Podcasts about title v

This New Year we're going in on all things space-relevant and the weird development of libertarian Network States with Fred Scharmen, author of Space Forces.Topics: Biocosmism in Russia, the project Concept Country, Bitcoin City, Nick Land Acknowledgement, mini singularities in the 1970's, astral exploration, lines by decade, science beyond earth, van stripes of the 1970's as cultural signifier, the broken future of Elon and Cyberpunk, why there is no libertarianism in outer space, Title V, The O'Neil Cylinder, "a world where many worlds are possible", Maoist tech Venture Capitalists, Ivan Chtcheglov, Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, Is Utopia different from the Real?, Is there an Outside to Utopian thinking?, the trash on the the International Space Station, Article V, Envoy of Humanity, the international court (ICC) beyond earth, quaalude colonialism, the ant farm Cadillac graveyard ranch, ecstatic desolation, the art of Rick Guidice and Don Davis, getting people in architecture into space futures

Today we have a special guest, CSI's Title V Grant Manager, Eddie Reyes on our show. We get into his story of success & how he is giving back to help create those opportunities for others. As a part of the Title V initiative, he is one of the organizers of a FREE Summer Leadership week for Jerome High School students that features some very helpful skills for students like Leadership Skills, Team Building, Empowerment, Career Exploration, & Engaging hands-on presentations! We have all your details & how your student could be a part of this program!Also it's Men's Mental Health Month, Eddie and Joey offer some advice on how to overcome situations that cause high stress & more.Plus you know we still got to bring you a movie review for the new BAD BOYS flick! Definitely a movie you have to watch in the theatre, the perfect popcorn flick, with a perfect mix of comedy & action! We'll break it down. NO SPOILERS! The finale in the Venom trilogy is on the way. Venom: The Last Dance dropped its 1st trailer & we found some Easter eggs & more. Plus lots more fun! Time to sip some tea with Joey and Marie! Learn More about the Title V grant and Register for the Summer Leadership Week here: https://www.csi.edu/hsi/title-v-goals.aspxSend us a Text Message.Support the Show.Social Media Handles:Tik Tok: @joeybravo208 @aaliyahmarie208Instagram: @joeybravo208 @aaliyahmarie208 @sippinteawithjoeyandmarieFacebook: @joeybravo208 @aaliyahmarie208 @sippinteawithjoeyandmarieYoutube: https://www.youtube.com/@sippinteawithjoeymarie5867

 Melissa Wallace was joined by Faith Bermingham, full-time Realtor at Boston Connect Real Estate to discuss all things septic systems! Podcast & Live Radio Show on WATD 95.9 The McNamara Horton Group Boston Connect Real Estate Sharon McNamara | Melissa Wallace Facebook Live every Tuesday at 6:15 pm & Saturday at 8AM @ facebook.com/McNamaraBrokerTeam Follow our team on Instagram @TheMcNamaraHortonGroup

Today we start a two episode series that Annika has been wanting to cover since the podcast began! We're journeying today down the rabbit hole inside the purity culture social phenomenon of the 1990s and early 2000s, situated within evangelical Christianity. While today we are mostly covering exactly what this movement was, the larger arc this lives inside is the way that this impacts not only the impact to the wellness world but also to the larger culture, especially within the US where this originated. Join us for part 2 next time!Joshua Harris in USA todayThe Kevin James Thornton clip we watch on InstagramThose poor Disney Channel kids**** As promised, the boring laws and funding amounts that Annika summarizedIn 1981 the US government passed the Adolescent Family Life Act, or AFLA, a US federal law that provided federal funding to both public and non-profit private religious organizations to counsel adolescents to abstain from sex until marriage.Under AFLA, from 1981 to 1988, the government gave more than $100 million US taxpayer dollars to religious organizations, that used the funding to teach abstinence-only education classes and in total, we've seen over $210 million tax dollars under this program specifically to abstinence-only teachings.1996 brought the additional funding from Title V of the Welfare Reform Act, in which the abstinence-only-until-marriage program was authorized for five years and then continually re-upped each year until 2009.So from 1998-2009 it paid out $50 million in tax dollars a year – so $550 million – to abstinence only programs.In addition, we get the yet another funding stream to support abstinence-only until-marriage programs starting in 2001, which were rewarded directly to community organizations and churches.$20 million a year from 2001-2006 ($100M)$113 million a year from 2006-2008 (226)$99 million in 2009For a total of $425 million.In 2010, the Obama administration cut all finding to these community organization grants.They also passed the affordable care act, which people now call Obamacare, and the Senate added on Title V at the final passing of the bill and this extension totaled $250 million for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs for a five-year period (2010–2014).Then there was another $50 million in 2015, and $75 million per year in 2016 and 2017. We also get the introduction in 2012 of a new discretionary fund, that specifically supports grants in 15 states, which was an additional $185 million from 2012-2022.Human Rights WatchImpacts of State Level FundingGuttmatcher Fact SheetSiecus Funding AnalysisAbstinence and the Politics of Sex Ed Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Join us as we kick off a lively discussion exploring the complex subject of air permitting. We jump right in with the Clean Air Act and  the role the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plays in regulating hazardous air pollutants. Shannon guides us through understanding both the EPA and the state's jurisdiction in air permitting, and reveals the unique system of air permitting regulations in Alaska. We discuss pre-approved limits issued by the state, a pivotal tool that allows certain industrial facilities to evade costly Title V permits. We also delve into two types of permit avoidance measures: pre-approved emission limits (PAEL) and owner requested limits (ORL). So, how does one determine if a facility is a PAEL or an ORL? Let's uncover that together in our latest episode of Tank Talk.  intro/outro created with GarageBand

We covered computer and internet copyright law in a previous episode. That type of law began with interpretations that tried to take the technology out of cases so they could be interpreted as though what was being protected was a printed work, or at least it did for a time. But when it came to the internet, laws, case law, and their knock-on effects, the body of jurisprudence work began to diverge.  Safe Harbor mostly refers to the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act, or OCILLA for short, was a law passed in the late 1980s that  shields online portals and internet service providers from copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is one form of immunity, but more was needed. Section 230 was another law that protects those same organizations from being sued for 3rd party content uploaded on their sites. That's the law Trump wanted overturned during his final year in office but given that the EU has Directive 2000/31/EC, Australia has the Defamation Act of 2005, Italy has the Electronic Commerce Directive 2000, and lots of other countries like England and Germany have had courts find similarly, it is now part of being an Internet company. Although the future of “big tech” cases (and the damage many claim is being done to democracy) may find it refined or limited. That's because the concept of Internet Exceptionalism itself is being reconsidered now that the internet is here to stay. Internet Exceptionalism is a term that notes that laws that diverge from precedents for other forms of media distribution. For example, a newspaper can be sued for liable or defamation, but a website is mostly shielded from such suits because the internet is different. Pages are available instantly, changes be made instantly, and the reach is far greater than ever before. The internet has arguably become the greatest tool to spread democracy and yet potentially one of its biggest threats. Which some might have argued about newspapers, magazines, and other forms of print media in centuries past. The very idea of Internet Exceptionalism has eclipsed the original intent. Chris Cox and Ron Widen initially intended to help fledgling Internet Service Providers (ISPs) jumpstart content on the internet. The internet had been privatized in 1995 and companies like CompuServe, AOL, and Prodigy were already under fire for the content on their closed networks. Cubby v CompuServe in 1991 had found that online providers weren't considered publishers of content and couldn't be held liable for free speech practiced on their platforms in part because they did not exercise editorial control of that content. Stratton Oakmont v Prodigy found that Prodigy did have editorial control (and in fact advertised themselves as having a better service because of it) and so could be found liable like a newspaper would. Cox and Widen were one of the few conservative and liberal pairs of lawmakers who could get along in the decisive era when Newt Gingrich came to power and tried to block everything Bill Clinton tried to do.  Yet there were aspects of the United States that were changing outside of politics. Congress spent years negotiating a telecommunications overhaul bill that came to be known as The Telecommunications Act of 1996. New technology led to new options. Some saw content they found to be indecent and so the Communications Decency Act (or Title V of the Telecommunications Act) was passed in 1996, but in Reno v ACLU found to be a violation of the first amendment, and struck down by the Supreme Court in 1997. Section 230 of that act was specifically about the preservation of free speech and so severed from the act and stood alone. It would be adjudicated time and time and eventually became an impenetrable shield that protects online providers from the need to scan every message posted to a service to see if it would get them sued. Keep in mind that society itself was changing quickly in the early 1990s. Tipper Gore wanted to slap a label on music to warn parents that it had explicit lyrics. The “Satanic Panic” as it's called by history reused tropes such as cannibalism and child murder to give the moral majority an excuse to try to restrict that which they did not understand. Conservative and progressive politics have always been a 2 steps forward and 1 step back truce. Heavy metal would seem like nothin' once parents heard the lyrics of gagster rap.  But Section 230 continued on. It stated that “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” It only took 27 words to change the world. They said that the people that host the content can't be sued for the content because, as courts interpreted it, it's free speech. Think of a public forum like a hall on a college campus that might restrict one group from speaking and so suppress speech or censer a group. Now, Section 230 didn't say it wasn't allowed to screen material but instead shielded providers from being held liable for that material. The authors of the bill felt that if providers would be held liable for any editing that they wouldn't do any. Now providers could edit some without reviewing every post. And keep in mind the volume of posts in message boards and of new websites had already become too much in the late 1990s to be manually monitored. Further, as those companies became bigger business they became more attractive to law suits.  Section 230 had some specific exclusions. Any criminal law could still be applied, as could state, sex trafficking, and privacy laws. Intellectual property laws also remained untouched, thus OCILLA. To be clear, reading the law, the authors sought to promote the growth of the internet - and it worked. Yelp gets sued over revues but cases are dismissed. Twitter can get sued over a Tweet when someone doesn't like what is said, but it's the poster and not Twitter who is liable. Parody sites, whistleblower sites, watchdog sites, revue sites, blogs, and an entire industry was born, which each player of what would later be known as the Web 2.0 market could self-regulate themselves.  Those businesses grew far beyond the message boards of the 1990s. This was also a time when machine learning became more useful. A site like Facebook could show a feed of posts not in reverse chronological order, but instead by “relevance.” Google could sell ads and show them based on the relevance of a search term. Google could buy YouTube and they could have ads on videos. Case after case poked at the edges of what could be used to hold a site liable. The fact that the courts saw a post on Reddit as free speech, no matter how deplorable the comments, provided a broad immunity to liability that was, well, exceptional in a way.  Some countries could fine or imprison people if they posted something negative about the royal family or party in charge. Some of those countries saw the freedom of speech so important as a weapon that could be used against the US in a way. The US became a safe haven in a way to free speech and many parts of the internet were anonymous. In this way (as was previously done with films and other sources of entertainment and news) the US began to export the culture of free speech. But every country also takes imports. Some of those were real, true ideas homegrown or brought in from abroad. Early posters of message boards maybe thought the Armenian Genocide was a hoax - or the Holocaust. A single post could ruin a career. Craigslist allowed for sex trafficking and while they eventually removed that, sites like Backpage have received immunity. So even some of the exceptions are, um, not. Further, extremist groups use pages to spread propaganda and even recruit soldiers to spread terror.  The courts found that sites were immune to suits over fake profiles on dating sites - even if it was a famous person and the person was getting threatening calls. The courts initially found sites needed to take down content if they were informed it was libelous - but have received broad immunity even when they don't due to the sheer amount of content. Batzel v Smith saw a lawyers firm ruined over false reports she was the granddaughter of Nazi Heinrich Himmler and the beneficiary of Nazi art theft, even though she wasn't - she too lost her case. Sites provide neutral tools and so are shielded from defamation - even if they're neutralish you rarely see them held to account. In Goddard v. Google, the Google Keyword Tool recommended that advertisers include the word “free” in mobile content, which Goddard claimed led to fraudulent subscription service recruitment. This was machine learning-based recommendations. The court again found provided the Keyword Tool was neutral that advertisers could adopt or reject the recommendation.  Still, time and time again the idea of safe harbor for internet companies and whether internet exceptionalism should continue comes up. The internet gave a voice to the oppressed, but also to the oppressors. That's neutrality in a way, except that the oppressors (especially when state sponsored actors are involved) often have more resources to drown out other voices, just like in real life. Some have argued a platform like Facebook should be held accountable for their part in the Capitol riots, which is to say as a place where people practiced free speech. Others look to Backpage as facilitating the exploitation of children or as a means of oppression. Others still see terrorist networks as existing and growing because of the ability to recruit online.  The Supreme Court is set to hear docket number 21-1333 in 2022. Gonzalez v. Google was brought by Reynaldo Gonzalez, and looks at whether 230 can immunize Google even though they have made targeted recommendations - in this case when ISIS used YouTube vides to recruit new members - through the  recommendation algorithm. An algorithm that would be neutral. But does a platform as powerful have a duty to do more, especially when there's a chance that Section 230 bumps up against anti-terrorism legislation. Again and again the district courts in the United States have found section 230 provides broad immunization to online content providers. Now, the Supreme Court will weigh in. After that, billions of dollars may have to be pumped into better content filtration or they may continue to apply broad first amendment guidance.  The Supreme Court is packed with “originalists”. They still have phones, which the framers did not. The duty that common law places on those who can disseminate negligent or reckless content has lost the requirement for reasonable care due to the liability protections afforded purveyors of content by Section 230. This has given rise to hate speech and misinformation. John Perry Barlow's infamous A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace in protest of the CDA was supported by Section 230 of that same law. But the removal of the idea and duty of reasonable care and the exemptions have now removed any accountability from what seems like any speech. Out of the ashes of accountability the very concept of free speech and where the duty of reasonable care lies may be reborn. We now have the ability to monitor via machine learning, we've now redefined what it means to moderate, and there's now a robust competition for eyeballs on the internet. We've also seen how a lack of reasonable standards can lead to real life consequences and that an independent cyberspace can bleed through into the real world.  If the Supreme Court simply upholds findings from the past then the movement towards internet sovereignty may accelerate or may stay the same. Look to where venture capital flows for clues as to how the First Amendment will crash into the free market, and see if its salty waters leave data and content aggregators with valuations far lower than where they once were. The asset of content may some day become a liability with injuries that could provide an existential threat to the owner. The characters may walk the astral plane but eventually must return to the prime material plane along their tether to take a long rest or face dire consequences. The world simply can't continue to become more and more toxic - and yet there's a reason the First Amendment is, well, first. Check out Twenty-Six Words Created the Internet. What Will It Take to Save It?

In this episode we discuss that when selling a property serviced by a septic system it is required by law that you have the system tested. This test is to ensure the property meets the state requirements under the Title V regulations. Sellers should do all they can to answer the questions buyers may have when looking at their property. Getting your Title V done ahead of coming on the market can alleviate a lot of the buyer's and your concerns. The Title V testing has three types of results including pass, fail, or conditional pass. Conditional pass means that there are some repairs required to come into compliance with the state regulations. Thanks to Arthur Bloomquist from Title V Inspections found at www.titlevinspections.com for joining us.

In this episode we go over that Title V is the rules that the state applies to properties serviced by a septic system. In order to transfer property a test must be completed.  Title V tests have three types of results a property can pass, fail, or conditionally pass. A conditional pass means the owner will need to do certain repairs to come into compliance with the code. When guiding clients to getting a Title V test done, remember timing can be important so book it early. The test results are good for two years and can be extended to three years with annual pumping.

