[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 40 (Wednesday, February 28, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7616-7661]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-4472]
[[Page 7615]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part IV
Office of Management and Budget
_______________________________________________________________________
Office of Federal Procurement Policy
_______________________________________________________________________
48 CFR Part 9903
Revisions to the Cost Accounting Standards Board Disclosure Statement
Form; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 1996 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 7616]]
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Office of Federal Procurement Policy
48 CFR Part 9903
Cost Accounting Standards Board; Revisions to the Cost Accounting
Standards Board Disclosure Statement Form (CASB DS-1)
AGENCY: Cost Accounting Standards Board, Office of Federal Procurement
Policy, OMB.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Procurement Policy, Cost Accounting
Standards Board (CASB), is revising its Disclosure Statement Form (CASB
DS-1). Section 26(g)(1) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy
Act, 41 U.S.C. 422(g)(1), requires that the Board, when promulgating
any new or revised Cost Accounting Standard, publish a final rule. This
final rule incorporates an updated and revised CASB Disclosure
Statement developed by the Board.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 28, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rein Abel, Director of Research, Cost
Accounting Standards Board (telephone: 202-395-3254).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Regulatory Process
The CASB's rules, regulations and Standards are codified at 48 CFR
Chapter 99. Section 26(g)(1) of the Office of Federal Procurement
Policy Act, 41 U.S.C. 422(g)(1), requires that the Board, prior to the
establishment of any new or revised CAS, complete a prescribed
rulemaking process. The process generally consists of the following
four steps:
1. Consult with interested persons concerning the advantages,
disadvantages and improvements anticipated in the pricing and
administration of Government contracts as a result of the adoption of a
proposed Standard.
2. Promulgate an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM).
3. Promulgate a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).
4. Promulgate a final rule.
This promulgation completes the four step process.
B. Background
Prior Promulgations
The original Disclosure Statement Form (CASB DS-1) was developed
and promulgated in the early 1970s. No revisions to the document were
made until the Board was reestablished in 1990. In 1992, some minor
revisions were made. 57 FR 14148, 14159 (April 17, 1992). Subsequently,
a project was initiated to revise and update the Disclosure Statement
(CASB DS-1).
On April 2, 1993, a Staff Discussion Paper incorporating a revised
Disclosure Statement was distributed to certain interested parties who
generally possessed actual field experience in submitting and auditing
these Statements. On the basis of the comments received in response to
this Staff Discussion Paper, an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(ANPRM) was developed and published in the Federal Register on April 4,
1994 (59 FR 15695).
The majority of the comments received in response to the ANPRM were
generally supportive of the proposed approach, but at the same time,
numerous revisions were suggested that were intended to improve and
streamline the document. Many of these suggested revisions were
incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that was
published in the Federal Register on November 29, 1994 (59 FR 60948).
Public Comments
Nine sets of public comments were received in response to the NPRM
from government contractors, industry associations and Federal
agencies.
Most commenters acknowledged that the NPRM version of the DS-1 was
a significant improvement as compared with the earlier versions of the
Disclosure Statement. Nevertheless, numerous additional revisions were
suggested by commenters in order to further simplify and streamline the
DS-1. Of particular concern to several commenters was the amount and
type of information needed to respond adequately to questions in Part
VII of the Statement.
In general, the Board has tried to be responsive to the suggestions
made by commenters. In particular, a careful reevaluation of Part VII
has been undertaken. In reevaluating this Part, the instructions have
been clarified to make clear that only relevant cost accounting
practices and applicable identifying data need be disclosed. Therefore,
numeric data representing accounting estimates is not required to be
submitted. Also, in most sections of Part VII, the substantive
questions have been limited to items that cover only 80-percent of the
relevant cost groupings.
The commenters overall concerns and suggestions are addressed in
greater detail under Section E., Public Comments.
The Board and the CASB staff express their appreciation for the
constructive suggestions and criticisms provided by the commenters with
regard to the content of the revised Disclosure Statement. Many of the
commenters' suggested improvements have been incorporated into the
final rule being promulgated today.
