U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

67–576 PDF 2012

CHAPTER 7 BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEES’ 

RESPONSIBILITIES AND REMUNERATION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COURTS, COMMERCIAL 

AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JULY 27, 2011 

Serial No. 112–68 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

LAMAR SMITH, Texas, Chairman 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

TRENT FRANKS, Arizona 

LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio 

TED POE, Texas 

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah 

TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina 

DENNIS ROSS, Florida 

SANDY ADAMS, Florida 

BEN QUAYLE, Arizona 

[Vacant] 

JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

ROBERT C. ‘‘BOBBY’’ SCOTT, Virginia 

MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

MAXINE WATERS, California 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

HENRY C. ‘‘HANK’’ JOHNSON, JR., 

Georgia 

PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico 

MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois 

JUDY CHU, California 

TED DEUTCH, Florida 

LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ, California 

DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida 

SEAN MCLAUGHLIN, Majority Chief of Staff and General Counsel 

PERRY APELBAUM, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COURTS, COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina, Chairman 

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina, Vice-Chairman 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

TRENT FRANKS, Arizona 

DENNIS ROSS, Florida 

[Vacant] 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

HENRY C. ‘‘HANK’’ JOHNSON, JR., 

Georgia 

MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina 

[Vacant] 

DANIEL FLORES, Chief Counsel 

JAMES PARK, Minority Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

JULY 27, 2011 

Page 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

The Honorable Howard Coble, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of North Carolina, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial 

and Administrative Law ...................................................................................... 1 

The Honorable John Conyers, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Michigan, and Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary ......... 6 

The Honorable Steve Cohen, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Tennessee, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial 

and Administrative Law ...................................................................................... 10 

WITNESSES 

Robert C. Furr, Founding Partner, Furr & Cohen, P.A. (Boca Raton, FL), 

on behalf of the National Association of Bankruptcy Trustees 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 12 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 15 

H. Jason Gold, Partner, Wiley Rein LPP (Washington, DC) and Chapter 

7 Trustee (E.D. VA), on behalf of the American Bankruptcy Institute 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 22 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 69 

William E. Brewer, Jr., Founder, The Brewer Law Firm (Raleigh, NC), on 

behalf of the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 74 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 77 

Blake Hogan, President, American Infosource (Houston, TX) 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 82 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 84 

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Prepared Statement of the American Bankers Association submitted by the 

Honorable Howard Coble, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of North Carolina, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial 

and Administrative Law ...................................................................................... 4 

Prepared Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr., a Representative 

in Congress from the State of Michigan, and Ranking Member, Committee 

on the Judiciary ................................................................................................... 7 

American Bankruptcy Institute report submitted by H. Jason Gold, Partner, 

Wiley Rein LPP (Washington, DC) and Chapter 7 Trustee (E.D. VA) ............ 23 

APPENDIX 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

Prepared Statement of the Honorable Steve Cohen, a Representative in Congress from the State of Tennessee, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee 

on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law .............................................. 92 

Response to Post-Hearing Questions from Robert C. Furr, Founding Partner, 

Furr & Cohen, P.A. (Boca Raton, FL) ................................................................ 97 

Page

IV 

Response to Post-Hearing Questions from H. Jason Gold, Partner, Wiley 

Rein LPP (Washington, DC) and Chapter 7 Trustee (E.D. VA) ....................... 102 

Response to Post-Hearing Questions from William E. Brewer, Jr., Founder, 

The Brewer Law Firm (Raleigh, NC) ................................................................. 104 

Response to Post-Hearing Questions from Blake Hogan, President, American 

Infosource (Houston, TX) ..................................................................................... 107 

GAO Report titled Bankruptcy Reform, Dollar Costs Associated with the 

Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ............ 111 

(1) 

CHAPTER 7 BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEES’ 

RESPONSIBILITIES AND REMUNERATION 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 2011 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON COURTS, COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:34 a.m., in room 

2141, Rayburn Office Building, the Honorable Howard Coble 

(Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Coble, Cohen, and Conyers. 

Staff present: (Majority) Daniel Flores, Subcommittee Chief 

Counsel; Travis Norton, Counsel; Johnny Mautz, Counsel; Ashley 

Lewis, Clerk; (Minority) James Park, Counsel; Carol Chodroff, 

Counsel; and Rosalind Jackson, Clerk. 

Mr. COBLE. We have others who are enroute, I am told. If the 

witnesses would take their seats, we will start momentarily, hopefully. 

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. The Subcommittee will 

come to order. Mr. Cohen is on his way I am told. But in recognition of your time, I am going to go ahead and give my opening 

statement, and he will be here hopefully ultimately. 

Chapter 7 trustees play an essential role in the administration 

of a liquidation bankruptcy. A Chapter 7 trustee investigates the 

financial affairs of the debtor, preference and fraudulent conveyance claims on behalf of the bankruptcy, and objects to creditors’ 

proofs of claims. Section 704 of the Bankruptcy Code also requires 

a trustee to serve as the administrator of the debtor’s ERISA plans. 

Notwithstanding their performance of numerous bankruptcy duties, in most cases Chapter 7 trustees are paid only a flat fee of 

$60 for their service; that is it. This dollar amount was fixed by 

statute in 1994, was not indexed to inflation like other dollar 

amounts of the Code, and has not been increased in 17 years. 

In rare liquidation cases where assets are distributed to creditors, a trustee earns a commission based on the value of the 

administered’s assets. The average trustee commission in an asset 

case in 2010 was approximately $2,200, but out of 1.4 million 

Chapter 7 cases filed in 2010, only about 60,000 were asset cases 

in which the trustee had the potential to earn more than the $60 

fee. 

