Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 11, 2018 / Notices 32151 

The United States, on behalf of the 

United States Environmental Protection 

Agency, filed a complaint against MFA 

Incorporated and MFA Enterprises, Inc. 

(collectively, ‘‘MFA’’) seeking injunctive 

relief and the imposition of civil 

penalties for violations of Section 112(r) 

of the Clean Air Act (‘‘CAA’’) in 

connection with MFA’s storage and 

handling of anhydrous ammonia at nine 

of its farm supply centers in Missouri. 

The Consent Decree requires MFA to 

pay a cash civil penalty of $850,000 for 

the violations alleged in the complaint, 

perform injunctive relief, and complete 

a Supplemental Environmental Project 

that involves installing electronic shutoff systems for anhydrous ammonia at 

no fewer than 53 facilities. In return, the 

United States agrees not to pursue MFA 

under Section 112(r) of the Clean Air 

Act for the violations alleged in the 

complaint. 

The publication of this notice opens 

a period for public comment on the 

Consent Decree. Comments should be 

addressed to the Assistant Attorney 

General, Environment and Natural 

Resources Division, and should refer to 

United States v. MFA Incorporated, and 

MFA Enterprises, Inc.., D.J. Ref. No. 90– 

5–2–1–11257. All comments must be 

submitted no later than thirty (30) days 

after the publication date of this notice. 

Comments may be submitted either by 

email or by mail: 

To submit 

comments: Send them to: 

By email ....... pubcomment-ees.enrd@

usdoj.gov. 

By mail ......... Assistant Attorney General, 

U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. 

Box 7611, Washington, DC 

20044–7611. 

During the public comment period, 

the Consent Decree may be examined 

and downloaded at this Justice 

Department website: https://

www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees. 

We will provide a paper copy of the 

Consent Decree upon written request 

and payment of reproduction costs. 

Please mail your request and payment 

to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ— 

ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 

20044–7611. 

Please enclose a check or money order 

for $17.75 (25 cents per page 

reproduction cost) payable to the United 

States Treasury. For a paper copy 

without the exhibits and signature 

pages, the cost is $9.25. 

Jeffrey Sands, 

Assistant Section Chief, Environmental 

Enforcement Section, Environment and 

Natural Resources Division. 

[FR Doc. 2018–14794 Filed 7–10–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

Employment and Training 

Administration (ETA) Program Year 

(PY) 2018; Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act (WIOA) Section 167, 

National Farmworker Jobs Program 

(NFJP) Formula Modifications and 

Allotments 

AGENCY: Employment and Training 

Administration, Labor. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This Notice announces 

updates and modifications to the 

allotment formula for the National 

Farmworker Jobs Program (NFJP), 

authorized under the Workforce 

Innovation and Opportunity Act 

(WIOA), Section 167, and allotments for 

Program Year (PY) 2018. These 

allotments are based on the enacted 

NFJP funding appropriation in the 

Consolidated Appropriation Act, 2018. 

On May 23, 2018, the Employment 

and Training Administration (ETA) 

published a notice in the Federal 

Register (83 FR 23937) concerning the 

use of updated data in and proposed 

modifications to the formula ETA uses 

to distribute funding for NFJP. The 

notice also presented preliminary State 

planning estimates for PY 2018. Public 

comments were requested at that time. 

The comment period closed May 30, 

2018. This notice summarizes and 

responds to the comments, and 

publishes the final PY 2018 allotments. 

DATES: The PY 2018 NFJP allotments 

cover July 1, 2018 through June 30, 

2019. 

ADDRESSES: Questions on this notice can 

be submitted to NFJP@dol.gov or the 

Employment and Training 

Administration, Office of Workforce 

Investment, 200 Constitution Ave. NW, 

Room C4510, Washington, DC 20210, 

Attention: Laura Iban ̃ ez, Unit Chief, 

(202) 693–3645 or Steven Rietzke, 

Division Chief at (202) 693–3912. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laura Iban ̃ ez, Unit Chief, (202) 693– 

3645 or Steven Rietzke, Division Chief 

at (202) 693–3912. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice is published pursuant to Section 

182(d) of the WIOA, Prompt Allotment 

of Funds. 

