now referred to as 9 million numbers; i.e., 9056783 Accession - Plant material (plant, seed, or vegetative part) collected and assigned a number to maintain its identity during evaluation, increase, and storage. Acid Equivalent - The theoretical yield of parent acid from an active ingredient. Active Ingredient - The chemical compound in a product that is responsible for the herbicidal (or other chemical) affect. Advanced Evaluation - The more intensive testing of plants that have been selected as being superior in one or more attributes to the initial evaluation. Aggressiveness - Seedling vigor related to ease of establishment. Also capacity of well-established plants to compete with or outcompete associated grasses, legumes, or woodies. Alien Species - A species introduced and occurring in locations beyond its known historical range. This includes introductions from other continents, bioregions, and also those not native to the local geographic region. Executive Order (E.O.), Invasive Species, February 3, 1999, more narrowly defines an alien species and ties the definition to an occurrence outside a native. Allele - One member of a pair or series of genes occupying a specific position (locus) in a specific chromosome; one of the alternative forms of a gene. Normally an individual has only two alleles for any trait ‑ one gene derived from its male parent, the other from its female parent. Allopolyploid - A polyploid containing genetically different sets of chromosomes; for example, sets from two or more species. Amphidiploid - A polyploid whose chromosome compliment is made up of the entire somatic complements of two species. Aneuploid - An organism whose somatic number is not an even multiple of the haploid number. Annual - A plant that completes its life cycle from seed in a single year or growing season. Apomixis - Reproduction in which sexual organs or related structures take part but fertilization does not occur, so that the resulting seed is vegetatively reproduced. Only a single parent contributes genes to the offspring. Apparent Trend - An interpretation of trend based on a single observation. Apparent trend is described in the same terms as measured trend except that when no trend is apparent it shall be described as \"not apparent\". See "Trend". Assembly - A systematic collection of plants (seed or vegetative material) of one or more species to be evaluated for a planned purpose. Autopolyploid - A polyploid arising through multiplication of the complete haploid set of one species. Backcross - The crossing of a hybrid with either of its parents. In genetics, the crossing of a heterozygote with a homozygous recessive. Band Applications - An application to a continuous restricted area such as in or along a crop row, rather than over the entire field area. Bare-root - A plant harvested from a field without any soil on its roots. Basal Treatment - Herbicide applied to the stems of woody plants at or just above the ground. Biennial - A plant that completes its life cycle in 2 years. The first year it produces leaves and stores food. The second year it produces fruits and seed. Biodiversity - The total variability within and among species of living organisms and the ecological complexes that they inhabit. Biodiversity has three levels - ecosystem, species, and genetic diversity - reflected in the number of different species, the different combination of species, and the different combinations of genes within each species. Biotype - A group of individuals within a population occurring in nature, all with essentially the same genetic constitution. A species usually consists of many biotypes. See also "ecotype". Blend - A mixture of seed of known proportions of two or more lots or variation of the same species. Blind Cultivation - Cultivating before a seeded or planted crop emerges. Botanical Variety - The botanical nomenclature division consisting of more or less recognizable entities within species that are not genetically isolated from each other, below the level of subspecies, and is indicated by the abbreviation "var." in the scientific name; Usage: the abbreviation in roman type; the name in italics; no capitals. See also "variety". Breeder Seed - Seed or vegetative propagating material which is directly controlled by the originating or, in some cases, the sponsoring plant breeder, institution, or firm, and which supplies the source for initial and recurring increase of foundation seed. See also "seed certification classes". Breeder\'s Rights - The assurance that the owner of a crop variety has exclusive control over the increase, distribution, and merchandising of a variety. The protection may be afforded by legislation and regulatory control by agreement among individuals concerned, or by biological factors inherent in the variety. The breeder is assured that his/her authorization must be obtained before the variety can be reproduced or sold by anyone else. See "Plant Variety Protection Act.\" Breeding System - A system of use to select or modify a plant to yield new progeny with desired characteristics. Business Plan - A document to indicate how the PMC resources are to be used and action items to be completed. It should be brief, flexible, realistic, and open-ended. It should be consistent with NRCS guidelines. C-3 Plants - Species having a photosynthetic pathway which results in 3-carbon compounds as initial products of photosynthesis. Includes most legumes, forbs and cool season grasses, as well as most trees and shrubs. Usually significantly less efficient users of soil and water nitrogen than are C-4 plants. Optimum temperature for photosynthesis and growth is 18 to 25° Celsius (64 to 77° Fahrenheit). See also "photosynthesis". C-4 Plants - Species having a photosynthetic pathway which results in 4-carbon compounds as initial products of photosynthesis. Includes most warm season grasses, tropical grasses, a few forbs, and at least one shrub. Usually significantly more efficient users of soil nitrogen and water than are C-3 plants. Total biomass production is generally substantially greater than plants with other photosynthetic pathways. Optimum temperature for photosynthesis and growth is in the range of 27 to 35° Celsius (84 to 100° Fahrenheit). See also "photosynthesis". CAM Plants - Abbr. for "Crassulacean Acid Metabolism". Species whose photosynthetic pathway primarily involves fixation of carbon dioxide during the dark period. Includes desert succulent plants such as cactus. Under good moisture and temperature conditions, carbon fixation may occur in the light via either C-3 or C-4 pathways. Generally the least productive of the three photosynthetic pathways. See also "photosynthesis". Carrier - A liquid or solid material added to a chemical compound or seed to facilitate its application in the field. Center of Diversity - The geographic region in which the greatest variability of a species occurs. A primary center of diversity is the region of true origin and secondary centers of diversity are regions of subsequent spread of a species. Center of Origin - The geographic region containing a concentration of genetic diversity of one or more species; also called a gene center. Certified Seed - The progeny of breeder, foundation, or registered seed that is so handled as to maintain satisfactory genetic identity and purity and that has been approved and certified by the certifying agency. Certified tree seed is defined as seed from trees of proven genetic superiority, as defined by the certifying agency, produced so as to assure genetic identity. See also "seed certification classes". Chasmogamous -- Plant type in which the perianth of flowers opens for pollination to occur. See also "cleistogamous". Cleistogamous -- plant type in which flowers self-pollinate inside the closed buds. Climax -- (1) The final or stable biotic community in a successional series that is self‑perpetuating and in dynamic equilibrium with the physical habitat; (2) the assumed end in succession. See also "historic climax plant community". Cline -- a gradual morphological or physiological change in a group of related organisms across their range, usually associated with environmental or geographic transition. Clone - A group of genetically identical plants produced by vegetatively propagating a single plant over one or more vegetative generations. Combining Ability -- In general, the average performance of a strain in a series of crosses. More specifically, deviation from performance predicted on the basis of general combining ability. Commercial Seed - Seed produced by commercial industry; may or mat not be recognized improved varieties of seed. Common Seed - Non-certified seed. Such seed may be a named variety but are not grown under the certification program. Also a term applied to seed that cannot be identified as to variety; sometimes used to denote local strains resulting from natural selection. Community - An assemblage of one or more populations of plants and/or animals in a common spatial arrangement. Community (Plant Community) - An assemblage of plants occurring together at any point in time, while denoting no particular ecological status. A unit of vegetation. Community Type - An aggregation of all plant communities distinguished by floristic and structural similarities in both overstory and undergrowth layers. A unit of vegetation within a classification. Companion Crop - A crop sown along with another crop; used particularly for small grain with which a forage crop is sown. Companion crop is preferred to the term "nurse crop." Compatible - Compounds or formulations that can be mixed and applied together without undesirably altering their separate effects. This term can be applied also to species mixtures. Composite - The combining of genetic material from several sources. This is one of the alternatives of the mass selection technique and should not be confused with a polycross. See also "mass selection" and "polycross". Concentration - The amount of active ingredient or acid equivalent in a given volume of liquid or in a given weight of dry material. Conservation Field Trial - Is identified in the NRCS General Manual 450-403 as a tool for evaluating new technology, species, or plant releases that address local soil and water resource problems; type of study used by many disciplines; in the PM program may be used to develop new technology, evaluate releases, and promote PM products; typically coordinated by the PMS; qualitative or quantitative data may be collected. Contact Herbicide - A herbicide that kills a plant primarily by contact with plant tissue rather than by translocation. Containerized Stock - Plant materials grown in containers. Cool-season Plant - A plant that makes its major growth during the cool part of the year, mainly in spring but in some localities in the fall or winter. Cooperative Agreement - A written document evidencing the intent of two or more parties to cooperate in an undertaking that will result in mutual benefit to the parties concerned. The parties work jointly in the undertaking \-- not each working within its own sphere of work and authority as under a memorandum of understanding relationship. The cooperative agreement is a fiscal document, and the period of time covered must not exceed the period for which funds are available for obligation. Cover Crop -- Close-growing crop grown primarily for the purpose of protecting and improving soil between periods of regular crop production. Cover Type - The existing vegetation of an area. Cross Pollination - The transfer of pollen from one flower (artificially or naturally) to the stigma of another; may occur on the same plants or on different plants, depending on the species and other conditions. Crossing-Over - The exchange of corresponding segments between chromatids of homologous chromosomes during meiotic prophase. The genetic consequence is the recombination of linked genes. Cultivar - The international term cultivar denotes an assemblage of cultivated plants that is clearly distinguished by any characters (morphological, physiological, cytological, chemical, or others) and when reproduced (sexually or asexually), retains its distinguishing characters. The term is derived from "cultivated variety", or their etymological equivalents in other languages. For cultivated plants, the term cultivar is the equivalent of a botanical variety, in accordance with the International Code of Nomenclature of Cultivated Plants 1980. Usage: cultivar names are not italicized, and are indicated by single quotes at first use, or the word cultivar (but not both). The abbreviation cv. is properly used only with a binomial name: Genus species cv. cultivar name. Omit the abbreviation if single quotes are used: Genus species 'cultivar name'. Cultural Evaluation - Studies designed to obtain information regarding establishment, management and production of plant materials. They may be conducted on or off the center at any stage of the evaluation process. Defoliant - A compound that causes the leaves or foliage to drop from a plant. Demonstration Plantings - A planting used primarily to promote use and acceptance of new technology or releases; no evaluations are done and no data is collected. Desiccant - A compound that promotes dehydration or removal of moisture from plant tissue. Desired Plant Community - A plant community which produces the kind, proportion, and amount of vegetation necessary for meeting or exceeding the minimum quality criteria for the soil, water, air, plant and animal resources, and the land use plan/activity plan objectives established for an ecological site(s). The desired plant community must be consistent with the site\'s capability to produce the desired vegetation through management, land treatment, or a combination of the two. Diluent - Any liquid or solid material serving to dilute an active ingredient in the preparation of a formulation. Dioecious - Having staminate and pistillate flowers occurring on different plants, that is, having distinct male and female plants (e.g. buffalograss). Diploid - Having two chromosomes of each kind. Having the basic chromosome number doubled. Direct Application - Method of applying chemicals or fertilizers directly to a restricted area, such as a row or a bed at base of plants. Diversity - The distribution and abundance of different plants and animal communities within an area. Also a measure of the number of species and their relative abundance within a given association of organisms. Areas of high diversity are characterized by a great variety of species; usually relatively few individuals represent any one species. Areas with low diversity are characterized by a few species; often relatively large numbers of individuals represent each species. Dormancy - An internal condition of the chemistry or stage of development of a viable seed that prevents its germination, although temperature and moisture are adequate for growth. Dormant Seeding - Planting seed during late fall or early winter after temperatures become too low so that seed germination occurs the following spring. Ecesis - Establishment and development of a plant in the plant community. Ecocline - Series of biotypes within a species that shows a genetic gradient correlated with a gradual environmental gradient. Ecological Niche - Role of an organism in an ecological system. Includes the physical space in a habitat occupied by an organism; its functional role in the community (e.g., its trophic position); and its position in environmental gradients of temperature, moisture, pH, soil, and other conditions of existence. Ecological Optimum - The most favorable conditions in the environment for the growth and reproduction of an organism. Ecological Race - Group of local populations within a