It appears to me that Chapter 7 trustees may be under compensated for the value of the important work they perform in a liqVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:48 Jan 24, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\COURTS\072711\67576.000 HJUD1 PsN: 67576
2 

uidation bankruptcy. This is especially true in cases where the 

bankruptcy code requires the trustee to administer and close out 

the debtor’s 401(k) and other ERISA qualifying benefits plans. 

Sometimes this process takes years, but even in those cases, the 

trustee only receives the $60 in base pay. 

Congress should consider whether and how to raise Chapter 7 

trustee compensation levels. One option is to raise bankruptcy filing fees. Another is to charge the commission bankruptcy formula 

in Section 326. But any method to increase trustee compensation 

should be sensitive to the concerns of all stockholders, including 

creditors, debtors, and the judiciary which currently pays a portion 

of the flat fee. 

We look forward to hearing from our witnesses today. And, 

again, if you all will bear with me and rest easy, we should be able 

to get under way momentarily. And, again, we thank you all for 

your taking time to be here and contributing to this worthwhile 

hearing. So, we will rest easy for the moment. 

We will bend the rules of procedure. I am going to go ahead and 

introduce the witnesses now to save a little time in the end. 

Mr. Robert Furr is the founding partner of Furr & Cohen, a law 

firm in Boca Raton, Florida that specializes in bankruptcy law. He 

is a Chapter 7 panel trustee for the U.S. Trustee Program in the 

Southern District of Florida. Mr. Furr is a past president of the 

National Association of Bankruptcy Trustees, on whose behalf he 

is testifying today. Mr. Furr testified before this Committee at a 

similar hearing almost 3 years ago, 2008. Good to have you back, 

Mr. Furr. 

Mr. Jason Gold is a partner of Wiley Rein in Mclean, Virginia, 

where he serves as chair of preferred bankruptcy and financial restructuring practice. Mr. Gold is also a Chapter 7 panel trustee for 

the Eastern District of Virginia and has been for 24 years. Super 

Lawyers magazine recently named Mr. Gold one of D.C.’s top 100 

lawyers and one of Virginia’s top 50 lawyer in recognition of his illustrious career as a bankruptcy attorney. Today he is testifying on 

behalf of the American Bankruptcy Institute, the Nation’s largest 

multidisciplinary association of insolvency professionals, with over 

13,000 members. I look forward to his testimony as well. 

Mr. William Brewer is the founder of The Brewer Law Firm in 

Raleigh, North Carolina, and a fellow of the American College of 

Bankruptcy. Today he is testifying on behalf of the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys, of which he is currently 

the president. The NCBA represents the interests of consumer 

debtors and their attorneys in legislative and judicial forums across 

the United States. Mr. Brewer holds a bachelor’s degree in English 

and a law degree from the University of North Carolina. And I may 

treat him a little better than the rest of you because he is a fellow 

North Carolinian. But good to have all of you here nonetheless. 

Finally, Mr. Blake Hogan is the president and founder of American InfoSource, a provider of bankruptcy accounting management 

services based in Houston, Texas. American InfoSource regularly 

performs data analyses on trends in Chapter 7 cases, including 

analyses on asset versus no-asset cases and Chapter 7 trustee commissions. According to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, 

Mr. Hogan’s firm is the largest commercial purchaser of bankVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:48 Jan 24, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\COURTS\072711\67576.000 HJUD1 PsN: 67576
3 

ruptcy data. Mr. Hogan has over 18 year of experience in the bankruptcy services industry. 

And we welcome each of you with us today. And I, again, apologize for the irregular procedural abuse that I have given to the 

rules of the Subcommittee, but hopefully I will be forgiven for that. 

We have now been joined by the distinguished gentleman from 

Maryland—from Michigan—I will stand corrected. Not Maryland, 

Michigan—former Chairman of the full Committee and presently 

Ranking Member of the full Committee. And I will be glad to recognize Mr. Conyers for an opening statement. 

And, John, before you start, if I may, I would like to ask unanimous consent to submit for the record a statement on behalf of the 

American Bankers Association and a letter from the Judicial Conference addressed to Chairman Lamar Smith of some days ago. 

Without objection? 

[The information referred to follows:] 

4 


67576A-1.eps
5 


67576A-2.eps
6 

Mr. CONYERS. Thank you, Chairman Coble. Top of the morning 

to all of our witnesses. I beg your indulgence for not being on time. 

We began a discussion of this in 2008, and I am a little bit taken 

aback by the fact that we are studying this like it is a rocket 

science matter. We are not paying the Chapter 7 trustees adequately. Everybody agrees on that. 

There is only one question: are we going to put it on the backs 

of the poor devils that come in that are bankruptcy that already 

are pleading with the court to have their whatever is left of their 

remains and property equitably distributed among their creditors, 

or are we going to find another way to compensate for this? And 

we have already suggested the other way. H.R. 4950, we have been 

through this, Chairman Coble. 

And, you know, this Congress does not have a very good reputation at this moment. It does not seem like we can solve anything. 

And here is a simple matter. We are telling lawyers and accountants that they can only get $60 for a no-asset case. And that has 

been since, what, 1984, 1994? That is disgraceful. They are on the 

verge of sitting on the other side of the table. They have to leave 

their profession, and they are willing to do this, but we are not 

even willing to compensate them adequately. 

I do not what this breaks down to an hour, but these are not professional wages. We are not compensating members of the Bar and 

accountants, frequently certified public accountants, adequately. 

And we have been 3 years studying this. 

And so, somebody proposed that we study it some more. Well, 

witnesses, I am tired of studying it, and I assume or hope that you 

are as well. And this Committee has got to do something about it. 

We cannot even get anybody to come to this hearing. And so, I will 

put my statement in the record and await your testimony. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Conyers follows:] 

7 


67576B-1.eps
8 


67576B-2.eps
9 


67576B-3.eps
10 

Mr. COBLE. I thank the gentleman. 