I. Background 

This notice represents the second of a 

two-stage process. In the first stage, ETA 

solicited and considered public 

comments regarding the use of updated 

data in and three proposed 

modifications to the NFJP allotment 

formula. Based on the comments and 

ETA’s consideration of them, ETA has 

applied the updated data to the formula 

and implemented two of the three 

proposed modifications. In this second 

stage, the final formula modifications 

are described and the resulting 

allotments are published. The updated 

data and modifications have been 

processed in accordance with the 

allotment formula methodology, which 

was described in detail in a notice that 

was published in the Federal Register 

on May 19, 1999 (64 FR 27390), which 

is accessible at https://

www.federalregister.gov/. 

The formula was developed for the 

purpose of distributing funds 

geographically by State service area, on 

the basis of each State service area’s 

relative share of persons eligible for the 

program. New data from each of the four 

data files that have been the basis of the 

formula since 1999 are used to 

determine the distribution of PY 2018 

funds. In addition, beginning in PY 

2018, ETA will implement two 

modifications to the allotment formula, 

which will result in more accurate 

estimates of each State service area’s 

relative share of persons eligible for the 

program. The modifications are the 

result of ETA’s review of the formula in 

the context of the NFJP-eligible 

population and farm labor market 

changes, ETA’s consideration of public 

comments received in response to the 

May 23, 2018 Federal Register Notice 

(FRN) (83 FR 23937), and feedback that 

it received from NFJP grantees prior to 

and following informational webinars 

that ETA hosted on February 23, 2017, 

and April 27, 2017. 

Section II of this notice reviews the 

formula updates and modifications that 

were proposed in the May 23, 2018 

notice. 

Section III summarizes the comments 

that ETA received in response to the 

May 23, 2018 notice and ETA’s 

decisions concerning the allotment 

formula based on those comments. 

Section IV describes a hold-harmless 

provision, which will be put into place 

for the implementation year and the 

following years. The hold-harmless 

provision is designed to provide a 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
32152 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 11, 2018 / Notices 

staged transition from old to new 

funding levels for State service areas. 

This was also proposed and discussed 

in the May 23, 2018 FRN (83 FR 23937). 

Section V describes minimum 

funding provisions to address State 

service areas which would receive less 

than $60,000. 

Section VI describes the application 

of the formula and the hold-harmless 

provision using allotments for PY 2018. 

II. Formula Updates and Modifications 

As with all State allotments since 

1999, the PY 2018 allotments are based 

on four data sources: (1) State-level, 

hired farm labor expenditure data from 

the United States Department of 

Agriculture’s (USDA) Census of 

Agriculture (COA); (2) regional-level, 

average hourly earnings data from the 

USDA’s Farm Labor Survey (FLS); (3) 

regional-level, demographic data from 

ETA’s National Agricultural Workers 

Survey (NAWS); and, (4) Lower Living 

Standard Income Level data from the 

United States Census Bureau’s 

American Community Survey (ACS). 

The PY 2018 allotments are based on 

2012 COA and FLS data, 2006 to 2014 

NAWS data, and 2010 to 2014 ACS data. 

A detailed description of how each data 

source is used in the formula is in the 

May 19, 1999 FRN (64 FR 27390) on 

pages 27396 to 27399. 

In addition to populating the formula 

with new data, two modifications have 

been implemented. Both are ‘‘back-out’’ 

adjustments to the COA hired labor 

expenditures (Wage Bill) to account for: 

(1) Unemployment Insurance (UI) 

payroll tax payments made on behalf of 

farmworkers; and (2) expenditures on 

H–2A workers. A third modification 

was proposed to align the allotment 

formula with the definition of 

dependent under WIOA Section 

167(i)(2)(B) and (3)(B) by accounting for 

eligible dependents ages 14 and over of 

eligible Migrant and Seasonal 

Farmworkers (MSFW) in each State’s 

share of the total eligible population. 

