19–006 

112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 112–322 

ENDANGERED SALMON AND FISHERIES PREDATION 

PREVENTION ACT 

DECEMBER 8, 2011.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 3069] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred 

the bill (H.R. 3069) to amend the Marine Mammal Protection Act 

of 1972 to reduce predation on endangered Columbia River salmon 

and other nonlisted species, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and 

recommend that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 3069 is to amend the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 to reduce predation on endangered Columbia 

River salmon and other nonlisted species. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) has resulted in 

California sea lions and certain populations of Steller sea lions 

being restored to historic levels. Steller sea lions are protected 

under the MMPA and the Endangered Species Act (ESA), because 

the Western and Eastern populations of this species are listed as 

endangered and threatened, respectively. In August 2010, the 

States of Washington, Oregon and Alaska filed two petitions with 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) 

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to de-list the Eastern 

population of Steller sea lions, and NMFS has announced it is reviewing those petitions for a decision by the end of 2011. 

The current MMPA allows for the lethal removal of marine mammals in narrow instances. Section 120, which was added in 1994 

amendments to the MMPA, allows States to apply to the Secretary 

of Commerce for an authorization to lethally take a nuisance 

pinniped, except those listed under the ESA, identified as having 

a ‘‘significant negative impact’’ on ESA listed salmon stocks. This 

section requires the Secretary of Commerce to review the impacts 

of California sea lions and Pacific harbor seals on West Coast salmon and recommend a course of action. The original report was completed and submitted to Congress. A second report with specific 

recommendations for MMPA amendments was submitted by NMFS 

in 1999. NMFS recommended that Congress amend MMPA to include site-specific management, including use of lethal and non-lethal removal of California sea lions and harbor seals. No changes 

have been made to this authority since then, and the result has 

been a huge increase in sea lions feasting on an increasing amount 

of ESA-listed and other fish species in the Columbia River and 

other tributaries. 

Increasing Numbers of Sea Lions in Columbia River. The Army 

Corps of Engineers reports that the daily average of pinnipeds 

(harbor seals, steller sea lions, and California sea lions) at Bonneville Dam on the Columbia River have steadily increased over the 

past several years. NMFS reported that in a typical May there are 

roughly 3,000 Pacific harbor seals, 1,000 Steller sea lions, and 800 

California sea lions resting in haul-out sites in the Columbia River 

estuary. All of these animals feed in the Columbia River and nearshore marine areas on a variety of prey, including squid, smelt, 

herring, flatfish, perch, pollock, hake, rockfish, sturgeon and salmon. 

Impacts on Endangered Species Act-listed Salmon and Steelhead 

and White Sturgeon. Estimates of annual predation on spawning 

ESA-listed salmon range between 4,000 to 6,000 per year since 

2008 for spring salmon. The actual number is likely much higher, 

since many fish kills by sea lions are out of sight of observers. In 

addition, a growing number of Steller sea lions at Bonneville have 

increased predation of both salmon and non-listed white sturgeon, 

which are important species for State and tribal fisheries. An expert with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife testified that 

data suggests that sea lions are consuming as much as 16 to 20 

percent of endangered Spring Chinook salmon, an alarming number. 

Ineffectiveness and Litigation on Current Section 120. Due to increasing numbers of sea lions preying on salmon runs, in 2006, the 

States of Oregon, Washington, and Idaho applied to NOAA for lethal take authority under Section 120 of the MMPA. NMFS established an 18-member Task Force, representing academic, scientific, 

environmental, tribal, federal and State agencies, that transmitted 

recommendations to NMFS on November 5, 2007. The Task Force’s 

recommendations ultimately resulted in partial approval of the 

States’ application by NMFS on March 18, 2008, to remove as 

many as 85 sea lions annually, with specific conditions. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

Shortly after, the Humane Society of the United States and other 

groups filed a federal lawsuit, alleging NMFS’ approval of the lethal removal of California sea lions violated the MMPA and the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In November 2008, the 

district court upheld NMFS’ approval of the lethal removal program and NMFS’ evaluation of impacts under NEPA. Plaintiffs appealed. During the period between 2008 and 2010, the States of 

Washington and Oregon and the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish 

Commission continued to conduct non-lethal and lethal removal activities, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers modified fish passage facilities at Bonneville Dam to exclude sea lions and conducted active hazing. Between 2008 and 2010, the States removed 

a total of 40 California sea lions. Ten were placed in public display 

facilities, four died while being examined and 26 were euthanized. 