This week, Bronson Pate is on with Charli to have a chat about his story. Bronson is the Global Fugitive Emissions Director, MagDrive Technologies, he has experience in the environmental field focused on air quality compliance inthe refining, petrochemical, and natural gas processing industries in the United States, China, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia. He has experience in fugitive emission source Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) monitoring, tagging, and database management, including Process and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) review. Bronson is familiar with VV, VVa, GGG, GGGa, KKK, QQQ, MON, HON and worked with multiple facilities to develop LDAR programs including those subject to LDAR consent decree requirements. Bronson has is also one of Sage's LDAR Consent Decree (CD) and Comprehensive Environmental Assesment (CEA) Auditors. Bronson has also preformed Highly Reactive Volialte Organic Compound (HRVOC) audits for various facilities. Bronson is also familiar with certain provisions of the Benzene Waste Operations NESHAP (BWON) standard including required sampling, training and lab auditing. Bronson has also helped with Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) for oil and gas production companies. Bronson has also worked with the refining industry in Texas that have received a section 114 letter. Bronson has also worked with the refining industry in producing Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan (SPCC). Bronson is also familiar with air permitting including MACT and Title V. Bronson also is one of HSE-U trainers for LDAR Essentials, Advanced LDAR and LDAR for Experts.Connect with Bronson on LinkedIn Read up at EmpweringPumps.com and stay tuned for more news about EPIC in Atlanta this November!Find us @EmpoweringPumps on Facebook, LinkedIn,  Instagram and Twitter and using the hashtag #EmpoweringIndustryPodcast or via email podcast@empoweringpumps.com 

In this podcast: Nohemi Lara-Miller, Director of Title V at Clovis Community College (NM) and former TRIO Upward Bound Staff at Eastern New Mexico University. Listen as Nohemi talks about her educational journey, serving TRIO Upward Bound, reflecting on her career, being a parent, moving around from town-to-town, volunteering her time to support military families, being a bilingual learner, and so much more. A HUGE thank you to our sponsors: Angelica Vialpando, Rosario Riley, Ryan Barone, Felicia Rivera, Dr. Jamie Motley, Jaded Electronics, and StudentAccess (ad within the podcast). Visit our sponsor at: Student Access: https://www.studentaccess.com/ Help keep our podcast going: Become a Patron of the Let's Talk TRIO podcast on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/letstalktrio Donate a one-time tip to our PayPal account: https://paypal.me/letstalktrio?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US Let's Talk TRIO Podcast Team Audio Engineer, Editor and Music Composer/Production (Intro/Transition/Outro): John Russell Producer, Social Media Manager, Marketing Manager, Script Supervisor - Voiceover and Ad: Amelia Castañeda Executive Producer & Host: Juan Rivas Cover Artwork: Raul Perez #TRIOworks #LetsTalkTRIO #TRIOvoices #TRIOpodcast #TRIOprograms #TRIOstudentsupportservices #TRIOstaff #TRIOprograms #TRIOupwardbound #TRIOtalentsearch #TRIOmcnair

The Communications Decency Act (CDA) is Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which was enacted when the internet was just making its way into US homes. 26 words […] The post SCOTUS cases explained: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act appeared first on WORT-FM 89.9.

James O'Keefe has been ousted from Project Veritas, the company he founded, on the heels of it's biggest expose against Pfizer!. What initially began as claims of “meanness” toward employees, as morphed into claims of financial impropriety. Both Gonzalez v Google and Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh are currently being heard by the Supreme Court. These cases have major implication to Section 230, a section of Title 47 of the United States Code that was enacted as part of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which is Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which generally provides immunity for website platforms with respect to third-party content. Should section 230 be overturned? In a remarkable turn of events, the Death of a Clinton aide with Epstein ties found tied to tree and shot, was ruled a suicide, despite NO GUN being found at the scene!

State Rep. Chris Markey (D-Dartmouth) joins Marcus to discuss the proposed Title V septic regulations by the Massachusetts DEP that could cause towns and residential homeowners throughout Southeastern Mass. to incur great financial cost. Then Rep. Markey gives his perspective as a practicing criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor on Sheriff Paul Heroux's proposed closure of the Ash Street Jail in New Bedford.

State Rep. Chris Markey (D-Dartmouth) joins Marcus to discuss the proposed Title V septic regulations by the Massachusetts DEP that could cause towns and residential homeowners throughout Southeastern Mass. to incur great financial cost. Then Rep. Markey gives his perspective as a practicing criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor on Sheriff Paul Heroux

Marcus discusses a recent op-ed in Commonwealth magazine opposing the proposed Title V septic regulations in Dartmouth and Cape Cod. He also discusses the perplexing debate surrounding gas stoves, and he takes calls on the MassGOP's current dysfunction.

Marcus discusses a recent op-ed in Commonwealth magazine opposing the proposed Title V septic regulations in Dartmouth and Cape Cod. He also discusses the perplexing debate surrounding gas stoves, and he takes calls on the MassGOP's current dysfunction.

This season, Transfer Nation is exploring Community College Transfer Centers! This is Part 2 of our roundtable discussion with the #TransferChampions behind Triton College's Transfer Center! Listen to Part 1 to catch up on the conversation and learn about the center's origin story and advocacy work. This episode focuses on day-to-day center activity, implementing accommodating design in physical spaces, and finding creative solutions to logistical challenges.Nelly Marcial is the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs at Arrupe College of Loyola University Chicago. She previously served as Director of the Triton College Transfer Center. Connect with Nelly on LinkedIn!Ian Torres is a Transfer Support Specialist at Triton College. Connect with Ian on LinkedIn!Derek Salinas-Lazarski is the Associate Dean of Arts & Sciences at Triton College. Connect with Derek on LinkedIn!Nancy Guzman is the Interim Transfer Coordinator at College of DuPage. She was a Transfer Specialist during her time at Triton College. Connect with Nancy on LinkedIn!The Triton College Transfer Center, which opened its doors in early Spring 2020, is 100% Title V funded. The college's transfer culture continues to evolve in a positive direction and staff have been given autonomy to create many new initiatives. The center also monitors student cohort retention and completion and strives to increase the number of partnerships and transfer guides for four year institutions.(This interview was recorded April 2022.)Mentioned Resources:Check out the Triton Transfer Center WebsiteTake a tour of the Triton Transfer CenterLearn more about the Title V Program#TritonTransferSuccess #TritonCollege #TransferCenter #CommunityCollegeShow CreditsHost | Dr. Heather AdamsGuests | Nelly Marcial, Ian Torres, Derek Salinas-Lazarski, Nancy GuzmanProducers | Sam Kaplan, Brandon RodríguezSound Editing | Abraham UriasKeep talking with Transfer Nation IG: @WeAreTransferNation TikTok: @TransferNation Twitter: @TransferPride FB Group: Transfer Nation Email: WeAreTransferNation@gmail.com Talk soon!#TransferPride #TransferSuccess #TransferChampion #TNTalks #TransferNation

This season, Transfer Nation is exploring Community College Transfer Centers! Over the next two episodes, we will be talking to the #TransferChampions behind Triton College's Transfer Center! In those roundtable conversations, we'll hear about the center's origin story, discuss how it works to alleviate student concerns and enhance the transfer experience, and share advice for those of you eager to form similar spaces on your own campus!Nelly Marcial is the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs at Arrupe College of Loyola University Chicago. She previously served as Director of the Triton College Transfer Center. Connect with Nelly on LinkedIn!Ian Torres is a Transfer Support Specialist at Triton College. Connect with Ian on LinkedIn!Derek Salinas-Lazarski is the Associate Dean of Arts & Sciences at Triton College. Connect with Derek on LinkedIn!Nancy Guzman is the Interim Transfer Coordinator at College of DuPage. She was a Transfer Specialist during her time at Triton College. Connect with Nancy on LinkedIn!The Triton College Transfer Center, which opened its doors in early Spring 2020, is 100% Title V funded. The college's transfer culture continues to evolve in a positive direction and staff have been given autonomy to create many new initiatives. The center also monitors student cohort retention and completion and strives to increase the number of partnerships and transfer guides for four year institutions.(This interview was recorded April 2022.)Mentioned Resources:Check out the Triton Transfer Center WebsiteTake a tour of the Triton Transfer CenterLearn more about the Title V ProgramThe Hidden Curriculum by Rachel GableCaste : The Origins of Our Discontents by Isabel WilkersonDeep Work by Cal NewportUntamed by Glennon Doyle#TritonTransferSuccess #TritonCollege #TransferCenter #CommunityCollegeShow CreditsHost | Dr. Heather AdamsGuests | Nelly Marcial, Ian Torres, Derek Salinas-Lazarski, Nancy GuzmanProducers | Sam Kaplan, Brandon RodríguezSound Editing | Abraham UriasKeep talking with Transfer Nation IG: @WeAreTransferNation TikTok: @TransferNation Twitter: @TransferPride FB Group: Transfer Nation Email: WeAreTransferNation@gmail.com Talk soon!#TransferPride #TransferSuccess #TransferChampion #TNTalks #TransferNation

We are excited to welcome Dr. Jeffrey Brosco to the NBSTRN SPOTlight today. Dr. Brosco will share moving stories from his lifetime of experiences caring for children and families as a clinician who specializes in Developmental-Behavioral Pediatrics. Dr. Brosco has both an M.D. and a Ph.D. degrees from the University of Pennsylvania, and he serves as Florida's Title V Director for Children and Youth with Special Health Care Needs. Dr. Brosco has written numerous articles on the ethical, legal, social implications of newborn screening and along with Diane Paul, he authored a book called The PKU Paradox: A Short History of a Genetic Disease.  In 2019 Dr. Brosco was awarded the Maternal and Child Health Bureau Director's Award for contributions to the health of infants, mothers, children, adolescents, and children with special health care needs across the United States. Listen along with us as Dr. Brosco discusses a wide range of topics including the use of genomics to help end the diagnostic odyssey for families.      Podcast Interview Questions for Dr. Jeff Brosco You are a pediatrician with a specialty in Developmental-Behavioral Pediatrics and also currently the State of Florida's Title V Director for Children and Youth with Special Health Care Needs.How did you get involved with newborn screening research? (Perhaps, you can give our listeners some background on Title V and your role as the director in your response). You have written numerous articles on the ethical, legal, social implications of newborn screening. In one of your articles, you mentioned that whole and exome sequencing can add medical insights for families in the ‘diagnostic odyssey' but in some case, families are still on the therapeutic odyssey. Here, you proposed a family-center approach to care in the genomic era. Could you elaborate to our listeners what this would be? Research helps to advance newborn screening by increasing the number of conditions that may be a fit for early identification and intervention. Where do you think the next decade of research will take newborn screening? In your recent publication, titled “Newborn Screening in Latin America: A Window on the Evolution of Health Policy,” you hypothesized that the history of NBS programs could be used to understand the development of health policy. Please share some of your takeaways from this effort and which comes first – NBS expansion or health policy – or are they intertwined? Are there unique game changers from a historical perspective that resulted in significant change? Are you involved in training the next generation of developmental-behavioral pediatricians and what do you tell them about newborn screening research? You played a key role in advancing the efforts of the NBSTRN for many years. What role does NBSTRN play? What role could NBSTRN play in your efforts to addressing the ethical, legal, social implications of NBS? As you think about your career as a clinician, are there any patient or family stories that you'd like to share with our audience? What does NBS research mean to you? To become a member of NBSTRN, sign up a free membership account at www.nbstrn.org  

Providence Title v. Fleming

Title V – Discovery. Rules 26 to 37. Title V covers the rules of discovery. Modern civil litigation is based upon the idea that the parties should not be subject to surprises at trial. Discovery is the process whereby civil litigants seek to obtain information both from other parties and from non parties (or third parties). Parties have a series of tools with which they can obtain information: 1. Document requests (Rule 34): a party can seek documents and other real objects from parties and non parties. 2. Interrogatories (Rule 33): a party can require other parties to answer 25 questions. 3. Requests for admissions (Rule 36): A party can require other parties to admit or deny the truth of certain statements. 4. Depositions (Rule 30): A party can require at most 10 individuals or representatives of organizations to make themselves available for questioning for a maximum of one day of 7 hours, without obtaining leave of court. FRCP Rule 37 oversees the possible sanctions that someone may seek if a failure to preserve data takes place and outlines how courts may apply sanctions or remedial measures. Updates to FRCP Rule 37 went into effect on December 1, 2015, and have led to a significant decline in spoliation rulings in subsequent years. Federal procedure also requires parties to divulge certain information without a formal discovery request, in contrast to many state courts where most discovery can only be had by request. Information covered by this initial disclosure is found in Rule 26a section 1 subsection A, includes information about potential witnesses, information/copies about all documents that may be used in the party's claim (excluding impeachment material), computations of damages, and insurance information. Information about any expert witness testimony is also required. Notable exceptions to the discovery rules include impeachment evidence/witnesses, "work product" (materials an attorney uses to prepare for the trial, especially documents containing mental impressions, legal conclusions, or opinions of counsel), and experts who are used exclusively for trial prep and will not testify. FRCP Rule 26 provides general guidelines to the discovery process, it requires the plaintiff to initiate a conference between the parties to plan the discovery process. The parties must confer as soon as practicable after the complaint was served to the defendants—and in any event at least 21 days before a scheduling conference is to be held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16b. The parties should attempt to agree on the proposed discovery plan, and submit it to the court within 14 days after the conference. The Discovery Plan must state the parties' proposals on subject of the discovery, limitations on discovery, case management schedule and timing deadlines for each stage of the discovery process, including: End-date of the discovery. This should be at least 60 days before the trial. The trial target date is usually 6 months to 2 years after the conference. Amendments to the deadlines for filing pleadings under FRCP 7 & 15, if any. Deadline for amending pleadings. Normally it is at least 30 days before the discovery ends. Deadline for joining claims, remedies and parties (FRCP 18 & 19). Normally it is at least 30 days before the discovery ends. Deadline for initial expert disclosures and rebuttal expert disclosures. Normally it is at least 30 days before the discovery ends. Deadline for dispositive motions. Usually it is at least 30 days after the discovery end-date. Deadline for Pre-trial order. If any dispositive motions are filed, the Joint Pretrial Order can be filed at least 30 days after the last decision on the merits. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Current title : Hennepin County CommissionerCurrent organisation: Hennepin CountyI am an experienced EHS professional with multi-site industrial experience encompassing national as well as international company locations. Experience includes large projects and work on Lean Six Sigma projects, 40 Hour HAZWOPER response training and ISO 14000 Lead Auditor. Past industrial experience is from large to small industry including heavy industry such as foundries, medical device and chemical industries.Provided leadership in the area of environmental and energy sustainability. Lead sustainability projects at the company level and at the city, metropolitan and statewide level. I provided direction for the gathering of information for metrics to measure success. I have participated in public reporting on corporate responsibility. My work includes collaboration with cross functional entities in shaping long-term policy and direction to maintain changes to operations.Environmental experience: storm water, wastewater, air permitting, including Title V, remediation, hazardous waste, emergency response, business continuity, pandemic planning, ISO 14000, regulatory negotiations, training.Safety experience: LOTO, electrical safety, NFPA 70E arc flash, hoist& cranes, emergency response, PPE, hazard analysis, process safety management, fall protection, hazardous communications, behavioral based safety, safety committees, OHSAS 18000, regulatory negotiations, training.  Resources mentioned in this episode:Free Download of The Leadership Survival Guide (10 World-Class Leaders Reveal Their Secrets) https://store.consultclarity.org/leadership-survival-guide-10-world-class-leaders-reveal-their-secrets1625572748028The Leadership Conversations Podcasthttps://open.spotify.com/show/4IB6V41kr4GVJ98XLHMPeCThe Jonno White Leadership Podcasthttps://open.spotify.com/show/2p8rvWrYW2XNLl9Z8m3pTsThe Leadership Question of the Day Podcasthttps://open.spotify.com/show/6eZ4lZ2bgA8aczPKY4Oqw6Clarity Websitehttps://www.consultclarity.org/7 Questions on Leadership Serieshttps://www.consultclarity.org/large-enterprises-leadershipWe'd Love To Interview YOU In Our 7 Questions On Leadership Series!https://www.consultclarity.org/7-questions-interestSubscribe To Clarity's Mailing Listhttps://www.consultclarity.org/subscribeJonno White's eBook Step Up or Step Outhttps://store.consultclarity.org/step-up-or-step-out-sales-page1640131063671Jonno White's Book Step Up or Step Out (Amazon)https://www.amazon.com/Step-Up-Out-Difficult-Conflict-ebook/dp/B0925MB4SR

فیلم زیبای « وی فور وِندِتا » محصول سال 2005 یه سای-فای-تریلر با موضوع سیاسی به حساب میاد. تو این فیلم هیجان انگیز، یه پادآرمان شهر تخیل میشه که توی اون یه حکومت دیکتاتور به مردم مسلط شده و تقریبا چیزی به اسم آزادی وجود نداره. تو این فیلم، ما با همراه شدن با شخصیت های اصلی فیلم، از رازهای پشتِ پرده ی این دنیای تاریک با خبر میشیمتوی اپیزود هشتم سناریو کست، ما درباره ی فیلم تامل برانگیز « وی فور وِندِتا » حرف می زنیم. پس اگر این فیلم رو دوست داشتید، شنیدن این اپیزود رو از دست ندید‎‏ Title: V for Vendetta‎‏Release date: December 2005‎‏Director: James McTeigue‎‏Screenplay by: The WachowskisBased on: V for Vendetta by Alan Moore‎‏Casts: Hugo Weaving, Natalie PortmanInstagram: Scenario_Cast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On June 25th, 2021 the Supreme Court decided Yellen v. Confederated Tribes of Chehalis Reservation, a case which concerned whether Alaska native regional and village corporations established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act “Indian Tribes” for purposes of the CARES Act. Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored the 5-4 majority opinion of the Court, which held that ANCs are “Indian tribe[s]” under ISDA and thus eligible for funding under Title V of the CARES Act. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan, arguing that the plain language and construction of the ISDA suggest that ANCs are not “Indian tribes,” supported by analogy to another statute with “nearly identical language in remarkably similar contexts,” and that the majority overlooked the critical statutory word “recognized.”With me today to discuss this case are Anthony Ferate, Of Counsel at Spencer Fan LLP, and Jennifer Weddle, Co-Chair of Greenberg Traurig's American Indian Law practice.