The gentleman from Tennessee, the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, is now recognized for his opening statement. Mr. 

Cohen? 

Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry about being 

late, but I was hearing where we are. It is a scary place. 


67576B-4.eps
11 

As far as I can tell, no one seems to disagree that Chapter 7 

trustees deserve some sort of compensation increase. There has 

been no effort over 17 years and there is has been no increase in 

per case compensation in these non-asset cases. And that is the 

bulk of Chapter 7 cases. The real debate is over how best to do this 

in a manner that is fair to all parties in the bankruptcy process, 

the debtors, the creditors, the judiciary. 

Last Congress, I introduced H.R. 4950, The Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Adjustment Improvement Act of 2010, which I think maybe 

possibly the Chairman—not the Chairman—the former Chairman, 

the Ranking Member, my dear and beloved friend, the esteemed 

and honorable John Conyers, might have talked about. That legislation offered an equitable solution to the problems of how to fairly 

increase trustee compensation. H.R. 4950 would have increased the 

potential compensation that the trustees could earn by increasing 

the maximum percentage of assets that could be used to compensate trustees in Section 326 percentage caps, which have not 

been raised since 1994. At the same, the bill maintained some judicial discretion to determine the reasonableness of trustee compensation, clarified that that compensation in asset cases should be 

treated as a commission, and avoided increasing the cost burden on 

debtors of an increased filing fee. 

In this way, the bill increased potential compensation for trustees, while at the same time recognizing the judiciary’s prerogatives 

in protecting already financially strapped and overburdened debtors. 

When I introduced the bill, it is my understanding all parties 

would be impacted, but were on board. Ultimately, those certain 

creditor interests raised concerns that the bill would reduce the potential recoveries in the future of Chapter 7 asset cases, greed, one. 

It is only fair that creditors be asked to shoulder a marginally 

greater burden than they currently do in ensuring just increased 

compensation for Chapter 7 trustees. 

One of the principle purpose of Chapter 7 trustees is to protect 

and maximize the size of the bankruptcy estate so the assets can 

be liquidated and the proceeds distributed to creditors to the greatest extent possible. Chapter 7 trustees’ work primarily benefits 

creditors; therefore, creditors should be prepared to give up just a 

little to increase compensation for those trustees. It seems that we 

have a parallel universe here in the Congress this year on the debt 

ceiling. 

While I believe that my bill offers the best solution to increasing 

Chapter 7 trustee compensation in an equitable manner, I am open 

to considering other suggestions that all interested parties can get 

behind. I would be deeply concerned, however, with any measure 

that forces the burden of increasing trustee compensation on consumer debtors, as I am concerned about revenue being used to deal 

with the debt ceiling. 

Consumer debtors already pay a disproportionate share of the 

costs of the bankruptcy system. Otherwise I noted it is creditors, 

not debtors, who mostly benefit from the worker Chapter 7 trustees. Equity demands that consumer debtors not be forced to bear 

the burden of a trustee compensation increase. 

12 

With the economy continuing to struggle, the last thing Congress 

should do is increase the financial burdens of people who are already on the brink of financial ruin, although it seems we are 

about to do that in a bigger picture. This is a microcosm, this hearing, of what is going on on the floor. 

My charge for our witnesses is to develop a solution that increases compensation for Chapter 7 trustees, does not burden consumer debtors, and addresses the concern of creditors. 

I thank Chairman Coble, a wonderful gentleman, a great Chairman, and a distinguished Member, for holding this hearing. I look 

forward to a fruitful discussion that will be just and fair. 

Mr. COBLE. I thank you, Mr. Cohen. 

Steve, I introduced the panelists earlier. Would you like for me 

to introduce them again? 

Mr. COHEN. No, sir. 

Mr. COBLE. All right. 

Gentleman, we will start. And we try to comply, gentleman, with 

the 5-minute rule. You have a panel on your desk. When the light 

is green, that tells you you’re skating on thick ice. It will then turn 

amber, and then when it is red, that is your 5 minutes have expired. So, if you all could confine your statements on or about 5 

minutes, we would be appreciative. 

And, Mr. Furr, we will start with you? 

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT C. FURR, FOUNDING PARTNER, FURR 

& COHEN, P.A. (BOCA RATON, FL), ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEES 

Mr. FURR. Chairman Coble, Ranking Member Cohen, and other 

distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, let me thank you for 

the opportunity to provide the views of the National Association of 

Bankruptcy Trustees to your Subcommittee on this subject. My 

name is Robert Furr. I am a past president of the National Association of Bankruptcy Trustees. I am on its board of directors and executive committee. 

In 2010, there were 1,139,000 Chapter 7 cases filed in the United 

States. That is an 8 percent increase over 2009. There were 25,000 

cases filed in North Carolina and 50,000 cases in Tennessee, so we 

know it is a big issue around the country. 

Trustees conduct the major work that is done in Chapter 7 bankruptcies. We protect both debtors and creditors from abuses of the 

system. We carry out important public policy priorities as directed 

by Congress involving issues of child support, patient health care 

records, dishonesty, criminal activity, fraud, mortgage scams, in 

addition to administering the cases in the normal way that we 

have always done. 

We have had no raise since 1994, no adjustment to our compensation. The Bankruptcy Abuse and Consumer Protection Act, 

BAPCPA, which was passed in 2005, gave other duties to Chapter 

7 trustees without additional compensation. Chapter 7 trustees 

that I know, and I know most of the around the country, are shouldering those burdens and moving forward, and doing the work required of us under BAPCPA at a very, very commendable way, but 

they are not being compensated for it. 