species in which individuals have similar environmental tolerances. Wide-ranging species may consist of many ecological races. Ecological Response Unit - A unit of land that is homogeneous in character such that similar units will respond in the same way to disturbance or manipulation. Syn. ecological site, ecological type. Ecological Site - A kind of land with a specific potential natural community and specific physical site characteristics, differing from other kinds of land in ability to produce vegetation and to respond to management. Syn. Ecological type, ecological response unit. Ecological Status - (1) The present state of vegetation and soil protection of an ecological site in relation to the potential natural community for the site. Vegetation status is the expression of the relative degree of which the kinds, proportions, and amounts of plants in a community resemble that of the potential natural community. If classes or ratings are used, they should be described in ecological rather than utilization terms. For example, some agencies are utilizing four classes of ecological status ratings (early seral, midseral, late-seral, potential natural community) of vegetation corresponding to 0‑25%, 26‑50%, 51‑75%, and 76-100% of the potential natural community standard. Soil status is a measure of present vegetation and litter cover relative to the amount of cover needed on the site to prevent accelerated erosion. This term is not used by all agencies. (2) The present state of vegetation and soil protection of an ecological site in relation to the historic climax plant community for the site. Vegetation status is the expression of the relative degree of which the kinds, proportions, and amounts of plants in a community resemble that of the historic climax plant community. If classes or ratings are used, they should be described in ecological rather than utilization terms. Ecological System - See "ecosystem". Ecological Type - A land classification category which is more specific than a phase of a habitat type. Ecological types are commonly used to differentiate habitat phases into categories of land which differ in their ability to produce vegetation or their response to management. Syn. ecological response unit, ecological site. Ecophene - Plants differing in appearance, especially in the size of vegetative parts, numbers of stems, erectness, and reproductive vigor but belonging to essentially homogeneous genetic stock. Their distinctness is due entirely to environmental influences, for when different ecophenes are transplanted into the same habitat these differences disappear. Ecosystem - Energy-driven complex of one or more organisms and their environment. Organisms together with their abiotic environment, forming an interacting system, inhabiting an identifiable space. The whole system, in the sense of physics, including not only the organism complex, but also the whole complex of physical factors forming what we call the environment. The complex of living and nonliving components in a specified location that comprise a stable system in which the exchange of material follows a circular path such as a biome. A community of organisms and the environment in which they live. A system of ecological relationships in a local environment, including relationships between organisms, and between the organisms and the environment itself. Syn.: ecological system. Ecotone - Transitional zone between two vegetational types or vegetational regions. A transition area of vegetation between two communities, having characteristics of both kinds of neighboring vegetation as well as characteristics of its own. Varies width depending on site and climatic factors. A transition line or strip of vegetation between two communities, having characteristics of both kinds of neighboring vegetation as well as characteristics of own. Ecotype - (1) A population of plants that has become genetically differentiated in response to the conditions of a particular habitat. The plants may vary in growth habit, maturity, and other characteristics such as pubescence and flower color. Sometimes referred to as a geographical race. (2) A transition area of vegetation between two communities, having characteristics of both kinds of neighboring vegetation as well as characteristics of its own. Width varies depending on site and climatic factors. Transition zone between two vegetation types or vegetation-type regions. (3) A transition line or strip of vegetation between two communities, having characteristics of both kinds of neighboring vegetation as well as characteristics of own. (4) A locally adapted population within a species which has certain genetically determined characteristics; interbreeding between ecotypes in not restricted. (5) A variety or strain within a given species that maintains its distinct identity by adaptation to a specific environment. (6) A locally adapted population of a species which has a distinctive limit of tolerance to environmental factors. (7) A variant type within an ecospecies. Ecovar - The offspring of native species that have been developed from original plant material collected form a specific ecological region. Selection is done with minor emphasis on improving agronomic characteristics, and major emphasis on maintaining genetic diversity. See also "ecotype". Educational Plantings -- Plantings designed to introduce the establishment and uses of new or potential releases to the public. Educational plantings show one or more conservation practice uses for the plant material, possibly in comparison to a standard cultivar or species; plantings may be established on or off-center. See also "demonstration plantings". Emulsifying Agent - A surface active material that facilitates the suspension of one liquid in another. Emulsion - The suspension of one liquid as minute globules in another liquid; for example, oil dispersed in water. Environment - The sum of all external conditions that affect an organism or community to influence its development or existence. Environmental Range - Range of environmental conditions in which, at a given time, the members of a species live. Epinasty - Increased growth on the upper surface of a plant organ or part (especially leaves) that causes it to head downward. Epithet - The final word or combination of words in a name that denotes an individual taxon. Exotic - A term describing an organism introduced from another country or continent. Facultative Weed - Weed found growing both wild and in association with human activity. Field Evaluation Planting (FEP) - Old name for off-center evaluations; term not currently used by the PM program. See "off-center evaluations". Field Plantings - Final stage of technology development or plant selection; plantings used primarily by PMSs to develop new methods or technology or evaluate the adaptability of new releases; data is collected and analyzed statistically. Field-Scale Increase - The reproduction of plant materials for use in field plantings and by cooperating agencies to obtain the final data needed to determine the feasibility of a variety release. Firm Seed - Seed, other than hard seed, that neither germinates nor decays during a prescribed test period under prescribed test conditions. Firm ungerminated seed may be alive or dead. Forb - Any non-woody plant that is not a grass, sedge, or rush. Foundation Seed -- The progeny of breeder or foundation seed that is so handled as to most nearly maintain specific genetic identity and purity. Production may be carefully supervised by the originating agency and approved by the certifying agency, the agricultural experiment station, or both. See also "seed certification classes". Frost-Free Period - The period, number of days or both between the last frost in spring and the first frost in fall. Gene Bank - A storage facility where germplasm is stored in the form of seeds, pollen, or in vitro culture, or in the case of a field gene bank, as plants growing in the field. Gene Flow - The transfer of genes from one population to another. See also "genetic flow". Gene Frequency - The relative frequency with which a particular gene is present in a particular population of a species or other group. Gene Pool - The total stock of genes in a breeding population, with each gene representing a number of alleles. See also "genetic pool". Genetic Diversity - The total amount of genetic variation present in a population or species. Having a heterogeneous constitution, reacting differently to diverse external condition. (Applied to a breeding population, variety, or species.). The genetic constitution of an individual or group. Genetic Drift - Chance occurrences in small populations which lead to changes in gene frequencies from generation to generation. The tendency, within small interbreeding populations, for heterozygous gene pairs to become homozygous for one allele or the other by chance rather than by selection. A change in gene frequency that occurs in small populations as a result of random sampling error during reproduction. The fluctuation in gene frequency occurring in an isolated population, presumably due to random variations from generation to generation. Genetic Engineering - The use of in vitro techniques to produce DNA molecules containing novel combinations of genes or other sequences in living cells that make them capable of producing new substances or performing new functions. Usage: A popular term for such technologies as a whole. Genetic Erosion - The loss of genetic diversity between and within populations of the same species over time; or a reduction of the genetic base of a species due to human intervention, environmental changes, etc. Genetic Flow - The exchange of genes between different populations. Also termed migration, it is considered to be a source of genetic variation. A single introduction of genes into a new population is known as gene exchange. If gene migration is constant and recurrent it is known as gene flow. The closer populations are related spatially and genetically, the more likely the chances of gene flow. Genetic Pool - The totality of genes and gene complexes of a given population at a given time. The sum of all genetic information carried by all individuals of an interbreeding population. All of the alleles of all the genes in a population. Genetic Shift - A change in the germplasm balance of a cross‑pollinated variety, usually caused by environmental selection pressures. Genetic Vulnerability - Having a narrow range of genetic diversity and reacting uniformly to diverse external conditions. (Applied to breeding populations of varieties or species). Genotype - The genetic constitution of an individual or group of plants. Individual plants may vary in appearance (phenotypically), but they must have the genetic characteristics of the genotype.. The genetic constitution, latent or expressed, of an organism, as contrasted with the phenotype. The sum total of all genes present in an individual.. Geographic Range - Geographic limits of the ecological range; geographic extent of actual occurrences of a species. Germination - The initiation of growth by the embryo and development of a young plant from seed. Germplasm -- Genetic material that determines the morphological and physiological characteristics of a species. Grex - A collective term applies to the progeny of an artificial cross from known parents; each and every crossing of any two parents belonging to different taxa that bear the same pair of specific, intraspecific, interspecific, grex, or cultivar epithets. Green Manure Crop -- A crop that is plowed under while still living to increase organic matter in soil. Growing Season - (1) The period, number of days, or both between the last frost in spring and the first freeze threshold temperature of the crop or other designated temperature threshold. (2) The amount of time a plant is able to actively grow. Habitat Type - The collective area which one plant association occupies or will come to occupy as succession advances. The habitat type is defined and described on the basis of the vegetation and its associated environment. Hard Seed - Seeds that remain hard at the end of a prescribed germination test because they have not absorbed water due to an impermeable seed coat. Herbaceous - A vascular plant that does not develop woody tissue. Heritability - The proportion of observed variability due to heredity; the remainder is due to environmental causes. Heterosis - Hybrid vigor such that the F~1~ hybrid falls outside the range of the parents with respect to some character or characters. Heterozygous - Having unlike alleles at one or more corresponding loci (such as Yy). Historic Climax Plant Community - The original natural plant community that represents the final or highest stable level in a successional series that is in dynamic equilibrium with ecosystem components - soils, vegetation, climate, etc. The assumed end point in primary as well as secondary succession. Synonym-Climax Plant Community. See Climax. Homozygous - Having alike alleles (such as YY). An organism may be described as homozygous at one, several or all loci. Horticultural Annual - A biennial or perennial which may treated as an annual in parts of the country where the usually persistent plant parts do not survive more than one growing season. Hybrid - offspring of a cross between genetically dissimilar individuals. First-generation progeny resulting from the controlled cross-fertilization between individuals that differ in one or more genes. Increase Plantings -- P production of seed or other reproductive parts of plant material to be made available for use in evaluations, field plantings, demonstration plantings, educational plantings or for distribution. See also "initial increase". Indicator Species - (1) Species that indicate the presence of certain environmental conditions, range condition, previous treatment, or soil type. (2) One or more plant species selected to indicate a certain level of grazing use. Indigenous - Born, growing, or produced naturally (native) in a specified area, region, or country. Initial Evaluation - The evaluation of the characteristics and comparative performance of an assembly of plants under controlled conditions so that promising plants can be selected for further evaluation. Initial Increase - The production of small quantities of seed or other reproductive parts of materials selected from initial or advanced evaluations to be used for further evaluation and exchange. Inter-Center Strain Trial (ICST) - Controlled, repeatable evaluations where scientific methods and experimental designs are used to study plants and techniques. Used to determine state and regional plant performance and adaptation. Interseeding - Seeding into an established vegetation cover. Often involves planting seeds into the center of narrow seedbed strips, commonly of variable spacing prepared by mechanical or chemical methods.. Introduced - A species not part of the original fauna or flora of the area in question, but introduced from another geographical region through human activity. Syn.: exotic. Introduced is [not]{.underline} synonymous and should [not]{.underline} be confused with the term "invasive species". Invader - (1) Plants not a part of the original plant community that invade an area due to disturbance and/or plant community deterioration. (2) Plant species that were absent in undisturbed portions of the original vegetation of a specific range site and will invade or increase following disturbance or continued heavy grazing. Invasion - The migration of organisms from one area to another area and their establishment in the latter. Invasive Plants -- plants that reproduce rapidly and spread aggressively from the area in which they originally occurred