New show out about UFC 264 and great UFC banter

This week our team was joined by Shayne McGlone from McGlone Enterprises to discuss everything septic systems from the engineering process to Title V inspections.   Podcast & Live Radio Show on WATD 95.9 McNamara Broker Team Boston Connect Real Estate Sharon McNamara | Mary Baker | Melissa Wallace Facebook Live every Tuesday at 6:15 pm @ facebook.com/McNamaraBrokerTeam Follow our team on Instagram @McNamaraBrokerTeam

Elizabeth O'Nan is Chair of Chapel Hill Organization for Clean Energy or CHOCE for short. Despite past promises by UNC to cut coal by 2020, the administration reneged on that promise a few years later and they are still burning dirty coal. UNC Chapel Hill is the only institute of higher learning in North Carolina still operating a coal-burning plant. Now, North Carolina's Division of Air Quality or DAQ for short has just issued a draft of its Title 5 Air Permit for the UNC coal plant which would allow them to burn MORE coal and emit MORE air pollution. Every major polluting facility in the country must have an air permit to operate. Permits are required by Title V of the Clean Air Act. The permit sets legal allowable limits for how much air pollution a facility can emit. Specifically, the permit regulates sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, particulate matter/soot, and hazardous air pollutants emitted from the UNC coal plant. Some of the major impacts of this draft permit is that it will significantly increase pollution and worsen the health impacts on the community. DAQ has removed the heat input limit from the draft permit. Without a heat input limit, there is no way to enforce the limit on the amount of pollutants that can be released from the coal plant's smokestack and allows the coal plant to pollute as much as it wants. This permit will lead to increased asthma attacks, respiratory illness, heart attacks, and premature death for the surrounding communities. With Elizabeth we discuss this Title 5 permit and what it could mean, health and environmental impacts, and tune in for the last bit to learn how you can take action to oppose this permit! Contact and connect with Elizabeth: CHOCE.NC@gmail.com CHOCE FB: https://www.facebook.com/groups/CHOCE Air Permit information: https://deq.nc.gov/news/press-releases/2021/03/31/release-public-hearing-draft-unc-title-v-permit-be-held-may-4 https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/north-carolina-air-regulators-propose-to-eliminate-restrictions-on-harmful-coal-emissions-from-unc-chapel-hill-power-plant-2021-04-26/ https://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2021/04/university-coal-plant-concerns-permit-lawsuit Comments can be submitted by email to DAQ.publiccomments@ncdenr.gov with the subject line ["UNC.15B"] You may also leave a voicemail comment at (919) 707-8726. Comments will be accepted until May 6, 2021 at 5 p.m. A public hearing will be held (by telephone) May 4th at 6pm Eastern Standard Time. If you wish to speak at the public hearing, you must register by May 4 at 4 p.m. To register, please visit: https://bit.ly/3clFndZ or call (919) 618-0968.

This is part two of a five-part series with the Wises, a nice family out of Virginia who is doing their part to expose the blatant corruption that goes on in the Title V-d Child Support system. It has turned into a windfall of profit for government agencies that seek to destroy families and are only doing it for the money. Be sure to log on to www.relevancepodcast.com for past and future episodes and take advantage of the other products and services that we offer. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/therelevancepodcast/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/therelevancepodcast/support

In this week's episode, Kaylee and Jen do a deep dive into sex ed policy around the United States. First, Kaylee covers the variations of rules for sex ed content on a state-by-state level. Then, we go through the history of abstinence-only sex ed funding in the US, particularly looking at the Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA), Title V of the Social Security Act, and Community Based Abstinence Education (CBAE). After covering these federal grants, Kaylee makes the case that abstinence-only sex education perpetuates systemic racism in the US. You can get involved to fight against systemic racism in sex education by asking your representatives to support the Real Education for Healthy Youth Act and the Youth Access to Sexual Health Services Act, or by donating to the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the US (SIECUS). Sources: Sex ed content in states Abstinence-only sex ed funding Impacts of abstinence-only sex ed through Title V UNAIDS/WHO evaluation Redlining Public school funding Funding amounts for white vs nonwhite schools Study – Abstinence-Only Education Fails African American Youth Pregnancy rates in Black and Hispanic women Teen pregnancy and graduation rates

Old Republic National Title v. Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy

In this session, we finish our study by considering consequences and final forgiveness. --Come visit us--For more information- http---gracesavannah.org--To give securely- https---gracesavannah.org-give-To watch live- https---gracesavannah.org-live--Title- V. Forgiveness and Consequences-Series- 1 Tim- Honoring God in Church-Speaker- Shaun Marksbury-Date- January 13, 2021

In the United States, the Title V Maternal and Child Health (MCH) Program provides support to all mothers, children and youth, including children and youth with special health care needs, and their families. The mission of Title V MCH is to improve the health and well-being of mothers, infants, children, and youth, including children and youth with special health care needs, and their families. In this episode, you will gain insights on how to manage and lead a team to improve the lives of mother and children and what you can do be a part of the public health mission. We will also discuss some of the pressing issues in maternal and child health: health equity. How can we make resources more equitable for everyone? We have a special guest on this episode - Karen Trierweiler who was the former Director of the Maternal and Child Health Division for the State of Colorado. Karen Trierweiler has a master’s prepared nurse midwife and experienced public health professional, known for leading collaborative efforts to achieve measurable health improvements for women, children, youth and families. If you are interested in a career in maternal and child health, then stay tune and listen to hear to Karen's career journey from a being a practitioner to becoming a leader in Maternal and Child Health Programs. She will also highlight the important skills in need right now which can make you a valuable team player in your organization: 1) performance management, 2) resources management, and 3) financial management. For skills building resources, check out the MCH Navigator: https://www.mchnavigator.org. Connect with Karen Trielweiler at karen@totalpopulationhealth.com and check out https://www.totalpopulationhealth.com Interview Questions and Topics: 1. Learn the career journey from being a practitioner to leader in MCH/public health practice. 2. How is Maternal and Child Health (MCH) program funded? What does Title V mean? What’s the history of these "Titles"? 3. Karen will share her one really tough decision in the past, and what would she would tell her ‘earliest self’ at that point – was it the right thing to do or not? 4. What are still pressing issues in MCH which we are still dealing with and why are they still unresolved? 5. Is something that the general public can do about them? What message or advice can you share with public health professionals working in the field of MCH? 6. What are things you know now that you didn't know then? (personal or professional) 7. What professional development skills are still needed in MCH? 8. Learn about Karen Trielweiler's new consulting venture, Total Population Health, where she works with MCH managers and leaders to bring theory and practice into reality. Learn more at https://www.totalpopulationhealth.com Connect with Karen Trielweiler at karen@totalpopulationhealth.com For skills building resources, check out the MCH Navigator: https://www.mchnavigator.org and http://www.amchp.org/pages/default.aspx This is the "What is Public Health Podcast" with your host Dr. Kee Chan. Public Health is the invisible force that keeps you healthy everyday, and I bet you didn’t even know it. This podcast is your source of the latest trend in public health, is a place to refresh your skill set and get quick tips on professional development so you can do your best work in serving the public. To learn more about public health, connect with me at www.whatispublichealthpodcast.com --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/whatispublichealth/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/whatispublichealth/support

FM #243 = This is the Franklin Matters radio show, number 243 in the series. This session of the radio show shares the Franklin (MA) Board of Health meeting which was conducted virtually for the first time. One member had some audio difficulty at the beginning of the call so he hand signaled and chatted until he resolved his audio problem. The recording runs about 31 minutes, so let’s listen to the Board of Health meeting held virtually on Wednesday, April 8. -------------- I was using Twitter to capture my notes during the meeting. The twitter results can be found https://twitter.com/search?q=%23boh0408&src=typeahead_click 1 - Real time reporting: Board of Health's first virtual meeting under this pandemic period. #BoH0408 it is a struggle as things are changing daily, fear among residents seems to be subsiding, dealing with other queries re: companies/businesses on closures, etc. 2 - Many business calls related to essential and non-essential status, esp with listing changes. #BoH0408 on positive side, volunteers through new MA program in planning; couple 2 focus on local hotels re: hosting first responders needing to self quarantine 3 - a number is not going to make the presence more real, releasing at County level makes sense; DPH doesn't release those #s for contagious diseases; need to mindful of those with the disease; testing is not end all be all #BoH0408 4 - respect that folks are upset with that decision but it won't change #BoH0408 5 - Title V inspections being kept up, use of an interim transfer point for doc handling (i.e Title V plans) working well #BoH0408 contractor is taking precautions and continuing inspections for Title V 6 - direct contact = within 6' for more than 15 minutes; if someone identified, then those individuals who do let us know who those are, we do make (or at least attempt to) contact - use of DPH MAVEN program for tracking #BoH0408 7 - some of the prior mentioned volunteers will help nurse do the contact tracing as identified and needed; effort being coordinated on a 'regional' basis to help with efficiencies #BoH0408 8 - food code was designed pre-COVID-19 to prevent spread of disease; restaurants should be following those anyway; they are checked 2x year as usual; as something comes up, we'll check. #BoH0408 9 - Board Of Health meeting ends; Chair had disconnected just prior, couldn't get back, other members picked up and closed logically and formally. Audio recording to be available later #BoH0408 We are now producing this in collaboration with Franklin.TV and Franklin Public Radio (wfpr.fm). This podcast is my public service effort for Franklin but we can't do it alone. We can always use your help. How can you help? - If you can use the information that you find here, please tell your friends and neighbors - If you don't like something here, please let me know Through this feedback loop we can continue to make improvements. I thank you for listening. For additional information, please visit Franklinmatters.org/ If you have questions or comments you can reach me directly at shersteve @ gmail dot com The music for the intro and exit was provided by Michael Clark and the group "East of Shirley". The piece is titled "Ernesto, manana" c. Michael Clark & Tintype Tunes, 2008 and used with their permission. I hope you enjoy! ------------------ You can also subscribe and listen to Franklin Matters audio on iTunes or your favorite podcast app; search in "podcasts" for "Franklin Matters"