13 

Trustees receive $60 for administering a Chapter 7 case and 

what is called a no-asset case in every case they get, and that is 

all they are guaranteed to get. It is truly an entrepreneurial kind 

of business that I am in. In many areas of the country, it is a mom 

and pop kind of business, and in some larger urban areas it is a 

more sophisticated kind of business. But it is truly a business 

where you if you are skilled and you work hard, you can make 

money. If you work hard and you are smarter than the other person, you may make more money. So, it is a great business to be 

in. 

The last increase in the filing fees occurred in 1994—excuse me 

in the trustee compensation occurred in 1994 when the filing fee 

was $130. Today the filing fee is $299, and the trustee’s fee is still 

$60, or 20 percent of the filing fee. 

Every case essentially begins as a no-asset case. After all, Chapter 7 is a liquidation bankruptcy. It is hard work for the trustee 

to determine if there are assets in the estate. Last year, I would 

like to report to you that Chapter 7 trustees paid $2.3 billion to 

creditors, including $132 million to taxing authorities, including 

the Internal Revenue Service. We did this by taking an average of 

commission of 5.7 percent in those Chapter 7 asset cases, a record 

which is much less than the average commercial collection lawyer 

would charge of 25 to 33 percent. 

We have enjoyed bipartisan support in the House, and I appreciate all the kind words that everyone has said this morning. Currently, we think the trustees should receive a per case fee increase 

of $40 so that the no-asset fee goes to $100. Based on inflation figures alone, trustees should be earning $28 more per case since 

1994. So, this brings us up to $40 more. That would compensate 

us for the money we do not make in informa popras cases, or cases 

where the filing fee is waived and we receive no compensation. 

The other day I had two cases on my calendar where attorneys 

appeared charging $1,200 to their clients, and having the filing fee 

waived because the client in forma pauperis guidelines. And there 

is nothing I can do about that. I did not get paid, and the attorneys 

did get paid $1,200. 

A couple of other issues I would like to talk about in the time 

remaining. First is trustee commission issues. In 2005 when 

BAPCPA was passed, Congress changed and added 330(a)(7) to the 

Code, which said that trustee fees shall be treated as a commission. Most of the bankruptcy judges around the country have honored that, and honored that even before that time. But there are 

a few courts in the country who do not treat the fees as a commission, but instead still use Lodestar factors, such as time factors, in 

awarding fees. And we think that should be changed. The law 

should be changed to make it clear that the commission is a presumptive commission, and only in extraordinary circumstances 

should it be changed by the courts. 

Finally, I want to talk about pension plan responsibilities, and 

this was mentioned by the Chairman a few minutes ago. BAPCPA 

placed on the Chapter 7 trustees the responsibility to handle pension plans in corporations and businesses that we receive into our 

hands. That creates a huge problem for trustees because we are not 

14 

really set up to do that kind of work. It is a separate entity than 

the debtor itself. 

In 2006, after the passage of BAPCPA, the Department of Labor 

developed a regulatory scheme and created something called a 

qualified termination administrator, an independent administrator 

which can do those plans. We would like that section changed in 

the Code, that Section 704(a)(11), to take that responsibility away 

from trustees and let it go to these QTAs under the supervision of 

the Department of Labor. I do not think the Department of Labor 

would object to that. Again, that is an important issue for us. 

I want to thank you again, Chairman Coble, for holding this 

hearing. Chapter 7 is the most and common form of bankruptcy in 

the United States with well over a million cases per year. On behalf of all the trustees, thank you for hearing our problem. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Furr follows:] 

15 


Furr-1.eps
16 


Furr-2.eps
17 


Furr-3.eps
18 


Furr-4.eps
19 


Furr-5.eps
20 


Furr-6.eps
21 


Furr-7.eps
22 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Furr. 

Mr. Gold? Mr. Gold, your mic, I do not think, is on? 

TESTIMONY OF H. JASON GOLD, PARTNER, WILEY REIN LPP 

(WASHINGTON, DC) AND CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE (E.D. VA), ON 

BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN BANKRUPTCY INSTITUTE 

Mr. GOLD. Thank you, Chairman Coble, Mr. Cohen, and Members of the Subcommittee. I am Jason Gold. I am a partner in the 

Mclean, Virginia and Washington, D.C. law of Wiley Rein. We have 

over 275 lawyers in our firm, and we practice in nearly two dozen 

practice areas. I am the chair of our bankruptcy and financial restructuring practice, and I have more than 30 years of experience 

as a bankruptcy trustee—excuse me, as an attorney. I have had 24 

years as a bankruptcy trustee. 

Before being appointed as a trustee, I had a great deal of experience representing debtors in Chapter 7 cases before I actually 

joined the Bankruptcy Trustee Panel. And I have served as trustee 

in over 21,000 cases. 

I appear here today as a representative of the American Bankruptcy Institute. The American Bankruptcy Institute is comprised 

of over 13,000 insolvency professionals around the country, and indeed many around the world. 

The $60 no-asset fee, as we all understand, has not been raised 

since 1994, yet the duties of the Chapter 7 trustee have continued 

to expand, and most recently, of course, with the enactment of 

BAPCPA as was discussed. 

Mr. Chairman, the initial duties of the trustee start even before 

the debtor appears before me at the so-called meeting of creditors, 

a 341 meeting. I must review the bankruptcy petition, the schedule 

of assets and liabilities, the sworn statement, all those papers that 

are filed in these cases. And I am appointed to about 110 cases 

every month or so, broken up into two dockets, again, each month. 

Now, over 90 percent of the cases are no-asset cases, as we all now 

know, and trustees file the no distribution report. But we do all 

this work for $60 per case, and that includes, of course, those cases 

where we are not paid at all, the informa popras cases. 