Benefits
After consideration of the public comments received, the Board
believes that the revised Disclosure Statement, as set forth in this
final rule, will improve the cost accounting practices followed by
contractors when estimating, accumulating and reporting costs deemed
allocable to Federal contracts. Adequate disclosure of cost accounting
practices is essential in order to ensure consistency in cost
measurement as costs are first estimated and then accumulated and
reported. A Disclosure Statement that has not been updated for some two
decades clearly cannot adequately reflect currently prevailing cost
accounting practices and cost elements. Therefore, in order to ensure
that the policies and Standards promulgated by the Board are
implemented in an economical and effective manner, a revised and
updated Disclosure Statement becomes essential. In addition, the Board
has previously expressed the view that an updated Disclosure Statement
should facilitate interaction between contractors and Government
representatives when dealing with contract costing matters.
The introduction of the revised statement should not impose any new
burden on contractors as it merely replaces an existing form which
requires periodic updating of disclosed practices.
To further reduce the possibility of increased costs, the extended
dates for submission of the new Disclosure Statement are designed to
provide an opportunity to delay submission until such time as
contractors would most likely have to file an updated disclosure form
regardless of whether a new Disclosure Statement is introduced or not.
Summary of Amendments
The primary purpose of this revision of the Disclosure Statement is
to bring it up to date and to improve it in light of two decades of
field experience that the government procurement community has had with
this document. The basic characteristics of the Disclosure Statement
have not been changed. However, a multitude of specific changes are
incorporated in the revised Statement. It would be impractical to list
here all the specific
[[Page 7617]]
changes. However, most of these changes can be summarized as follows:
1. The current Disclosure Statement specifies that Parts I through
VII be prepared at the segment or business unit level, while Part VIII
should be prepared at the corporate or group headquarters level. This
revised Statement provides that although Parts V, VI and VII still have
to be submitted by segments, they may be completed either at the
segment or headquarters level depending on where the applicable
practices or procedures are established or where the cost is actually
incurred.
2. In general, various legal references have been updated.
3. As the original Disclosure Statement was in essence prepared
before any Cost Accounting Standards were issued, the revised format
includes references to subsequently issued Standards where appropriate.
In this context, some cost accounting practices described in the
original Disclosure Statement may not be in compliance with the
relevant provisions of a Cost Accounting Standard. The purpose of the
Disclosure Statement is not to elicit noncompliant answers, and
therefore, any references to potentially non-compliant practices have
been eliminated.
4. Requests for certain statistical data have been eliminated as
this information is no longer used.
5. Certain new topical areas have been added to the Disclosure
Statement. These cover items that have become important from a cost
measurement perspective over the last two decades. The topical areas
include cost-of-money, post-retirement health benefits and employee
stock ownership plans. Most of these new topical areas are incorporated
in a significantly revised Part VII.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection aspects of this rule have been approved
by the Office of Management and Budget, and assigned Control Number
0348-0051.
D. Executive Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The economic impact of this final rule on contractors and
subcontractors is expected to be minor. As a result, the Board has
determined that this final rule does not result in the promulgation of
a ``major rule'' under the provisions of Executive Order 12866, and
that a regulatory impact analysis will not be required. Furthermore,
this final rule does not have a significant effect on a substantial
number of small entities because small businesses are exempt from the
application of the Cost Accounting Standards. Therefore, this rule does
not require a regulatory flexibility analysis under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980.
E. Public Comments
This final rule is based upon the NPRM published in the Federal
Register on November 29, 1994 (59 FR 60948), wherein public comments
were invited. Nine sets of comments were received from government
contractors, industry associations and Federal agencies. The more
significant comments received, and the Board's actions taken in
response thereto, are summarized below. Many other comments that were
more of an editorial nature have been incorporated in the document
where appropriate.
Comment: Two commenters suggested that compliant as well as non-
compliant cost accounting practices should be described in the
Disclosure Statement.