In this episode we discuss the newly signed Cares Act aimed at providing aid to businesses and individuals that have been impacted by the Coronavirus and the resulting economic shut-down. The application process for the Cares Act loans will take the form of a modified 7a SBA loan and will be processed through SBA approved lenders. On this episode, we have bank representatives, employment attorney, FSU Economics professor and business leaders in the restaurant industry. A recent post re: the summary of the Cares Act:Senate Passes the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”)26 March 2020  Coronavirus Resource Center  BlogAuthors: Frank S. Murray Jr Jared B. Rifis Leah R. Imbrogno Jamie N. Class Matthew E. Sierawski Julia Di Vito Kaitlyn M. Foley As the coronavirus outbreak continues to wreak havoc on markets and industries in the United States and around the world, businesses are now confronting significant and unique challenges. Successful navigation of these challenges will require thoughtful and comprehensive planning. Foley has created a multi-disciplinary and multi-jurisdictional team, which has prepared a wealth of topical client resources (see Foley’s Coronavirus Resource Center) and is prepared to help our clients meet the legal and business challenges that the coronavirus outbreak is creating for stakeholders across a range of industries, including manufacturing, technology, solar, hospitality and travel, healthcare, food, fashion and apparel, and sports and entertainment. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) – Summary of Bill Language and Key TakeawaysOn March 25, 2020, the Senate unanimously passed (96-0) the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”), commonly known as “Phase Three” of coronavirus economic relief. The CARES Act provides much needed stimulus to individuals, businesses, and hospitals in response to the economic distress caused by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The bill passed on March 25 is not yet law. Until the CARES Act is passed by the House of Representatives and signed into law by the President, it is subject to revisions. The bill will now go to the House, which is currently not in session. The House may reconvene to address the bill or pass the bill by unanimous consent agreement. The House is expected to pass the bill without changes on March 27, and it will then be presented to the President for his signature.Additional information, updates, and analysis regarding the CARES Act will be posted on Foley’s Coronavirus Resource Center. Please check back frequently for updates. Foley is available to assist in interpretation of the CARES Act for your business and can help you find ways to claim and/or use available funding for your company. The CARES ActTop 10 Takeaways:Provides stimulus to individuals, businesses, and hospitals in response to the economic distress caused by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.Creates a $349 billion loan program for small businesses, including 501(c)(3) non-profits and physician practices. These loans can be forgiven through a process that incentivizes companies to retain employees.Allocates $500 billion for assistance to businesses, states, and municipalities, with no more than $25 billion designated for passenger air carriers, $4 billion for air cargo carriers, and $17 billion for businesses critical to maintaining national security. The remaining $454 billion may be used to support lending to eligible businesses, states, and municipalities.Allocates $130 billion in relief to the medical and hospital industries, including for medical supplies and drug and device shortages.Expands telehealth services in Medicare, including services unrelated to COVID-19 treatments.Provides $1,200 to Americans making $75,000 or less ($150,000 in the case of joint returns and $112,500 for head of household) and $500 for each child, to be paid “as rapidly as possible.”Expands eligibility for unemployment insurance and provides people with an additional $600 per week on top of the unemployment amount determined by each state.Expands the Defense Production Act, allowing for a period of two years when the government may correct any shortfall in resources without regard to the current expenditure limit of $50 million.Provides the Secretary of the Treasury with the authority to make loans or loan guarantees to states, municipalities, and eligible businesses and loosens a variety of regulations prior legislation imposed through the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, and others.Accompanied by supplemental appropriations to help the government respond to this pandemic.Summary of the CARES Act:Division A - Keeping American Workers Paid and Employed, Healthcare System Enhancements, and Economic Stabilization   Title I – Keeping American Workers Paid and Employed Act     Foley Title I Contacts: Jamie Class, Erin Toomey, Jessica Glatzer Mason, and Frank MurrayPaycheck Protection ProgramThe Paycheck Protection Loan Program, at a price tag of $349 billion, covers the period February 15, 2020 through June 30, 2020 and greatly expands SBA loan eligibility.  The loan program will allow businesses suffering due to the coronavirus outbreak to borrow money for a variety of qualified costs related to employee compensation and benefits, including (i) payroll costs, (ii) continuation of health care benefits, (iii) employee compensation (of those making less than $100K), (iv) mortgage interest obligations, (v) rent, (vi) utilities and (vii) interest on debt incurred before the covered period.The legislation greatly expands the number of businesses (including non-profits) that are eligible for SBA loans and raises the maximum amount for such a loan by 2.5 x the average total monthly payroll costs, or up to $10 million.  The interest rate may not to exceed 4%.Companies that employ no more than 500 employees are (or a greater number based on the size standard applicable to the industry) may be eligible.  Certain companies in the Accommodation and Food Services Industry (NAICS Code 72) may be eligible if they have no more than 500 employees per physical location. In most cases, the number of employees is counted together with all affiliates.Waives affiliation rules under 13 C.F.R.  121.103 for any business with less than 500 employees in the Accommodation and Food Services Industry, certain franchise businesses and small businesses that receive financing through the Small Business Investment Company Act.  Affiliation rules otherwise apply to determine eligibility.Waives the credit available elsewhere, personal guaranty and collateral requirements.For eligibility purposes, requires lenders to determine whether a business was operational on February 15, 2020, and had employees for whom it paid salaries and payroll taxes, or a paid independent contractor. (This is likely to be interpreted to replace the determination of repayment ability which is not possible during the crisis.)All or a portion of the loan may be forgivable and debt service payments may be deferred for up to 1 year.Entrepreneurial DevelopmentProvides funding to educate small businesses and their employees regarding (i) Federal resources available during this time, (ii) Hazards of COVID-19 and (iii) best practices around teleworking to prevent the spread of COVID-19.iii.  State Trade Expansion ProgramAllows for federal grant funds appropriated to support the State Trade Expansion Program (STEP) in FY 2018 and FY 2019 to remain available for use through FY 2021.Waiver of Matching Funds Requirement under the Women’s Business Center ProgramEliminates the non-federal match requirement for Women’s Business Centers for a period of three months. Loan Forgiveness Establishes that the borrower under the Paycheck Protection Program shall be eligible for loan forgiveness equal to the amount spent by the borrower during an 8-week period after the origination date on (i) rent, (ii) payroll costs for workers making less than $100K, (iii) interest on a mortgage, and (iv) utility payments. The amount forgiven may not exceed the principal of the loan. Incentivizes companies to retain employees by reducing the amount forgiven proportionally by any reduction in employees retained compared to the prior year.To encourage employers to rehire any employees who have already been laid off due to the COVID-19 crisis, borrowers that re-hire workers previously laid off will not be penalized for having a reduced payroll at the beginning of the period.Minority Business Development Agency Empowers the Department of Commerce, through the Minority Business Development Agency, to provide grants to minority business centers and minority chambers of commerce to provide education, training and advising related to accessing federal resources.vii. United States Treasury Program Management Authority The Department of the Treasury, consulting with the Small Business Administration and the Chairman of the Farm Credit Administration shall establish criteria to allow other lenders to participate in the Paycheck Protection Program, so long as such participation does not threaten the safety and soundness of the lender, as determined in consultation with the relevant federal banking agencies.viii.  Emergency Economic Injury Disaster Loans (“EIDLs”) For the period between January 31, 2020 and December 31, 2020 (the “covered period”) EIDL eligibility is greatly expanded to include any business with not more than 500 employees operating under a sole proprietorship or as an independent contractor, and any cooperative, ESOP and tribal small business concern with not more than 500 employees. The number of employees is determined together with affiliates.Furthermore, EIDLs may be approved solely on the bases of an applicant’s credit score or by use of alternative methods to gauge the applicant’s ability to repay. Additionally, applicants may request an advance of up to $10,000 within three days after the Administrator receives the application, subject to verification that the entity is eligible under this program. The advance may be used for any allowable purposes under §7(b)(2) of the Small Business Act and is not subject to repayment, even if the loan request is ultimately denied.Importantly, the CARES Act waives: (1) the requirement of personal guarantees for loans up to $200,000, (2) the requirement that the applicant must be in business for a year (but must be in operation on January 31, 2020), and (3) the credit elsewhere test.Establishes that an emergency involving Federal primary responsibility determined to exist by the President under Section 501(b) of the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act qualifies as a new trigger for EIDLs.Importantly, the CARES Act waives: (1) the requirement of personal guarantees for loans up to $200,000, (2) the requirement that the applicant must be in business for a year (but must be in operation on January 31, 2020), and (3) the credit elsewhere test.Subsidy for Certain Loan PaymentsFor loans under §7(a) of the Small Business Act, Title V of the Small Business Investment Act, and for loans made by an intermediary using §7(m) loans or grants, the Administrator shall pay the principal, interest, and fees owed for loans in regular servicing status for any such loans, whether on deferment or not, that were made before the enactment of the Act for the following 6-month period, and for any such loans that were made between the date of enactment of the Act and six months from such date. This does not apply to Payroll Protection loans or EIDL loans which have separate subsidy and repayment requirements.The payments shall be made not later than 30 days from when the first payment is due and shall be applied such that the borrower is relieved of any obligation to pay that amount. The Administrator shall coordinate with relevant banking agencies to request that lenders not be required to increase reserves because of these payments.The Administrator will waive limits on the maximum loan maturities for loans given deferral and extended maturity during the year following enactment. The Administrator will extend lender site visit requirement timelines as necessary because of COVID-19, to within 60 days of a non-default adverse event, and 90 days of a default. $17 billion is appropriated for the foregoing.BankruptcySection 1182(1) of Title 11 is amended to define “debtor” as persons engaged in commercial or business activities and their affiliates (excluding persons who primarily own single asset real estate) that have aggregate, noncontingent, liquidated secured and unsecured debts (at the date of petition filing or the order for relief) of $7,500,000 or less (excluding debts owed to affiliates or insiders), half or more of which arose from those activities.  Exempt from this new definition are any members of a group of affiliated debtors that has aggregate, noncontingent, liquidated secured and unsecured debts over $7,500,000 (excluding debt owed to affiliates or insiders); corporations subject to 1934 Act reporting requirements; and affiliates of an issuer under the 1934 Act.  National Emergency Act payments for COVID-19 by the President are exempted from “current monthly income” and “disposable income” when determining the power of courts to approve debtor plans rejected by trustees or claim holders. Debtors that have experienced material financial hardship due to COVID-19 can modify a plan confirmed prior to this Act’s enactment date if approved after notice and hearing, but only if that plan doesn’t provide payments more than seven years after the first payment was due under the original plan, and follows requirements of 1322(a)-(c) and 1325(a). This modification terminates one year after the enactment of this Act.Title II – Assistance for American Workers, Families, and Businesses      Foley Title II Contacts: Julie Lutfi, Ashley May, and Dick RileySubtitle A: Unemployment Insurance ProvisionsEligibilityThe law expands the scope of individuals who are eligible for unemployment benefits, including those who are furloughed or out of work as a direct result of COVID-19, self-employed or gig workers, and those who have exhausted existing state and federal unemployment benefit provisions.The only individuals expressly excluded from coverage are those who have the ability to telework with pay and those who are receiving paid sick leave or other paid benefits (even if they otherwise satisfy the criteria for unemployment under the new law).Administration of BenefitThe benefits are administered by each state and upon the state’s written agreement with the Secretary of Labor to provide the specific benefits.  States that enter into such an agreement with the Secretary of Labor will be reimbursed in whole or in part for the cost of the benefits plus administrative expensesTypes of Benefits ProvideThe law provides an increase of $600 per week in the amounts customarily available for unemployment under state law.  This increase applies for unemployment payments made from the date of the law’s enactment through July 31, 2020 (approximately four months).States can agree to provide pandemic emergency unemployment compensation to individuals who have either exhausted all of the benefits available to them under existing state and federal law or who are not otherwise eligible for benefits under existing state and federal law.  Individuals must be able and available to work and actively seeking work, unless they are unable to do so as a result of COVID-19 illness, quarantine, or movement restriction.States can agree to waive the waiting period for receipt of benefits so that individuals do not experience gaps in income.The federal government will temporarily fund short-time compensation under existing state plans.  States that do not yet have short-time compensation plans in place may agree to implement a plan, provided that employers who enter into short-time compensation plans must be required to pay to the state half of the short-time compensation paid under the planTime Periods for Expanded BenefitsThe law provides unemployment benefit assistance to covered individuals who are not otherwise entitled to benefits under existing state or federal law for weeks of unemployment, partial unemployment, or inability to work caused by COVID-19 during the period January 27, 2020 through December 31, 2020.  This includes any waiting periods for benefits under applicable state law.The total benefit may not extend beyond 39 weeks (including any unemployment benefits or extended benefits received under existing state or federal law), unless, after the law is enacted, the duration of extended benefits is extended, in which case the total benefit may extend beyond 39 weeks by that same additional period of extended benefits.The $600 weekly benefit increase will be applicable to weekly payments made through the end of July 2020.Protections Against Fraud and OverpaymentAny fraudulent intent or misrepresentations to obtain payments to which an individual is not entitled will result in ineligibility for any other unemployment compensation benefits under the new law as well as criminal prosecution. Overpayments may be clawed back by the state agencies.Social Security TreatmentThe additional unemployment compensation provided is not considered “income” for purposes of Medicaid and CHIP.Subtitle B: Rebates and Other Individual ProvisionsTax CreditsBeginning in 2020, "eligible individual" taxpayers can benefit from a tax credit equal to the sum of: (i) $1,200 for single filers ($2,400 for those filing a joint return) plus (ii) an amount equal to th eproduct of (a) $500 multiplied by (b) the number of qualifying children. However, the aforementioned tax credits will be “phased-out” by 5% (but not below 0) when such eligible taxpayer’s adjusted gross income exceeds: (i) $150,000 for joint-filers, (ii) $112,500 for heads of household, and (iii) $75,000 for all other types of filers.This means, for example, the tax credit will phase out entirely at $198,000 for joint-filers with no children.“Coronavirus-Related Distribution”A “coronavirus-related distribution,” as defined under the CARES Act, is generally defined as any distribution from an eligible retirement plan made: (i) on or after January 1, 2020 and before December 31, 2020, (ii) to an individual (a) who is diagnosed with COVID-19, (b) whose spouse or dependent is diagnosed with COVID-19, or (c) who experiences adverse financial consequences as a result of being quarantined, furloughed, laid off, had hours reduced, or other factors as determined by the Secretary of the Treasury during the COVID-19 pandemic.Tax Treatment of Coronavirus-Related DistributionsIndividuals who elect to receive a “coronavirus-related distribution” will not be subject to the traditional 10% tax penalty imposed under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) for early withdrawals from eligible retirement accounts,unless the aggregate amount of such distributions from all plans maintained by the employer (and any member of any “controlled group” which includes the employer) to such individual exceeds $100,000. Coronavirus-related distributions made from both traditional eligible employer sponsored retirement plans and individual retirement accounts (“IRAs”) may be excluded from gross income.Repayments of Coronavirus-Related DistributionsAny individual who receives a coronavirus-related distribution may generally, at any time during the three (3) year period beginning on the day after the date such coronavirus-related distribution was received, make one (1) or more contributions in an aggregate amount not to exceed the amount of such distribution to an eligible retirement plan of which such individual is a beneficiary . The aforementioned repayments of coronavirus-related distributions for eligible retirement plans, will, to the extent of the amount of the contribution, be treated as having received the coronavirus-related distribution in an eligible rollover distribution,” and as having transferred the amount to the eligible retirement plan in a direct trustee to trustee transfer within sixty (60) days of distribution.Effects on the Limits on Loans from Qualified Employer PlansThe limitation on loans from any qualified employer plan made to qualified individuals will be increased from $50,000 to $100,000, and should the due date of any such loan occur between the date of enactment of the CARES Act and December 31, 2020, it will be delayed for one (1) year.Effects on Minimum Distribution ThresholdThe CARES Act temporarily waives the minimum distribution requirements for all “eligible deferred compensation plans.” This includes: (i) certain contribution plans (e.g. an employer purchased annuity contract), (ii) deferred compensation plans that are maintained by an eligible employer, or (iii) IRAs.  This applies for all distributions made on or after January 1, 2020.However, if this section applies to any pension plan or contract amendments, such pension plan or contract amendments will not fail to be treated as being operated in accordance with the terms of the plan during such period, solely because the plan operates in accordance with the CARES Act, so long as the amendment or contract in question has been in effect from its effective date until December 31, 2020.Any plan or contract amendments to which Section 2203 of the CARES Act (the section on temporary waiver of required minimum distribution rules) applies will not fail to meet the requirements of either the Internal Revenue Code or the Employee Retirement Income Security Act as a result of making such an amendment. However, this provision only applies to those amendments which are in effect during the period beginning on the effective date of the amendment until December 31, 2020.Tax Treatment of Charitable DonationThe CARES Act allows taxpayers to take an above-the-line tax deduction for charitable contributions of up to $300 for the tax year beginning in 2020.Additionally, except for certain exclusions specified below, the percentage and excess carryover restrictions on charitable and other “qualified contributions” (e.g. a contribution to a corporation, trust, a state, or an organization of war veterans, etc.) are disregarded.Exceptions to the CARES Act General Disregard of the Percentage and Excess Carryover Restrictions on Qualified ContributionsThe CARES Act treats individuals and corporations differently regarding the aforementioned exceptions, and such different treatments are described below.Qualified contributions for individuals will be allowed as deductions to the extent that the combined contributions do not exceed (i) the excess of the taxpayer’s adjusted gross income over (ii) the amount of the charitable contributions made by the individual under certain other provisions of the CARES Act (e.g., donations to a church, educational organization, private foundation, etc.). If such contributions exceed the foregoing limitation, they will be added to the qualified contribution excess, which is eligible to be treated as charitable deductions for up to the next five (5) successive tax years. Any qualified contributions made by corporations will be allowed as deductions only if these contributions do not exceed 25% of the taxable income of the corporation over the amount of all other charitable contributions allowed under the CARES Act. To the extent a corporation exceeds this limit, it will carry over the excess which will be eligible to be applied as charitable contribution deductions for the subsequent five tax years. This is provided that the excess qualified contribution amounts in question meet certain other restrictions, specifically, they must not exceed the lesser of: (i) 10% of the corporation’s taxable income or the total charitable deductions taken by the corporation during the taxable year over the sum of the contributions made in such year plus the aggregate of the excess contributions which were made in taxable years before the contribution year and which are deductible under this subparagraph for such succeeding taxable year; or (ii) in the case of the first succeeding taxable year, the amount of such excess contribution, and in the case of the second, third, fourth, or fifth succeeding taxable year, the portion of such excess contribution not deductible under this subparagraph for any taxable year intervening between the contribution year and such succeeding taxable year.iii.  Subtitle C: Business ProvisionsEmployee Retention Credit for Employer Subject to Closure Due to COVID-19Eligible employers will receive a credit against applicable employment taxes for each calendar quarter in an amount equal to 50% of the qualified wages with respect to each employee. The amount of qualified wages taken into account for each eligible employee, however, will not exceed $10,000 per calendar quarter and the credit will not exceed the applicable employment taxes owed for such calendar quarter. The aforementioned credit is not applicable if the employer is alto taking advantage of the small business interruption loan. An eligible employer is defined as any employer: (i) which was carrying on a trade or business during calendar year 2020, and (ii) with respect to any calendar quarter for which, (a) the operation of their trade or business was fully or partially suspended due to governmental order as a result of COVID-19, or (b) the  calendar quarter is within the period beginning with (1) the calendar quarter after December 31, 2019 for which gross receipts for the calendar quarter are less than 50% of the gross receipts for the same calendar quarter of the prior year and the ending with (2) the calendar quarter following the first calendar quarter beginning after the calendar quarter described in (1) for which gross receipts of the employer are greater than 80% gross receipts for the same calendar quarter in the prior year.Delay of Payment of Employer Payroll TaxesThe CARES Act will allow for most employers to defer paying their share of applicable employment taxes from the time the CARES Act is signed into law through December 31, 2020. Half of this deferred amount would be due on December 31, 2021 and the other half by December 31, 2022.Modifications for Net Operating Losses (“NOL”)There will generally be a temporary repeal of taxable income limitation including (i) in the case of a taxable year beginning before January 1, 2021, the aggregate of the net operating loss (“NOL”) carryovers to such year, plus the NOL carrybacks to such year, and (ii) in the case of a taxable year beginning after December 31, 2020, the sum of (a) the aggregate amount of NOLs arising in taxable years beginning before January 1, 2018, carried to such taxable year, plus (b) the lesser of (1) the aggregate amount of NOLs beginning after December 31, 2017, carried to such taxable year, or (2) 80% of the excess of certain taxable income.In the case of any NOL arising in a taxable year beginning after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2021, whereby (i) such NOL will be a net operating loss carryback to each of the five (5) taxable years preceding the taxable year of such loss and (ii) certain rules applicable to farming losses and insurance companies shall not apply.  There are additional rules that apply specifically to “real estate investment trusts” and life insurance companies.Modification of Limitation on Losses for Taxpayers Other Than CorporationsFor any taxpayer other than a corporation:For a taxable year beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026, subsection (j) (relating to a limitation on excess farm losses of certain taxpayers) would not apply; and ii.  For any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2020 and before January 1, 2026, any excess business loss of the taxpayer for the taxable year will not be allowed.In regard to treatment of capital gains and losses for purposes of calculating “excess business losses”: Deductions for losses from sales or exchanges of capital assets will not be taken into account.The amount of gains from sales or exchanges of capital assets taken into account will not exceed the lesser of (1) the capital gain net income determined by taking into account only gains and losses attributable to a trade or business, or (2) the capital gain net income.The amendments made in the aforementioned section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017.Modification of Credit for Prior Year Minimum Tax Liability of CorporationsThe corporate alternative minimum tax (AMT) was repealed as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, but corporate AMT credits were made available as refundable credits over several years, ending in 2021.  The CARE Act accelerates the ability of companies to recover those AMT credits, permitting companies to claim a refund now and obtain additional cash flow during the COVID-19 emergency.  Modification of Limitation on Business InterestThe CARES Act temporarily increases the amount of interest expense businesses are allowed to deduct on their tax returns, by increasing the 30-percent limitation (as imposed under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act) to 50 percent of taxable income (with adjustments) for 2019 and 2020.  As businesses look to weather the storm of the current crisis, this provision will allow them to increase liquidity with a reduced cost of capital, so that they are able to continue operations and keep employees on payroll.Qualified Improvement PropertyThe CARES Act enables businesses, especially in the hospitality industry, to write off immediately costs associated with improving facilities instead of having to depreciate those improvements over the 39-year life of the building. The provision, which corrects an error in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, not only increases companies’ access to cash flow by allowing them to amend a prior year return, but also incentivizes them to continue to invest in improvements as the country recovers from the COVID-19 emergency. Temporary Exception from Excise Tax for Alcohol Used to Produce Hand SanitizerFor distilled spirits removed after December 31, 2019 and before January 1, 2021, such distilled spirits will be free of tax for use in or contained in hand sanitizer produced and distributed in a manner consistent with any guidance issued by the FDA related to the outbreak of COVID-19.Title III – Supporting America’s Health Care System in the Fight Against the Coronavirus      Foley Title III Contacts: Rachel O’Neil, Erin Horton, Anil Shankar, and Paul JosephSubtitle A, Part I:  Addressing Supply ShortagesProvides for the National Academies to examine and report on the security of the U.S. medical product supply chain in order to assess U.S. dependence on critical drugs and devices sourced outside of the U.S., and to develop recommendations to improve resiliency of the U.S. supply chain for critical drug and devices.Requires the Strategic National Stockpile to include certain types of medical supplies, including personal protective equipment (PPEs), and identifies respiratory protective devices as covered countermeasures for use during a public health emergency.Prioritizes the review of drug applications to mitigate emergency drug shortages.Creates additional reporting requirements for drug manufacturers to report a discontinuation and disruption of the sourcing of active pharmaceutical ingredients.Requires manufacturers of certain drugs and medical devices critical to public health during a public emergency to develop, maintain, and implement risk management plans related to shortages, creating an annual notification requirement of the same. Such manufacturers are also subject to shortage-related inspections by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS).Subtitle A, Part II: Access to Health Care for COVID-19 Patients Permits group health plans and insurers to cover and reimburse providers of diagnostic testing relating to COVID-19 at pre-emergency-period negotiated rates, and sets reimbursement rates in instances without previously negotiated rates equal to the cash price for services listed on a publicly-available website or the plan or insurer can negotiate with a provider for a rate lower than such cash price. All providers of a diagnostic test for COVID-19 are required to publicize cash price for such tests. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in HHS assessing a civil monetary penalty of up to $300 per day.Requires health plans and issuers to provide for rapid coverage of “qualifying coronavirus preventative services” – an item, service, or immunization intended to prevent or mitigate coronavirus—and vaccines for coronavirus.Appropriates $1.3 billion for FY 2020 for supplemental awards to health care centers for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of COVID-19.Amends Section 330I of the Public Health Service Act, relating to Telehealth Network and Telehealth Resource Centers Grant Programs, and Section 330A of the Public Health Service Act, relating to the Rural Health Care Services Outreach, Rural Health Network Development, and Small Healthcare Provider Quality Improvement Grant Programs—an individual or entity affected by these grant programs should seek out an attorney to examine the effect of such amendments.Limits potential state and federal liability for volunteer health care professionals—who provide services without compensation or other thing of value—for harm caused to patients relating to the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of COVID-19. This provision expressly preempts more restrictive state or local law.Amends certain federal regulations governing the confidentiality and disclosure of substance use disorder patient records (Part 2), including allowing certain re-disclosures to covered entities, business associates, or other programs subject to HIPAA after obtaining the patient’s prior written consent.Permits a state agency or area agency on aging to transfer, without prior approval, not more than 100% of the funds received by the agency to meet the needs of the state or area served, and provides that the same meaning shall be given to an individual unable to obtain nutrition due to social distancing as one who is homebound due to illness.Provides that within 180 days of the passage of the Act, the Secretary of HHS shall issue guidance on the sharing of patients’ protected health information (PHI) related to COVID-19, including guidance on compliance with HIPAA regulations and applicable policies.Provides that the Secretary of HHS shall carry out a national awareness campaign relating to the importance and safety of blood donation, and the need of for donations for the blood supply during a public health emergency.iii.  Subtitle A, Part III:  Innovation Provides for using competitive procedures to enter into transactions to carry out public-health emergency health related projects and prohibits canceling those contracts solely because the emergency ends.Includes new provisions to expedite the development and approval of drugs to prevent or treat diseases in animals that are could have significant adverse consequences for humans.Subtitle A, Part IV:  Health Care WorkforceApproves appropriations for a variety of health professions-related programs, with particular focus on programs serving medically underserved populations (rural and geriatric).Subtitle B:  Education ProvisionsWaives requirement for certain higher education institutions to match federal funding and allows certain institutions to transfer unexpended allotment.Permits certain higher education institutions to use their allocations of Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants for emergency financial aid for students.Permits certain higher education loan borrowers flexibility in repaying loans or returning grants during a qualified emergency.Permits certain students to complete distance education and certain students of foreign institutions to take classes in the United States.Allows the Secretary of Education to issue waivers upon request relating to assessments, accountability, and related reporting requirements, and requirements for state and local educational agencies and Indian Tribes to receive funding.Allows the Secretary of Education to grant a deferment to an institution that received a loan under Part D of Title III of the Higher Education Act.Payments on student loans held by the Department of Education are suspended for 6 months, and the Secretary of Education shall suspend all involuntary collection activities during the period of payment suspension.The Corporation for National and Community Service can allow individuals to accrue service hours and may permit certain grants funds.Not more than 20% of the total amount allocated to a local area under 29 U.S.C. 3151 et seq. may be used for administrative costs.For the program year 2019, not more than 20% of the total amount allocated to a local area under 29 U.S.C. 3151 et seq., may be used for administrative costs of carrying out certain local workforce investment activities, if the portion of the total amount that exceeds 10% of the total amount is used to respond to qualifying emergency.  For the program year 2019, certain unobligated funds reserved by a governor for statewide activities under the Workforce Innovation Opportunity Act may be used for statewide rapid response activities, or in certain circumstances, released to local boards impacted by the coronavirus.Gives the Secretary of Education authority to waive certain eligibility requirements, wait periods, and allotment requirements under the Higher Education Act for a period of time.Authorizes the Secretary of Education to modify the required and allowable uses of funds for grants and to modify any federal share or other financial matching requirement for a grant awarded under certain provisions of the Higher Education Act to an institution of higher education or other grant recipient (not including an individual recipient of Federal student financial assistance) as a result of a qualifying emergency.Allows the Secretary of Education to modify the categories of extenuating circumstances under which a grant recipient may be excused from fulfilling a portion of a service obligation under title IV of the Higher Education Act and must consider teaching service that is part-time or temporarily interrupted due to the emergency to be full-time service.  Requires the Secretary of Education to waive certain years of teaching service requirements under the Higher Education Act in certain circumstances.Subtitle C: Labor ProvisionsPaid Public Health Emergency Leave MinimumsEmployers may, but are not required to, pay any more than $200 per day and $10,000 in the aggregate for each employee for public health emergency leave under section 110(b)(2)(B) of the Family & Medical Leave Act of 1993 as amended by the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act.Rehire Eligibility for Paid Public Health Emergency Leave EmployersFor purposes of public health emergency leave under the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act, an eligible employee is an employee who has been employed for at least 30 calendar days by an employer with respect to whom leave is requested. The employee must be employed for at least 30 calendar days, which includes an employee who was laid off by that employer on or after March 1, 2020, had worked for employer for not less than 30 of the last 60 calendar days prior to the employees layoff, and was rehired by the employer.Emergency Paid Sick Leave MinimumsEmployers may, but are not required to, pay any more than:$511 per day or $5,110 in the aggregate for each employee when taking emergency paid sick leave if the employee is subject to a federal, state or local quarantine or isolation order related to COVID-19, the employee has been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine due to concerns related to COVID-19, or the employee is experiencing symptoms of COVID-19 and seeking medical diagnosis; or $200 per day or $2,000 in the aggregate for each employee when taking emergency paid sick leave if the employee is caring for an individual who is subject to a federal, state or local quarantine order, or is caring for an individual who has been advised to self-quarantine due to concerns related to COVID-19, the employee is caring for the employee's son or daughter, if the child’s school or childcare facility has been closed or the child’s care provider is unavailable due to COVID-19 precautions, or the employee is experiencing any other substantially similar condition specified by HHS in consultation with the Department of the Treasury and the Department of Labor.Advance Refunding of Payroll Credits for Required Paid Sick Leave and Required Paid Family LeaveEmployers can apply a credit in the amount calculated under subsection (a) of section 7001 or 7003 of the Family First Coronavirus Response Act, subject to the limitations placed by subsection (b) of section 7001 and 7003, both calculated through the end of the most recent payroll period in the quarter. In anticipation of a credit, the credit may be advanced according to forms and instructions to be provided by the Secretary of Labor. The Act ensures employers that the Secretary of Treasury shall waive any penalty under section 6656 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for failure to make a deposit of the tax imposed under section 3111 (a) or 3221(a) of such Code if failure was due to anticipation of credit allowed.vii. Subtitle D: Finance CommitteeAn additional safe harbor provision is added to section 223(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code, providing that a plan shall not fail to be treated as a high deductible health plan (HDHP) by reason of failing to have a deductible for telehealth and other remote care services.  Section 223(c)(1)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code is adjusted to include “telehealth and other remote care.” This addition allows an individual to have an insurance plan (for plan years beginning on or before December 31, 2021) that includes telehealth and other remote care without disqualifying the individual from owning an HDHP.Inclusion of Certain Over-the-Counter Medical Products as Qualified Medical ExpensesMenstrual care products are now included under the term “qualified medical expenses.” Increasing Medicare Telehealth Flexibilities During Emergency Period The amendment removes some limiting qualifications to section 1320b-5(b)(8), which allows for the Secretary of HHS to temporarily waive or modify the application of portions of the Social Security Act in the case of a telehealth service furnished in any emergency area during an emergency period.  The provision that sets out the defined term “qualified provider,” which limited 1320b-5(b)(8), is removed in its entirety. Enhancing Medicare Telehealth Services for Federally Qualified Health Centers and Rural Health Clinics During Emergency PeriodA new provision is added under Section 1834(m) of the Social Security Act (42 USC 1395m(m)), enhancing payment for telehealth services furnished via a telecommunications system by a federally qualified health center (FQHC) or rural health clinic (RHC) during an “emergency period” notwithstanding that the FQHC or the RHC providing the telehealth service is not at the same location as the beneficiary.  Payment methods for FQHCs or RHCs that serve as distant sites shall be based on payment rates similar to the national average payment rates for comparable telehealth services under the physician fee schedule under section 1848.Temporary Waiver of Requirement for Face-to-Face Visits Between Home Dialysis Patients and PhysiciansAmended section 1395rr(b)(3)(B) to allow the Secretary of HHS to waive the requirement that individuals with end stage renal disease receiving home dialysis must receive certain periodic face-to-face (non-telehealth) clinical assessments in order to be eligible to receive end stage disease-related clinical assessments via telehealth. Use of Telehealth to Conduct Face-to-Face Encounter Prior to Recertification of Eligibility for Hospice Care During Emergency PeriodSection 1395f(a)(7)(D)(i) is amended to allow a hospice physician or hospice nurse practitioner during an “emergency period” to conduct a face-to-face encounter via telehealth to determine recertification for continued eligibility for hospice care.Encouraging Use of Telecommunications Systems for Home Health Services Furnished During Emergency PeriodDuring an emergency period, the Secretary of HHS shall consider ways to encourage the use of telecommunications systems.Improving Care Planning for Medicare Home Health ServicesCertain Medicare sections are expanded from being limited to the services of a physician to include services of nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, and physician assistants that provide home health services.Adjustment of SequestrationA temporary suspension of Medicare sequestration put into effect during the period of May 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020. The Medicare programs under title XVIII of the Social Security Act shall be exempt from reduction under any sequestration order during the period.Medicare Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System Add-On Payment for COVID-19 Patients During Emergency PeriodThe Secretary of HHS will increase the weighting factor for coronavirus-diagnosed patients discharged during the emergency period. The weighting factor is used by the Secretary of HHS to reflect the relative hospital resources used with respect to discharges for a particular group compared to discharges within other groups.Increasing Access to Post-Acute Care During Emergency PeriodDuring the emergency period, the Secretary of HHS will waive the requirement that patients of inpatient rehabilitation facilities receive at least 15 hours of therapy per week.  For long-term care hospitals furnishing services during the emergency period, the Secretary of HHS will further waive discharge percent requirements and the general application of site neutral payment rates.Revising Payment Rates for Durable Medical Equipment Under the Medicare Program Through Duration of Emergency PeriodThe Secretary of HHS shall apply the transition rule, described in 42 C.F.R. § 414.210(g)(9)(iii), to items and services furnished in rural areas and noncontiguous areas as planned through December 31, 2020, and through the duration of the emergency period.  For areas other than rural and noncontiguous areas, the Secretary of HHS shall apply the transition rule described in 42 C.F.R. § 414.210(g)(9)(iv) through the remainder of the emergency period.Coverage of the COVID-19 Vaccine Under Part B of the Medicare Program Without Any Cost-SharingThe term “medical and other health services” is expanded to include “COVID-19 vaccine and administration.”  The deductible described in section 1395l(b) shall not apply with respect to a COVID-19 vaccine and its administration.Requiring Medicare Prescription Drug Plans and MA-PD Plans to Allow for Fills and Refills of Covered Part D Drugs for up to a 3-Month SupplyDuring the emergency period, a prescription drug plan or MA-PD plan shall permit a part D eligible individual reenrolled in such plan to obtain a single fill or refill the total day supply prescribed for such individual for a covered part D drug.Providing Home and Community-Based Services in Acute Care HospitalsThe prohibition that nothing in section 1395a allows the Secretary of HHS authorization to limit the amount of payment that may be made under a plan for home-and-community care is expanded to include home and community-based services, self-directed personal assistance services, or home and community-based attendant services.  The provision is also expanded to clarify that the section shall not be construed to prohibit receipt of any care or services specified in paragraph (1) in an acute care hospital, provided certain requirements are met.Clarification Regrading Uninsured Individuals The Families First Coronavirus Response Act, enacted last week, added subsection (ss) to section 1396a, which defined “uninsured individual” as those not described in section 1396a(a)(10)(A)(i) and not enrolled in certain health care programs. The CARES Act amends this definition to exclude subsection VIII if the individual is a resident of a state that does not furnish medical assistance as described.    Clarification Regarding Coverage of COVID-19 Testing ProductsThe Families First Coronavirus Response Act, enacted last week, added COVID-19 testing to section 1396d, which provides medical assistance payments under certain conditions. The CARES Act amends this section by removing the requirement that the in-vitro diagnostic products administered are approved, cleared, or authorized under sections 510(k), 513, 514, or 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.Amendment Relating to Reporting Requirements with Respect to Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory TestsThe CARES Act extends the dates by one year for the reporting periods in section 1395m-1(a)(1)(B).  The applicable prohibition that payment amounts determined under section 1395m-1 shall not result in a reduction in payments, as defined by the subsection, for a clinical diagnostic laboratory test is expanded to 2017 through 2024.   The applicable percentages used to determine the limits on reductions in payment defined in 1395m-1(b)(3)(A) are adjusted to include a new clause for 2021, which makes the new applicable percentage zero (0) for 2021.Expansion of Medicare Hospital Accelerated Payment Program During the COVID-19 Public Health EmergencyMandates that the Secretary of HHS expand the accelerated payment program to hospitals experiencing significant cash flow problems during the “emergency period.” Exception for Certain States from Enhanced FMAP Requirements Provides that states may receive the temporary increase of Medicaid Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) (authorized under the Families First Act enacted last week) notwithstanding the requirement to not impose premiums on beneficiaries, for a period of 30 days.viii.  Subtitle E, Part I: Medicare ProvisionsExtension of Funding for Quality Measure Endorsement, Input, and SelectionThe Social Security Act is amended to increase the amount allotted for this fiscal year ending on October 1, 2020 from $4,830,000 to $20,000,000 and for the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending on November 30, 2020, the amount equal to the pro rata portion of $20,000,000. Extension of Funding Outreach and Assistance for Low-Income ProgramsThe amount allocated for state health insurance programs shall be $13,000,000 for this fiscal year. For the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending on November 30, 2020, the amount available will be equal to the pro rata portion of $13,000,000.The amount allocated for area agencies on aging shall be $7,500,000 for the fiscal year of 2020. For the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending on November 30, 2020, the amount available will be equal to the pro rata portion of $7,500,000.The amount allocated for aging and disability resource centers shall be $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2020. For the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending on November 30, 2020, the amount available will be equal to the pro rata portion of $5,000,000.The amount allocated for grant or contract with national center for benefits and outreach enrollment is now $12,000,000 for the 2020 fiscal year ending on October 1, 2020. For the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending on November 30, 2020, the amount available will be equal to the pro rata portion of $12,000,000.Subtitle E, Part II: Medicaid ProvisionsExtension of the Money Follows the Person Rebalancing Demonstration ProgramThe Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 section 6071(h)(1)(G) is amended to allocate $337,500,000 for the period beginning on January 1, 2020 and ending on September 30, 2020. For the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending on November 30, 2020, the amount available will be equal to the pro rata portion of $337,500,000.Extension of Spousal Impoverishment ProtectionsExtends the protections through November 30, 2020.Allows the State to disregard the income of a spouse and conduct an analysis solely on an individual’s eligibility for medical assistance on the basis of reduction of income.Delay of DSH ReductionsThis section removes the $4 billion DSH reductions for federal fiscal year 2020 and delays the cuts from taking effect December 1, 2020. Extension and Expansion of Community Mental Health Services Demonstration ProgramExpands the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014.According to this section not later than 6 months after the date of enactment, the Secretary shall select two states, in addition to the eight States already listed, to participate in two-year demonstration programs that meet the requirements of this subsection.The requirements are states that:Were awarded planning grants, Applied to participate in the demonstration programs under this subsection but were not selectedThe Secretary shall use the results of its evaluation of the state’s original application and shall not require the submission of any additional application.If a state is selected it is required to: Submit a plan to monitor certified community behavioral health clinics under the demonstration program to ensure compliance with certified community behavioral health criteria during the demonstration period; and Commit to collecting data, notifying the Secretary of any planned changes that would deviate from the prospective payment system methodology outlined in the state’s demonstration application, and obtaining approval from the Secretary of any such change before implementing change.The Federal matching percentage applicable to amounts expended by states participating in the demonstration program under this subsection shall apply to amounts expended by the state during the fiscal period that begins on January 1, 2020 if the state was participating in the demonstration program as of January 1, 2020 and shall apply to amount expensed by the state during the first fiscal period the state participates if the state was selected pursuant to the expansion. Subtitle E, Part III: Human Services and Other Health ProgramsExtension of Sexual Risk Avoidance Education ProgramSection 510 of the Social Security Act is amended to extend the time through 2020 instead of ending in May 22, 2020 and to change the fiscal year to 2021. Extension of Demonstration Projects to Address Health Professions Work-Force NeedsActivities authorized by section 2008 of the Social Security Act shall continue through November 30, 2020. Extension of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program and Related ProgramsActivities authorized by part 1 of title IV and section 1108(b) of the Social Security Act shall continue through November 30, 2020. Subtitle E, Part IV: Public Health ProvisionsExtension for Community Health Centers, the National Health Service Corps, and Teaching Health Centers that Operate GME ProgramsThe amount allocated for community health centers under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is increased to $4,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2020 and $668,493,151 for the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending on November 30, 2020.The amount allocated for the National Health Service Corps is now $310,000,000 for fiscal year 2020 and $51,808,219 for the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending in November 30, 2020.The amount allocated for teaching health centers that operate graduate medical education programs now extends through fiscal year 2020 and $21,141,096 is allocated for the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending on November 30, 2020.Diabetes ProgramsThe amount allocated under the Public Health Service Act for Type I will extend through the fiscal year of 2020 and $25,068,493 will be allocated for the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending on November 30, 2020.The amount allocated under the Public Health Services Act for Indians will extend through the 2020 fiscal year and $25,068,493 will be allocated for the period beginning on October 1, 2020 and ending on November 30, 2020.xii. Subtitle F, Part I: Over-the-Counter DrugsAmends Chapter V of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) to insert a new section regulating certain nonprescription drugs that are marketed without an approved drug application under section 505 of the FD&C Act.  This new section primarily achieves two goals: (1) reforms the regulatory process for over-the-counter (OTC) drug approvals permitting the FDA more flexibility to make changes administratively, rather than through the time-consuming full notice and comment rulemaking process; and (2) incentivizes pharmaceutical companies to research and manufacture innovative drug products by providing an 18-month market-exclusivity period to reward investments for new OTC drugs.Amends Section 502 of the FD&C Act, to clarify that an OTC drug which does not comply with the requirements of its OTC monograph, which is essentially an approved recipe for a drug product, is considered misbranded.  The FD&C Act prohibits the introduction of misbranded drugs into interstate commerce.Clarifies that nothing in the CARES Act will apply to drugs previously excluded by the FDA from the Over-the-Counter Drug Review under the original 1972 Federal Register document.Clarifies that sponsors of sunscreen ingredients with pending orders have the option to see review in accordance with the Sunscreen Innovation Act (SIA) or to see review under the new monograph review process.  The election must be made within 180 calendar days of the date of enactment of the CARES Act. Provides an annual procedure to update Congress on the appropriate pediatric indication for certain OTC cough and cold drugs for children under the age of six.  The evaluation consists of conditions under which nonprescription drugs are generally recognized as safe and effective.Makes technical corrections to the FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017 (Public Law 115-52).xiii. Subtitle F, Part II: User FeesDeclares that the fees paid pursuant to this section will be dedicated to FDA review of over-the-counter monograph drugs as set forth in the goals section and in letters from the Secretary of HHS to certain congressional committees.Establishes a new FDA user fee to allow the agency to hire additional staff members to ensure there is adequate agency oversight to approve changes to OTC drugs.Title IV – Economic Stabilization and Assistance to Severely Distressed Sectors of the United States Economy      Foley Title IV Contact: Christopher SwiftTitle IV of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Securities Act provides the Secretary of the Treasury with the authority to make loans or loan guarantees to states, municipalities, and eligible businesses and loosens a variety of regulations created in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, and others.ii.Subtitle A – Coronavirus Stabilization Act of 2020Emergency Relief and Taxpayer ProtectionsThe Act authorizes the Treasury Secretary to make up to $500 billion worth of loans and loan guarantees to eligible businesses, states, and municipalities. The term “eligible business” includes passenger air carriers or any other business that has not already received adequate economic relief in the form of loans or loan guarantees under other provisions of the Act. The Act reserves $46 billion to support passenger air carriers, air cargo carriers, and businesses important to maintaining national security. The Act establishes a $454 billion credit facility for Federal Reserve programs designed to support lending to eligible businesses, states, and municipalities. This program contemplates various loans and loan guarantees for distressed businesses.Businesses that receive loans through these Federal Reserve programs are prohibited from paying dividends or repurchasing stock (or other outstanding equity interests) while the loan or loan guarantee is outstanding, as well as for the 12 months following repayment. These businesses are subject to the same employee compensation restrictions as listed for air carriers, air cargo carriers, and businesses deemed important to maintaining national security. Although the Treasury Secretary can waive these restrictions, he must identify and explain the rationale for such waivers in testimony before Congress.Businesses that receive loans or loan guarantees through these Federal Reserve programs can only make loans (or other advances) to business that are incorporated in the United States. Transfers to subsidiaries and affiliates incorporated outside the United States are prohibited.The Act directs the Treasury Secretary to establish a program to provide low-interest loans for eligible businesses (including nonprofit organizations) with between 500 and 10,000 employees. Although these loans will require no repayment for at least six months, businesses and non-profit organizations seeking this support must provide a good-faith certification that they meet the following criteria:The company intends to maintain at least 90 percent of their current workforce;The company will not pay dividends or repurchase stock (or other equity securities);The company will not outsource or offshore jobs during the loan period or two years thereafter;The company will not abrogate existing collective bargaining agreements with labor unions; and The company will remain neutral regarding current or future union organizing activity.Limitation on Certain Employee CompensationThe Act also imposes certain compensation caps for officers and employees at companies  receiving loans or loan guarantees.  Under these caps, officers or employees that received $425,000 or more in total compensation in 2019 will have their future compensation capped at the amount they received that year.  This cap applies while the loan or loan guarantee is in effect, as well as to the 12 consecutive months after the loan or loan guarantee is no longer outstanding. The same restriction also applies to severance payments or other compensation received upon termination from businesses participating on the loan and loan guarantee programs.Additional caps apply for officers and employees whose total compensation exceeded $3,000,000 in 2019.  Under the Act, these individuals may receive compensation up to $3,000,000 plus 50 percent of the excess over $3,000,000 of the total compensation received by the officer or employee in 2019. For example, an officer or employee whose total 2019 compensation was $3,000,010 would be restricted to total compensation of $3,000,005 in subsequent years. Like the lower cap discussed above, this restriction applies while the loan or loan guarantee is in effect, as well as to the 12 consecutive months after the loan or loan guarantee is no longer outstanding.Continuation of Certain Air ServicesThe Secretary of Transportation may require any air carrier receiving loans or loan guarantees under Section 4003 to maintain scheduled air transportation services as the Secretary deems necessary to maintain service to any destination the carrier served before March 1, 2020. The Secretary of Transportation is to consider the needs of “small and remote communities” and “health care and pharmaceutical supply chains” when enforcing this portion of the Act.Suspension of Certain Aviation Excise TaxesThe Act suspends the imposition of aviation excise taxes as otherwise required under the Internal Revenue Code through December 31, 2020.Debt Guarantee AuthorityIn order to backstop solvent depository institutions, it appears that the CARES ACT allows the FDIC to establish a program to insure these institutions without regard to a maximum amount.  All such guarantees are to last at least until December 31, 2020.Temporary Government in the Sunshine Act ReliefIn the event that unusual and exigent circumstances continue to exist, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System may conduct meetings with less restrictive and formal meeting notification and record-keeping requirements until December 31, 2020.  Temporary Hiring FlexibilityWithout regard to certain statutory hiring requirements, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Securities Exchange Commission are given flexibility to recruit and appoint candidates for temporary and term appointments as necessary to prevent, prepare for, or respond to COVID-19 during the “covered period” of the CARES Act.Temporary Lending Limit WaiverEnlarges exception to requirement on the maximum amount of loans and extensions of credit by a national banking association to include a nonbank financial company (as defined in Section 102 of the Financial Stability Act of 2010) and allows the Comptroller o