or were planted, posing a threat to natural area diversity or managed / agricultural area productivity. See also "Invasive Species". Invasive Species - A species that demonstrates rapid growth and spread, invades habitats, and displaces other species. Species that are prolific seed producers, have high seed germination rates, easily propagated asexually by root or stem fragments, and/or rapidly mature predispose a plant to being an invasive. Example: The hybrid cattail (Typha xglauca), a cross between native cattails, is extremely aggressive and out-competes its parents and other native species when established. Introduced species that are predisposed to invasiveness have the added advantage of being relatively free from predators (herbivores, parasites, and disease) and can therefore, expand more energy for growth and reproduction. Example: Nepal (Microstegium vimineum), introduced from Asia, displaces native vegetation in floodplains and other moist environments creating a monoculture in the herbaceous layer. Microstegium now occurs in 21 states and Puerto Rico, ranging from Texas to Florida in the south and north into New York State and Illinois. Invasive species should [not]{.underline} be confused with "Introduced Species". Kind - One or more related species or subspecies that singly or collectively is known by one common name; for example, wheat, vetch and sweetclover. Limited Generations - A restriction placed by the developer on the number of generations through which a variety may be sold by variety name. Line - A group of individuals of common ancestry. Genetically, a more narrowly defined group than a strain or a variety. Liner - Plant material which is grown in one location and then "lined-out" in another location for finishing off. Plants may be started in seedbeds and lifted bare-root or grown in containers. Either type of these liners may be finish their production cycle in the ground or in containers. Linkage - Association of genetic factors; the genes are in the same chromosome. Local Native - A genetically local source that originated at or within the same seed zone and elevation band as the project site (planned planting). See also "range site" and "woodland site". Local Population - Group of individuals of the same species growing near enough to each other to interbreed and exchange genes. Long Range Plan - A plan which directs plant materials activities of the PMC or within a state or the PMC service area. Major Land Resource Areas (MLRA) -- A system of land classification composed of geographically associated land resource units; MLRAs are important in agricultural and other types of regional planning. Land resource units are geographic areas, usually several thousand acres in extent, that are characterized by a particular pattern of soils, climate, water resources, and land uses. Management Site Potential - The kinds of levels of productivity or values of a range site that can be achieved under various management prescriptions. Mass Selection - Selection of individual plants and propagation of the next generation from the aggregates of that seed. Memorandum of Understanding - A written instrument evidencing the intent of two or more parties to cooperate in carrying out an undertaking that will result in mutual benefit to the parties concerned. Each party works within its own sphere of work and authority. It is not a fiscal document used as a basis for obligating funds. It may run for an indefinite time or be limited. Miscible Liquids - Two or more liquids capable of being mixed; they will remain mixed under normal conditions. Mixture - More than one kind of seed or variety; each is present in excess of 3 percent of the whole. Monoecious - Staminate and pistillate flowers borne separately on the same plant. Morphology - A branch of biology dealing with the form and structure of organisms. Native Grazing Land - Land used primarily for production of native forage plants maintained or manipulated primarily through grazing management. Native grazing land includes grazed rangeland, grazed forestland, and native and naturalized pasture, individually or collectively. Native Plant - See "native species". Native Species - A native plant species is one that occurs naturally in a particular region, state, ecosystem, and habitat without direct or indirect human actions. Its presence and evolution in an area are determined by climate, soil, and biotic factors. Synonyms of native include indigenous, endemic, aboriginal. Natural Potential - Occasionally used as synonym for climax with reference to range vegetation. Naturalized Plant - A plant introduced from other areas that has become established in and more or less adapted to a region by long, continued growth. See also "naturalized species". Naturalized Species - A species introduced from other areas that has become established in and more or less adapted to a region by long, continued growth there. Does not require artificial inputs for survival and reproduction, and has established a stable or expanding population. Examples: cheatgrass, Kentucky bluegrass, starling, etc. Nonselective Herbicide - A chemical that is toxic to plants, generally without regard to species. Noxious Weed - A weed arbitrarily defined by law as being especially undesirable, troublesome, and difficult to control. Definition varies according to legal interpretations. Nurse Crop - See "companion crop". Off-center Evaluations - Plantings used by PMCs to evaluate releases or technology off the center; data is collected and analyzed statistically; was previously named "field evaluation planting." On-center Evaluations - Plantings done on the PMC to evaluate new technology or new plant selections; data is collected and analyzed statistically. Open Pollination - Natural, as opposed to controlled, pollination. Open pollinated seed contrasts with hybrid seed. Perennial - A plant that lives more than 2 years. Performance Trial -- A planting designed to test a potential plant release for reliability in a particular conservation application. May require multiple plantings and/or off-center sites. Standards for comparison are to be included if available. Phenology - A branch of science dealing with the relationship between climate and periodic biological phenomena. Also dates or sequence of occurrence of different growth stages of plants. Phenotype - (1) The external appearance or discernible characteristics of an organism, resulting from interaction between an organism\'s genetic makeup (genotype) and the environment. A group of individual plants may appear alike (phenotypically) but not have the same genotype, or they may vary in appearance and have the same genotype. (2) Observable characteristics. Photosynthesis - The metabolic pathway by which plants produce food. See also "C-3 plants", "C-4 plants", and "CAM plants". Pioneer Species - The first species or community to colonize or recolonize a barren or disturbed area in primary or secondary succession. Plan of Operations (PO) - see \'Business Plan\' Plant Association - A kind of climax plant community consisting of stands with essentially the same dominant species in corresponding layers. Plant Community Type - Each of the existing plant communities that can occupy an ecological site. Several plant community types will typically be found on an ecological site, including the historic climax plant community for that site. Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA) - Approved December 23, 1970, the PVPA offers legal protection to developers of new releases or varieties of plants that reproduce sexually, that is, through seed. Developers of plants that reproduce asexually have received protection from the U.S. Patent Office since 1930. The law states that protection will be extended to a "novel variety\" if it has these three qualifications: [Distinctness]{.underline} - The variety must differ from all known prior varieties by one or more identifiable morphological, physiological, or other characteristic; [Uniformity]{.underline} - If any variations exist in the variety, they must be describable, predictable, and commercially acceptable; and [Stability]{.underline} - When sexually reproduced, the variety must remain unchanged in its essential and distinctive characteristics to a degree expected of similarly developed varieties. Polycross - Open-pollination of a group of genotypes (generally selected) in isolation from other compatible genotypes in such a way that each of the original selections has an equal opportunity at pollinating, or being pollinated by, any of the others. Population - (1) The aggregate of organisms which inhabit a particular area or region; (2) a (specified) portion of such an aggregate, usually a group of organisms of the same kind occupying an area small enough to allow interbreeding. Population Genetics - A branch of genetics dealing with the frequency and distribution of genes, mutants, genotypes, etc. among populations of organisms. Population genetics is now based upon an increasing input of laboratory and field observations under an array of environments; much of this work involves the documentation and interpretation of genetic variability in natural populations. Post-Emergence - After the emergence of a specified weed or crop. Potential Natural Community - The biotic community that would become established on an ecological site if all successional sequences were completed without interferences by man under the present environmental conditions. Natural disturbances are inherent in its development. Pre-Emergence - Before the emergence of a specified weed or crop. Pre-Planting - Any time before the crop is planted. Pristine - A state of ecological stability or condition existing in the absence of direct disturbances by modern man. See also "relict". Project - A national PM activity that is broad in nature and serves as an umbrella for PMC studies. Refer to Part 540.51 of the NPMM for more information on PM projects. Project Statement - A document that outlines the details of a National PM Project. Refer to Part 540.51 of the NPMM for more information on PM project statements. Pure Line - Succession of generations of organisms homozygous for all genes. Pure Live Seed (PLS) - The product of the percentage of germination plus the hard seed and the percentage of pure seed divided by 100. Purity - (1) The name or names of the kind, type, or varieties and the percentage or percentages thereof. (2) The percentage of other agricultural seed or crop seed; the percentage of inert matters. (3) The percentage of weed seed, including noxious weed seed, and the names of the noxious weed seed and the rate of occurrence of each. Race - A term sometimes used to denote ecotypes. Range Condition - A generic term relating to present status of a unit of range in terms of specific values or potentials. Specific values or potentials must be stated. Some agencies define range condition as follows: the present state of vegetation of a range site in relation to the climax (natural potential) plant community for that site. It is an expression of the relative degree to which the kinds, proportions, and amounts of plants in a plant community resemble that of the climax plant community for the site. Range Condition Class - Confusion has existed regarding both definition and use of this term. The following definition fits the thinking expressed in the definition Range Condition: one of a series of arbitrary categories used to either classify ecological status of a specific range site in relation to its potential (early, mid, late, or potential natural community) or classify management-oriented value categories for specific potentials, e.g., good condition spring cattle range. Range Degradation - The degeneration of a site caused by biotic or abiotic factors which results in a lowered successional status to the point that ecological potential is changed. See also "Range Site Degeneration". Range Retrogression - The degradation of a site caused by biotic or abiotic factors which results in movement of the site to a lower successional status within the same ecological potential. Range Seeding - The process of establishing vegetation by the artificial dissemination of seed. Establishing adapted plant species on ranges by means other than natural revegetation. See also "Reseeding". Range Site - An area of rangeland having the potential to produce distinctive kinds and amounts of vegetation, resulting in a characteristic plant community under its particular combination of environmental factors, especially soils and climate. Each range site is typified by an association of species that differ from that of other range sites in the kind or proportions of species, or in total production. Synonymous with ecological site when referring to rangeland. Some agencies use range site based on the climax concept, not potential natural community. Syn.: Ecological Site. Range Site Degeneration - The degradation of a site caused by biotic or abiotic factors which results in an ecological shift to a lower successional status and possibly a lower ecological potential for production. Syn.: retrogression. See also "range degradation". Reciprocal Cross - A second cross involving the same characters as the first but with the sex of the parents interchanged. Reclamation - Restoration of a site or resource to a desired condition to achieve management objectives or stated goals. The construction of plant, soil, and topographic conditions, after disturbance, which permits the disturbed site to function adequately within its ecosystem. However, the constructed conditions may not be identical to predisturbance conditions. The process of reconverting disturbed lands to their former uses or other productive uses. Recovery - The rate or amount of regrowth following harvesting of a forage species or following a dormant season. Recurrent Selection - A method of breeding designed to concentrate favorable genes scattered among a number of individuals by selecting in each generation among the progeny produced by intermating of the selected individuals of the previous generation. Registered Seed - The progeny of foundation seed that is so handled as to maintain satisfactory genetic identity and purity and that has been approved and certified by the certifying agency. This class of seed should be of a quality suitable for production of certified seed. See also "seed certification classes". Registered Variety - (1) For grasses and agricultural species: A variety accepted, numbered, and registered as a recognized improved variety by the Committee on Varietal Standardization and Registration of the Crop Science Society of America. (2) For other species: A variety which has been registered with the appropriate International Species Registrar. Rehabilitation - Return of land to a form and productivity that conforms with a prior land use plan, including a stable ecological state that does not contribute substantially to environmental deterioration and is consistent with surrounding aesthetic values. Improving a project site to a more desired condition than previously existed, usually as result of a major disturbance. Synonymous with reclamation. Released Variety - A new variety of proved value that is made available to the public, according to ESCOP standards, for a conservation purpose. See also "variety". Relict - A remnant or fragment of the climax plant community that remains from a former period when it was more widely distributed. See also "pristine". Reseeding - A crop variety or inbred line that has been evaluated and made available to the public. To make available to the public. To seed again, usually soon after an initial seeding has failed to achieve satisfactory turf establishment. Restoration - The process of restoring