On November 23, 2010, the Ninth Circuit instructed the district 

court to vacate NMFS’ Section 120 decision and remand the decision to NMFS ‘‘to afford the agency the opportunity either to articulate a reasoned explanation for its action or to adopt a different 

action with a reasoned explanation that supports it.’’ Humane Society of the U.S. v. Locke, 626 F.3d 1040, 1053 (2010). 

On May 13, 2011, NMFS, following recommendations by an independent Pinniped Task Force that the current non-lethal program 

was not effective in reducing impacts on salmon, announced it had 

properly responded to the federal district court’s concerns and that 

it was resuming permission for Washington and Oregon to lethally 

remove individual identifiable California sea lions that were observed eating salmon or steelhead in the area immediately below 

Bonneville Dam. The Humane Society filed a lawsuit to block implementation a week later, and the States announced they would 

suspend lethal removal pending further direction. On July 26, 

2011, NOAA announced it was withdrawing its authorization for 

Washington and Oregon to lethally remove California sea lions at 

Bonneville Dam, and instead accepted a new request, that the 

States, including the State of Idaho, submitted on August 22, 2011. 

On September 12, 2011, NOAA announced it was convening the 

Pinniped Task Force to review the application. 

H.R. 3069 amends Section 120 of the Marine Mammal Protection 

Act to allow the Secretary of Commerce to issue permits to eligible 

States and tribes to lethally remove sea lions on the Columbia 

River or its tributaries. This new Secretarial authority could be 

suspended at the discretion of the Secretary, after consultation 

with effected States and tribes five years after the date of enactment if the Secretary determines that the lethal take of predatory 

sea lions is no longer necessary to protect salmon stocks. NEPA 

would not apply to this subsection or to any permits issued during 

the five-year period beginning on the date of enactment of the Act. 

The Administration testified in support of a provision in an earlier version of the bill (H.R. 946) that attempted to streamline procedures necessary to take action on a growing wildlife problem, but 

did not officially endorse or oppose the bill. It raised concerns about 

H.R. 946, which have been addressed in H.R. 3069, including the 

removal of a provision that required identification of individual 

predatory sea lions, which NOAA noted would be impractical to 

apply; removal of a provision requiring a determination that nonlethal measures are ineffective, something that has already been 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

determined by the Pinniped Task Force; removal of the reporting 

requirement, which NOAA noted has been complied with; and 

streamlining of the specific, difficult to implement provisions of the 

permits. 

The Directors of the Washington and Oregon Departments of 

Fish and Wildlife, the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, and the Confederated Tribes of the Yakama Indian Nation 

submitted letters supporting H.R. 3069. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 3069 was introduced with broad bipartisan support on September 29, 2011, by Congressman Doc Hastings (R–WA), and cosponsored by Congressman Norm Dicks (D–WA), Congresswoman 

Jaime Herrera Beutler (R–WA), Congressman Kurt Schrader (D– 

OR), Congressman Greg Walden (R–OR) and Congressman Mike 

Simpson (R–ID). It followed several versions from two previous 

Congresses, including one introduced by former Congressman 

Brian Baird (D–WA) in 2007. H.R. 3069 was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and on October 5, 2011, the Full Natural Resources Committee met to consider the bill. Congresswoman 