However, based on public comments 

and ETA’s consideration of them, the 

third modification will not be 

implemented. The rationale for not 

implementing this modification is 

described in Section III, below. 

Modifications 1 and 2 more accurately 

estimate each State’s share of the NFJPeligible population. Modification 1 

removes non-wages from COA farm 

labor expenditures. UI payroll tax 

payments, which vary by State, are not 

wages. Modification 2 removes labor 

expenditures on H–2A workers from 

COA farm labor expenditures to align 

the allotment formula with the NFJPeligible population. Therefore, 

including the UI payroll tax payments 

and labor expenditures on H–2A 

workers in the formula did not 

accurately count the number of eligible 

NFJP participants. 

III. Response to Public Comments 

ETA received a total of 24 comments 

from four commenters. Nine comments 

were general in nature, one concerned 

Modification 1, two concerned 

Modification 2, nine concerned 

Modification 3, and three concerned 

state-specific issues. The following is a 

summary of these comments and ETA’s 

response. 

A. General Comments 

General comments concerned basic 

elements of the formula, applying newer 

data to and modifying the formula, 

support for including a hold-harmless 

mechanism, and questions about how a 

hold-harmless works. Several of the 

general comments were supportive of 

using updated data in and modifying 

the allotment formula. Support for the 

modifications, however, was limited to 

modifications 1 and 2: Backing out UI 

and H–2A expenditures from the COA 

Wage Bill, respectively. Two general 

comments concerned the accounting of 

work-authorized farmworkers in the 

formula. One commenter opined that no 

modification was made to account for 

farmworkers who do not have 

authorization to work in the United 

States, and one commenter inquired if 

ETA used 2013–2014 NAWS data on 

work authorization status to determine 

the total number of NFJP-eligible 

individuals. One commenter opined 

that the data used in the formula will 

not fully capture the totality of MSFWs 

to whom grantees provide services, 

while another opined that the Legal 

Services Corporation’s allotment 

formula is a better representation of the 

NFJP-eligible population. Lastly, there 

was a general question about how the 

hold-harmless mechanism affects 

grantees’ percentage of the allotment. 

ETA used nine years (2006–2014) of 

regional-level NAWS data to determine 

the share of crop hours in each state that 

were performed by NFJP-eligible crop 

workers. The eligibility criteria included 

whether a crop worker was authorized 

to work in the United States. The 

application of NAWS data to the 

allotment formula is discussed in 

greater detail in the May 19, 1999 FRN 

(64 FR 27390) on pages 27397 to 27399. 

While ETA is aware that the formula 

does not account for the totality of the 

NFJP-eligible population, it is not aware 

of data sources that could be used to 

estimate subpopulations of NFJPeligible farmworkers that would meet 

the requirements for allotment formula 

of accuracy, transparency, and reliance 

on published data. 

Although there are similarities 

between the LSC and ETA formula, they 

are different, because they are 

constructed for different purposes. 

While LSC’s formula is designed to 

estimate the total number of agricultural 

workers and their dependents who are 

eligible for LSC-funded services, ETA’s 

formula is concerned with determining 

each State service area’s relative share of 

the NFJP-eligible population. Therefore, 

ETA will not adopt the LSC formula. 

The hold-harmless functions in the 

following manner. There is a limited 

total amount of funding to be 

distributed to all of the states. For states 

that would have lost funds based on the 

formula without the hold-harmless, 

when the hold-harmless is applied, 

funding must be reduced from other 

states that did not fall below the holdharmless to make up the shortfall. This 

reduction is implemented by formula 

proportionally across the affected states. 

In some cases, this can result in a state 

experiencing a reduction in funding 

with the hold-harmless provision even 

though it would have experienced an 

increase without the hold-harmless 

provision. However, in no instance will 

a state’s funding fall below the holdharmless level. 