Mr. Chairman, there is a report that has been submitted to the 

Committee, a preliminary report, issued by the American Bankruptcy Institute entitled ‘‘The Costs of BAPCPA: Preliminary Report on BAPCPA’s Impact on Chapter 7 Trustees Administering 

Consumer Cases’’ authored by Lois R. Luprica, dated today, July 

27, 2011. I would ask that that be included in the record. 

Mr. COBLE. Without objection. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

23 


67576D-1.eps
24 


67576D-2.eps
25 


67576D-3.eps
26 


67576D-4.eps
27 


67576D-5.eps
28 


67576D-6.eps
29 


67576D-7.eps
30 


67576D-8.eps
31 


67576D-9.eps
32 


67576D-10.eps
33 


67576D-11.eps
34 


67576D-12.eps
35 


67576D-13.eps
36 


67576D-14.eps
37 


67576D-15.eps
38 


67576D-16.eps
39 


67576D-17.eps
40 


67576D-18.eps
41 


67576D-19.eps
42 


67576D-20.eps
43 


67576D-21.eps
44 


67576D-22.eps
45 


67576D-23.eps
46 


67576D-24.eps
47 


67576D-25.eps
48 


67576D-26.eps
49 


67576D-27.eps
50 


67576D-28.eps
51 


67576D-29.eps
52 


67576D-30.eps
53 


67576D-31.eps
54 


67576D-32.eps
55 


67576D-33.eps
56 


67576D-34.eps
57 


67576D-35.eps
58 


67576D-36.eps
59 


67576D-37.eps
60 


67576D-38.eps
61 


67576D-39.eps
62 


67576D-40.eps
63 


67576D-41.eps
64 


67576D-42.eps
65 


67576D-43.eps
66 


67576D-44.eps
67 


67576D-45.eps
68 

Mr. GOLD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to just quote 

very briefly from the report. After interviewing many, many trustees around the country, the report quotes one, and this was agreed 

to many others, in fact, probably the vast majority, two or three 

times as much work in no-asset cases as trustees—I am paraphrasing—as trustees had to perform before BAPCPA, two or three 

times as much. So, you can imagine the $60 has not been raised; 

the amount of work is two or three times just since 2005 when 

BAPCPA was enacted. 

Now, certain of our bankruptcy responsibilities are more demanding and challenging than others. Most recently, this new requirement of administering employee benefit plans with that whole 

range of Federal regulation under ERISA and other regulations, 

which now we are responsible for, with all the liabilities and all the 

issues that go along with that. That is very, very important work, 

and yet, again, that is all subsumed within the $60 fee, unless, of 

course, we are lucky enough that there might be an asset case involved. 

In health care bankruptcies, trustees also have the obligation to 

transfer patient records and even the patients themselves sometimes from facilities that are being closed. And we have to safeguard patient privacy, of course, as well. 

Mr. Chairman, this year the bankruptcy will handle some 1.5 

million cases, and that is far greater than the total number of cases 

handled by all the other Federal courts. No system, however well 

designed, is better than the people who operate within it. Therefore, we must retain and attract competent, honest, and committed 

trustees. And as designed, our system will work only if we have 

these folks employed. Therefore, I certainly support, and these 

views are my own, but I certainly support the increase to $100 the 

no-asset fee. 

And let me also finally echo Mr. Furr’s comment with respect to 

the commission and how some bankruptcy judges around the country have interpreted what most bankruptcy lawyers think is very 

clear, that indeed the compensation is commission based. Like a 

real estate agent who sells a house gets 6 percent, bankruptcy 

trustees should get the commission as provided in the statute, and 

not adjusted by simply the views of a particular bankruptcy judge, 

unless of course there is wrongdoing or misdeeds and the like. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gold follows:] 

69 


Gold-1.eps
70 


Gold-2.eps
71 


Gold-3.eps
72 


Gold-4.eps
73 


Gold-5.eps
74 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Gold. 

Mr. Brewer? 

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM E. BREWER, JR., FOUNDER, THE 

BREWER LAW FIRM (RALEIGH, NC), ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CONSUMER BANKRUPTCY ATTORNEYS 

Mr. BREWER. Chairman Coble, Ranking Member Cohen, thank 

you for the opportunity to appear today on behalf of the National 

Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. I am William E. 


Gold-6.eps
75 

Brewer, Jr., and the president NACBA. NACBA is the only national organization dedicated to serving the interests of consumer 

bankruptcy attorneys and, more importantly, protecting the rights 

of consumer debtors in bankruptcy. 

Some NACBA members, including my predecessor as president, 

serve as Chapter 7 trustees, giving us a broad perspective on the 

issues before the Subcommittee today. NACBA appreciates the opportunity to offer its views on compensation to Chapter 7 trustees 

in no asset cases. 

Let me be clear. NACBA supports increased compensation for 

Chapter 7 trustees. We recognize that trustees have had not had 

their fees increased in 17 years, despite expanded duties under the 

2005 Bankruptcy Act. 

Let me emphatically clear. NACBA opposes any increase in fees 

for bankruptcy filers as a way to pay for the increased compensation to Chapter 7 trustees. Cash strapped and overburdened debtors have had the filing fees more than double in those same 17 

years. Furthermore, their fees and other costs associated with filing 

bankruptcy have gone up a whopping 90 percent in the wake of the 

2005 Act. Since 2005, the filing fees have increased from $205 to 

$299. This does not include the cost of the mandatory credit counseling. Incredibly, Congress increased fees on bankruptcy consumers as a way to reduce the deficit in 2006. 

When Congress increased the filing fees in 2005, it was well understood that the new law would impose new responsibilities on 

Chapter 7 trustees. Why has not some portion of the $94 increase 

in the filing fee gone to Chapter 7 trustees to compensate them for 

their expanded workload, rather than further burden financially 

distressed Americans who have suffered an extended period of unemployment, home foreclosure, or other financial calamity by piling 

on yet another fee increase? Congress should determine where all 

the money is now going into the bankruptcy system is being spent, 

and reallocate the existing revenue so that the Chapter 7 trustees 

are adequately compensated. 