Madeleine Bordallo (D–GU) offered amendment designated .002 to 

the bill; the amendment was not adopted by voice vote. Congresswoman Bordallo offered amendment designated .003 to the bill; the 

amendment was not adopted by voice vote. Congresswoman 

Bordallo offered amendment designated .010 to the bill; the amendment was not adopted by a rollcall vote of 17 to 26, as follows: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 5 here HR322.001
6 

Congressman Ed Markey (D–MA) offered amendment designated 

.001; the amendment was withdrawn. The bill was then ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by a bipartisan 

rollcall vote of 29 to 13, as follows: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 7 HR322.002
8 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Endangered Salmon and Fisheries 

Predation Prevention Act.’’ 

Section 2. Findings 

This section provides findings for the bill. 

Section 3. Taking of sea lions on the Columbia River and its tributaries to protect endangered and threatened species of salmon 

and other nonlisted fish species 

Section 3 authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue annual 

permits to ‘‘eligible entities’’ to lethally remove up to 10 sea lions 

per permit, no more than 1 percent of potential biological removal 

level per year. ‘‘Eligible entities’’ are defined to include the States 

of Washington, Oregon and Idaho, the Nez Perce Tribe, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, the Confederated 

Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, and the Columbia 

Intertribal Fish Commission. 

The section authorizes any eligible permitted entity to lethally 

remove sea lions, to delegate its authority to any other eligible entity, and to allow States and tribes to further coordinate these ongoing efforts. Further, the section waives the application of the National Environmental Policy Act with regard to the process or implementation of lethal permits. 

The section also allows the Secretary of Commerce to suspend 

permitting authority, after consultation with the affected States 

and tribes, if the Secretary believes lethal removal is no longer necessary to protect fish species. 

Section 4. Sense of Congress 

Section 4 includes the sense of the Congress that preventing predation by sea lions, recovery of listed salmon stocks, and preventing future listings of fish stocks in the Columbia River is a 

vital priority; permit holders exercising lethal removal authority 

should be trained in wildlife management; and the federal government should continue to fund lethal and nonlethal removal measures for preventing such predation. 

Section 5. Treaty rights of federally recognized Indian tribes 

Section 5 ensures that the bill’s provisions do not impact the 

treaty rights of any federally-recognized tribe. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on 

Natural Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the body of this report. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII 

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of 

the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a compariVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:49 Dec 09, 2011 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR322.XXX HR322

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
9 

son by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that rule provides 

that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Under clause 

3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 

section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for this bill from the 

Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

H.R. 3069—Endangered Salmon and Fisheries Predation Prevention Act 

H.R. 3069 would authorize the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to issue permits to allow states and 

tribal entities in the Northwest United States to kill (engage in the 

lethal taking of) California sea lions under certain circumstances. 

Each permit would allow up to 10 sea lions a year to be removed 

from healthy populations that threaten species of salmon and other 

fish that are listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act. 

Under current law, NOAA has the authority to issue permits to 

kill certain marine mammals that threaten other species. Based on 

information provided by the agency, CB0 estimates that providing 

NOAA with the authority to issue such permits for California sea 

lions would have a negligible impact on the federal budget. Enacting H.R. 3069 would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

H.R. 3069 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jeff LaFaye. The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

2. Section 308(a) of Congressional Budget Act. As required by 

clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, 

this bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or 

tax expenditures. Under current law, NOAA has the authority to 

issue permits to kill certain marine mammals that threaten other 

species. Based on information provided by the agency, CBO estimates that providing NOAA with the authority to issue permits for 

California sea lions would have a negligible impact on the federal 

budget. 

3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 

clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or objective 

of this bill is to amend the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 

to reduce predation on endangered Columbia River salmon and 

other nonlisted species. 

EARMARK STATEMENT

This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined under clause 9(e), 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
10 

9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4 

This bill contains no unfunded mandates. 