B. Modification 1 Comment 

One commenter agreed that it was 

appropriate to remove UI payroll tax 

payments from Census of Agriculture 

farm labor expenditures (Modification 

1), noting that UI payments are not 

wages, and UI rules, regulations, and 

rates vary by State. 

ETA is pleased that it is now possible 

to back out this number from the 

calculation of the NFJP allotment 

formula. 

C. Modification 2 Comments 

One commenter questioned the 

backing out of H–2A expenditures from 

COA expenditures (Modification 2) due 

to: (1) A recent increase in the number 

of foreign-born farmworkers employed 

through the H–2A program, which 

could create an increase in emergencies 

for which NFJP grantees will be asked 

to provide assistance; and (2) a greater 

coordination, stemming from the 

enactment of the WIOA, between State 

Monitor Advocates (SMA) and NFJP 

grantees regarding the provision of 

emergency services for H–2A 

farmworkers. 

ETA has determined that 

Modification 2 is needed to strike a 

balance between ETA policy concerning 

the utilization of grant funds for 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 11, 2018 / Notices 32153 

emergency services and the primary 

purpose of NFJP, which is to strengthen 

the ability of eligible MSFWs and their 

dependents to obtain or retain 

unsubsidized employment, stabilize 

their unsubsidized employment, and 

achieve economic self-sufficiency, 

including upgraded employment in 

agriculture (WIOA 20 CFR 685.100). 

D. Modification 3 Comments 

Of the nine comments concerning 

Modification 3, only one was 

supportive. Generally, commenters 

expressed concern that Modification 3 

caused big changes in funding levels for 

some states, particularly those in the 

Midwest that have large numbers of 

animal agricultural workers relative to 

crop workers. One commenter pointed 

out that the Department was able to 

estimate the share of animal agricultural 

workers in each state with income 

below the Lower Living Standard 

Income Level (LLSIL) and inquired if 

the Department was also able to 

estimate the number of dependents of 

animal agricultural workers and, if not, 

whether it would be possible to assume 

animal agricultural and crop workers 

are similar with respect to the number 

of their offspring. Another commenter 

opined that the Department should 

either use data on crop workers to 

estimate the number of dependents of 

animal agricultural workers or drop 

Modification 3. One commenter 

inquired if the Department had used 

NAWS data to account for eligible 

dependents of eligible MSFWs in each 

State’s share of the total NFJP-eligible 

population and, if so, had it accounted 

for the fact that some children of 

farmworkers are themselves 

farmworkers, while another commenter 

opined that the Department triplecounted dependents because some are 

themselves farmworkers and some have 

two farmworker parents. Lastly, one 

commenter expressed concern that 

grantees were not given sufficient time 

to comment on Modification 3. 

ETA informed the public through the 

May 23, 2018 FRN (83 FR 23937) of its 

proposal to use NAWS data to estimate, 

by region, the average number of NFJPeligible dependents ages 14 and above 

per MSFW-eligible crop worker and, in 

doing so, accounted for the fact that 

some dependents are themselves 

farmworkers. 

Based on the public comments 

received, ETA agrees with the 

comments that states with large 

numbers of animal agricultural workers 

relative to crop workers would be 

unfairly impacted by this modification. 

As such, it has not applied Modification 

3 to the PY 2018 allotment formula. 

Should survey data on animal 

agricultural workers, like NAWS data on 

crop workers, become available, ETA 

would reconsider applying this 

modification to the formula and would 

give the public an opportunity to 

comment. 

Although in some circumstances it 

may be appropriate to use demographic 

data collected from crop agricultural 

workers to estimate the characteristics 

of animal agricultural workers, ETA 

does not believe it would be appropriate 

to use crop worker data to estimate, by 

region of the country, the average 

number of NFJP-eligible dependents per 

eligible MSFW employed in animal 

agriculture. Doing so would require ETA 

to make a large number of assumptions, 

which would fail to adhere to the 

requirements for allotment formula of 

accuracy, transparency, and reliance on 

published data. 