Consumer debtors are already paying more than their share of 

the costs of the administration of the bankruptcy system. 

There are approaches to this issue that NACBA can and will support. For example, in 2008, the Senate included language in Senate 

1638 that would increase the compensation to Chapter 7 trustees, 

but also provided that no additional fee could be charged to the 

debtor for the fee increase to trustees. Under this approach, the 

court would fund the increase through the fees through the judicial 

conference that the United States already collects. 

More recently, Representatives Cohen, Whitfield, and Conyers 

sponsored legislation in the last Congress, H.R. 4950, that would 

make a relatively modest adjustment to the percentage price points 

used to compensate trustees in cases in which there are assets, 

roughly 5 to 10 percent. This adjustment would supplement the 

fixed fee compensation that is provided in the no-asset cases. 

Under this approach, trustee compensation would be paid not only 

by debtors through existing filing fees, but also by creditors who directly benefit from a trustee’s work in administering asset cases. 

Fees could be charged for creditors for filing proofs of claim. 

There is an industry of debt buyers purchasing claims in bankVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:48 Jan 24, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\COURTS\072711\67576.000 HJUD1 PsN: 67576
76 

ruptcy and benefitting from the system. A modest fee to file an assignment of claim could be imposed. 

In summary, NACBA respects the role of the Chapter 7 trustees 

in maintaining the professional function of our bankruptcy system. 

We must ensure that the system continues to attract and retain 

competent, experienced, and qualified private trustees, like the 

ones here today, in light of this critical role. Increased compensation with Chapter 7 trustees is a part of that equation; however, 

it must not fall to the financially distressed consumers to shoulder 

that increase. 

NACBA stands ready to work with this Subcommittee and other 

interested parties in advising an equitable approach to this issue. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Brewer follows:] 

77 


Brewer-1.eps
78 


Brewer-2.eps
79 


Brewer-3.eps
80 


Brewer-4.eps
81 


Brewer-5.eps
82 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Brewer. 

Mr. Hogan? 

TESTIMONY OF BLAKE HOGAN, PRESIDENT, 

AMERICAN INFOSOURCE (HOUSTON, TX) 

Mr. HOGAN. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Cohen, my 

name is Blake Hogan, and I am the president and founder of American InfoSource, the market leader in providing bankruptcy specific 

filing and information services to participants in the bankruptcy 

system. We are based in Houston, Texas, with operations in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. 

American InfoSource provides account management services and 

performs many bank case functions for eight of the largest financial institutions in the country, as well as health care institutions, 

retailers, utility, and telecom companies. 

I would like to explain a little bit about myself and my company 

so that the Subcommittee can understand the views I have on the 

topic of trustee compensation. 

In 1995, I built the first direct connection to the bankruptcy 

courts, creating the first comprehensive bankruptcy database of its 

kind. The business was sold to First Data Corporation in 1996, and 

the original organization has since been sold to another company. 

My current company, launched in 2000, has successfully automated 

bankruptcy procedures from notification, to payment processing in 

a safe, reliable, and cost-effective manner. 

Today American InfoSource is the leading filer of bankruptcy 

claims, and, according to the administrative office of the U.S. 

Courts, we are the largest commercial purchaser of bankruptcy 

data. As a consequence, we have amassed a great deal of data 

about the actual function of the consumer bankruptcy system as it 

exists in practice. 

I am pleased to provide my perspective to the Subcommittee on 

the important issue of Chapter 7 trustee compensation. As I have 

noted, and I want to reiterate, I provide services to lenders and 

trustees. American InfoSource is not a lender, creditor, borrower, 

or debtor. The perspective I bring to the issue is based on the 

sound data collection and analysis of the facts. 

First, let me start by saying I personally support an increase in 

the no-asset fee for Chapter 7 trustees. Thanks in large measure 

to the hard work of many talented Chapter 7 trustees, our consumer bankruptcy system works as well as it does. It is only fair 

to ensure that this work is compensated according to its value. 

I am confident that the fee set in 1994 has eroded in value over 

time. After all, prices for other goods and services have increased 

since 1994, and I believe the same would be true for the Chapter 

7 no-asset fee. 

I am aware that there have been past proposals to increase compensation to Chapter 7 trustee in no-asset cases by increasing commissions paid in asset cases under Section 326 of the Bankruptcy 

Code. Based on the data I have reviewed, such proposals would not 

work and would merely reduce dividends paid to creditors in Chapter 7 asset cases. As one of the witnesses today said in prior testimony in 2008 before this Subcommittee, Chapter 7 cases with significant assets are rare, and mostly in large metropolitan areas. 

83 

This is why the lack of decent compensation in no-asset cases is 

particularly difficult for trustees in small or rural areas. 

Following this logic, increasing amounts paid in asset cases to 

those trustees who live and work in cosmopolitan areas will do 

nothing to help trustees in other areas of the country. For instance, 

our data shows that 75 percent of the asset cases are administered 

in 15 states. 

Finally, I would like to address the question of whether increasing commissions under Section 326 would actually incentivize 

greater collection for creditors. While there may be anecdotal evidence to support this theory, there is no statistically significant 

data which supports this premise. I believe, based on our data, that 

creditors would in effect pay more for the same services if commission amounts under Section 326 were increased. 

In sum, Mr. Chairman, it may be advisable for Congress to increase compensation in no-asset Chapter 7 cases. I also believe this 

should be done by increasing the statutory no-asset fee. Proposals 

to make up for below market no asset fee by increasing commissions in Chapter 7 asset cases would help only a select few trustees 

and would likely impose costs on creditors in the form of reduced 

dividends without collateral benefits to creditors. 