Today, Zidane on the brink of 10th title this weekend plus lots of rumour and speculation names in the news, Icardi, Mane, Kante, Camavinga, Milik Marcus Rashford and the future of Diaz remains undecided

Today, Zidane on the brink of 10th title this weekend plus lots of rumour and speculation names in the news, Icardi, Mane, Kante, Camavinga, Milik Marcus Rashford and the future of Diaz remains undecided

Heller #Opinionaterz! Happy New Year! On this episode (112), DeVonta talks #KevinHart, #AdrianBronner, #DaBaby, #ReclaimingYourPlates2020 and much more. #MVPsOfTheWeek: American Troops#ClownOfTheWeek: Donald Trump The Opinionated Topic Of The Week: DeVonta' talks about the difference between 'Title vs Character' and how our society and culture are shifting from one notion to the other.Follow us on Social Media:Instagram: www.instagram.com/tob__podcast/Twitter: mobile.twitter.com/tob__podcastFacebook: m.facebook.com/theopinionatedbru…od/?ref=bookmarksFollow DeVonta on Social Media:Instagram: www.instagram.com/devontas_world/Twitter: mobile.twitter.com/devontas_WorldIf you would like to make a donation to our podcast & network, click the link below:www.tyronzahicks.com/donateSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/THCNetwork)

Tony is off in Aruba in the sunshine. He claims to be working. This week Rick and Kathy talk about the steps you need to take when selling your property. They discuss a variety of topics including: Today is National red head day Kathy lives in a very loud house Don’t sign your purchase and sale agreement before consulting your attorney In Massachusetts, the offer is a binding contract What things should be included in the offer? Should I get a broker when selling my house? What happens during the purchase and sale phase? Your spouse will need to sign away his or her Homestead rights Do a title search very early in the process If you need a Title V certificate, get that done early Get your smoke detector certificates Bill for municipal services like town water need to be paid up to date For condos, you need a certificate that shows you have no outstanding common fees Make sure you have a moving company lined up On the day of closing, the property needs to be in “broom clean” condition You need to make sure the closing disclosure is accurate What are tax stamps and how much do I need to pay? If you need a Real Estate Team that can walk you through the purchase of your new home start with Carter Law offices. All that and much more on this week’s episode of Real Estate House Party recorded this and every week at The Studio 21 Podcast Café and hosted on The United Podcast Network!

Dr. Priscilla Magrath and Lisa Balland discuss maternal and child health, particularly looking at the case of Indonesia while discussing the influence of policy on birthing practices, the notion of the “right to health,” and the limitation of using statistics to describe health status. Some discussion refers to Magrath’s article, “Right to Health: A Buzzword in Health Policy in Indonesia” recently published in Medical Anthropology. Priscilla Magrath, PhD, is a Medical Anthropologist that specializes in global health policy and practice. Recent work in Indonesia has examined how global health policies are interpreted and implemented in the areas of maternal health. Lisa Balland is a graduate student at the Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health (MEZCOPH), studying global Family and Child Health. She currently works with El Rio Health's Reproductive Health Access Project (RHAP), which centers young people in bringing sexual health access and rights to Tucson teens, as well as works as a research assistant for the Title V project at MEZCOPH.

Mark Ludwig from the Americans for Equal Shared Parenting sits down with Duane to talk about his organizations efforts to bring the presumption of shared parenting to all 50 states and effect changes to Title IV-D. Mark has spent the last year meeting with state and federal legislatures as well as the executive branch to bring awareness to this problem. CORRECTION - I incorrectly stated Title V where I should have stated Title IV-D Show Sponsor This episode was sponsored by Hypnosis Downloads - you can find out more and support the Podcast by visiting http://www.dadsurvivingdivorce.com/hypnosis Links to find out more!l Website - Americans For Equal Shared Parenting Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/afesp5050/ SSA Website on Title IV-D, Section 455 (Payments to States) - [https://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title04/0455.htm] [https://nationalparentsorganization.org/blog/20547-child-support-enforcement-and-the-social-security-act-title-iv-d-program] What is Title IV-D funding? From Mark Ludwig at AFESP: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22b3YeU6nnQ] How much states are profiting off Title IV-D money: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOPG2NK3MY8] An attorney in Illinois admits Title IV-D money is for the states, NOT for kids: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3w1jMUErpA] A very brief overview of how Title IV-D works: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVPPfMSPGAA&t=1s] Introduction of Mark Ludwig 00:34 - Mark Ludwig from the Americans For Equal Shared Parenting joins the podcast today to discuss what he is doing to change the minds of federal and state legislatures in regards to child custody and the presumption of 50/50 share custody as the default when going into the family court system. Mark started the AFESP organization a bit over a year ago. He has leveraged his 30 years of political and legislative experience to champion this cause. He has two main goals. The first being the push for legislation for 50/50 shared custody right from the beginning. His second goal is to educate, enable, and empower other people to work this at their levels both state and federal. How the presumption of 50/50 custody help? 05:37 - Duane and Mark discuss the nuances of how the family court system is abused and how changing the presumption of custody to “shared” 50/50 right from the start could positive effect the outcome and minimize high conflict divorces and custody battles. The current system encourages both parties to use the kids as pawns for money and control. The system has riled up both parties and has made things worse and created abuse where none previously existed. Mark also talks about the parents he’s talked to who have been able to make 50/50 work positively for them even though they were encouraged to fight for more custody from their attorney. How is the message received by politicians 10:16 - Mark talks about some of his meetings with high level members of the executive branch to include the Office of the Vice President of the United States Mike Pence. The key is understanding how to reach people and now the process works. Mark also talks about the amount of people who are trying to connect with their elected officials and the care they must take to ensure they are meeting with vetting people. He also discusses the importance of building support on both sides of the isle. Mark indicated that he has created some support on the democrat side with La Shawn Ford from Chicago. It is very important for advocates for family court reform to reach the highest levels of each party as possible to effect change. Parental Alienation and how people do not understand 17:57 - Duane and Mark talk about the nuances and complexity of people truly understanding this topic when they haven’t been through it. Most people just can not comprehend how bitter and nasty a person can be in a high conflict toxic divorce. Oftentimes when a person brings up parental alienation the person listen assumes you are being “nit picky” and blowing things out of proportions. Mark also talks about the effects of parental alienation and how it impacts young children. The State Level Success Stories 28:31 - Mark talks about the successes they have had in Kentucky and the progress made in Missouri. Kentucky was the first state to pass a presumptive 50/50 custody but an amendment was added on that the law doesn’t count if they are any current or pending orders of protection which still opens the door for procedural abuse by false allegations. Even with this concern Mark indicated this is a good bill for 80% of people and it shows the family court judges what their direction is. There currently are dual bills in the Missouri state legislature which a good chance for success this year. South Carolina is also working on a bill and it has been submitted to legislative research. Abuse of Domestic Violence Allegations in Family Court 32:47 - Mark and Duane discuss the issue of false domestic violence claims in family court. Oftentimes accusations are made after the divorce has been filed. Duane talks about a conversation he had with his own brother who is Deputy Sheriff who told him their procedures for abuse allegations is to take someone to jail. This means the system can be abused and then an individual is fighting both a criminal and family court issue simultaneously. How is 2019 looking for AFESP 36:13 - Mark talks about their plans for 2019 and what they hope to accomplish. He feels as they are gaining ground and there has been a shift from public protest at local court house toward making fundamental legislative changes. He also discusses the problem of the “angry dad” image and how it undermines the argument for change. The message can be corrupted and/or lost when individuals and small groups approach this the wrong way. Mark has said in some states even mentioning “Father’s Rights” will shut down any discussion because the image is so toxic. They also discuss the phenomenon of more women becoming targets of the family court system where they are paying support and loosing custody and how that is opening people’s eyes that this is truly a gender neutral issue. Mark also talks of the importance of a collation of fathers and mothers to effect change on this issue and to counter the divide that the opposition to shared parenting is trying to create. Title IV-D Reform and how it effects family court and enforcement 42:11 - Mark talks about the two main problems within the family court system. The first is the amount of money that can be made in family law. The adversarial nature of “winner take all” in family court encourages lawyers and clients to fight everything they possibly can. This generates and enormous amount of billable hours for the attorneys. The big problem, according to Mark, is the federal incentive money. The program start with a good intent back in the 1970s in a time where most, if not all, mothers did not work and were stay-at-home. This system recognized a problem where these mothers ended up on welfare because the fathers, of that time, oftentimes would not pay to support their children. In 1997/8 the system was changed and everyone was included in the system instead of just the people who were on welfare. The program provides $0.66 on the dollar for enforcement of child support collection. Mark clarifies that this isn’t on the exact amount collect but instead is on the money spent to enforce the collection. The result is these state programs have a vested interest in increasing collection and staff to support it. Mark also unravels the other issue where states get access to another federal pot of funding of $5.5B depending on the amount of money they do collect from parents. This creates an issue where the counties/states will focus on easy targets such as middle class families where they have consistent employment and higher child support amounts so they can show a higher collection success rate. End of show wrap-up 51:21 - Duane and Mark close out the podcast and provide links for where people can learn more about Americans For Equal Shared Parenting and other ways they can have use their own unique skill sets to effect change. Mark also talks about big convention in June 28th and 29th in Washington D.C. where he is pulling together state leaders from all across the country to help them implement change throughout the states.