site conditions as they were before land disturbance. Revegetation - Establishing or re-establishing desirable plants in areas where desirable plants are absent or of inadequate density, by management alone (natural revegetation) or by seeding or transplanting (artificial revegetation). A general term for renewing the vegetation on a project site, which include restoration and rehabilitation. Refers to the vegetation construction phase of reclamation. Riparian Community Type - A recurring, classified, defined and recognizable assemblage of riparian plant species. A repeating, classified, defined and recognizable assemblage of riparian plant species. Riparian Ecosystems - (1) Those assemblages of plants, animals, and aquatic communities whose presence can be either directly or indirectly attributed to factors that are water‑influenced or related. (2) Interacting system between aquatic and terrestrial situations, identified by soil characteristics, and distinctive vegetation that requires or tolerates free or unbound water. Riparian Species - Plant species occurring within the riparian zone. Obligate species require the environmental conditions within the riparian zone; facultative species tolerate the environmental conditions, therefore may also occur away from the riparian zone. Seed Certification - A system whereby seed of plant cultivars (and pre-varietal releases) is produced, harvested and marketed under authorized regulation to insure seed of high quality and genetic purity. Seed Certification Classes - Classes of seed produced by a grower to ensure the purity of the genetic material. Seed which undergoes the certification process is typically inspected during the growing season or at harvest and the seed is tested. Certification classes include: Breeder, Foundation, Registered, Certified, and Common. See also "breeder seed", foundation seed", "registered seed", "certified seed", and "common seed". Seed Certifying Agency - General term for the state or other agency responsible for the release and certification of crop varieties and for inspecting and approving seed produced under one of the seed certification classes. Most seed certification agencies are members of the Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies (AOSCA). Seed Lot - A definite quantity of seed identified by a lot number, every portion or bag of which is uniform, within permitted tolerances, for the factors that appear on the labeling. Selected Class Release - (1) Seed that is the progeny of rigidly selected seed or stands of untested parentage that have promise but not proof of genetic superiority, and for which geographic source and elevation shall be stated on the certification label. (2) One of the classes of pre-varietal releases recognized by AOSCA. Selection - Selecting an accession or accessions from an assembly, or individuals from within an accession, to obtain the plants having the best characteristics for a particular conservation use. Selective Herbicide - A chemical that is more toxic to some plant species than to others. Self Pollination - The transfer of pollen from the anther of a flower to the stigma of the same flower, or different flowers on the same plant. Seral - Refers to species or communities that are eventually replaced by other species or communities within a sere. Seral Community - One of a series of biotic communities that follow one another in time on any given area. Syn. successional community. Seral Stages - The developmental stages of an ecological succession. Sere - All temporary communities in a successional sequence. The complete series of ecological communities occupying a given area over hundreds or thousands of years from the initial to the final or climax stage. Sod Seeding - Direct drilling of seed into sod of existing vegetation with no mechanical seedbed preparation. Soil Application - Chemical applied mainly to the soil surface rather than to vegetation. Soil Incorporation - Mechanical mixing of a chemical with the soil. Soil Injection - Mechanical placement of a chemical beneath the soil surface with a minimum of mixing or stirring. Soil Sterilant - A biocide that prevents the growth of plants and kills all living organisms when present in the soil. Soil sterilization effects may be temporary or permanent. Source-Identified Seed - (1) Source identified propagating materials are seed, seedlings, or other propagating materials collected from natural stands, seed production areas, seed fields, or orchards where no selection or testing of the parent population has been made. (2) One of the classes of pre-varietal releases recognized by AOSCA. Stand - (1) A population of plants. (2) Density of population or number of individuals per unit area. Standard Plant - (1) A commonly used species or, if available, variety for the use of which an evaluation is being made. (2) A plant which serves as the standard for comparison. Strain - (1) A group of organisms of common origin having one or more definite morphological or physiological characteristics that are heritable. (2) A term to include breed differences within a species, or as a group of plants differing little, if any, in morphology yet physiologically distinct in some additional quality such as yield or vigor: i.e., the northern and southern strains of smooth brome. Strain also means variety, ecotype, biotype, type, or a group of these. Study - An activity at a PMC that develops a product to address a conservation need identified in the PMC LRP. A PMC study must be outlined in a study plan and be identified in the PMC Business Plan and Workload Analysis. Refer to Part 540.52 of the NPMM for more information on PMC studies. Study Plan - A comprehensive document that outlines the details of a PMC study. Refer to Part 540.52 of the NPMM for more information on PMC study plans. Subspecies - A grouping within a species used to describe geographically isolated variants, a category above "variety", and is indicated by the abbreviation "ssp." in the scientific name. Succession - (1) The progressive replacement of plant communities on a site which leads to the potential natural plant community, i.e., attaining stability. Primary succession entails simultaneous successions of soil from parent material and vegetation. Secondary succession occurs following disturbances on sites that previously supported vegetation, and entails plant succession on a more mature soil. (2) The progressive development of vegetation toward its highest ecological expression, the climax replacement of one plant community by another. Surfactant - A material that facilitates and accentuates the emulsifying, dispersing, spreading, wetting, and other surface-modifying properties of herbicide formulation. Suspension - A system consisting of very finely divided solid particles dispersed in a solid, liquid, or gas. Synergism - Cooperative action of different chemicals or organisms such that the total effect is greater than the sum of the independent effects. Synthetic Variety - Advanced generation progenies of a number of clones or lines (or of hybrids among them) obtained by open-pollination. Testcross - A cross of a double or multiple heterozygote to the corresponding multiple recessive to test for homozygosity or linkage. Tested Seed - (1) Seeds or plants which have been through additional testing on more than one generation which will include testing on multiple sites with replicated plots to verify performance and heritability of desirable traits. The material has proven genetic superiority or possesses distinctive traits for which heritability is stable as defined by the certifying agency. (2) One of the classes of pre-varietal releases recognized by AOSCA. Tetraploid - An organism having four basic sets of chromosomes. Topcross Progeny - Progeny from outcrossed seed of selections, clones or lines crossed with a single variety or line that serves as a common pollen parent. Translocated Herbicide - An herbicide that is distributed throughout the plant from the point of entry. Syn. Systemic herbicide. Trend - The direction of change in ecological status or resource value rating observed over time. Trend in ecological status should be described as toward, or away from the potential natural community, or as not apparent. Trend in a resource value rating for a specific use should be described as up, down or not apparent. Trends in resource value ratings for several uses on the same site at a given time may be in different directions, and there is no necessary correlation between trends in resource value ratings and trend in ecological status. Some agencies use trend only in the context of ecological status. Syn. range condition trend. See and "apparent trend". Type - A group of varieties so nearly similar that the individual varieties cannot be clearly differentiated except under special conditions. For further information, refer to the Federal Seed Act Rules and Regulations. Use Groups - The artificial grouping for the comparative testing of plant materials having similar uses. Variety - (1a) The botanical nomenclature division consisting of more or less recognizable entities within species that are not genetically isolated from each other, below the level of subspecies, and is indicated by the abbreviation "var." in the scientific name (see "botanical variety"); (1b) The rank of taxa below subspecies but above forma; a plant which retains most of the characteristics of the species, but differs in some way such as flower or leaf color, size of mature plant, etc. A variety is added to the specific binomial and preceded by \"var.\", such as saxatilis in the epithet Juniperus communis var. saxatilis. (2) Term used in some national and international legislation to denominate one clearly distinguishable taxon from another; equivalent to "cultivar". (Note: the Plant Materials Program does not recognize the terms "variety" and "cultivar" as equivalent.) Vegetation Type - A kind of existing plant community with distinguishable characteristics described in terms of the present vegetation that dominates the aspect or physiognomy of the area. Syn. Type. Warm-Season Plant - A plant that completes most of its growth during the warm part of the year, generally late in spring and in summer. Commonly a C-4 plant photosynthetic pathway. Wetland Communities - Plant communities that occur on sites with soils typically saturated with or covered with water most of the growing season.	en
all-txt-docs	459348	PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE JET PROPULSION LABORATORY CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION PASADENA, CALIF. 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011 MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT June 28, 1993 The Magellan Transition Experiment to circularize the spacecraft's orbit by lowering it into the top of the Venusian atmosphere to create drag is going very well, project officials said today. As of last Friday, June 25, the spacecraft had made 260 atmospheric drag passes and the apoapsis, or furthest point from the planet, had been lowered below 5,300 kilometers (3,286 miles) from its original orbital apoapsis of 8,540 kilometers (5,294 miles). The spacecraft's closest point to the planet, or periapsis, is being maintained at between 138 and 140 kilometers altitude (about 86 to 88 miles). The spacecraft also is being maintained in a specific corridor on its closest passes to the planet. Plans were being made to execute a corridor orbit trim maneuver Thursday to slightly raise the altitude at periapsis and maintain a steady course during the upcoming July 4th holiday weekend. It is expected the orbit will be sufficiently changed by early August so that only fine-tuning the orbit will be needed to achieve the desired, nearly circular orbit required for high- resolution gravity studies of Venus. This is the first time a spacecraft's orbit has been changed at another planet by "aerobraking," or using the planet's atmosphere to create drag. #####	en
converted_docs	372477	Research to Operations Guidelines for the Climate Forecast System These "Research to Operations (R2O) Guidelines" establish the path to implementation of changes in the NCEP operational climate model suite. They establish the roles and responsibilities of the "home research institution" and NCEP (EMC, CPC and Climate Test Bed) in this process. Significant resources for the home research institution and the NCEP are required to carry out a smooth transition. The R2O Guidelines, which describe the implementation path of changes to the NCEP operational climate model suite, consist of the following seven steps: > 1. Model development and refinement > > 2. Preliminary assessment > > 3. Calibration > > 4. Interface with operations > > 5. Final skill assessment > > 6. Parallel tests > > 7. Approval While most of the steps are identical to the way NCEP implements changes in other model suites, the calibration step is unique to the climate model suite. Some of the changes may not need to go through all of the steps and, therefore, are negotiable on a case-by-case basis. The three NCEP center directors (NCO, EMC and CPC) must approve changes to the procedures. The NCEP director makes the final decision to approve an implementation. Details of each step are described below. 1. Model development and refinement The NCEP CFS is a fully coupled system for atmosphere-ocean-land surface-sea ice. It is expected that any CFS improvements will come from any or all of these components or from provision of additional, independent information to supplement operationally available CFS products. Upgrades to CFS components must be tested with the full CFS and compared with the operational system to demonstrate any changes to the system's climatology (using a 30- to 50-year coupled run with CMIP, Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) protocols, and improved simulation of the seasonal-to-interannual (El Niño/Southern Oscillation) and intraseasonal (Madden-Julian Oscillation) signals via a subset set of 1-year hindcasts (usually initialized in April and November). The development and refinement of any upgrades are to be performed by the model host institution, using its personnel and computing resources, except if the development is supported by the NOAA Climate Test Bed (CTB). In the latter case, some computing resources may be available for CMIP runs and a hindcast subset through the CTB allocation on the NOAA R&D computer. If testing on the retrospective forecast subset indicates sufficient improvement compared to the operational CFS, a full hindcast set (initialized for all 12 calendar months using procedures compatible with NCEP's operations) must be completed before implementation can be considered. At the present level of computing resources, NCEP and the CTB cannot support execution of a full, pre-implementation hindcast set. Upgrades to CFS components may also be tested in the NCEP Global Forecast System (GFS), which covers the 1-15 day forecast range, and a future Monthly Forecast System (MFS, 16-45 day range). Both the GFS and MFS may become fully coupled systems in 2009-2012. Testing system components in both the weather and climate applications is a major strategic item at NCEP, and fosters a unified approach to the weather-climate problem. The second strategy for improvements to NCEP's climate forecasts is through provision of additional, independent information to supplement operationally available CFS products. This may be done by a Multi-Model Ensemble (MME) approach. Testing any new climate model system must follow the same strategy as for CFS upgrades outlined above. As with CFS component upgrades, NCEP and the CTB cannot support execution of a full, pre-implementation hindcast set with the present level of computing resources. Evaluations of all climate (and weather) system upgrades and MME configurations will be done with standard techniques, documented and available at NCEP. More details are given in the sections below. EMC scientists will participate in a consulting role for projects involving model changes, while CPC scientists will participate in projects involving evaluations and product development for all upgrades and MME systems. 