We appreciate the opportunity to share our views, and I look forward to any questions that you might have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hogan follows:] 

84 


Hogan-1.eps
85 


Hogan-2.eps
86 


Hogan-3.eps
87 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Hogan. Thanks to all of you for what 

you do. I just told Mr. Cohen, I have never been exposed to a bankruptcy matter, either as a trustee, creditor, or debtor. So, we look 

to you all as experts. 

Gentleman, we try to comply with the 5-minute rule as well, so 

if you all could keep your questions tersely, we would appreciate 

that. 

Mr. Furr, if you had your choice, would you rather be freed from 

the duty to wind down a debtor’s ERISA case plans or raise trustee 

compensation in no-asset case? 

Mr. FURR. I would rather raise the no-asset fee. 


Hogan-4.eps
88 

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Brewer, my fellow Carolinian. I have another 

question here. 

Mr. Brewer, do you believe that a trustee who is not an expert 

in employment or labor law should have the duty to wind down the 

debtor’s ERISA plans? 

Mr. BREWER. I really see no need for that to happen, I mean. 

And if so, they have got to find some way to compensate them, for 

that can be a lot of work. Now, I have never done it. I have never 

served as a Chapter 7 trustee. So, I do not know how competent 

I am to answer that question, but I know from my friends of the 

trustees in North Carolina, they find it quite burdensome. 

Mr. COBLE. They find it quite? 

Mr. BREWER. Burdensome. 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Gold, in your testimony, you advocate the raising of the $60 

flat fee to $120. Do you have any recommendation how we in the 

Congress would alter the law to that end? 

Mr. GOLD. How to fund that—— 

Mr. COBLE. Yes. 

Mr. GOLD.—Mr. Chairman? Well, there are several ways as has 

been debated now for many years. My personal view is that perhaps a combination of ways might be effective. For example, raising the filing fee slightly or to some degree, which would less of a 

burden on debtors. I think trustees are very sensitive to the burden 

on debtors. But even the filing fee hasn’t been raised since 2006, 

which is not nearly as long ago as 1994. But raising it perhaps 

slightly might be an advantage. And then perhaps raising funds 

through a more complicated, the PACER system, which is the electronic filing and data system used in bankruptcy in Federal courts. 

These are fees paid by law firms typically, and of course the public, 

to some degree. But law firms could certainly afford perhaps a one 

or two cent increase in PACER fees per page. But we understand 

there are complications with that with respect to the judiciary. 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, sir. 

Let me beat the red light with a question to Mr. Hogan, and then 

I will yield to Mr. Cohen. 

Mr. Hogan, are you aware of any evidence to support the proposition that raising the Section 326 commission would result in 

higher asset recoveries by trustees? 

Mr. HOGAN. No, I am not. I think it is all about equity in the 

fact that if you take after State number 10, the number of asset 

cases that are administered in the United States, fewer than 3 percent of the cases in the remaining States are actually asset cases. 

So, it is very difficult to understand how taking an increase in fee 

on that would be equitable for a majority of the trustees in the program. It would not result in them having an increase in that. 

Mr. COBLE. I thank you, sir. 

The distinguished gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Cohen, is recognized for 5 minutes? 

Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Coble, and I will be quick. 

Mr. Furr, how many Chapter 7 trustees have resigned since 

2005? 

Mr. FURR. We think about 20. 

89 

Mr. COHEN. About 20? And what was the principle reason why 

they resigned, do you think? 

Mr. FURR. Well, the reason, and I put it in my part of my remarks here, a Chapter 7 trustee from Wisconsin resigned a few 

weeks ago, and decided the duties that he has to fulfill in a 

BAPCPA versus the amount of money he is being paid and the risk 

he takes, he resigned for that reason. And I hear that from time 

to time. 

Most trustees are sticking to it and really trying to stay with it. 

This is a profession for most of us. I have been a trustee for over 

22 years, and I am 61 years old. And I will be a trustee for many 

years to come. I enjoy it a lot; I do not want to give it up. And I 

think most trustees feel that way. It is a great way to practice law, 

or accounting if you are an accountant. And something I do not 

want to give up. 

Mr. COHEN. Or Congress if you are a congressman. 

Mr. FURR. That is correct. 

Mr. COHEN. Yes. 

Mr. FURR. I mean, a judge. Thank you, Mr. Cohen. So, I do not 

want to give it up. I think most trustees really do not. They want 

to struggle through this and find a solution. 

Mr. COHEN. Can a trustee be forced to continue to serve by the 

judge in a Chapter 7 trustee case? 

Mr. FURR. Yes, sir, he can. He could resign, but if he resigns and 

refuses to take a case, I think the U.S. Trustees Office would not 

take kindly to that. 

Mr. COHEN. Mr. Gold, when a Chapter 7 trustee administers an 

asset case, who is the primary beneficiary to that? 

Mr. GOLD. Well, typically it would be the creditors, Mr. Cohen. 

The creditors, of course, receive the benefit in terms of the money 

that is distributed. There are, of course, duties to the debtor as well 

and to the bankruptcy system, but in terms of the economic benefit, 

it is 100 percent, in my view, to the creditors. 

Mr. COHEN. Okay. And are the creditors themselves, some of the 

creditors are against increasing this compensation, to the best of 

your knowledge? 

Mr. GOLD. I think the creditor industry would not like to see the 

brackets increased on the asset cases, as was discussed earlier this 

morning, because that would in theory reduce the net amount that 

goes to the creditors. I do not agree with that. I think it is well understood in the American economy and capitalism, incentives do 

work. It is only a question of degree. And it is not to say that all 

incentives work, but if you increase the percentages, I think most 

trustees, I would certainly feel like this is now even a greater incentive to raise more money to work even harder. 