Regarding the question and opinion 

about over-counting dependents of crop 

workers, ETA confirms that it did not 

over-count these dependents. ETA 

reviewed the analysis program that was 

used to estimate, by region, the average 

number of eligible dependents ages 14 

and over per eligible MSFW and 

confirms that dependents who 

themselves worked in agriculture were 

not included in the analysis. 

Furthermore, crop workers in families 

where the spouse was also a farmworker 

were weighted appropriately, so that the 

number of dependents in such families 

was not overestimated. 

ETA will include background 

analyses steps, such as these, in a future 

FRN concerning changes to the 

allotment formula involving the 

calculation of dependents, should it 

ever determine that it is able to account 

for eligible dependents of eligible 

MSFWs employed in animal agriculture 

in the NFJP allotment formula. 

E. State-Specific Comments 

Two commenters inquired how a 

particular state would be impacted by 

the hold-harmless, and one inquired 

about the breakdown of funds, within a 

particular state, by grantee. 

ETA would like to clarify that a 

State’s hold-harmless is not based on its 

PY 2018 allotment percentage share 

without the hold-harmless. The 

calculation is based on 95 percent of its 

PY 2017 allotment percentage share 

(column 2) as applied to the PY 2018 

formula funds available. 

Regarding the breakdown of a State’s 

award by grantee within that State, ETA 

will provide this information when it 

issues its final allotment TEGL. 

IV. Description of the Hold-Harmless 

Provision 

For PY 2018, 2019, and 2020, the 

Department intends to apply a holdharmless provision to the allotment 

formula in order to allow a staged 

transition from the application of the 

previous formula to the modified 

formula. The hold-harmless provision 

provides for a stop loss/stop gain limit 

to transition to the use of the updated 

data. Due to the length of time since the 

data has been updated, it is anticipated 

there may be significant changes for a 

few states, necessitating the stop loss/ 

stop gain approach. The stop loss/stop 

gain approach is based on a State 

service area’s previous year’s allotment 

percentage share, which is its relative 

share of the total formula allotments. 

The staged transition of the holdharmless provision will be implemented 

specifically as follows: 

(1) In PY 2018, State service areas will 

receive an amount equal to at least 95 

percent of their PY 2017 allotment 

percentage share, as applied to the PY 

2018 formula funds available; 

(2) In PY 2019, State service areas will 

receive an amount equal to at least 90 

percent of their PY 2018 allotment 

percentage share, as applied to the PY 

2019 formula funds available; 

(3) In PY 2020, State service areas will 

receive an amount equal to at least 85 

percent of their PY 2019 allotment 

percentage share, as applied to the PY 

2020 formula funds available. 

In PY 2018, 2019, and 2020, the holdharmless provision also provides that no 

State service area will receive an 

amount that is more than 150 percent of 

their previous year’s allotment 

percentage share. 

In PY 2021, since the Department has 

a responsibility to use the most current 

and reliable data available, amounts for 

the new awards will be based on 

updated data from the sources described 

in Section II, pending their availability. 

At that time, the Department will 

determine whether the changes to State 

allotments are significant enough to 

warrant another hold-harmless 

provision. Otherwise, allotments to each 

State service area will be for an amount 

resulting from a direct allotment of the 

proposed funding formula without 

adjustment. 

V. Minimum Funding Provisions 

A State area that would receive less 

than $60,000 by application of the 

formula will, at the option of the DOL, 

receive no allotment or, if practical, be 

combined with another adjacent State 

area. Funding below $60,000 is deemed 

insufficient for sustaining an 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
32154 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 11, 2018 / Notices 

independently administered program. 

However, if practical, a State 

jurisdiction that would receive less than 

$60,000 may be combined with another 

adjacent State area. 