2 Preliminary assessment Developers of CFS upgrades and MME candidates should provide the subset of hindcast results (including raw monthly-mean fields) to NCEP and work with CPC and EMC to assess whether there are forecast improvements relative to existing operational dynamical and statistical predictions. Iterations back to Step 1 may be necessary if the results do not provide improvements. Statistically significant improvements would lead to an implementation plan and completion of the full, pre-implementation hindcast set. A team of scientists from the external institution, CPC and EMC will work together to make the evaluation. A plan for transition to operations at NCEP will be written by the team and approved by NCEP management. 3 Calibration Candidates for operational implementation must provide a full (9-12 month) hindcast set for the period 1982-present, with 20 or more ensemble members per month, together with the code and scripts used to generate the hindcasts. Calibration includes bias correction and statistical quantification of skill, using cross-validation, for U. S. temperature and precipitation prediction using standard NCEP procedures available publicly. The resources needed to complete such runs are very large. For major projects such as multi-model ensembles, the host model institution will provide the necessary resources. Additional resource needs at NCEP for operational execution will have to be proposed and planned for well in advance of the implementation process. Developers will collaborate with CPC and EMC to perform the skill assessment and cross-validation for these forecasts. The key metric for success is the ability of proposed upgrade to provide independent, additional information to the products that are already operationally available for U. S. temperature and precipitation, including statistical-empirical methods. 4 Interface with operations As the calibration and assessment work is completed, the provider will work with EMC and NCO to make all programs in the model comply with NCO standards and to make all model output comply with WMO and NCO standard formats. EMC and NCO will assess the additional computer resources needed to add the system changes into the operational job stream. For new MME systems, the provider may need to work with NCEP to obtain additional resources needed for the operational runs of new systems. 5 Final skill assessment As the calibration runs are completed and the interface with operational standards is finished, CPC and EMC will work with the provider to complete the final assessment to determine if the change is ready for implementation. Assuming production resources are available for the additional runs, the parallel tests will begin. 6 Parallel tests EMC staff will work with the code provider and NCO to bring all running scripts up to NCO production standards. NCO staff will run the new model in the parallel production environment and make routine near-real-time forecasts. CPC, EMC and the provider will verify that the parallel prediction products are the same as the provider intended. CPC forecasters will begin to evaluate the products in preparation for operational ISI forecasts. NCEP will provide the computing resources for this step and EMC and CPC will participate in all aspects of the final assessment with the developer. 7 Approval NCO Production Management Branch staff will brief the director of NCEP on the technical evaluation of the new model. EMC Global Climate and Weather Modeling Branch staff will brief the director of NCEP on the scientific evaluation of the new model, and the CPC Prediction Branch staff will brief the director of NCEP on the operational evaluation of the forecasts from the new model. Four categories will be considered and checked off before the briefing takes place: 1) Forecast/analysis benefits; 2\) Efficiency Assessment (especially important for NCO and CPC); 3) Compatibility with NOAA/NCEP IT assets; 4) Sustainability. Upon approval by the NCEP director, the new model will be scheduled for implemen	en
markdown	507880	# Presentation: 507880 ## PDOE Macroeconomic Model #2: Consumer Prices - Mark Rodekohr, Ph.D. - June 2004 - South Asian Regional Initiative – Energy - Bangkok, Thailand ## Two Models of Inflation - I - Quantity theory of money – growth of the money supply is equal to the sum of the growth in output and the inflation rate. Any misalignments in the growth of output and the money supply will be reflected in the inflation rate. There are many of examples of this throughout history related to government “printing money” ## Two Models of Inflation - II - Cost-Push Theory – states that increases in prices can be traced to increases in the costs of primary inputs such as wage rates, interest rates, prices of imports, and movements in exchange rates. - Demand-pull theories attribute prices increases to autonomous increases in demand. ## PDOE Model - This model allows for both cost-push and demand-pull factors. - The energy price is one of the cost-push factors along with wage rates, interest rates, prices of imported goods and exchange rate adjustments. - Demand-pull factors include excess demand variables related to misalignment between the growth in the money supply and output growth. ## Model Structure - The consumer price index (CPI) is a function of wages, the 90-day T-bill rate (indicator of interest) index of imported fuel prices, index of non-fuel imports and an excess liquidity variable expressed as the ratio of money supply to gross domestic product. ## Inflation Model ## Data: Inflation Model ## Implications of Inflation Model - In the short run a 10 percent increase in the imported fuel price results in a 1.1 percent increase in the consumer price index. In the long run (you divide the short run figure by 1-lag value) a 10 percent increase in the imported fuel price results in a 2.5 percent increase in the consumer price index. - In this model neither wages nor the excess demand variable are significant. This is not consistent with economic theory or is likely to hold true for most countries. ## Forecasting Exogenous Variables: Wages ## Forecasting Exogenous Variables: TBILL Rate ## Forecasting Exogenous Variables: Fuel Price ## Forecasting Exogenous Variables: Non-Fuel Prices ## Forecasting Exogenous Variables: Excess Demand ## Conclusions - Some of the variables, namely wages and excess demand are not significant counter to economic theory and the experience of other countries. - The imported fuel price was used for a lack of data. If possible substitute the average fuel price. This would give a clear link between domestic energy issues and inflation. - Many of the exogenous variables are forecast using time and a lagged dependent variable. Other formulations can and should be used. - Recall only first order effects are projected. However these should be sufficient for most analyses. ## Exercises - Try one of the following: - Estimate inflation equation using data from your own country. - Estimate inflation equation using U.S. data provided here. - Estimate the impact of a 10 percent increase in non-energy imports in both the short and long run using the model estimates shown here. ## Internet Resources - Macro Data Generator: _[http://www.digitaleconomist.com/econ_data.html](http://www.digitaleconomist.com/econ_data.html)_ - Macro Models: _[http://www.digitaleconomist.com/office_hours_macro.html](http://www.digitaleconomist.com/office_hours_macro.html)_ - Macro Terms: _[http://www.digitaleconomist.com/glossary_macro.html](http://www.digitaleconomist.com/glossary_macro.html)_ - Macro Course: _[http://www.mankiw.nelson.com/web_resources.html](http://www.mankiw.nelson.com/web_resources.html)_	en
markdown	YYKJWO5IRBRA3PQKTQHF4PX4AM5EBSER	# Presentation: YYKJWO5IRBRA3PQKTQHF4PX4AM5EBSER ## State of Washington[Office of Financial Management]Human Resource Management Report - October 16, 2006 - _This is the 10-20-06 email message from Dan Myers about this report:_ - Here's my "best" effort and I have to say, I'm not real happy with it. - As you both know, I've have some challenges with data. There is a large number of merit system 9 exempt employees in OFM. In addition there are 338 employees listed in OFM (105); however, only 270 employees are what I consider OFM "Proper." The other 68 employees are part of and report to the Governor's Office. - The information on hiring balance, turnover, and diversity is based on 338 employees. The information concerning position descriptions, individual development plans, performance expectations, performance evaluations and employee survey is based on 270 employees. I was not able to provide sick leave or overtime reports. - Finally, some of the labels on the charts did not update (see employee survey charts and diversity chart). The graphs updated but not the labels. - Please let me know if you need anything else from me. ## Logic ModelManagers Accountability for Workforce Management - Logic ModelManagers Accountability for Workforce Management Plan & Align Workforce DeployWorkforce Reinforce Performance Develop Workforce HireWorkforce - Articulation of managers HRM accountabilities. HR policies. Workforce planning. Job classes & salaries assigned. - Qualified candidate pools, interviews & reference checks. Job offers. Appts & per-formance monitoring. - Work assignments& requirements defined. Positive workplace environment created. Coaching, feedback, corrections. - Individual development plans. Time/ resources for training. Continuous learning environment created. - Clear performance expectations linked to orgn’al goals & measures. Regular performance appraisals. Recognition. Discipline. - Staffing levels & competencies aligned with agency priorities. Mgr’s HRM accountabilities are understood. - Best candidate hired & reviewed during appointment period. Successful performers retained. - Workplace is safe, gives capacity to perform, & fosters productive relations. Staff know job rqmts, how they’re doing, & are supported. - Learning environment created. Employees are engaged in develop-ment opportunities & seek to learn. - Employees know how performance contributes to success of orgn. Strong performance rewarded; poor performance eliminated - Foundation is in place to build and sustain a productive, high performing workforce. - The right people are in the right job at the right time. - Time & talent is used effectively. Employees are motivated & productive. - Employees have competencies for present job & career advancement - Successful performance is differentiated & strengthened. Employees are held accountable. State government has workforce depth & breadth needed for present and future success Employees are committed to the work they do & the goals of the organization Productive, successful employees are retained Agencies are better enabled to successfully carry out their mission. The citizens receive efficient government services. ## Human Resource Management ReportStandard Performance Measures - Percent current position/competencies descriptions - Percent supervisors with current performance expectations for workforce management - Time-to-fill funded vacancies - Percent satisfaction with candidate quality New Hire-to-Promotional ratio - Percent turnover during review period - Percent employees with current performance expectations - Employee survey ratings on “productive workplace” questions - Leave usage (sick, LWOP, unscheduled leave) - Overtime usage - Number & type of non-disciplinary grievances - Percent employees with current annual individual development plans - Employee survey ratings on “learning/development” questions - Percent current performance evaluations - Employee survey ratings on “performance accountability” questions - Number/type of disciplinary issues, actions, appeals disposition - Turnover rates and types (e.g., retirement, resignation, etc.) - Turnover rate of key occupational categories and of workforce diversity - Employee survey ratings on “commitment” questions Measures to add in the future: - Current workforce plans that align staff with business priorities - Safety and Workers Compensation measures - Competency gap analysis measure - Recognition/reward measure - Others to be determined ## Overall foundation & management accountability system to build & sustain a high performing workforce - Performance Measures - Percent current position/competency descriptions - Percent supervisors with current performance expectations for workforce management - Plan & Align Workforce \| - HR Management Report category: - Agency-wide Percent Current Position & Competency Descriptions - 68.5% - All classified positions in OFM “proper” have position descriptions on file (CQ’s or PDF’s). Supervisors of exempt positions have always been required to conduct a thorough job analysis, identifying key job responsibilities and key competencies. Descriptions for exempt positions are in the form of either CQ’s, PDF’s, Workforce Plans or recruitment documents. OFM has made a concerted effort to implement the new Position Description Form. 32 exempt PDF’s were on file in January 2006 this number has increased to 84 as of October 15, 2006. - Analysis: - 102 Classified Positions - 102 CQ’s or PDF’s on File - 168 Exempt Positions - 84 CQ’s or PDF’s on File - Action Steps: - Continue to require Position Description Forms be developed or updated when: - Establishing new positions - Recruiting to fill vancancies - Duties/responsibilities change - Conducting PDP/Performance Evaluations Notes: Notes: Plan & Align Workforce is the foundation for the remaining four key HRM functions. Ideally, each agency should have a comprehensive workforce plan that aligns staffing levels and competencies with business priorities, and identifies strategies to close workforce gaps. Most agencies do not have a workforce plan (a key reason WA did not get an A on Grading of the States). A future action step is to institute workforce planning in the state. Right now, as a starting point, managers need to know what their HRM responsibilities and performance expectations are. This includes an understanding of the master agreement provisions and new HR policies. Of the XX agencies with represented employees that responded to our inquiry, XX had trained the majority of their managers on those provisions. Next, a management accountability system needs to be in place. At this point, our best measure is whether managers are receiving performance evaluations. However, what needs to happen is implementation of the Managers HRM Report Card, so that those meaasures are incorporated in the evaluations. ## Overall foundation & management accountability system to build & sustain a high performing workforce - Performance Measures - Percent current position/competency descriptions - Percent supervisors with current performance expectations for workforce management - Plan & Align Workforce \| - HR Management Report category: - Percent supervisors with current performance expectations for workforce management - 100% - OFM supervisors have expectations for managing performance. Policies on performance, diversity, recruitment, and training are in place and being managed under the direction of senior leadership. A consultant recently conducted an organization review of the agency and concluded that performance management is being practiced