Sharon discusses private septic systems with special guest Lisa Cullity the Town of Pembroke Board of Health Agent and the importance of having a Title V inspection when you are planning to sell your home.  Podcast & Live Radio Show on WATD 95.9 McNamara Broker Team Boston Connect Real Estate Sharon McNamara | Mary Baker | Melissa Wallace  Facebook Live every Tuesday at 6:15 pm @ facebook.com/McNamaraBrokerTeam Follow our team on Instagram @McNamaraBrokerTeam

This week Rick, Kathy and Tony are by themselves again. They talk about trends in real estate and a whole lot more. Real Estate Attorney Rick Carter, Para Legal Extraordinaire Kathy Holtshouser and Comedian Tony V discuss a variety of topics including: What’s up with this marriage thing? Kathy talks about her heating woes Tony talks electric problems Real Estate can be very funny What did Tony learn about real estate this week? Buyers are pushing back Should houses have an ATM in them? Is Tony like Charles Manson? What is the order of events for a typical real estate closing? You should get your smoke certificate early It’s worth doing title searches early Take care of Title V early to avoid problems Is Siri on Kathy’s side? If you need a Real Estate Team that can walk you through the purchase of your new home start with Carter Law offices. All that and much more on this week’s episode of Real Estate House Party recorded this and every week at The Studio 21 Podcast Café and hosted on The United Podcast Network!

In this edition of the SpheraNOW podcast, Mark Harbin, Sphera’s senior consultant for refrigerant compliance software and services, sheds light on the rigors and complexities facing companies in the wake of wide-ranging environmental regulatory changes. To put things in perspective, Harbin explains the evolution of refrigerant regulations and what the current regulatory changes mean for refrigerant and environmental managers. The landscape for refrigerant regulations has changed dramatically with the rollout of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s expanded regulations for documentation, recordkeeping and reporting. In the wake of these changes, facility managers and owners must revisit their methods and procedures for refrigerant-related work, including appliance disposals and refrigerant disposals, which adds a new layer of recordkeeping that companies must now manage. Organizations must be able to prove that their refrigerants are being handled in the right way. In this episode, you’ll also learn about common misconceptions about refrigerant compliance management and get recommendations on establishing a robust refrigerant compliance program. Simply put, refrigerant compliance has become a lot more complicated. Robust software solutions and a change in organizational behavior are now, more than ever, key components of a successful refrigerant compliance management program. Listen to the podcast.

