The following significant part of the process for authorship is studying the write. Let's see now 3 designs which are a type of process to foster the process for writing. It's the stage in which you must correct the mistakes within the write as well as feel of means to foster your authorship. The entire process of editing write my essay custom writing another major part of writing. The function of the example essay is to generate available a more complete evaluation of a dilemma. When you place an purchase, regardless of what subject it's about, it is possible to really make certain that you will have core areas of investigation performed in your essay. Ordinarily a kid's essay homework would contain a couple paragraphs. This sort of composition offers you the skill to create your composing abilities without pressure. Composition composing might be challenging project but is a crucial area of extensive academic training.
So he retires to his property at nij?? wherever he will not write to her and sulks.
Conclusion can function as closing and the most crucial component of your composition. Outline of your own essay is critical. Thus, you're required to make certain it's written as clearly and powerfully as possible, jointly with the assistance of a brilliant article creating software. For further aid by signifies of your essay, we'll enable. While writing this sort of essay, the author must show remarkable advice of things. Firstly, he has to be familiar with the truth that all the classes in the essay must disclose the general theme of the essay to the audience. For all these authors that are additionally photographers, in inclusion, there are composing contests using a pictures element to to them. The issue will decide on the essential or main topic of the article. This site has most various sorts of essays and maybe they're efficiently mentioned.
Make sure you include http://www so that it is a link that is live.
Story essays are frequently summary, test, and private. When you purchase an essay, you're guaranteed to get your custom composition documents close to period. Powerful essays also called argumentative documents. Listing down the large subtopics of your own essay. Regardless, the author must ensure the judgment definitely emphasizes the intention of the categorization or divide that has been initially made before composing the entire thing. This type of essay is truly a familiar course of ordering and conferring notions within an academic setting. Since there's no 1 tactic to brainstorm, this provides the author an opportunity to discover some ideas for the essay without being bound by its own unique business structure. Crossing many of folks think story composition composing is simple, but it is not. Academic papers creating performs a vital role in keeping up an excellent effect on any teacher.
The writer who is designated to the function has to be an expert in that specific area of study.
Be aware that scholarship article supplies the scholarship supplier a fantastic idea about or to acquire info about the individual assisting the program, and gives them a far more thorough view in your college along with home life. Not among the pupils may become away from the project of writing documents throughout their educational decades The goal of an educational composition is consistently to convince beginners to expand thoughts and notions in their own writing. Thus, many of the pupils may have to be acquainted with this sort of writing. Being a genuine student, you are going to be requested to compose varied sorts of duties during your educational decades Samples of numerous types of openings are discovered on the internet site of UNC's Writing Centre. This difficulty is the reality that, when studying such an article, it actually is cloudy regarding what the pupil is assessing until near to the conclusion.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized on October 9, 2018 by Akiva.


text:
section.category-slice{
    display: none;
}
.categories-item{
    margin-top: 0.5em;
}
.categories-item .categories-badge{
    font-size: 10px;
    color: #fff;
    background-color: #999;
    padding: 0 7px 1px 7px;
    border-radius: 9px;
    float: right;
    transition:0.4s ease;
    -webkit-transition:0.4s ease;
    -moz-transition:0.4s ease;
    -o-transition:0.4s ease;
}
.categories-item:hover .categories-badge{
    -webkit-transform:rotate(360deg) scale(1.2);
    -moz-transform:rotate(360deg) scale(1.2);
    -o-transform:rotate(360deg) scale(1.2);
    -ms-transform:rotate(360deg) scale(1.2);
    transform:rotate(360deg) scale(1.2);
}