by supervisors throughout the agency. A recent agency communication assessment, employee surveys as well as exit interview data confirm performance management is an expectation of and practiced by supervisors. OFM supervisors are expected to attend HELP, Harassment Prevention, Diversity Awareness/Management, Ethics, and DOP Supervisory Training. - Analysis: - All 50 supervisors in OFM “proper” have expectations to manage employee performance - 7 supervisors are in the classified service - 43 supervisors are in exempt positions - Action Steps: - Continue to ensure supervisors are aware of expectations to manage performance. - Continue to monitor required supervisor training - Continue to provide HR assistance to supervisors in performance management (monitoring and reporting status of Performance Development Plans) - Strategic Plan Objectives in place Notes: Notes: Plan & Align Workforce is the foundation for the remaining four key HRM functions. Ideally, each agency should have a comprehensive workforce plan that aligns staffing levels and competencies with business priorities, and identifies strategies to close workforce gaps. Most agencies do not have a workforce plan (a key reason WA did not get an A on Grading of the States). A future action step is to institute workforce planning in the state. Right now, as a starting point, managers need to know what their HRM responsibilities and performance expectations are. This includes an understanding of the master agreement provisions and new HR policies. Of the XX agencies with represented employees that responded to our inquiry, XX had trained the majority of their managers on those provisions. Next, a management accountability system needs to be in place. At this point, our best measure is whether managers are receiving performance evaluations. However, what needs to happen is implementation of the Managers HRM Report Card, so that those meaasures are incorporated in the evaluations. ## Hire Workforce \| - Performance Measures - Days to fill vacancies - % satisfaction with candidate quality - % new hires; % promotional hires - % separation during review period Candidate Quality(managers’ satisfaction rating) - Right People in the Right Job at the Right Time - This data will be reported by agencies to DOP in April 2007 - This data will be reported by agencies to DOP in April 2007 _Hiring Balance - FY 2006_ - HR Management Report category: - * - Other = transfers, demotions, reassignments, movement in lieu of RIF, etc. _Separation during Review Period_ - * - * Released - Voluntary - - Analysis: - 2 Probationary Appointments - 2 Trial Service Appointments into OFM - 4 Trial Service Appointments with OFM - 29 Exempt Appointments into OFM - 30 Exempt Appointments within OFM - Total of 67 Appointments includes all appointments made in Agency 105 - No Separations during Review Period to report - Action Steps: - Hiring is Balanced no actions planned other than implementation of the HRMS E-Recruiting System - Other (3,926) - Total of 67 appointments (2/1/06 – 10/15-06) Notes: Notes: ## Deploy Workforce \| - Performance Measures - Percent employees with current performance expectations - Employee survey ratings on “productive workplace” questions - Overtime usage - Sick leave usage Number & type of non-disciplinary grievances and disposition - Employee time and talent is used effectively. Employees motivated. - HR Management Report category: - Percent employees with current performance expectations - 100% - Data gathered through exit interviews, employee surveys, organizational unit reviews conducted by OFM's HR/Management Consulting group as well as the many agency accomplishments, indicated that OFM employees know what is expected of them. OFM revised its evaluation policy on July 1, 2005 and has been using the PDP tool. The number of employees with current PDP's has increased from 58 to 112. While not required by WAC, supervisors of exempt employees are expected to establish performance expectations and conduct annual assessments of performance. OFM leadership encourages supervisors of exempt employees to follow best practices in the management of performance of their staff. - Analysis: - 58 classified employees with PDPs on file = 56.9% - 55 exempt employees with PDPs on file = 41.9% - Action Steps: - Continue to track and report PDP completion - Develop a method for use by agency leadership that ensures PDPs are developed in accordance with agency policy - Strategic Plan objectives in place ## Deploy Workforce \| - Performance Measures - Percent employees with current performance expectations - Employee survey ratings on “productive workplace” questions - Overtime usage - Sick leave usage Number & type of non-disciplinary grievances and disposition - Employee time and talent is used effectively. Employees motivated. - HR Management Report category: Overall average score for “productive workplace” questions is “4.16” - Analysis: - Q4 = 4.38 - Q1 = 4.10 - Q2 = 4.23 - Q6 = 4.25 - Q7 = 4.61 - Q8 = 3.71 - Q9 = 3.83 - Action Steps: - Senior Managers of divisions or major works group are looking for opportunities to improve DOUBLE CLICK ON THE BAR CHARTS TO ENTER YOUR AGENCY’S DATA - 94% - Develop Workforce \| - Employees have competencies for present job and future advancement - Performance Measures - Percent employees with current annual individual development plans - Employee survey ratings on “learning & development” questions - HR Management Report category: - Analysis: - Q5 = 4.18 - Q8 = 3.71 - Action Steps: - Continue to develop employee development plans as part of the new hire process and/or the PDP development process - Continue to sponsor agency training forum - Continue to support employee training and development - Percent employees with current Individual Development Plans - 100% Overall average score for “Learning & Development” questions is “3.94” - OFM has a strong employee development focus. Each year, OFM sponsors an agency-wide training forum where employees receive just in time training, attend required training and learn about the direction and needs of the agency. In addition, OFM regularly approves training and education requests in accordance with agency policy and budget constraints (this includes requests for training needed for the employee's current job, to improve general work performance, for career development and to meet mandatory training requirements. DOUBLE CLICK ON THE BAR CHARTS TO ENTER YOUR AGENCY’S DATA Notes: Notes: ## Successful performance is differentiated & strengthened. Employees are held accountable. - Performance Measures - Percent employees and managers with current annual performance evaluations - Employee survey ratings on “performance and accountability” questions - Number and type of disciplinary issues, actions, appeals disposition - Reinforce Performance \| - HR Management Report category: - Overall average score for “performance & accountability” questions is “3.87” - Q3. I know how my work contributes to the goals of my agency. (4.1) - Q10. My performance evaluation provides me with meaningful information about my performance. (3.4) - Q11. My supervisor holds me and my co-workers accountable for performance. (4.1) - Q9. I receive recognition for a job well done (3.3) - Do employees see a meaningful linkage between their performance and the success of the organization? - Percent employees with current performance evaluations - 43.7% - Analysis: - 74 of 102 classified employees with performance evaluations on file = 72.5% - 11 not due - 44 of 168 exempt employees with evaluations on file = 26.2% - 33 not due - Q3 = 4.36 - Q10 = 3.18 - Q11 = 4.12 - Q9 = 3.83 - Action Steps: - Continue to track and report PDP completion - Develop a method for use by agency leadership that ensures PDPs are developed in accordance with agency policy DOUBLE CLICK ON THE BAR CHARTS TO ENTER YOUR AGENCY’S DATA ## Successful performance is differentiated & strengthened. Employees are held accountable. - Performance Measures - Percent employees and managers with current annual performance evaluations - Employee survey ratings on “performance and accountability” questions - Number and type of disciplinary issues, actions, appeals disposition - Reinforce Performance \| - HR Management Report category: - Analysis: - No Disciplinary Actions, Appeals, or Grievances filed. - Action Steps: Formal Disciplinary Actions, Appeals, GrievancesFY 2006 to date (July 1, 2005- February 28, 2006) Issues Leading to Disciplinary Action - [List of general categories of reasons that agency took disciplinary action for this time period] Disposition of Disciplinary-related Grievances or Appeals - [List disposition of grievances/appeals for this time period.] - * Non-represented employees Represented employees DOUBLE CLICK ON THE CHART TO ENTER YOUR AGENCY’S DATA ## Ultimate Outcomes - State has workforce breadth & depth for present & future success. - Employees are committed to the work they do and the goals of the organization. - Successful, productive employees are retained. - Performance Measures - Employee survey ratings on “commitment” questions - Turnover rates and types (e.g., retirement, resignation, etc.) - Turnover rate of key occupational categories - TBD - Diversity profile [& turnover TBD] - HR Management Report category: - Overall average score for “performance & accountability” questions is “3.93” DOUBLE CLICK ON THE BAR CHARTS TO ENTER YOUR AGENCY’S DATA - Analysis: - Q3 = 4.36 - Q12 = 3.60 - Q9 = 3.83 - Action Steps: - Strategic plan objectives in place Notes: Notes: ## Ultimate Outcomes \| continued Agency Workforce Turnover Breakdown - Ultimate Outcomes \| continued - HR Management Report category: Agency-wide Turnover**[leaving agency] - Performance Measures - Employee survey ratings on “commitment” questions - Turnover rates and types (e.g., retirement, resignation, etc.) - Turnover rate of key occupational categories - TBD - Diversity profile [& turnover TBD] DOUBLE CLICK ON THE CHARTS TO ENTER YOUR AGENCY’S DATA - Analysis: - Data for FY05 and FY06 are approximate. HRMS does not provide detail for separations to other agencies - Data challenges due to Merit System 9 as well as HRMS - Action Steps: - No action contemplated at this time Notes: Notes: Trend Factors: HRISD – Project ending – if current trend continues = 8% by end of FY06 DIR – Change in leadership – if current trend continues = 7% by end of FY06 CERS & PSD - Reorganized – if current trend continues = 4% by end of FY06 ASD Stable and low rate – if current trend continues = .33% by end of FY06 OEDS – Stable and low rate – if current trend continues = 1.5% by end of FY06 ## Ultimate Outcomes \| continued - Performance Measures - Employee survey ratings on “commitment” questions - Turnover rates and types (e.g., retirement, resignation, etc.) - Turnover rate of key occupational categories - TBD - Diversity profile [& turnover TBD] - Ultimate Outcomes \| continued - HR Management Report category: DOUBLE CLICK ON THE CHART TO ENTER YOUR AGENCY’S DATA - Notes: - Chart labels did not update Diversity Profile [OFM] State - Women 59% 52% - Persons with disabilities 4.2% 5% - Vietnam Veterans 5.7% 7% - Disabled Veterans 1.5% 2% - People of color 14.8% 17.5% Office of Financial Management WA State Government Notes: Notes: Trend Factors: HRISD – Project ending – if current trend continues = 8% by end of FY06 DIR – Change in leadership – if current trend continues = 7% by end of FY06 CERS & PSD - Reorganized – if current trend continues = 4% by end of FY06 ASD Stable and low rate – if current trend continues = .33% by end of FY06 OEDS – Stable and low rate – if current trend continues = 1.5% by end of FY06	en
converted_docs	497962	APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AT THE AMERICAN EMBASSY AMERİKAN BÜYÜKELÇİLİĞİ İŞ BAŞVURU FORMU <table> <colgroup> <col style="width: 12%" /> <col style="width: 9%" /> <col style="width: 6%" /> <col style="width: 6%" /> <col style="width: 7%" /> <col style="width: 1%" /> <col style="width: 3%" /> <col style="width: 3%" /> <col style="width: 6%" /> <col style="width: 9%" /> <col style="width: 1%" /> <col style="width: 1%" /> <col style="width: 3%" /> <col style="width: 4%" /> <col style="width: 1%" /> <col style="width: 1%" /> <col style="width: 7%" /> <col style="width: 6%" /> <col style="width: 6%" /> </colgroup> <tbody> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="8"><strong>1. POSITION APPLIED</strong> (Müracaat ettiğiniz kadro ünvanı) </td> <td colspan="6"><strong>DATE APPLIED</strong> (Müracaat tarihi) </td> <td colspan="5" rowspan="4"></td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="8"><p><strong>2. NAME IN FULL</strong> (Tam İsim)</p> <p><strong>LAST</strong> (Soyadı) <strong>FIRST</strong> (Adı) <strong>MIDDLE</strong> (Göbek Adı)</p> <p> </p></td> <td colspan="6"><p>2. OTHER NAMES EVER USED (e.g. maiden name, nickname, etc.) Diğer İsimler (kızlık soyadı, lakap, takma ad)</p> <p><strong> </strong></p></td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="8"><p><strong>4. PRESENT ADDRESS</strong> (Şu andaki adresiniz)</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>TEL NO.</strong> </p></td> <td colspan="6"><p><strong>5. DATE OF BIRTH (Month/Day/Year)</strong> Doğum Tarihi (Ay/Gün/Yıl)</p> <p> </p></td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="8"><p><strong>6. DO YOU HAVE PERMANENT U.S. RESIDENT STATUS?</strong> Amerika’da oturma müsadeniz var mı?)</p> <p> <strong>YES</strong> (Evet) <strong>NO</strong> (Hayır)</p></td> <td colspan="6"><p>7. PLACE OF BIRTH (City/Country) Doğum Yeri (Şehir/Ülke)</p> <p> </p></td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="19"><strong>8. LIST EACH COUNTRY OF WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN A CITIZEN</strong> (Vatandaşı olduğunuz ülkeleri aşağıda belirtiniz.)</td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="5"><strong>DATES</strong> (Tarihler)</td> <td colspan="7"><strong>COUNTRY</strong> (Ülke)</td> <td colspan="7"><strong>HOW CITIZENSHIP WAS ACQUIRED?</strong> (Vatandaşlığın elde ediliş şekli)</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="5"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="7"> </td> <td colspan="7"> </td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="5"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="7"> </td> <td colspan="7"> </td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="5"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="7"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="7"><strong> </strong></td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="19"><p><strong>9. ARE YOU WILLING TO TAKE A JOB LASTING:</strong> (Aşağıda gösterilen sürelerdeki geçici işleri kabul eder misiniz?)</p> <p><strong>A. 1 Year to 2 years?</strong> (1-2 yıl arası) <strong>YES</strong> (Evet) <strong>NO</strong> (Hayır)</p> <p><strong>B. 5 to 12 months?</strong> (5-12 ay arası) <strong>YES</strong> (Evet) <strong>NO</strong> (Hayır)</p> <p><strong>C. 1 to 4 months?</strong> (1-4 ay arası) <strong>YES</strong> (Evet) <strong>NO</strong> (Hayır)</p> <p><strong>D. Less than 1 month?