On September 20, 2017, Hurricane Maria wiped out the electricity on the entire island of Puerto Rico. Six months later the lights are still off for too many people. In this episode, by hearing highlights of Congressional testimony from Puerto Rico's government officials and through stories of Jen's recent trip to the island, learn the good news and the bad news about life right now on Puerto Rico. Please Support Congressional Dish Click here to contribute using credit card, debit card, PayPal, or Bitcoin Click here to support Congressional Dish for each episode via Patreon Mail Contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North #4576 Crestview, FL 32536 Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes CD028: Crisis in Puerto Rico CD147: Controlling Puerto Rico Additional Recommended Listening The David Pakman Show Additional Reading Article: Needs go unmet 6 months after Maria hit Puerto Rico by Danica Coto, AP News, March 20, 2018. Article: Six months after Maria, the hardest hit city in Puerto Rico is still being ignored by AJ Vicens, Grist, March 20, 2018. Article: The battle for paradise by Naomi Klein, The Intercept, March 20, 2018. Report: U.S. executive appointed head Puerto Rico power company by Dalissa Zeda Sanchez, Caribbean Business, March 20, 2018. Report: Puerto Rico legislature sends education reform to governor's desk for enactment by Genesis Ibarra, Caribbean Business, March 20, 2018. Report: Gov presents Puerto Rio justice, agriculture reorganization plans, Caribbean Business, March 20, 2018. Article: 'We are the forgotten people': It's been almost six months since Hurricane Maria, and Puerto Ricans are still dying by John D. Stutter, CNN, March 15, 2018. Article: Puerto Rico reforms could boost GNP by 1.5 percent: Jaresko by Daniel Bases, Reuters, March 14, 2018. Press Release: Committee seeks answers on corruption at Puerto Rico Power Utility, House Committee on Natural Resources, March 12, 2018. Report: Recycled proposals in Puerto Rico's fiscal plans by Luis J. Valentin Ortiz, City & State New York, March 11, 2018. Article: 'This city has been ignored': Yabucoa, ground zero for Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico, still reeling by Rick Jervis, USA Today, March 11, 2018. Article: The role of private investment in rebuilding Puerto Rico by The Brian Lehrer Show, WNYC, March 8, 2018. Opinion: Puerto Rico? Guinea pig for water privatization by Britt Fremstad, Public Citizen, 2018. Article: Why Puerto Rico is pushing to privatize its schools by Mimi Kirk, City Lab, February 27, 2018. Report: Citigroup drove Puerto Rico into debt. Now it will profit from privatization on the island by Kate Aronoff, The Intercept, February 21, 2018. Report: Hedge fund-driven austerity could come back to bite the hedge funds driving it in Puerto Rico by Kate Aronoff, The Intercept, February 3, 2018. Article: Privatization won't fix Puerto Rico's broken power utility by Lara Merling, NACLA, February 1, 2018. Press Release: Bishop statement on Puerto Rico fiscal plans, PREPA privatization by House Committee on Natural Resources, January 25, 2018. Report: Puerto Rico governor seizes opportunity created by Hurricane Maria, plans to privatize electric power by Kate Aronoff, The Intercept, January 24, 2018. Article: The peril of privatizing PREPA by Vann R. Newkirk II, The Atlantic, January 24, 2018. Report: Puerto Rico to sell off crippled power utility PREPA by Daniel Bases, Reuters, January 22, 2018. Report: Puerto Rico utility workers charge that federal government is hoarding reconstruction supplies by Kate Aronoff, The Intercept, January 16, 2018. Article: PREPA "Warehouse 5" was no secret by Alex Figueroa Cancel, El Nuevo Dia, January 16, 2018. Article: Energy answers marchincinerator: the struggle continues by Leysa Caro Gonzelez, El Nuevo Dia, January 16, 2018. Report: Armed federal agents enter warehouse in Puerto Rico to sieze hoarded electric equipment by Kate Aronof, The Intercept, January 10, 2018. Article: Puerto Rico said 64 people died in Hurricane Maria. A new report puts the death toll over 1,000 by Aric Jenkins, Time.com, December 19, 2017. Report: Nearly 1,000 more people died in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria by Center for Investigative Journalism, Latino USA, December 7, 2017. Law Firm Post: Did you lose money investing in Puerto Rico bonds with Morgan Stanley financial advisor Robert Dennison? by Erez Law Firm, December 6, 2017. Article: The lineman got $63 an hour. The utility was billed at $319 an hour. by Frances Robles, The New York Times, November 12, 2017. Article: Ex-Morgan Stanley broker at center of Puerto Rico bond disputes by Bruce Kelly, Investment News, September 28, 2017. Report: Maps: Hurricane Maria's path across Puerto Rico by Sarah Almukhtar, Matthew Bloch, Ford Fessenden and Jugal K. Patel, The New York Times, September 26, 2017. Article: Incinerating the future: Austerity crisis threatens wetlands and economic opportunity for Puerto Rico by Adriana Gonzelez, The Planet: Sierra Club, August 14, 2017. Report: Puerto Rico's Fiscal Control Board spent $31 million in fiscal year 2017 by Julio Ricardo Varela, Latino USA, August 2, 2017. Report: SEC probes Barclays, Morgan Stanley bankers over Puerto Rico by Martin Z. Braun, Bloomberg, June 28, 2017. Report: Puerto Rico Senate approves bill to eliminate debt audit commission by Cindy Burgos Alvarado, Caribbean Business, April 18, 2017. Article: A glimpse of Natalie Jaresko by Jose A. Delgado Robles, El Nuevo Dia, March 29, 2017. Article: Ukraine must fully implement IMF Program, says former finance minister by Mitch Hulse, Atlantic Council, April 14, 2016. Article: How free electricity helped dig $9 billion hole in Puerto Rico by Mary Williams Walsh, The New York Times, February 1, 2016. Article: Puerto Rico - a way forward by Anne O. Krueger, Ranjit Teja, and Andrew Wolfe, GDB.PR.GOV, June 29, 2015. Article: Meet the woman overhauling Ukraine's economy - and born and raised in the suburbs of Chicago by James Ellingworth, Business Insider, March 1,2015. Article: Proposed Arecibo waste-to-energy plan gets EPA nod by Michelle Kantrow, Energy Answers, May 10, 2012. Research Paper: Does private management lead to improvement of water services? Lessons learned from the experiences of Bolivia and Puerto Rico by Susana Maria Cortina de Cardenas, University of Iowa Research Online, Spring 2011. Resources DESMOG Blog Info: Edison Electric Institute Energy Answers Resources: Puerto Rico Resource Recovery and Renewable Energy Project International Monetary Fund Bio: Anne O. Krueger International Monetary Fund Blog: Ranjit Teja LinkedIn Profile: Noel Zamot, Federal Oversight Management Board USDA Report: Arecibo Waste to Energy Generation and Resource Recovery Facility Arecibo, Puerto Rico Sound Clip Sources Hearing: Hurricane Recovery Efforts in Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands, Power Utility Officials; Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, November 14, 2017. Witnesses: - Natalie Jaresko - Executive Director of the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico - Jose Roman Morales - Associate Commission and Interim President of the Puerto Rico Energy Commission - Ricardo Ramos - Executive Director of Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority - Julio Rhymer - Executive Director of the US Virgin Islands Water and Power Authority 53:40 Ricardo Ramos: Many of the fallen poles fell because of the additional weight of infrastructure that originally was not supposed to be there, so the grid itself is old—are new. Design standards account for an amount of additional infrastructure for communications and other, but many of the poles were—they had communications because some local law of Puerto Rico permitted the common right-of-way usage, so we had to allow telecom companies to put the telecommunications cables there—but the pole itself not necessarily was designed to those standards. 59:10 Natalie Jaresko: So, as you know, Madame Chairman, the board took an action and filed in the Title III court to name a chief transformation officer. The court ruled yesterday against us in that action, although we have not yet seen the written judgment, so I can’t comment on it in detail. Hearing: Hurricane Recovery Efforts in Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands, Governors; Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Witnesses: - Donald Jackson - Deputy Commanding General of the US Army Corps of Engineers, Civil and Emergency Operations - Kenneth Mapp - Governor of US Virgin Islands - Jose Roman Morales - Associate Commission and Interim President of the Puerto Rico Energy Commission - Ricardo “Ricky” Rossello - Governor of Puerto Rico - Bruce Walker - Assistant Secretary of the Department of Energy, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability 38:20 Assistant Secretary of the Department of Energy Bruce Walker: PREPA, with the limited crews that it had—I will point to this map over here—made an early decision to have to tie the southern portion, where the generation is, to the northern portion, where the load is. And in doing so, they made a key decision to construct the 230 kV line from the south, bringing it up to the San Juan area, the Bayamon substation. On the map, you can see here, from down here, wrapping up through here, that that align is going to appear all the way over to here. What was important about that was that one decision and the efforts made by PREPA, with limited staffing, enabled the power to be distributed to where the load was and in conjunction with the other big decision, which is the next slide, Jennifer, the Army Corps, working with PREPA, installed two 25-megawatt generators at the Palo Seco generation plant, and that, in conjunction with the rebuild of the 230 line, enabled power to be distributed to the northern portion to start picking up commercial and residential customers. Those two efforts were monumental, given the facts and circumstances. The installation of this generator was, with the letting of the contract and the install—and I was at Palo Seco when this was being put in—and the work that had to be done was really incredible—we had fantastic support from PREPA in coordinating it particularly with the re-laying and the coordination with the Army Corps. 1:10:00 Governor Ricardo Rossello: We have several flaws in terms of the design, aside from having antiquated power plants. Most of our generation was done in the south, yet most of the people and most of the consumption is done in the north, so you lose about 12 to 15% in the transmission, going northward. It is time, it is an opportunity, to rethink that, where do we have that generation and make it better? Piggybacking on Senator Cassidy’s comments, I think it is an opportunity also to leapfrog in renewables. I’ve envisioned us leapfrogging to 25% renewables in Puerto Rico and recognizing that there are some mitigation strategies that we need to put in place. That is why we have worked with the PREPA governing board to have a group of thought leaders that can actually help us in the design, looking forward, and specifically looking where this could happen. Last-mile events in Puerto Rico are very important. It’s important to consider the terrain. Puerto Rico’s not flat; it’s got a mountainous region. And so we will be very aggressively pursuing that we get to 90, 95% of energy consumption and energy generation, but that last mile always takes more time because there are sort of remote areas of the island. This is an opportunity to make microgrids in Puerto Rico so that they can be sustained in different areas. And, lastly, adding to this whole component of renewables, I think it is an opportunity to look at this from a bottom-up-and-a-top-down approach. With the collaboration of FEMA, we were able to, for the first time in the STEP program, allow that either a power plant generator be added to the house or a renewable battery-pack solar combo be added to those homes in the STEP program. Now, we expect that there will be about 80,000 homes that will be introduced in the STEP program. Think about what that means if half of them decide to go with the renewable battery-pack route. It means that now you have the starting conditions to actually think about things like a virtual power plant in Puerto Rico, where you can have smart distribution of the energy; and where some days it might be cloudy in some areas in Puerto Rico—it’ll be sunny, certainly, in others as well—and that energy can be distributed alongside, of course, a complement of utility-size and industrial-size generation, which I envision, Senator, should start transitioning from petroleum-based generation, which is costly and, of course, more harmful, to liquid-gas and so forth generation. So, those are, in a nutshell, what we envision the sort of future grid of Puerto Rico looking like. 1:34:15 Senator Catherine Cortez Masto: It’s my understanding under the Stafford Act, it’s Section 406(e), that limits the use of federal disaster-relief funds for repairing, restoring, reconstructing, or replacing a public facility or private nonprofit facility on the basis of the design of the facility as the facility existed immediately before the major disaster. Now, my understanding of that, then, is that all of the talk that I’ve heard today, which is important talk about new infrastructure—burying lines, looking at how we add renewable capacity—that is something that is not going to be addressed through the funding, through the relief, that comes from the federal government. Is that correct? And I guess I’m asking Mr. Walker and General Jackson, is that your understanding? Assistant Secretary of the Department of Energy Bruce Walker: That is my understanding. As I mentioned earlier, we’re doing emergency restoration work now. A number of the things that have been mentioned here, if the Congress approves additional appropriations, those would be opportunities that we could further, you know, build into— Masto: And that’s—are you asking today, then? That’s what you’re asking Congress today, additional appropriations outside of the Stafford Act be able to set up new infrastructure and do just what we’ve heard today, because we know another hurricane’s going to come through, or some other disaster. I think it’s just the way the climate is today. Is that the ask today from the governors? Governor Ricardo Rossello: To amend that, could you repeat the question, Senator? Masto: Sure. So, the Stafford Act limits the amount of— Rossello: Yeah. Masto: —money that you’re getting from the federal government for disaster relief to repair and reconstruct. Rossello: Yeah. Masto: It is not for new construction or new types of renewable energy or burying lines. So, are you coming today for additional funds outside of the Stafford Act, outside of disaster relief? Is that what I’m hearing today? Governor Kenneth Mapp: Yes. Yes, because under Stafford, if a system connected to the power generation isn’t damaged, it can’t be touched. If it’s cost effective, it can be mitigated, but the whole power system is all connected, and so if we want to change to more-efficient renewables—wind, solar—if the generation system hasn’t been damaged, then we can have an exclusion. So we will need changes in the language to permit that. Rossello: Yes. We are, we recognize what the limitations of FEMA funding are within this, so we’re asking for additional funding so that we can get that flexibility as well and actually rebuild better. I mean, again, you can discuss whether it’s a good idea or not on the context of the merit of the energy and the structure, but it is really just a bad idea to rebuild a system that is frail over again, spend good taxpayer money in that, because you’re going to have to do it once over again. 1:44:34 Senator Mazie Hirono (HI): Based on your estimates, how much are you asking Congress to fund in terms of the kind of modernization, resilience, etc. that you would like to see in Puerto Rico? Governor Ricardo Rossello: Yeah. It’s about $17 billion in damage estimates. Hirono: One year? Rossello: No. For the bulk of the process. Hirono: Seventeen billion dollars? Rossello: Yes, that’s right. Hirono: And is it your—well, I know that you hope that Congress will authorize that, and do you think that authorization or the funding to occur in one year, or is it over a period of time? Rossello: No, it would be over a period of time, of course. 1:53:28 Senator Bernie Sanders (VT): Puerto Rico is struggling with an unsustainable 75-billion-dollar debt and $49 billion in pension obligations. More than one-third of that debt is held by Wall Street vulture funds that are getting interest rates of up to 34% on tax-exempt bonds they purchased for as little as 29 cents on the dollar. Is that correct, Governor? Governor Ricardo Rossello: Yep. Hearing: Puerto Rico Recovery Challenges; House Natural Resources Committee, November 7, 2017. Witnesses: - Natalie Jaresko - Executive Director of the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico - Angel Perez Otero - Mayor of Guanynabo, Puerto Rico - Noel Zamot - Revitalization Coordinator of the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico 22:30 Natalie Jaresko: As the committee is aware, the board has recently named Noel Zamot as chief transformation officer of PREPA, with all the powers of a CEO and reporting to the board. We believe this is absolutely essential both to restoring service as soon as possible and to creating a sustainable, efficient, resilient, and fiscally accountable power system for the island. While the board is confident, the PROMESA, coupled with fundamental aspects of bankruptcy law, gives us the power and responsibility to do as we have done. Some parties are vigorously contesting our authority in proceedings before the Title III judge. To avoid uncertainty and lengthy delays and litigation, congressional reaffirmation of our exercise of our authority is welcome. 23:08 Natalie Jaresko: We have also implemented a contract-review policy as a tool to ensure transparency throughout the government, for the benefit of the people of Puerto Rico and all stakeholders. The policy applies to all contracts in which the commonwealth or any covered instrumentality is a counterparty, including those with the federal government, state governments, and private parties. The policy provides that all contracts of 10 million or more must be submitted to the board for its approval before execution. In addition, the board retains the authority to adopt other methods, such as random sampling of contracts below that 10-million-dollar threshold, to assure that they promote market competition and are not inconsistent with the approved fiscal plan. 26:48 Noel Zamot: I will retain key leaders on my staff to enable speed and effectiveness in our decision-making. I’d like to highlight two key roles. The chief operations officer will be responsible for day-to-day operations of the utility. This will initially be a senior leader from within PREPA but will be augmented by an industry executive identified in conjunction with input that we are receiving from the Edison Electric Institute. 27:41 Noel Zamot: I’ve also identified key executives to serve on a board of advisors. These are CEOs from public and private utilities who have generously volunteered to bring their considerable expertise to help with this task. I will also rely on an internal group of world-class experts from multi-national utilities, the energy sector, academia, and more. 28:22 Noel Zamot: Puerto Rico’s energy strategy calls for 50% renewables by 2040, with a balance of natural and LP gas mix; regional grids, with generation close to demand; physical hardening and control systems to provide resiliency; and widespread distributed generation, all wrapped by an empowered and accountable energy regulator. PROMESA is clear in its guidance to attract private capital to achieve this end state. We need to do just that, not only for generation but to attract innovative capital solutions from the private sector for transmission and distribution as well. 43:42 Representative Raul Grijalva (AZ): Do you or the board hold a view that, relative to Title V, waiving or eliminating additional federal environmental safeguards like NEPA or regulations will accelerate the recovery in Puerto Rico? Ms. Jaresko, you and then Mr. Zamot, if you don’t mind, as well, answering the question. Natalie Jaresko: I certainly believe that further expeditious permitting is a requirement. I’m not an expert on the individual sets of permitting, but I want to underline that it’s both federal, commonwealth, and municipality permitting at all levels. It needs to be expedited for any private-sector investment to become a quick recovery. Grijalva: Okay. Mr. Zamot, do you think that’s needed? Noel Zamot: Thank you, sir. My view is that economic growth and fast-tracking projects is not inconsistent with being good stewards of the environment, and we have a very robust process within Title V and within the working group that we have set with the government to ensure that we, the residents of Puerto Rico, are very respectful of that. Grijalva: If I may, sir, let me just follow up with you. You cite the proposed trash incinerators an example of a project Title V that could come to fruition, but I see an example of why Title V, in this instance, doesn’t work. Public comments about the project are overwhelming in opposition. It’s opposed by both mayors’ groups, representing all the mayors in the island. It was stalled in part because it couldn’t get a permit to drain 2.1 million gallons from a protected wetland. Farmers and residents concerned about the effects on their health, that it could undermine recycling programs that are in place. It flooded during the hurricane. We have a before-and-after situation, that’s up on the screen. It flooded during and released some of the hundreds of tons of toxic ash that could release, in the future, toxic ash into surrounding neighborhoods. And it requires a major loan from the federal government to go forward even though it’s fully privately funded for 67 megawatts of power. Is that what we can expect in terms of Title V critical projects? Zamot: Sir, there are many voices that, obviously, in a democratic process, voice their concern with such a project, but there are equal number of voices on the positive side. We don’t look at this project in Arecibo necessarily as even a power project. It is really a waste-management project. Puerto Rico has a critical, essentially a crisis, in waste management and landfill use that has been identified by the EPA, and that is why the EPA has actually been supportive of this program. 47:30 Representative Doug Lamborn (CO): Is it safe in assuming that pretty much 100% of the electricity generated in Puerto Rico today is from burning fuel oil? Noel Zamot: Sir, I would say it’s 96%. There is approximately 4% that is renewables in Puerto Rico right now. Lamborn: And as we know, fuel oil is very expensive and very dirty. Zamot: That is correct, sir. Lamborn: So, I like the plan. I think you said by 2040, 50% renewables, 50% natural gas through liquefied form. Zamot: That’s correct. Lamborn: Have you identified investors who are willing to make that huge investment in a LNG terminal? Zamot: Sir, there are a number of investors that are actually very bullish on Puerto Rico’s long-term prospects, and we and the board and specifically in my role as revitalization coordinator, we receive a lot of proposals, a lot of questions about how people can bring innovative capital solutions using private capital to bear, to benefit, the reconstruction of the grid and the people of Puerto Rico. Lamborn: Well, I would really urge you to keep pushing in that direction because I don’t think nuclear or coal is going to be a solution. Renewables are great, but to provide that much electricity in that short of time is unrealistic. So I welcome the discussion about LNG. 50:30 Representative Doug Lamborn (CO): And the last thing I want to ask you about is that 800-million-dollar project, and the ranking member referred to it: burning waste to create electricity. Is my understanding that that would be privately funded and would not need government subsidies of any kind? Noel Zamot: That is correct, sir. It’s entirely privately funded. Some of the capital structure includes some federal loans, but there is no money from Puerto Rico, and it relies on relatively new technology that is respectful of emissions. 51:53 Representative Grace Napolitano (CA): The incinerator would be built in an area in Arecibo previously contaminated by a battery recycling plant, and it was flooded during the hurricanes. Has the area been tested for lead, arsenic, and other contaminants? Noel Zamot: Ma’am, I do not have the specific details on what work has been accomplished to date, but we do know that the company that is planning that work has done extensive mitigation pre-work— Napolitano: How long has the plant been there, that it hasn’t been tested? Zamot: Ma’am, I do not have that information. Napolitano: Would you mind sending the answers to this committee— Zamot: Yes, ma’am. Napolitano: —so we can understand that. And how does the Energy Answers Arecibo, LLC plan to prevent their landfill from being flooded by future hurricanes? Zamot: Ma’am, could you repeat the question? Napolitano: How do you prevent landfill from being flooded by hurricanes? Zamot: That is an engineering question that I’m not prepared to answer right now. I would imagine that that has been looked at in the permitting that the company has received to date. Napolitano: Okay. When and—how and when does the company plan to bury the toxic ashes generated by the incinerator? Zamot: That is being currently discussed with the current Puerto Rico administration. Napolitano: Is, let’s see, how many Puerto Rico municipalities refuse to send trash to the plant incinerator? Zamot: I think the answer to that is many, because that represents a threat to current waste management in Puerto Rico, which the EPA has identified as a critical need to address. 1:19:36 Representative Steve Pearce (NM): Now, one of the problems that I see, just as a former business owner taking a look at it, one of the reasons that residents had to pay such a high rate is that certain entities didn’t have to pay for the electrical power. One of those would be the hotels. So are they still exempt from paying their power? Natalie Jaresko: Each of the economic development plans that Puerto Rico implemented over the years had individual tax agreements— Pearce: I’m just asking about the hotels. Jaresko: —between businesses and energy. Pearce: Are they still exempt? Are they not exempt? Jaresko: Some of them are, yes. Pearce: Some of them are exempt. Jaresko: That’s correct. Pearce: Now, also, cities were also exempt, and so city governments were exempt prior, according to what I’ve read. Noel Zamot: That’s correct, sir. 1:38:50 Natalie Jaresko: The board certainly considers privatization as one of the options going forward. There’s a question that remains open to see whether it’s privatization of the entire power sector, meaning generation transmission and distribution or some select part, or whether it just means bringing in private sector to compete and bring down the cost and bring up the efficiency of electricity. We’re looking at all of those as we define this fiscal plan for PREPA. 1:49:50 Representative Raul Labrador (ID): You stated that prior to the hurricane that the board possessed the authority to execute its mission and deliver on the underlying mandate Congress set with PROMESA, but with the devastation, you allude that those tools may be inadequate. So please tell us why does the board currently have—does the board currently have the tools necessary to facilitate efficient and effective recovery? Natalie Jaresko: I will try to be clear. I believe the board has the tools, that PROMESA gives us the tools. That said, when there are disagreements, the use of those tools ends up in costly and time-consuming litigation. Today more than ever that time and that cost is not helping Puerto Rico, so we asked for clarity of the tools that we have—whether it is in the appointment of a CTO through Title III, whether it is the implementation of our contract-policy review, or whether or not it is the implementation of the fiscal plans in full when certified. Labrador: So, what else do you need to be successful? Is there anything else that we need to give you to be successful? Jaresko: I think we would appreciate a legislative affirmation of those and/or conditioning of appropriations on those powers as you see fit. 2:11:11 Representative Garret Graves (LA): The governor recently proposed a law to address emergencies and disasters. Part of that law would allow, basically, eliminating or waiving sales tax in Puerto Rico. Are you aware—is that proposal on your radar screen? Were you consulted? Natalie Jaresko: No, we were not consulted. And I am aware that there has been a problem because of the lack of electricity and the collections of the sales-and-use tax. However, as electricity comes back, the collection process should also return. Graves: So you were not consulted. You were not aware on the front end. If ultimately the governor certifies that this is in compliance with the fiscal plan and you determine otherwise, what happens then? How does that play out? Jaresko: Well, I would hope that they would consult prior to putting that policy in place because it is something that can have a direct adverse fiscal effect, and it could be not in compliance with the fiscal plan. If they certify that it is, as you described, then we have a situation which could potentially, again, lead to difference of opinion in terms of what our role is in PROMESA. And it is very difficult for us, once it is certified by the government as being in compliance, if we disagree, to reverse that. Graves: I’m sorry. Say that last part again. Jaresko: If the government certifies that the executive order or law is in compliance with the fiscal plan, it is difficult for us to reverse that. Graves: Your hands are effectively tied. Do you think Congress should revisit that in terms of something that you believe causes economic harm or undermines the objectives of the fiscal plan but you don’t have the ability to actually help reset that? Jaresko: I think it should be very clear that the intent of PROMESA was for us to be able to stop things that were having an adverse effect on the fiscal plan, yes. 2:26:37 Representative Luis Gutierrez (IL): Arecibo incinerator, Mr. Zamot, I would hope you would talk to Secretary Vilsack because you seem to have a different perspective than he does, since the loan from the USDA is through the Rural Utilities Services. In other words, the money is not in order to do something with waste management; the money is to create energy. But you said to us earlier—and correct me if I’m wrong, if I misunderstood—that the purpose is one of for garbage, basically, disposal, and not for energy. How do you see it? Is it garbage disposal or energy? What is the primary purpose of it? Noel Zamot: Sir, the government of Puerto Rico has a letter out, and they consider that plan in Arecibo to be both a provider of energy— Gutierrez: But when you said primarily, you said primarily. Zamot: The plan at Arecibo, where about 2% of the aggregate electrical demand— Gutierrez: Okay. So primarily, I heard you—and we can go back to the record—you said that it was primarily; yet, they are asking for a loan between half a million and 750 million dollars. And let me just assure you and everybody here: Given the fact that the government of Puerto Rico already owes over $2 billion, unless Mrs. Jaresko’s going to use some of her skills to eliminate that debt, I don’t see how we’re going to do that. And in the last 25 seconds, because I want to focus on this issue with you, do you believe that the control board has such power that you do not have to take into consideration the concerns of the duly elected mayors of the cities that will be affected by the incinerator? Or do you feel you need to consult with them before you make a decision going forward? Zamot: Sir, in 9 seconds, the statute provides for a public comment period that in conclusion— Gutierrez: So, you don’t believe. You do believe that you’re supreme. You’re kind of a dictator over everything. 2:32:05 Resident Commissioner Jenniffer Gonzalez (PR): You say that the board has the power to name a chief transformation officer to take over the management of PREPA, and at the same time, I know the state government, state legislator, the governor is against that. And you filed a motion in the court to allow that to happen. Do you have the power or you don’t have the power to actually name the coordinator board? Natalie Jaresko: Thank you. We believe we do have that power, and that’s why we filed that petition in court. We believe we have that power under Title III as any representative of a debtor, and the board is named the representative of the debtor, in the law in PROMESA, to name a chief restructuring officer, a receiver, a chief transformation officer, as we call it. Gonzalez: So, sorry to interrupt you, but then you don’t need any change in the PROMESA law? You don’t need any power to make that happen, because that’s the question this committee is doing. What do you need in terms of helping the people of Puerto Rico to recover power? I think that’s the main question. If we were a state, we will not have you. If we were a state, we will have full funding in all federal programs, and now that’s a problem all territories got. Jaresko: The board believes that in appointing this CTO will help us move more quickly to restoration of power. That is the only reason the board took this position, and they took it at this time. 2:43:30 Representative Luis Gutierrez (IL): Mayor, thank you very much for being here with us. Could you tell us your annual salary? Mayor Angel Perez Otero: My? Gutierrez: Yes. *Otero: 96,000. Gutierrez: $96,000. Mr. Zamot? What’s your annual salary? Noel Zamot: That’s a matter of— Gutierrez: I’m sorry? Zamot: Sir, that’s a matter of public record. Gutierrez: How much is it? Zamot: I think it’s in the record, sir. Gutierrez: Just—can’t you tell us how much it is? You know how much you’re getting paid. Why are you so reluctant to give us—this is a committee. Just want to know how much you’re getting paid. The mayor was very forthcoming. Zamot: The board found a competition competitive compensation of $315,000. 2:55:30 Representative Luis Gutierrez (IL): So, I’ll ask Mrs. Jaresko—I didn’t get to ask you—what’s your annual salary? Natalie Jaresko: $625,000. Gutierrez: $625,000. Music Presented in This Episode Intro & Exit: Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito (found on Music Alley by mevio)  

So, you're a master mason now. Where do you go from here, and what's in it for you? Please join brothers Rhit Moore and Gabriel Jagush as they try and tackle the challenge of leaving the structured safety of going through the degrees, and getting lost in the world of the travelling man. Sure, the world is your oyster, but how do you take advantage of that? What's your motivation to keep going? How do you go through that process? Where do you find value in Lodge? How do you best use your Masonic career as a learning tool? How do you master yourself? We'll tackle all this and more on this episode. We'll also address some questions about last episode's content! The Fort Worth Lodge #148 Podcast would also like to urge you to donate blood if you are medically able. Your time and precious gift, can and DOES save lives. Thanks! Bookmarks: 00:00:35 - Host Introduction 00:01:10 - Legal Clarifications on Title V of Grand Lodge Law and the Grandmaster's Decisions 00:03:49 - Listener/Discussion Questions 00:04:13 - What are the rules for using a holy book other than the Bible for degree work? 00:06:59 - Can I be a Knight Templar if I am not a Christian? 00:09:09 - Rhit asks a question and Gabe begins rambling about the York Rite 00:13:54 - Main Episode Content: "I'm Finally a Master Mason - Now What?" 00:16:23 - Setting Goals: The Finite Playing Field vs the Infinite Playing Field 00:18:23 - Staying Motivated When You Get Lost in the Quarries 00:32:09 - The Process of Becoming a Better Man 00:41:24 - Finding Value in Your Lodge 00:53:12 - The Lodge as a Classroom 01:04:54 - Mastery of the Self 01:26:38 - Fraternal Quote of the Week 01:27:57 - Closing Thoughts Check us out: http://www.fortworth148.org/ https://www.facebook.com/fortworthlodge148/ info148@fortworth148.org #DareToBeSquare Contact the 64th District for events: 64th.org