.dropdown .btn,
.dropdown .dropdown-menu{
    font-size: 17px;
}
a {
    color: #660000;
    text-decoration: none;
}

a:visited {
    text-decoration: none;
}

a:link {
    text-decoration: none;
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Hello everyone and Happy Easter to all of you that are celebrating this Day and Happy 1st of April! Anyone got fooled today?
Today I'm showing you what I've read and watched in the past few weeks!
I've read 7 books! Seven!! That's pretty great! I listened to one audiobook, I've read one physical book and five ebooks. Of these five ebooks, I've finally had the time to read 3 review copies which waited on my ARC shelf like forever. (At least one of these books!) This makes a total of 2526 pages that I've read in March! I'm amazed by that number!
And now let's see how many episodes I've watched these last 31 days.
What have you read and watched in March? Please let me know in the comments below!
* These ebooks were sent to me by the publisher or author in exchange for an honest review!
Seven books is an incredible amount to read in one month! Along with the amount of episodes you watched as well, I am impressed! I read four books in the month of March which included: All That She Can See by Carrie Hope Fletcher, Wonder by R. J. Palacio, Daisy Jones by Mack Mama and Aversion by Kenechi Udogu. I saw Ready Player One yesterday in the cinema and thoroughly enjoyed it, my boyfriend not so much as he read the book not to long ago and fell in love with it – the movie is very different to the book and so he felt it could have been a lot better although still enjoying the graphics, characters and (most) of the storyline. I will read the book soon, I hope and see what I think. I've also been watching the anime series: Sword Art Online, which I'd highly recommend if you haven't watched it yet and, of course, if you're into anime. I hope you have a great Easter weekend!


text:
Truth es un docudrama político estadounidense del año 2015. La película fue escrita y dirigida por James Vanderbilt en su debut como director. Está basado en las memorias de la periodista estadounidense y productora de noticias de televisión Mary Mapes, Truth and Duty: The Press, the President and the Privilege of Power.

La película se enfoca en los documentos Killian y los últimos días del presentador de noticias Dan Rather (Robert Redford) y la productora Mary Mapes (Cate Blanchett ) en CBS Noticias.

Truth tuvo su estreno mundial en el Festival de Cine Internacional de Toronto de 2015.

Resumen

En los meses previos a las elecciones presidenciales de 2004, Mary Mapes (productora del programa de noticias en horario estelar 60 Minutes Wednesday) y su equipo formado por Mike Smith (Grace), Lucy Scott (Moss) y el Coronel Roger Charles (Quaid) buscan evidencia que verifique si George W. Bush recibió algún trato especial durante su tiempo en el ejército. Charles, teniendo fe en el ejército y lo que éste representa, confía en que no hubo errores, a pesar de que se habían perdido los registros de Bush, de que varios de ellos estaban alterados y de que Bush tenía dificultades para cumplir con las mínimas pruebas de aptitud física. En busca de todas las pistas, Mapes y su tripulación eventualmente encuentran a Bill Burkett, quien les dice que tiene evidencia contundente en forma de memorandos y cartas que dictaban que Bush en efecto había recibido un trato especial. Eventualmente, a partir de esta evidencia, Mapes escribe una historia que Dan Rather reporta en una edición de 60 minutos.[1]

Después de la ventilación, Mapes y Rather se enfrentan a preguntas sobre la precisión del segmento. Los documentos fundamentales en los que se basaron estas alegaciones fueron inmediatamente cuestionados por diversas fuentes, algunas indicando que los documentos estaban falsificaciones, que luego fueron investigados y amplificados por varios locutores de radio, blogueros y numerosos medios de comunicación, (incluyendo The Washington Post y la propia CBS). No tardaron de encontrar que ciertas características de los memorandos, tales como la fuente y el espaciado de las letras, indicaban que éstos habían sido creados en un ordenador con Microsoft Word, y por lo tanto, no en una máquina de escribir como correspondería a principios de los 70. Posteriormente, Burkett admitió que había mentido acerca de dónde los había obtenido.

Después del escándalo, Mapes, su tripulación, y Rather se enfrentan con cargos que acusan a la agenda política liberal de Mapes de haber jugado un papel en la ventilación del segmento. Uno por uno, se ven obligados a hacer frente a un panel de revisión interna para determinar si el sesgo político fue o no un factor en el informe. Smith, Scott y Charles son finalmente prohibidos de su trabajo y posteriormente despedidos. Mapes se defiende y presenta la evidencia desde su punto de vista. Después de la audiencia, Mapes es despedida y Rather hace su última transmisión, citando cómo el coraje le ayudó a él y a su tripulación a superar los momentos más difíciles.