Response: The Board agrees that the actual cost accounting
practices being followed must be described. However, where the
Disclosure Statement provides a list of alternative practices, only
compliant alternatives will be listed. If the contractor's practice is
not one of the listed alternatives, the actual practice must be
described on a continuation sheet. This will not be tantamount to
conceding that the practice is non-compliant since such a determination
can only be made after appropriate analysis and review.
Comment: Several commenters indicated that although the NPRM has
been significantly improved and streamlined, the draft still contains
too many questions of a detailed nature that may, in the future,
increase rather than decrease the opportunities for disputes.
Response: The Board has, once more, consulted with the respondents
to the NPRM and all the concerns have been subjected to additional
review. As a result, some changes have been made to the version
incorporated in the NPRM that should contribute to further streamlining
and clarification of the final document. This comment applies in
particular to Part VII of the Disclosure Statement.
Comment: At least two commenters indicated that, in their opinion
the revised document still contains too many pages.
Response: In the final format there is no substantial difference in
the length of the original and the final Disclosure Statement.
Comment: One commenter stressed that whenever possible, existing
CAS wording or definitions should be used.
Response: The Board agrees with this suggestion and, wherever
appropriate, the Disclosure Statement has accordingly been changed.
Comment: Several contractors indicated that throughout the document
the term ``CAS-covered contracts'' rather than ``Federal contracts''
should be used.
Response: The Disclosure Statement deals with the cost accounting
practices of an entity such as a segment or home office and it is
presumed that cost accounting practices are applied consistently to all
the applicable final cost objectives. Although the dollar amount of
CAS-covered contracts received is crucial in determining whether a
Disclosure Statement has to be filed, once the requirement to file has
been met, the disclosure will cover all of the entity's policies and
practices as they affect cost measurement and allocation to all
contracts. Therefore, a broader term, such as ``Federal contracts'',
seems preferable to a narrower term such as ``CAS-covered contracts''.
Comment: Two commenters suggested a shorter implementation period
than the one proposed in the NPRM.
Response: While the Board encourages early adoption of the new
form, it does not believe that it can adequately envision all the
circumstances that might arise necessitating a delay in the
introduction of the new form. It believes that any deadline imposed for
the introduction of the new form should make ample provision for any
unexpected difficulties that may arise at the implementation stage.
Therefore, the final filing date for existing contractors has not been
changed, although the Board hopes that an earlier adoption is possible
in most cases.
Comment: Several commenters expressed some criticism of the
procedure outlined in General Instructions that allows parts of
contractors' accounting manuals to be incorporated by reference in the
Disclosure Statement.
Response: The wording in the Instructions has been changed to make
it clear that the procedure in question is an optional one--
particularly from the perspective of the contractor.
Comment: Several commenters suggested that the language be
clarified to indicate the appropriate circumstances in which home
offices may be able to complete Parts V, VI, or VII to be filed by
segments reporting to the home office.
Response: The language in the General Instructions has been
clarified. In particular, it has been made clear that where the home
office establishes the applicable cost accounting policies and
[[Page 7618]]
procedures, it may also complete the relevant Parts of the Disclosure
Statement to be submitted by its subordinate segments.
Comment: Several commenters offered suggestions for clarifying the
layout and terminology used on the Cover Sheet.
Response: Certain changes have been made to the Cover Sheet, in
particular to item 0.2, Reporting Unit Classification, in order to
introduce standard CAS terminology and definitions whenever
appropriate.
Comment: Several commenters pointed out that in Part I, General
Information, the wording of several items could be improved in order to
ensure that the questions are more clearly focused and take into
account current practices.
Response: Some changes have been made to Part I to reflect the
suggestions made by several commenters. In particular, the question
dealing with unallowable costs has been reformatted so as to reflect
the basic structure of CAS 9904.405, Accounting for Unallowable Costs.
Comment: A number of comments were received concerning the
formulation of questions in Part II, Direct Costs, dealing with direct
material, direct labor and other direct costs. Some commenters
suggested that the questions included in this part might be more
appropriate elsewhere, such as in Part III, Direct vs. Indirect Costs,
of the Disclosure Statement.