So, increasing the brackets, I think, would be an advantage. And, 

frankly, I think it would be an advantage to the creditors as well, 

certainly the creditors because—— 

Mr. COHEN. Since it would be an advantage to the creditors, and 

since they are the primary beneficiaries of the trustees’ work, 

should the doctrine of estoppel be invoked to say that they should 

estopped to be against any increase in the fees? [Laughter.] 

Or should the definition of chutzpah be applied for being against 

it? 

90 

Mr. GOLD. Chutzpah could be a better word. My grandmother 

would agree, yes. 

Mr. COHEN. Okay. Mr. Brewer, what is it that makes you believe 

that these, other than the fact that trustees have been having the 

same fee since ’94 and that they are quitting the profession, that 

you think that their fee should be increased in asset cases as well 

as non-asset cases? 

Mr. BREWER. Well, I mean, to me, the issue is they need more 

money, you know, for what they do. I think they are probably fairly 

adequately compensated based on the fee schedule for the asset 

cases. But we have got to find a way to increase the fee, whether 

it be another $60, $40, some amount, to the Chapter 7 trustee in 

the no-asset case. 

The trouble is, in my opinion, that the consumer debtors, the noasset folks, and they are the low people on the totem pole. If you 

are trying to look around for who can kind of suffer more financial 

difficulty, those are the people who can least do it. We just cannot 

put them on to those people. So, we have go to—— 

Mr. COHEN. But they are the closest to the floor, so they are the 

easiest to step on, and normally that is an easier solution. 

Mr. BREWER. No, I understand, you know. I mean, these people, 

where I come from—you probably have the same in Tennessee. You 

know, you cannot get blood out of a turnip. And these folks are flat 

out turnips. And, you know, you can keep squeezing them, but at 

some point, you know—— 

Mr. COHEN. And BAPCPA caused them to pay some more money 

already, did it not, in 2005? 

Mr. BREWER. Oh, very much so. There was some talk about, you 

know, what the Chapter 7 trustees duties have in cost. You ought 

to come to my office and look at the extra duties I have got. Chapter 7 trustees do not really have to deal with the means test much. 

That becomes—— 

Mr. COHEN. I am about to get to the red light. 

Mr. Hogan, is Bank of America one of your clients? 

Mr. HOGAN. Yes. 

Mr. COHEN. And is Bank of America against this bill? 

Mr. HOGAN. Again, I have not consulted with them with this, 

about whether they are for or against this bill. 

Mr. COHEN. I will forgo further questions for the red light has 

appeared. 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Cohen. 

Gentleman, thank you all for your attendance today and your 

contribution to this very important issue. 

Without objection, all Members will have 5 legislative days to 

submit to the Chair additional written questions for the witnesses, 

which we will forward and ask the witnesses to respond as promptly as they can so that their answers may be made a part of the 

record. 

Without objection, all Members have 5 legislative days to submit 

any additional materials for inclusion in the record. 

With that, again I thank the witnesses. 

This hearing stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:23 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(91) 

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

92 


67576C-1.eps
93 


67576C-2.eps
94 


67576C-3.eps
95 


67576C-4.eps
96 

f 


67576C-5.eps
97 

Response to Post-Hearing Questions from Robert C. Furr, 

Founding Partner, Furr & Cohen, P.A. (Boca Raton, FL) 


67576E-1.eps
98 


67576E-2.eps
99 


67576E-3.eps
100 


67576E-4.eps
101 

f 


67576E-5.eps
102 

Response to Post-Hearing Questions from H. Jason Gold, Partner, 

Wiley Rein LPP (Washington, DC) and Chapter 7 Trustee (E.D. VA) 


67576F-1.eps
103 

f 


67576F-2.eps
104 

Response to Post-Hearing Questions from William E. Brewer, Jr., 

Founder, The Brewer Law Firm (Raleigh, NC) 


67576G-1.eps
105 


67576G-2.eps
106 

f 


67576G-3.eps
107 

Response to Post-Hearing Questions from Blake Hogan, 

President, American Infosource (Houston, TX) 


67576H-1.eps
108 


67576H-2.eps
109 


67576H-3.eps
110 

f 


67576H-4.eps
111 


67576I-1.eps
112 


67576I-2.eps
113 


67576I-3.eps
114 


67576I-4.eps
115 


67576I-5.eps
116 


67576I-6.eps
117 


67576I-7.eps
118 


67576I-8.eps
119 


67576I-9.eps
120 


67576I-10.eps
121 


67576I-11.eps
122 


67576I-12.eps
123 


67576I-13.eps
124 


67576I-14.eps
125 


67576I-15.eps
126 


67576I-16.eps
127 


67576I-17.eps
128 


67576I-18.eps
129 


67576I-19.eps
130 


67576I-20.eps
131 


67576I-21.eps
132 


67576I-22.eps
133 


67576I-23.eps
134 


67576I-24.eps
135 


67576I-25.eps
136 


67576I-26.eps
137 


67576I-27.eps
138 


67576I-28.eps
139 


67576I-29.eps
140 


67576I-30.eps
141 


67576I-31.eps
142 


67576I-32.eps
143 


67576I-33.eps
144 


67576I-34.eps
145 


67576I-35.eps
146 


67576I-36.eps
147 


67576I-37.eps
148 


67576I-38.eps
149 


67576I-39.eps
150 


67576I-40.eps
151 


67576I-41.eps
152 


67576I-42.eps
153 


67576I-43.eps
154 


67576I-44.eps
155 


67576I-45.eps
156 


67576I-46.eps
157 


67576I-47.eps
158 


67576I-48.eps
159 


67576I-49.eps
160 


67576I-50.eps
161 


67576I-51.eps
162 


67576I-52.eps
163 

Æ 


67576I-53.eps