[1] https://decine21.com/peliculas/verdad-truth-31588

Películas sobre periodismo

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


"Malaysia offers steamy jungles packed with wildlife, beautiful beaches, idyllic islands, culinary sensations and multi-ethnic cultures. Malaysia is like two countries in one, cleaved in half by the South China Sea. The multicultural peninsula flaunts Malay, Chinese and Indian influences, while Borneo hosts a wild jungle of orang-utans, granite peaks and remote tribes. Throughout these two regions is an impressive variety of microcosms ranging from the space-age high-rises of Kuala Lumpur to the smiling longhouse villages of Sarawak.
And then there´s the food. Malaysia (particularly along the peninsular west coast) has one of the best assortments of cuisines in the world. Start with Chinese-Malay `Nonya´ fare, move on to Indian curries, Chinese buffets, Malay food stalls and even impressive Western food.
Malaysia's population is predicted to rise to 37.27 million by 2030. These millions of extra people will all need space to live, food to eat, energy to consume, and will increase the burden on the planet's resources. This country has a fertility rate of 2.58. The fertility rate is, in simple terms, the average amount of children that each woman has. The higher the figure, the quicker the population is growing, although, to calculate the rate you also need to take into account morbidity, i.e., the rate at which people die. If people live healthy and long lives and morbidity is low, then, 2.0 approximates to the replacement rate, which would keep the population stable. If all countries had such a fertility rate, population growth would end. The actual replacement rate in most developed countries is around 2.1.
Malaysia is very poor at ensuring human rights and freedom compared to the rest of the world, and it has cultural issues when it comes to tolerance and equality. Malaysia does worse than average in supporting personal, civil & economic freedoms18, eliminating modern slavery19, supporting press freedom20 and in LGBT equality21. And finally, it falls into the bottom 20 in fighting anti-semitic opinions22, commentary from Human Rights Watch23 and in its nominal commitment to Human Rights24. Malaysia "continued its crackdown on critical voices and human rights defenders in 2017". Malaysia already persecutes non-Muslims and thoroughly rejects human rights, but in 2017 it continued to deepen its Islam-based intolerance and prejudice even further25, and in 2017 was considering giving Shariah courts more powers25. Anti-free-speech laws are used to persecute critics even for minor and indirect criticisms of government policy25. LGBT and women's rights are both rejected.
The CIA World Factbook has slightly different data, and states: Muslim (or Islam - official) 60.4%, Buddhist 19.2%, Christian 9.1%, Hindu 6.3%, Confucianism, Taoism, other traditional Chinese religions 2.6%, other or unknown 1.5%, none 0.8% (2000 census)29.
Freedom of Religion and Belief: Malaysia has a particular problem when it comes to human rights surrounding freedom of belief, with non-Muslims facing persecution and legal restrictions impacting on many aspects of their personal lives25, and deconversion from Islam is difficult, impossible, and illegal30.
United Nations Development Programme: Malaysia country profile.


text:
Eminem Is the First Artist to Have Three Albums Spend 300 Weeks on the Billboard Chart
Congrats Slim Shady.
Frederick M. Brown/Getty Images
Music Nov 2, 2017
According to Forbes, Eminem recently set a new record after another one of his albums spent 300 weeks on the Billboard 200 chart. Proving once again his place in hip-hop and music greatness, Eminem's 2010 album, Recovery clocked its 300th week on the Billboard chart sitting at number 160. And although other albums have stayed on the chart for at least 300 weeks, Eminem is the first artist to have three albums make a lengthy stay on the ranking. The Detroit rapper's albums Curtain Call: The Hits and The Eminem Show have spent an astounding 363 and 342 weeks on the chart respectively. Learn more about Eminem's impressive achievement over at Forbes.
Also, Eminem is set to donate the proceeds from his "Lose Yourself" lawsuit to aid hurricane relief efforts.
EminemBillboardSlim Shady
Playboi Carti's 'Whole Lotta Red' Hits No. 1 on the Billboard 200 Chart
Leading Artists Create Billboards In Response to The Current U.S. Political State
Lil Baby's 'My Turn' Returns to No. 1 on Billboard 200 Three Months After Release
Lil Baby's 'My Turn' Is the Longest-Charting Album of 2020 So Far
adidas EQT Cushion ADV Gets Decked out In "Cargo Camo"
Olive upgrade.
By Joanna Fu/ Nov 2, 2017
Love Hultén Returns With Another Stunning Retro Gaming Device
Swedish design meets arcade gaming.
By HB Team/ Nov 2, 2017
Joey Badass Doesn't Think Donald Trump Is the Only Problem in the US
"We had these problems with Obama."
By HP Cheung/ Nov 2, 2017
'Star Wars: The Last Jedi' Drops New "Awake" Trailer
"Darkness rises… and light to meet it."
T-Pain Sues Cash Money Over 'Tha Carter III' Royalties
"Got Money"?
On and DJ Brendan Fallis Balance Fitness and Music
Presented by On
The Swiss brand presents its latest versatile running shoe.
Presented by On / Nov 2, 2017