Response: The basic characteristic of Part II, as a section dealing
with direct material, direct labor and other direct costs has been
retained. The purpose here is to obtain information on how certain
elements of cost are treated once it has been determined that they
represent direct costs for government contract costing purposes.
Therefore, items such as the question dealing with employee travel
expenses that are directly charged to contracts have been retained.
On the other hand, as suggested by several commenters, the question
dealing with interorganizational transfers has been eliminated
primarily because it requested information about the cost accounting
practices of the transferor and not of the transferee who is preparing
the Disclosure Statement. It cannot be assumed that such information is
always readily available to the transferee. The transferee's practices
in this area are covered in Part IV, Indirect Costs.
Comment: A few commenters suggested that Part III should be
drastically recast--including a suggestion that instead of long lists
of functions, elements of cost and transactions, the equivalent
information should be described on a continuation sheet.
Response: The existing format has been retained as it seems to be
the most effective way to obtain the relevant information on whether an
item of cost is being treated as a direct cost, as an indirect cost or
as a sometimes direct/sometimes indirect cost. The lists of functions,
elements of cost and transactions have been somewhat modified on the
basis of comments received.
Comment: In Part IV, several commenters pointed out that the
subtitles used to describe various methods of allocating General and
Administrative (G&A) expense did not properly reflect the requirements
of CAS 9904.410, Allocation of Business Unit General and Administrative
Expenses to Final Cost Objectives.
Response: The subtitles in question have been modified to conform
more closely to the requirements of CAS 9904.410.
Comment: A number of commenters were concerned about the amount of
detail required in Part IV dealing with modified allocations from
indirect cost pools using a modified allocation base or a rate that is
either more or less than the normal ``full rate''. Some commenters
indicated that too much detail was requested regarding those modified
allocations whereas others expressed the view that more information
should be made available.
Response: Certain parts of Part IV, in particular the question
dealing with the application of overhead and G&A rates to specified
transactions or costs, have been restated in an attempt to present a
more effective and balanced data gathering instrument. It should, once
more, be remembered that the aim has been to provide a vehicle for a
contractor to disclose its CAS compliant cost accounting practices.
Therefore, the Disclosure Statement should not be regarded as a
substitute for an audit check list. It is for this reason that non-
compliant practices have been expressly excluded from the Disclosure
Statement.
Comment: Several commenters suggested changes in the format in
which questions regarding Independent Research and Development (IR&D)
and Bid and Proposal (B&P) costs were presented in Part IV.
Response: The two questions that previously dealt separately with
IR&D and B&P respectively have been combined to provide a more compact
approach to the topic. In particular, the new approach, unlike the one
in the NPRM, does not presuppose that every contractor who incurs B&P
expense also has incurred IR&D expense--a supposition that does not
necessarily hold for civilian agencies.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the headings in the question
in Part VI, Other Costs and Credits, dealing with charging and
crediting vacation, holiday and sick pay be rearranged.
Response: The column headings have been changed to reflect the fact
that salaried exempt and non-exempt employees (as defined by the Fair
Labor Standards Act) are generally treated differently in this area.
Comment: Regarding Part VII, Deferred Compensation and Insurance
Costs, most commenters representing contractors expressed the view that
too much detailed and possibly superfluous and ambiguous information
was required with respect to the various pension, post-retirement
health, deferred compensation and insurance plans. One commenter had
actually tested the proposed NPRM requirements by using actual plan
data in completing selected parts of the various sections in Part VII.
The estimated time to complete these various sections were clearly
significant and possibly burdensome when extrapolated to cover the
whole of Part VII. Even though the data submitted was not verified on
an overall basis, it did provide valuable insight into the relative
amount of time required to complete the various individual questions.
The data also distinguished between time required on a ``recurring''
basis to keep the Disclosure Statement current, as contrasted with the
initial effort of ``non-recurring'' time required to prepare the
original submission. The general comments regarding time required to
complete Part VII were frequently supplemented by specific suggestions
regarding individual sections or questions.