</strong> (1 aydan az) <strong>YES</strong> (Evet) <strong>NO</strong> (Hayır)</p></td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="7" rowspan="2"><strong>10. NAMES AND LOCATIONS OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS ATTENDED</strong> (Tahsil durumu, okulların isimleri ve yerleri)</td> <td colspan="4"><strong>DATES</strong> (Tarihler)</td> <td colspan="5" rowspan="2"><strong>DEGREES</strong> (Dereceler)</td> <td colspan="3" rowspan="2"><strong>MAJOR SUBJECTS</strong> (Eğitim Konusu)</td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="2"><strong>From</strong> (Başlangıç)</td> <td colspan="2"><h1 id="to">To</h1> <p>(Bitiş)</p></td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="7"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="5"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="3"><strong> </strong></td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="7"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="5"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="3"><strong> </strong></td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="7"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="5"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="3"><strong> </strong></td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="7"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="5"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="3"><strong> </strong></td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="7"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="5"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="3"><strong> </strong></td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="7"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="2"> </td> <td colspan="5"><strong> </strong></td> <td colspan="3"><strong> </strong></td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="19"><strong>11. LANGUAGES (Indicate the extent of your competence)</strong> LİSANLAR (Hangi ölçüde bildiğinizi belirtiniz)</td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td rowspan="2"><strong>LANGUAGE</strong> (LİSAN)</td> <td colspan="3"><strong>SPEAK</strong> (Konuşma)</td> <td colspan="5"><strong>READ</strong> (Okuma)</td> <td colspan="6"><strong>WRITE</strong> (Yazma)</td> <td colspan="4"><strong>UNDERSTAND</strong> (Anlama)</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td><strong>Excellent</strong> (Mükemmel)</td> <td><h1 id="good-iyi">Good (İyi)</h1></td> <td><strong>Fair</strong> (Zayıf)</td> <td colspan="2"><strong>Excellent</strong> (Mükemmel)</td> <td colspan="2"><h1 id="good-iyi-1">Good (İyi)</h1></td> <td><strong>Fair</strong> (Zayıf)</td> <td><strong>Excellent</strong> (Mükemmel)</td> <td colspan="3"><h1 id="good-iyi-2">Good (İyi)</h1></td> <td colspan="2"><strong>Fair</strong> (Zayıf)</td> <td colspan="2"><strong>Excellent</strong> (Mükemmel)</td> <td><h1 id="good-iyi-3">Good (İyi)</h1></td> <td><strong>Fair</strong> (Zayıf)</td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td> </td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td colspan="3"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td> </td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td colspan="3"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td> </td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td colspan="3"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td><strong> </strong></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td colspan="3"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"></td> <td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="19"><p><strong>12. SPECIAL QUALIFICATION AND SKILLS (List any job-related licenses/course certificates you have, special skills you possess and machines and equipment you can use such as computer, calculator, motor vehicles and other tools.)</strong> ÖZEL BECERİ VE YETENEKLER (İş ile ilgili olarak sahip olduğunuz lisansları/kurs belgelerini, özel yeteneklerinizi ve kullandığınız bilgisayar , hesap makinası, motorlu araç ve diğer makina ve aletleri belirtiniz.)</p> <h2 id="typing-wpm"> TYPING: wpm</h2></td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="19"><strong>13. MILITARY SERVICE (Outline military service past or present , giving country or service, branch of service, unit or organization, specialty, highest rank held, dates of service, present rank, and date and type of discharge)</strong> ASKERLİK GÖREVİ (Şube hizmet kolu, hizmet tarihleri ve yeri, en yüksek rütbe, şu andaki rütbe, terhis şekli ve tarihini belirtiniz.)</td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="19"> </td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td colspan="19"></td> </tr> <tr class="even"> <td colspan="19"></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| 14. EMPLOYMENT Describe \| \| \| every position which you \| \| \| have held since you first \| \| \| began to work. Start with \| \| \| Present Position and work \| \| \| back to the first position \| \| \| which you held. You can use \| \| \| continuation sheet if you \| \| \| need additional space. \| \| \| MEMURİYETLER (Çalışmaya ilk \| \| \| başladığınızdan bu yana \| \| \| bulunduğunuz tüm görevleri \| \| \| yazınız. Şu andaki \| \| \| görevinizden başlayarak ilk \| \| \| bulunduğunuz göreve doğru \| \| \| geri gidiniz. Gerekirse ek \| \| \| bir sayfa \| \| \| kullanabilirsiniz.) \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| 14. A. DATES OF \| EXACT TITLE OF YOUR POSITION \| \| EMPLOYMENT (Çalıştığınız \| SALARY (per year or per month) \| \| tarihler) \| \| \| \| (Kadronuzun tam ünvanı) MAAŞ (yıllık \| \| Starting (Başlangıç) \| veya aylık olarak) \| \| (Month/Year) (Ay/Yıl): \| \| \| \| YTL or USD \| \| \| \| \| Ending (Bitiş) (Month/Year) \| \| \| (Ay/Yıl): \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| NAME AND ADDRESS OF \| DUTIES PERFORMED (Yaptığınız \| \| EMPLOYER (İşverenin Adı \| işlerin tarifi) \| \| ve Adresi) \| \| \| \| \| \| TEL NO: \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| NAME AND TITLE OF \| \| \| IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR (En \| \| \| Yakın Amirinizin Adı ve \| \| \| Ünvanı) \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| REASON FOR SEPARATION \| \| \| (Ayrılma sebebiniz) \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| 14. B. DATES OF \| EXACT TITLE OF YOUR POSITION \| \| EMPLOYMENT (Çalıştığınız \| SALARY (per year or per month) \| \| tarihler) \| \| \| \| (Kadronuzun tam ünvanı) MAAŞ (yıllık \| \| Starting (Başlangıç) \| veya aylık olarak) \| \| (Month/Year) (Ay/Yıl): \| \| \| \| YTL or USD \| \| \| \| \| Ending (Bitiş) (Month/Year) \| \| \| (Ay/Yıl): \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| NAME AND ADDRESS OF \| DUTIES PERFORMED (Yaptığınız \| \| EMPLOYER (İşverenin Adı \| işlerin tarifi) \| \| ve Adresi) \| \| \| \| \| \| TEL NO: \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| NAME AND TITLE OF \| \| \| IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR (En \| \| \| Yakın Amirinizin Adı ve \| \| \| Ünvanı) \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| REASON FOR SEPARATION \| \| \| (Ayrılma sebebiniz) \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| 14. C. DATES OF \| EXACT TITLE OF YOUR POSITION \| \| EMPLOYMENT (Çalıştığınız \| SALARY (per year or per month) \| \| tarihler) \| \| \| \| (Kadronuzun tam ünvanı) MAAŞ (yıllık \| \| Starting (Başlangıç) \| veya aylık olarak) \| \| (Month/Year) (Ay/Yıl): \| \| \| \| YTL or USD \| \| \| \| \| Ending (Bitiş) (Month/Year) \| \| \| (Ay/Yıl): \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| NAME AND ADDRESS OF \| DUTIES PERFORMED (Yaptığınız \| \| EMPLOYER (İşverenin Adı \| işlerin tarifi) \| \| ve Adresi) \| \| \| \| \| \| TEL NO: \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| NAME AND TITLE OF \| \| \| IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR (En \| \| \| Yakın Amirinizin Adı ve \| \| \| Ünvanı) \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| REASON FOR SEPARATION \| \| \| (Ayrılma sebebiniz) \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| 14. D. DATES OF \| EXACT TITLE OF YOUR POSITION \| \| EMPLOYMENT (Çalıştığınız \| SALARY (per year or per month) \| \| tarihler) \| \| \| \| (Kadronuzun tam ünvanı) MAAŞ (yıllık \| \| Starting (Başlangıç) \| veya aylık olarak) \| \| (Month/Year) (Ay/Yıl): \| \| \| \| YTL or USD \| \| \| \| \| Ending (Bitiş) (Month/Year) \| \| \| (Ay/Yıl): \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| NAME AND ADDRESS OF \| DUTIES PERFORMED (Yaptığınız \| \| EMPLOYER (İşverenin Adı \| işlerin tarifi) \| \| ve Adresi) \| \| \| \| \| \| TEL NO: \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| NAME AND TITLE OF \| \| \| IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR (En \| \| \| Yakın Amirinizin Adı ve \| \| \| Ünvanı) \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| REASON FOR SEPARATION \| \| \| (Ayrılma sebebiniz) \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| 14. E. DATES OF \| EXACT TITLE OF YOUR POSITION \| \| EMPLOYMENT (Çalıştığınız \| SALARY (per year or per month) \| \| tarihler) \| \| \| \| (Kadronuzun tam ünvanı) MAAŞ (yıllık \| \| Starting (Başlangıç) \| veya aylık olarak) \| \| (Month/Year) (Ay/Yıl): \| \| \| \| YTL or USD \| \| \| \| \| Ending (Bitiş) (Month/Year) \| \| \| (Ay/Yıl): \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| NAME AND ADDRESS OF \| DUTIES PERFORMED (Yaptığınız \| \| EMPLOYER (İşverenin Adı \| işlerin tarifi) \| \| ve Adresi) \| \| \| \| \| \| TEL NO: \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| NAME AND TITLE OF \| \| \| IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR (En \| \| \| Yakın Amirinizin Adı ve \| \| \| Ünvanı) \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ \| REASON FOR SEPARATION \| \| \| (Ayrılma sebebiniz) \| \| +-----------------------------+----------------------------------------+ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| 15. REFERENCES \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| LIST THREE COMPETENT AND RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUALS, NOT RELATED TO \| \| YOU BY BLOOD OR MARRIAGE, WHO ARE QUALIFIED TO SUPPLY DEFINITE \| \| INFORMATION REGARDING YOUR CHARACTER AND ABILITY(Do not give the \| \| names of your supervisors listed in Item 14) \| \| \| \| REFERANSLAR (SİZİN KARAKTERİNİZ VE YETENEKLERİNİZ HAKKINDA TAM VE \| \| KESİN BİLGİ VEREBİLECEK VE SİZİNLE BİR KAN VEYA EVLİLİK BAĞI \| \| BULUNMAYAN VE MESULİYET SAHİBİ ÜÇ KİŞİNİN ADINI YAZINIZ.) (14. \| \| maddede belirtilen amirlerinizin isimlerini yazmayınız.) \| \| \| \| NAME (İsim) ADDRESS IN FULL & TEL NO (Tam Adresi & Tel No) \| \| OCCUPATION (Meşguliyeti) \| \| \| \| 1. \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| 2. \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| 3. \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| 16. DO ANY OF YOUR RELATIVES WORK FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT \| \| OR THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES? YES (Evet) If 'YES\', \| \| provide details below. NO (Hayır) \| \| \| \| (Herhangi bir akrabanız Amerika Birleşik Devletleri Hükümeti veya \| \| Amerika Birleşik Devletleri Silahlı Kuvvetleri için çalışıyor mu?) \| \| Eğer cevabınız 'EVET' ise, aşağıda detaylı bilgi veriniz. \| \| \| \| NAME (İsim) RELATIONSHIP (Yakınlığınız) ORGANIZATION \| \| WORKED (Çalıştığı Kurumun Adı) \| \| \| \| 1. [ ]{.underline} [ ]{.underline} [ \| \| ]{.underline}[.]{.underline} \| \| \| \| [2. .]{.underline} \| \| \| \| [3. .]{.underline} \| \| \| \| 4. \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| 17. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN DISCHARGED OR FORCED TO RESIGN FOR \| \| MISCONDUCT OR UNSATISFACTORY SERVICE FROM YES (Evet) A \| \| POSITION? IF ANSWER IS 'YES', GIVE DETAILS BELOW. NO (Hayır) \| \| (Herhangi bir işten yetersiz hizmet veya fena hareketten dolayı \| \| çıkarıldınız veya istifaya zorlandınız mı? Cevabınız 'EVET' ise \| \| aşağıda detaylı olarak açıklayınız.) \| \| \| \| \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| 18. HAVE YOU BEEN ARRESTED OR DETAINED BY ANY POLICE OR MILITARY \| \| AUTHORITY? YES (Evet) IF SO, NAME THE AUTHORITY, GIVE TIME, \| \| PLACE, REASON AND THE DISPOSITION OF COURT ACTION. NO (Hayır) \| \| \| \| (Polis veya askeri bir makam tarafından tutuklandınız veya gözaltına \| \| alındınız mı?) \| \| \| \| (Cevabınız 'EVET' ise, makamın adını, tarih, yer ve gözaltına alınma \| \| veya tutuklanma sebebini yazın ve mahkemenin kararını belirtin. \| \| \| \| \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| CERTIFICATION: (DOĞRULUĞUN TASDİKİ) \| \| \| \| BEFORE SIGNING THIS FORM, MAKE SURE YOU HAVE ANSWERED ALL QUESTIONS \| \| FULLY AND COMPLETELY. A FALSE STATEMENT ON THIS APLLICATION IS CAUSE \| \| FOR DISMISSAL. (Bu formu imzalamadan önce tüm soruları doğru ve tam \| \| olarak cevaplandırdığınızdan emin olunuz. Bu formdaki yanlış veya \| \| asılsız malumat derhal işinize son verme sebebidir.) \| \| \| \| I DO SOLEMNLY AFFIRM THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS \| \| CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. BURADA BELİRTİLEN \| \| TÜM BİLGİLERİM BİLGİM VE İNANCIM DAHİLİNDE DOĞRULUĞUNU TEYİT EDERİM. \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ \| SIGNATURE (İMZA) DATE (TARİH) \| +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+	en
markdown	177032	# Presentation: 177032 ## VxWorks 6.0 and EPICS“a first look” VxWorks 6.0 and EPICS“a first look” Ernest L. Williams Jr. 27 April 2005 EPICS Collaboration Meeting @ SLAC ## Outline What is vxWorks 6.0? Maybe we will begin using the tools? Integration into the EPICS R3.14 build system. Running with EPICS, cool!! Issues/Concerns References ## What is vxWorks 6.0? An expensive new toy!! ## What is VxWorks 6.0? Kernel execution environment compatible with 5.5 Real-time Process environment for user-mode code MMU-based memory protection Error detection and reporting facility Better POSIX compilance, esp. in RTPs dosFS improvements Transaction-based Reliable File System ROMFS Filesystem New and enhanced IPC facilities Shared library support Object ownership and resource reclaimation Kernel (target) shell enhancements New processor/device support Improved OS configuration and build facilities *New Features* ## What is VxWorks 6.0 (Cont’d) \| Architectures \| Intel, MIPS and PowerPC \| \| --- \| --- \| \| Architecture Families \| Pentium ,2,3,4 MIPS 5Kx, tx49xx, bcm125x Freescale PowerPC 60x, PowerPC 7xx, PowerPC 74xx, PowerPC 82xx, PowerPC 52xx, PowerPC 85xx IBM PowerPC 405, PowerPC 44x \| \| Hosts \| Windows 2000 professional Windows XP Solaris 2.8, 2.9 Red Hat Enterprise Workstation 3.0 --- Fedora Core 3 works great as well (but not supported) --- Red Hat Enterprise Workstation 4.0 will be supported in future releases \| *Supported Hardware/Host* *Not good where is the 68K** **support --- Did WRS “pull a Redhat?”