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Welcome to the Resources homepage. The information provided here is designed to assist all members of the Empire State College community to learn more about disability related issues in higher education.
If you encounter a link that is no longer working, please notify the Office of Accessibility Resources and Services at: Disability.Services@esc.edu.
All links will open in new windows. Close the window to return to this page.
Adobe on-line conversion tool for PDFs (Link will open in new window) This tool will convert your PDF file to either html or text formats to allow for use with a screen reader.
American Public Transportation Association (Link will open in new window) This site offers a searchable database of all public transportation authorities in the US on state and local levels.
The following links are resources that can be found within New York state. In some instances, you can search the web site to find your local resources.
Please click on a link below to learn of the resources that are available in your center's regional area.


Has anyone really noticed the one thing that is common through all the mass/school shooting we've had to deal with? They have all been soft targets — no one has been there to shoot back. Maybe we should start there. I have heard no celebrity say they are getting rid of their armed bodyguards. Non of our politicians, active or retired, have suggested getting rid of theirs. Are they really more important than our children? I think not. So maybe it's time to protect our own as they are protected.
Maybe it's time to actively protect what is most important to us with more than wringing of hands and moaning about life and death. Hire retired police and military to patrol our schools armed. Take a lesson from Israel. In 1974 in a school shooting 22 children and 3 others died and 68 were injured. It is now a requirement to have an armed guard in any school of 100 or more students. And they do not just stand or sit around. They move throughout the school. Their intent is to prevent, not clean up after.
People immediately want to blame the NRA for gun violence. How many of the shooters have been NRA members? None. In the last church shooting to make the news (soft target) the shooter was taken down when he went back to his vehicle for more ammunitions. Who took him down? An NRA member with an AR-15. What would have happened had he (and his gun) not been there? The NRA is fair game for those who want what? Not protection for our children. A criminal is called a criminal because he has no respect for the law. A "gun-free zone" is an invitation to come in, not go away. Why do you think they are called criminals?