VI. Program Year 2018 Allotments 

The state allotments set forth in the 

Table appended to this notice reflect the 

distribution resulting from the allotment 

formula described above. For PY 2017, 

$81,896,000 was appropriated for 

migrant and seasonal farmworker 

programs, of which $75,505,575 was 

allotted on the basis of the old formula 

after $407,010 was set aside for program 

integrity. The remaining $5,489,415 of 

the PY 2017 appropriation was retained 

to fund housing grants after $27,585 was 

set aside for program integrity, and 

$494,000 was retained for Training and 

Technical Assistance. The figures in the 

first numerical column show the actual 

PY 2017 formula allotments to State 

service areas. The next column shows 

the percentage of each allotment. 

For PY 2018, the funding level 

provided for in the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2018 for the 

migrant and seasonal farmworker 

program is $81,203,000 and will be 

allotted on the basis of the formula. For 

purposes of illustrating the effects of the 

allotment formula, the State service area 

allotments with the application of the 

first-year (95 percent) hold-harmless 

and minimum funding provisions, 

followed by the percentages, are shown 

in columns 3 and 4. The difference 

between PY 2017 and PY 2018 

allotments are shown in column 5. The 

sixth column of the Table shows the 

allotments based on the formula without 

the application of the hold-harmless or 

minimum funding provisions. The 

percentages are reported in column 7. 

Rosemary Lahasky, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Employment 

and Training, Labor. 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 11, 2018 / Notices 32155 

[FR Doc. 2018–14747 Filed 7–10–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–C 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

Request for Feedback on the 

Interagency Arctic Research Policy 

Committee’s Draft Principles for 

Conducting Research in the Arctic 

ACTION: Request for public comment on 

Principles for Conducting Research in 

the Arctic; Corrected. 

SUMMARY: The National Science 

Foundation (NSF) published a 

document in the Federal Register of 

July 5, 2018, concerning request for 

public comment on the Principles for 

Conducting Research in the Arctic. The 

notice was published without a link to 

the document under review. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICESEN11JY18.001</GPH>

py 2017 

Allotment 

State (1) 

Total $75,505,575 

Alabama 764,119 

Alaska 

Arizona 2,057,698 

Arkansas 1,104,657 

California 19,283,115 

Colorado 964,874 

Connecticut 340,039 

Delaware 122,461 

Dis! of Columbia 

Florida 4,000,446 

Georgia 1,478,430 

Hawaii 318,882 

Idaho 1,037,089 

Illinois 1,386,739 

Indiana 891,099 

Iowa 1,135,326 

Kansas 1,037,193 

Kentucky 1,168,337 

Louisiana 878,803 

Maine 282,793 

Maryland 349,786 

Massachusetts 310,726 

Michigan 1,350,141 

Minnesota 1,190,716 

Mississippi 1,251,630 

Missouri 951,239 

Montana 576,293 

Nebraska 1,049,996 

Nevada 173,439 

New Hampshire 98,352 

New Jersey 671,802 

New Mexico 913,490 

New York 1,598,538 

North Carolina 2,596,474 

North Dakota 586,161 

Ohio 1,215,667 

Oklahoma 1,228,006 

Oregon 1,902,686 

Pennsylvania 1,490,645 

Puerto Rico 2,950,975 

Rhode Island 37,337 

South Carolina 932,956 

South Dakota 598,476 

Tennessee 827,313 

Texas 6,438,740 

Utah 279,058 

Vermont 184,099 

Virginia 895,239 

Washington 2,981,590 

West Virqinia 189,444 

Wisconsin 1,206,739 

Wyoming 225,722 

U. S. Department of Labor 

Employment and Training Administration 

National Farmworker Jobs Program 

Impact of Final PY 2018 Allotments to States 

py 2018 

With hold harmless 

Ul H-2AAdil 

Percentage Allotment Percentage Difference 

Share Share (PY 2018 vs. PY 2017) 

(2) (3) (4) (5) 