* ## What is VxWorks 6.0 (Cont’d) Real-time Processes (RTPs) are containers for user-mode applications. Each RTP has own copies of code, data, stacks, heap and resources. RTPs are not scheduled – tasks within RTPs are. RTPs are launched from a fully-linked relocatable executable loaded from a file system (a la UNIX). *Real-time Processes* ## What is VxWorks 6.0 (Cont’d) Object Management (private and public scope) ISR Objects Optimized mutex semaphore for processes Task preemption prevention in processes (taskRtpLock/Unlock) Priority-inheritance enhancement Configurable kernel work queue size *Kernel Enhancements* ## What is VxWorks 6.0 (Cont’d) Non-executable stack pages (certain CPUs.) Stack overrun and underrun detection. NULL pointer dereference detection (certain CPUs.) Text segment write protection Heap and partition manager instrumentation (run-time checking) Kernel heap allocator improvements (best-fit vs. first-fit) User-space heap and partition allocators *Memory Management* ## What is VxWorks 6.0 (Cont’d) New error detection and reporting facility Persistent error logs Configurable behaviors on a task, process, and system level Exception handlers instrumented to log information *Error Detection and Reporting* ## What is VxWorks 6.0 (Cont’d) Improved dosFs file system Safest-order writes of metadata and user data to minimize chances of corruption Optional cache write-through Support for O_SYNC flag on open() operations FIOSYNC ioctl fully flushes block device caches Support for Unicode file names Enhanced CHKDSK (FAT recovery, performance, etc.) TRFS lightweight journaling filesystem ROMFS read-only filesystem *File System* ## What is VxWorks 6.0 (Cont’d) C interpreter enhancements for process information Handles long long, short, float, signed, unsigned types Path completion (if filesystem supports it) New UNIX shell like interpreter Allows custom interpreters Multiple shell support Secure access (user id/password protection) Fault management support (ED&R) VI or EMACS style command line editting C++ symbol handling enhancements *Kernel (Target) Shell* ## New Tools “WindRiver Work Bench” Development environment revolves around ECLIPSE. A smart move by WindRiver We still like using the commandline but maybe we will begin to use some of the builtin tools that come bundled with “Workbench” Source Code Analyzer Debugger System Viewer Scope Tools Sergei and Tom use ECLIPSE; so it must be good! ## EPICS Integration BSP migration and flashing the IOC Simply re-compile the mv2100 BSP against vxWorks 6.0 If you want native support, then follow the BSP migration documenation. The mv5100 BSP has native support for vxWorks 6.0 The idea of the project facility is not too bad when done via command line. Use WRS workbench CLI to add components recommended by Andrew Johnson. _[http://www.aps.anl.gov/epics/base/T20xConfig.html](http://www.aps.anl.gov/epics/base/T20xConfig.html)_ vxprj component add INCLUDE_POSIX_TIMERS The GUI folks can use the workbench IDE to do this as well. *Prepare vxWorks for EPICS* ## EPICS Integration We begin by adding/modifying the EPICS build environment to support building vxWorks 6.0 targets. Supported cross targets at the SNS MVM2101 (vxWorks-mv2100_v6) MVME5110 (vxWorks-mv5100_v6) Changes to $(EPICS_BASE)/configure/CONFIG_SITE Add our two new cross targets Changes to $(EPICS_BASE)/configure/os Add ---- CONFIG_SITE.linux-x86.vxWorks-mv2100_v6 Add ---- CONFIG.Common.vxWorks-mv2100_v6 Add ---- CONFIG_SITE.linux-x86.vxWorks-mv5100_v6 Add ---- CONFIG.Common.vxWorks-mv5100_v6 Add ---- CONFIG.Common.vxWorksCommon_v6 *Let’s build some vxWorks 6.0 targets* ## EPICS Integration CONFIG_SITE.linux-x86.vxWorks-mv2100_v6 - VX_DIR_YES = /ade/vxWorks/6.0 CONFIG.Common.vxWorks-mv2100_v6 - include $(CONFIG)/os/CONFIG.Common.vxWorksCommon_v6 - # Vx GNU cross compiler suffix - CMPLR_SUFFIX = ppc - ARCH_CLASS = ppc - # Architecture specific build flags - ARCH_DEP_CPPFLAGS = -DCPU=PPC603 - ARCH_DEP_CFLAGS = -mcpu=603 -mstrict-align -mlongcall *Here’s what we do for the mv2100:* ## EPICS Integration CONFIG.Common.vxWorksCommon_v6: - #-------------------------------------------------- - # vxWorks directory definitions - # Tornado directory definitions - GNU_TARGET_INCLUDE_DIR = $(VX_DIR)/vxworks-6.0/target/h - GNU_TARGET_INCLUDE_DIR += $(VX_DIR)/vxworks-6.0/target/h/wrn/coreip - GNU_DIR = $(VX_DIR)/gnu/3.3.2-vxworks60/x86-linux2 *Wow WRS has moved the headers around on us, hmmm.* ## Running with EPICS R3.14.7 EPICS is running in kernel space Checkout the DEMO Next Step --- How can EPICS use RTPs? ## Issues/Concerns WRS supplied patches to get around issues with the new “target shell” environment. WRS did a great job to supply patches Compiler problems introduced for C++ drivers Not too bad but thrashes our developers a bit Licensing Model can be a pain. Need to do some real performance testing ## Issues/Concerns Disadvantages Much too expensive WRS is incompetent on deployment of their own licensing schemes “Subscription” versus “Perpetual” Tries to use FlexLM (maybe WRS should ask the MathWorks how to do this, hmmm?) Unique User Node-Locked Floating Advantages WRS is still the current leader in the Real-Time OS space. Many vendors will give or sell vxWorks drivers. Most will just give away the driver in source/binary form. Technical Support is really much better. Really they are!! Network Stack is improved ## References Talk by WindRiver Systems (March 2005) _[http://www.aps.anl.gov/epics](http://www.aps.anl.gov/epics)_	en
all-txt-docs	295971	ABCD ________________________________________ DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: July 14, 1992 ________________________________________ GSBCA 11903-P NATIONAL COMPUTER SYSTEMS, Protester, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Respondent. David S. Cohen and Donn R. Milton, Cohen & White, Washington, DC, counsel for Protester. Richard Couch, Jeffrey I. Kessler, and Craig E. Hodge, Office of Command Counsel, Department of the Army, Alexandria, VA, and Larry D. Manecke, US Army Armament, Rock Island, IL, counsel for Respondent. BORWICK, Board Judge. ORDER On June 26, 1992, National Computer Systems, protester, filed a protest against the respondent, Department of the Army, United States Materiel Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois. Protester alleged that respondent had split requirements for optical mark readers (OMRs) in using small purchase procedures to place a number of orders for the OMRs. After the docketing of the protest, the Board convened a prehearing conference and developed a pre-trial schedule. A hearing on the merits was set to convene on July 23. On July 10, the parties advised the Board of the settlement of the matter and requested a dismissal with prejudice, with each side to bear its costs. Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties and Rule 28(a)(1), this protest is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. ________________________________ ANTHONY S. BORWICK Board Judge	en
markdown	519044	# Presentation: 519044 ## Microbiological Findings on Sprout Operations Following FDA Guidance Microbiological Findings on Sprout Operations Following FDA Guidance Dr. Jed W. Fahey* Johns Hopkins School of Medicine To be presented at Public Meeting: 2005 Sprout Safety Harvey W. Wiley Federal Building Auditorium 5100 Paint Branch Parkway College Park, MD 20740 Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:30 am – 4:30 pm - * _[[email protected].](mailto:[email protected].)_ ## Overview Microbial contamination tests were performed on 6839 drums of sprouts, equivalent to about 5 million consumer packages of fresh green sprouts. Only 0.75% of the 3191 sprout samples gave an initial positive test for *Escherichia coli* O157:H7 or *Salmonella* sp., and when re-tested, 3 drums again tested positive. Composite testing (e.g., pooling up to 7 drums for pathogen testing) was equally sensitive to single drum testing. *Overview* ## Disclosure *Disclosure* ## Effect of leachate from sprouting broccoli seeds, on the growth of E. coli DH10B in dilute (10%) Luria broth, assessed by spectrophotometry of bacterial broth cultures after 5h of incubation at 37 ̊C. ## Antibiotic Potency of Sulforaphane M.I.C. (g/ml) 48 strains of *H. pylori* Antibiotic Potency of Sulforaphane 21 Bacteria and Fungi - Fahey et al., (2002) PNAS 99: 7610-7615 ## Introduction placed in environmentally controlled, hydroponic conditions incubated in warm, moist, nutrient-rich conditions [1.5 m. diameter, slowly rotating “drums” charged with ca. 20 kg of seed], which are ideal environments for microbial growth. If *Escherichia coli* or *Salmonella* spp. are present on the surface of the seed, it is likely that they will multiply in the sprouting environment. *Introduction* ## Introduction They must therefore be prevented from entering the process, or if contamination occurs, affected final product must be identified and destroyed. *Introduction* ## Introduction The efficacy of such agents, most notably calcium hypochlorite, has been extensively documented in the laboratories of Beuchat and colleagues as well as others. When these agents are used correctly, the resulting sprouts are safe to eat. A recommendation to use such a surface disinfection process is now part of a guidance that the FDA issued in 1999. *Introduction* ## Introduction The ultimate control point for microbial safety is the product, thus incidents of contamination, when they occur, can only be ascertained by testing each lot of sprouts prior to releasing them for sale (hold-and-release testing). This is best done by testing the spent irrigation water. *Introduction* ## Introduction The FDA followed up issuance of this guidance with an inspection of 150 sprouters, and determined that only about half of them were complying with the guidance. We have examined a subset of sprouters in whose facilities compliance with the FDA guidance was verified based upon inspections by two third party auditors. *Introduction* ## Hold-and-Release Testing 13 producers or co-packers of broccoli (BroccoSprouts®) and other sprouts for the company Brassica Protection Products (Baltimore, MD, USA) during 2001. Established companies that grow many different kinds of green sprouts – all had previously agreed to comply with rigid standards of sanitation. Plant siting and product distribution geographically distributed around the U.S. ## Hold-and-Release Testing Surface-disinfect all seeds Perform microbial testing of spent irrigation water from each batch of green sprouts produced. Are subject to announced and unannounced third party audits and state and federal inspections of these procedures. *Hold-and-Release Testing* ## Seed treatment and sprout production Seeds exposed to 20,000 ppm of calcium hypochlorite for 15’, followed by extensive rinsing to remove residual chlorine. Sprouts grown in trays or drums + light (fluorescent, incandescent and/or filtered sunlight), + heat (constant temperature) + clean water (filtered, well, or municipal-chlorinated) ## Seed treatment and sprout production A sample of the spent irrigation water, typically 1 L, is collected after 48 hours of sprout growth. Since the sprouts typically are grown for 72 – 120 h, a rapid microbial test permits the sprouters to abort contaminated batches of sprouts prior to packaging, or to shipping and distribution. All sprouts were held until test results were obtained. *Seed treatment and sprout production* ## Data collection All growers directly forwarded their hold-and-release testing results for the calendar year 2001 to Quality Associates Incorporated (QAI; Columbia, MD, USA). In addition to broccoli sprouts, the growers reported growing the following green sprouts: alfalfa, clover, radish, onion, pea, sunflower, and a variety of mixes. Data that was exclusively derived from batches of bean sprouts (e.g. mungbean and soybean) were not used herein. In some cases pooled water samples that were tested included water from both green sprouts and bean sprouts, and these test results are included in the analyses. ## Data collection All growers but one used the services of an external microbiological testing laboratory, to which samples could be delivered on the day of collection. One grower had instead set up an in-house laboratory for these analyses and all laboratory notes were provided to us by this grower. ## Microbial testing All samples were screened for *Escherichia coli* O157:H7 and for *Salmonella* spp. Most of the testing for *E. coli* O157:H7 (over 75%) was performed using a test kit identified in the FDA Guidance for Industry (*1999*). Only about 10% of the testing for Salmonella was performed using a test kit identified in this FDA Guidance. ## Microbial testing Most kits were Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) Official Methods; One kit was an AOAC Performance Tested Method. One laboratory used the official FDA Bacterial Analytical Method (*45*) for *Salmonella* testing. Methods used by two laboratories (both for *E. coli* and *Salmonella*) and for a third (only for *Salmonella*) not specified. All results entered into a database -- data entries independently verified by an auditor at QAI. ## Methods used for hold-and-release testing. \| Bacteria \| AOAC No. \| AOAC Status \| Test kit name \| Sensitivity (%) \| Specificity (%) \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| E. coli 0157:H7 \| 996.09 a \| Official Method \| Biocontrol VIP EHEC for E.coli O157:H7 \| >98 \| >99 \| \| \| 996.10 b \| Official Method \| Biocontrol Assurance EIA EHEC \| 100 \| >98 \| \| \| 2000.14 c \| Official Method \| Neogen Reveal E.coli O157:H7 \| >89 \| >98 \| \| Salmonella spp. \| 999.09 d \| Official Method \| Biocontrol VIP for Salmonella \| >77 \| >98 \| \| \| 996.08 e \| Official Method \| bioMerieux VIDAS SLM \| >96 \| 100 \| \| \| 960801 f \| Performance Tested Method \| Neogen Reveal Salmonella \| >96 \| 100 \| \| \| 992.11 g \| Official Method \| Biocontrol Assurance Gold EIA Salmonella \| >79 \| 100 \| \| \| 989.14 h \| Official Method \| Tecra Salmonella VIA \| >70 \| >78 \| \| \| -- \| -- \| Bacteriological Analytical Method Chapter 541 \| -- \| -- \| a Reference (16) [Sensitivity and specificity reported in liquid milk and apple cider] b Reference (1) [Sensitivity and specificity reported in liquid milk and apple cider] c Reference (31) [Sensitivity and specificity reported in apple cider] d Reference (17) [Sensitivity and specificity reported in liquid milk] e Reference (2) [Sensitivity and specificity reported in milk chocolate] f Reference (31) [Sensitivity and specificity reported in orange juice, lettuce rinse, sprout rinse, chicken rinse] g Reference (18) [Sensitivity and specificity reported in apple cider] h Reference (3) [Sensitivity and specificity reported in pepper, soy flour, nonfat dry milk, raw ground poultry, chocolate] ## Distribution of number of drums composited into each sample for pathogen testing. Distribution of number of drums composited into each sample for pathogen testing. Composite of: No. samples Percent *a* Single drum 1805 57 2-4 drums 1171 37 5-7 drums 166 5.2 8-19 drums * ** *49 1.5 *a** *Expressed as a percent of the 3191 samples for which the number of drums was known. ## Presumptive positive samples grouped by composite number of drums represented by the water sample tested. \| No. of drums \| No. of presumptive positives \| No. of samples \| Total No. of drums \| Presumptive positives per drum (%) \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| 1 \| 10 \| 1805 \| 1805 \| 0.554 \| \| 2 \| 4 \| 259 \| 518 \| 0.772 \| \| 3 \| 4 \| 558 \| 1674 \| 0.239 \| \| 4 \| 2 \| 354 \| 1416 \| 0.141 \| \| 5 \| 2 \| 69 \| 345 \| 0.580 \| \| 6 \| 0 \| 63 \| 378 \| 0.000 \| \| 7 \| 2 \| 34 \| 238 \| 0.840 \| \| 8-19 \| 0 \| 49 \| 465 \| 0.000 \| \| Overall \| 24 \| 3191 \| 6839 \| 0.351 \| 24 presumptive positives from 3191 samples (6839 drums) = 0.75% ## Summary In most cases of presumptive positives, the water sample was then reanalyzed. In two of these cases, a follow-up analysis was again positive for *Salmonella *spp*.*, and the sprouts were destroyed. In a single case a presumptive detection of *E. coli *O157:H7 was assumed by the grower to be real without re-testing; the sprouts were destroyed. None of these 3 samples included broccoli sprouts. Sprouts were held at the growing facilities until microbial testing results were confirmed. There were no instances in which contaminated sprouts were released for distribution. ## ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work was supported in part by generous gifts from the Lewis B. and Dorothy Cullman Foundation. Many colleagues, in particular Philippe J. Ourisson1, Katherine K. Stephenson2, Douglas L. Archer3 & Frederick H. Degnan4 contributed to this work. Special thanks go to the audited sprout companies for permitting us access to their records and for their close cooperation. - 1Quality Associates, Inc., Columbia Maryland, USA - 2Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine, Department of Pharmacology and Molecular Sciences, Lewis B. and Dorothy Cullman Cancer Chemoprotection Center - 3University of Florida, Food Science and Human Nutrition Department, Gainesville, FL, USA - 4King and Spalding LLP, Washington D.C., USA.	en