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT OF 1972 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE I—CONSERVATION AND PROTECTION OF MARINE 

MAMMALS 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 120. PACIFIC COAST TASK FORCE; GULF OF MAINE. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

ø(f) CALIFORNIA SEA LIONS AND PACIFIC HARBOR SEALS; INVESTIGATION AND REPORT.— 

ø(1) The Secretary shall engage in a scientific investigation 

to determine whether California sea lions and Pacific harbor 

seals— 

ø(A) are having a significant negative impact on the recovery of salmonid fishery stocks which have been listed as 

endangered species or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), or 

which the Secretary finds are approaching such endangered species or threatened species status; or 

ø(B) are having broader impacts on the coastal ecosystems of Washington, Oregon, and California. 

The Secretary shall conclude this investigation and prepare a 

report on its results no later than October 1, 1995. 

ø(2) Upon completion of the scientific investigation required 

under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall enter into discussions 

with the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, on behalf of the States of Washington, Oregon, and California, for 

the purpose of addressing any issues or problems identified as 

a result of the scientific investigation, and to develop recommendations to address such issues or problems. Any recommendations resulting from such discussions shall be submitted, along with the report, to the Committee on Merchant 

Marine and Fisheries of the House of Representatives and the 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 

Senate. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
11 

ø(3) The Secretary shall make the report and the recommendations submitted under paragraph (2) available to the 

public for review and comment for a period of 90 days. 

ø(4) There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary 

such sums as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this 

subsection. 

ø(5) The amounts appropriated under section 308(c) of the 

Interjurisdictional Fisheries Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. 4107(c)) 

and allocated to the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission may be used by the Commission to participate in discussions with the Secretary under paragraph (2).¿ 

(f) TEMPORARY MARINE MAMMAL REMOVAL AUTHORITY ON THE

WATERS OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER OR ITS TRIBUTARIES.— 

(1) REMOVAL AUTHORITY.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the Secretary may issue a permit to an eligible 

entity authorizing the intentional lethal taking on the waters of 

the Columbia River and its tributaries of sea lions that are part 

of a healthy population that is not listed as an endangered species or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 

1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), to protect endangered and threatened species of salmon and other nonlisted fish species. 

(2) PERMIT PROCESS.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—An eligible entity may apply to the Secretary for a permit under this subsection. 

(B) DEADLINE FOR CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION.—The 

Secretary shall approve or deny an application for a permit 

under this subsection by not later than 30 days after receiving the application. 

(C) DURATION OF PERMIT.—A permit under this subsection shall be effective for no more than one year after the 

date it is issued, but may be renewed by the Secretary. 

(3) LIMITATIONS.— 

(A) LIMITATION ON PERMIT AUTHORITY.—Subject to subparagraph (B), a permit issued under this subsection shall 

not authorize the lethal taking of more than 10 sea lions 

during the duration of the permit. 

(B) LIMITATION ON ANNUAL TAKINGS.—The cumulative 

number of sea lions authorized to be taken each year under 

all permits in effect under this subsection shall not exceed 

one percent of the annual potential biological removal level. 

(4) DELEGATION OF PERMIT AUTHORITY.—Any eligible entity 

may delegate to any other eligible entity the authority to administer its permit authority under this subsection. 

(5) NEPA.—Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) shall not apply with 

respect to this subsection and the issuance of any permit under 

this subsection during the 5-year period beginning on the date 

of the enactment of this subsection. 

(6) SUSPENSION OF PERMITTING AUTHORITY.— 

If, 5 years after enactment, the Secretary, after consulting 

with State and tribal fishery managers, determines that lethal removal authority is no longer necessary to protect 

salmonid and other fish species from sea lion predation, 

may suspend the issuance of permits under this subsection. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
12 

(7) ELIGIBLE ENTITY DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term 

‘‘eligible entity’’ means each of the State of Washington, the 

State of Oregon, the State of Idaho, the Nez Perce Tribe, the 

Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, the 

Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, and the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 

* * * * * * * 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(13) 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