Response: The Board is grateful to those commenters who spent
significant amounts of time to prepare constructive comments on this
part of the Disclosure Statement. In particular, the Board would like
to express its gratitude to the commenter who actually completed
sections of Part VII and made the relevant data available to the Board.
As a result of the input received from commenters, Part VII has
been substantially redesigned in order to make it more ``user
friendly''. When dealing with pension plans, post-retirement health
benefits, employee group insurance, deferred compensation, and worker's
compensation and property insurance, the amount of detailed information
related to various aspects of cost measurement has been substantially
[[Page 7619]]
reduced. The detailed data is required only for those plans or policies
that account for 80-percent of the relevant category of costs--provided
data on at least three plans is disclosed. Only a limited amount of
general plan information is sought for all the other plans. By
excluding the less significant plans from the more detailed disclosure
requirements, it is anticipated that the paperwork burden will be
significantly eased.
Some commenters also inferred that in certain instances actual
numeric data was requested that would have to be updated annually. It
has been made clear in the final document that when dealing with such
items as actuarial assumptions, only the basis used to determine
numeric values need be disclosed and not the actual values themselves.
This clarification should ensure that no regular annual updates of the
Disclosure Statement are prepared and submitted merely to reflect
changes in the relevant numeric values.
Other, more specific changes to the various sections of Part VII
are summarized below:
Pension Plans. The number of General Plan Information questions has
been reduced from nine in the NPRM to six in the final document.
In the NPRM, the information requested for Defined Contribution
Plans applied to all plans of this type. In the final version, if there
are more than three plans, this information has to be supplied only for
plans that account for 80-percent of the defined contribution plan
costs.
Defined Benefit Plans. The number of questions asked in this area
has not been changed. However, the topics covered and the manner of
presentation have been somewhat changed. In particular, it has been
made clear that regarding actuarial assumptions, no disclosure of
actual numeric values is required. Only the basis for determining these
numeric values need be described.
Post-Retirement Benefits (PRBs). This section has been rearranged
to conform with the pattern established for pension plans in the
previous section. In the NPRM, the questions posed were applicable to
all PRB plans. In the final rule, questions dealing with general plan
information have been separated from questions dealing with more
specific aspects of PRB cost determination. The latter group consists
of five questions and they have to be completed only for those plans
that, in the aggregate, account for at least 80-percent of the total
PRB costs. However, if there are three plans or less, then data on all
the plans must be disclosed.
Employee Group Insurance Programs. Responses to this section of
Part VII of the NPRM indicated that it was the most time consuming
section to complete. Therefore, some significant changes have been made
to the amount of information to be disclosed. First, if there are more
than three policies or self-insurance plans, the applicable information
should be provided only for those policies and self-insurance plans
that, in the aggregate, account for at least 80-percent of the costs of
the program for each category of insured risk. Second, the information
previously requested under three separate questions has been recast as
a single question in a tabular form. Third, a number of specific
questions dealing with treatment of dividends, earned refunds, and
employee contributions have been dropped as these items are largely
covered by the provision of CAS 9904.416, Accounting for Insurance
Costs. It is anticipated that the time needed to complete this section
of Part VII will be significantly reduced as a result of the changes
listed above.
Deferred Compensation Plans. This section has been recast to
conform to the format used in the sections dealing with pension plans
and PRBs. Therefore, the first five questions dealing with general plan
information are applicable to all the plans. Two other questions, of a
more substantive nature, should be completed for all the plans if there
are no more than three plans. If there are more than three plans, the
information should be provided for those plans that in the aggregate
account for at least 80-percent of these deferred compensation costs.
Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs). Questions in this section
have been reformulated, and, as a result, the total number of these
general plan information questions has been increased by two as
compared with the NPRM. These questions must be completed for all
ESOPs.