100.00000 $81,203,000 100.00000 $5,697,425 

1 01200 780,688 0.96140 16,569 

0.00000 0.00000 

2.72523 2,208,505 2.71973 150,807 

1.46301 1,128,611 1.38986 23,954 

25.53866 20,302,807 2500253 1,019,692 

1.27788 1,172,108 1.44343 207,234 

0.45035 350,127 0.43117 10,088 

0.16219 135,621 0.16701 13,160 

0.00000 0.00000 

5.29821 4,087,192 503330 86,746 

1.95804 1,510,489 1.86014 32,059 

0.42233 325,797 0.40121 6,915 

1.37353 1,546,823 1.90488 509,734 

1.83660 1,520,015 1.87187 133,276 

1.18018 996,927 1.22770 105,828 

1.50363 1,381,814 1.70168 246,488 

1.37366 1,061,734 1.30751 24,541 

1.54735 1,193,671 1.46998 25,334 

1.16389 897,859 1.10570 19,056 

0.37453 288,925 0.35581 6,132 

0.46326 357,371 0.44010 7,585 

0.41153 317,464 0.39095 6,738 

1.78813 1,852,921 2.28184 502,780 

1.57699 1,418,215 1.74651 227,499 

1.65767 1,278,771 1.57478 27,141 

1.25983 971,866 1.19684 20,627 

0.76325 588,789 0.72508 12,496 

1.39062 1,127,274 1.38822 77,278 

0.22970 177,200 0.21822 3,761 

0.13026 100,577 0.12386 2,225 

0.88974 686,369 0.84525 14,567 

1.20983 933,298 1.14934 19,808 

2.11711 1,633,201 201126 34,663 

3.43878 2,652,776 3.26684 56,302 

0.77631 720,475 0.88725 134,314 

1.61004 1,242,028 1.52953 26,361 

1.62638 1,254,634 1.54506 26,628 

2.51993 2,129,586 2.62255 226,900 

1.97422 1,522,968 1.87551 32,323 

3.90829 3,014,964 3.71287 63,989 

0.04945 52,828 0.06506 15,491 

1.23561 953,186 1.17383 20,230 

0.79262 611,453 0.75299 12,977 

1.09570 845,253 1 04091 17,940 

8.52750 6,578,359 8.10113 139,619 

0.36959 406,255 0.50030 127,197 

0.24382 188,091 0.23163 3,992 

1.18566 914,652 1.12638 19,413 

3.94883 3,931,488 4.84156 949,898 

0.25090 193,552 0.23836 4,108 

1.59821 1,426,806 1.75709 220,067 

0.29895 230,617 0.28400 4,895 

Without hold harmless 

Allotment Percentage 

Share 

(6) (7) 

$81 ,203,000 100.00000 

768,204 0.94603 

0.00000 

2,432,392 2.99545 

1,096,396 1.35019 

22,360,997 27.53716 

1,290,930 1.58976 

385,621 0.47489 

149,369 0.18395 

0.00000 

3,606,857 4.44178 

1,602,040 1.97288 

308,641 0.38009 

1,703,632 209799 

1,674,107 206163 

1,097,990 1.35215 

1,521,896 1.87419 

1,169,367 1.44005 

1,000,708 1.23235 

764,787 0.94182 

315,182 0.38814 

370,569 0.45635 

349,258 0.43010 

2,040,761 2.51316 

1,561,987 1.92356 

929,482 1.14464 

944,305 1.16289 

602,338 0.74177 

1,241,551 1.52895 

182,939 0.22529 

110,773 0.13641 

577,864 0.71163 

1,005,311 1.23802 

1,509,341 1.85873 

2,528,390 3.11367 

793,513 0.97720 

1,358,636 1.67314 

844,974 1 04057 

2,345,472 2.88841 

1,424,004 1.75363 

2,279,197 2.80679 

58,183 0.07165 

777,471 0.95744 

585,156 0.72061 

857,454 1 05594 

4,828,716 5.94647 

447,439 0.55101 

178,027 0.21924 

960,818 1.18323 

4,330,041 5.33237 

123,103 0.15160 

1,571,448 1.93521 

235,363 0.28985