H.R. 3069, the Endangered Salmon and Fisheries Predation Prevention Act, would amend the Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA) to authorize the Secretary of Commerce to issue annual 

permits to Washington, Oregon, Idaho and five tribal groups (Nez 

Perce, Umatilla, Warm Springs, Yakama, and the Columbia River 

Inter-Tribal Fish Commission) to lethally take sea lions. The bill’s 

stated intent is intended to reduce the effect of predation by sea 

lions on salmon listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

and any non-listed fish. Under H.R. 3069, as many as 85 sea lions 

could be taken in a year, which exceeds the number of individuals 

identified at the Bonneville Dam in 2011 (50 animals). H.R. 3069 

also waives the application of Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to the permit process. This would 

eliminate the requirement that the Secretary consider the environmental impacts associated with the permit, and alternatives to the 

permitted action. 

H.R. 3069 targets the threat that any fish face from predation by 

marine mammals, specifically sea lions, but does not address other 

far more significant factors which impact endangered salmon or 

non-listed fish. Other threats to ESA-listed salmon and non-listed 

fish in the Columbia River include hydropower development and 

habitat loss, fishing pressure, interactions with hatchery fish, climate change, pesticides, and predation. 

In contrast, the salmon predation rate by California sea lions 

(predation as a percent of the salmon run) below Bonneville Dam 

from January to May has declined each year since 2007 from 4.2 

percent to 2.2 percent in 2010. Preliminary results for 2011 indicate a predation rate of 1.4 percent with the fewest number of California sea lions than any year since 2002. With a run size of 

205,000 fish, 2011 marks the third highest spring salmon run size 

since 2002. California sea lions are eating only 10 percent the 

amount of salmon that fishermen are court-approved to take. Ironically, while H.R. 3069 focuses on the ‘‘threat’’ that marine mammals pose to salmon and other fish, the fact is that rates of predation increase in areas where human barriers, such as fishing locks 

or dams with fish ladders, increase the concentration of adult and 

juvenile salmon and other fish. 

During full committee mark-up of this bill on October 5, 2011, 

Congresswoman Bordallo offered an amendment to require the Secretary of Commerce to make a determination that the killing of a 

sea lion is conducted humanely before a permit can be issued. H.R. 

3069 places no stipulation as to the distance from which sea lions 

can be shot or the platforms from which shooting can take place. 

If a person is allowed to shoot a sea lion from an unstable platform, 

like a boat, this could result in an unpredictable and inhumane 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
14 

death. This amendment was defeated, with the Majority voting in 

opposition. 

H.R. 3069 has not received a legislative hearing, although on 

June 14, 2011, the Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs 

Subcommittee held a hearing on a predecessor bill, H.R. 946, the 

Endangered Salmon Predation Prevention Act. The Administration 

did not support H.R. 946, due to concerns with streamlining the 

process for the lethal take of sea lions and the NEPA exemption. 

Despite these objections, H.R. 3069 expands the scope of H.R. 946 

to allow the take of any sea lion, including California sea lions, 

which eat any fish, including but not limited to, endangered salmon. H.R. 3069 allows the Secretary of Commerce to renew permits 

to take sea lions without review. H.R. 3069 extends the NEPA 

waiver from 3 to 5 years and expands the entities eligible to take 

sea lions to include the State of Idaho and the Columbia River 

Inter-Tribal Fish Commission. 

H.R. 3069, if enacted, would not put into place meaningful action 

needed to address all the threats faced by endangered salmon and 

non-listed species. For these reasons, we oppose H.R. 3069 as reported. 

EDWARD J. MARKEY. RUSH HOLT. DALE E. KILDEE. GRACE F. NAPOLITANO. NIKI TSONGAS. RAU ́ L M. GRIJALVA. JOHN GARAMENDI. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
15 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 17 here HR322.003
16 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 18 here HR322.004
17 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 19 here HR322.005
18 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 20 here HR322.006
19 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 21 here HR322.007
20 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 22 here HR322.008