Worker's Compensation Liability and Property Insurance. This
section has been rearranged to conform to the format used in dealing
with employee group insurance plans. In addition, the term ``line of
insurance'' has been introduced in an attempt to clarify the nature of
the aggregation of costs for which the relevant cost data has to be
disclosed. In this context, for the purpose of guidance, ``line of
insurance'' has the meaning attributed to it in Generally Accepted
Auditing Standards (GAAS) literature (see AICPA Audit and Accounting
Guide, Audits of Property and Liability Insurance Companies) and
includes groupings such as fire and similar perils, general liability,
marine perils, automobile liability and property damage, worker's
compensation, theft, etc. If there are more than three policies or
self-insurance plans, the applicable information should be provided
only for those policies and plans that in the aggregate account for at
least 80-percent of the applicable costs for a line of insurance. Also,
two separate questions have been combined into a single question in a
tabular form.
Comment: Several comments relating to Part VIII, Corporate or Group
Expenses, dealt with the requirement in the NPRM to ``list all active
segments and groups that are material in size reporting to the home . .
. office''. Suggestions received included deletion of the words
``all'', ``active'', and ``that are material in size'' in the above
quote from the first question in this part. At least one commenter
suggested that if the term ``material'' is used, criteria for
materiality should be developed.
Response: The suggestions regarding deletions have been accepted by
the Board. The restated sentence reads: ``list segments and other
intermediate level home offices reporting to this home office.''
The Board believes that this is an area where the individuals
implementing the Standards and other regulations necessarily must
exercise their own judgment in carrying out their tasks. The objective
of this provision in the Disclosure Statement is to obtain a listing of
segments and other entities to which home office expenses may be
allocated. This allocation is part of the cost determination process
for government contract costing purposes. Furthermore, this cost
determination process, which includes all the relevant pronouncements
of the Board, is subject to the materiality provisions of 9903.305.
Specific reiteration of the materiality provision in each instance is
not needed. Therefore, the requirement in the present instance is to
list all the segments or other entities reporting to the home office
that may have other than immaterial impact on the cost allocation
process from the home office to its subordinate entities.
Comment: Several suggestions were received to improve and
streamline the main section of Part VIII that deals with the pooling
and allocation of home office expenses.
Response: Several of the suggestions received have been adopted. An
addition has been made to the list of allocation base codes used and
one question in the NPRM has been eliminated and its substance combined
with another question.
[[Page 7620]]
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 9903
Cost accounting standards, Government procurement.
Richard C. Loeb,
Executive Secretary, Cost Accounting Standards Board.
For the reasons set forth in this preamble, chapter 99 of title 48
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth below:
1. The authority citation for Part 9903 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Public Law 100-679, 102 Stat. 4056, 41 U.S.C. 422.
PART 9903--CONTRACT COVERAGE
Subpart 9903.2--CAS Program Requirements
2. Section 9903.202 is amended by deleting the illustrated CASB DS-
1 and inserting a revised CASB DS-1.
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P
[[Page 7621]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.000
[[Page 7622]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.001
[[Page 7623]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.002
[[Page 7624]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.003
[[Page 7625]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.004
[[Page 7626]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.005
[[Page 7627]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.006
[[Page 7628]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.007
[[Page 7629]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.008
[[Page 7630]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.009
[[Page 7631]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.010
[[Page 7632]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.011
[[Page 7633]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.012
[[Page 7634]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.013
[[Page 7635]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.014
[[Page 7636]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.015
[[Page 7637]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.016
[[Page 7638]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.017
[[Page 7639]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.018
[[Page 7640]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.019
[[Page 7641]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.020
[[Page 7642]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.021
[[Page 7643]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.022
[[Page 7644]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.023
[[Page 7645]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.024
[[Page 7646]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.025
[[Page 7647]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.026
[[Page 7648]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.027
[[Page 7649]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.028
[[Page 7650]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.029
[[Page 7651]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.030
[[Page 7652]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.031
[[Page 7653]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.032
[[Page 7654]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.033
[[Page 7655]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.034
[[Page 7656]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.035
[[Page 7657]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.036
[[Page 7658]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.037
[[Page 7659]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.038
[[Page 7660]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.039
[[Page 7661]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28FE96.040
[FR Doc. 96-4472 Filed 2-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-C