text:
"Pulitzer Prize Creative Fiction": Thomas Pickering Dissects Congressional Follies, Media Coverage, And 'Cover-Up' Charges
No doubt the degraded quality of congressional oversight astonishes Thomas Pickering, the distinguished American diplomat who oversaw the State Department's Benghazi review board — although he tries not to say so too directly. For his demanding and difficult effort – only the most recent in a long history of public service under both Republican and Democratic administrations — Pickering has found himself under sustained attack by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), the excitable partisan who chairs the House Government Reform Committee.
Last Friday, Issa subpoenaed Pickering to deliver a taped deposition to the committee behind closed doors, without offering a public chance to answer the charges already lodged by Republicans against the Accountability Review Board report authored by Pickering and retired admiral Mike Mullen.
Immediately prior to this latest skirmish, Pickering spoke with The National Memo about the ARB report, political maneuvering by the administration's adversaries, and media coverage of the Benghazi "scandal." Asked whether he had ever experienced or seen anything resembling Issa's conduct, Pickering said, "No, I haven't.…I suspect that on this particular issue, this guy [Issa] is driven by whatever will maximize his capability to be tough on the administration. This seems to be one effort he's kind of landed on to make that happen. But I'm only guessing here," he added.
Meanwhile, Pickering hasn't noticed much attention being given on Capitol Hill to the extensive recommendations that he and Mullen made to improve security in dangerous posts around the world. "I can't tell you whether anyone [in Congress] has sat down and examined them and wanted to have hearings on [the recommendations]" – instead of the notorious "talking points" developed by the White House last September. "So far I haven't seen any evidence of that."
For Pickering, the subpoena issued by Issa must be especially confusing. Ever since the Government Reform committee announced its planned hearings on Benghazi last winter, its leadership has repeatedly failed to establish a time when the review board chairman — perhaps the most important witness – could testify. Although at first Pickering says he thought they were "genuinely interested" in getting his testimony, he became "increasingly less inclined" to appear before the committee "as the thing became more politicized."
Before the May 8 hearing, he made a final effort to arrange to testify publicly. But via the White House and the State Department, he learned that his presence was not desired. Before Issa issued his subpoena to Pickering on Friday, he and Mullen had sent a letter requesting an opportunity to testify publicly – and said that they are "not inclined to give testimony in a closed hearing before that [happens]."
Having listened to Issa and others take potshots at him, Mullen, and their report for several weeks, Pickering wants to rebut some of the misinformation they have propagated, for the record. He wants to address claims that the military "could have relieved or in fact changed the situation by sending men or equipment or both the night of the event" – and specifically assertions by Gregory Hicks, the former Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya, that four Special Forces soldiers should have been dispatched to Benghazi from Tripoli. Pickering says those four officers would have arrived in Benghazi too late to help and were needed in Tripoli anyway to treat the wounded, who were brought there after the Benghazi attack.
"The third question that has come up," said Pickering, "is why we didn't investigate the Secretary of State" and her deputies. The "simple and straightforward answer" is that "they played no role in the decision making which was relevant to the preparations for meeting the security crisis in Benghazi," and the role they did play on the night of September 11 "was fairly clearly portrayed to us by other people who attended the meetings, and we had no questions about it. We thought that what they did made sense and fit exactly what should have been done."
What Pickering may mention, if and when he does testify in public, is the role of Congress, which he considers primarily responsible for underfunding the protection of diplomatic posts abroad. Fortunately, legislative idiocy has not prevented the redirection of almost $1.5 billion in funds to improve security in dozens of posts, both physically and with additional security officers and Marine guards.
Aside from the weak oversight of Congress, Pickering also seems critical of the media coverage of Benghazi. In preparing to chair the Accountability Review Board, Pickering said, he "asked for, received, and read all of the press reporting that the State Department could find and put together for me, covering the events in Benghazi and the aftermath, from the initial attack right through to the day we submitted our report."
He undertook this required reading because "I thought there would be useful ideas, leads, analyses that had to be taken into account. What I found in general was a very significant amount of wild, and I think fictionalized, made-up kind of information…
And in effect much of this alleged a kind of betrayal of those people, in one way or another, all of which I thought bordered on Pulitzer Prize creative fiction but didn't bear any relationship to what we were able to determine, both from the documentary evidence, from the extensive film footage that we had an opportunity to review carefully, and of course the interviews we had with people who were on the spot." Indeed, Pickering believes that the ARB report is "the best compilation I've seen of what actually took place."
Pickering won't comment on the "talking points" controversy, which wasn't relevant to the ARB investigation. But he resents broader allegations by the Republicans and their allies in the media — in particular "the allegation that I would be engaged in a cover-up…I hope people feel that I'm a more honest and hopefully more dedicated public servant than that. "
"Our interest was to do everything we could to find out what happened," Pickering said, "and then on the basis of that [investigation] to make as clear recommendations as we could to help the State Department and other agencies so that it wouldn't happen again. That was our motive, that was the driver, and that's where we went. Any effort to cover up would have been a betrayal… We did everything we could in terms of the national interest in saving future lives." He believes it is vital to defend the credibility of the report and prevent it from being undermined. "That's why I'm interested in talking to the American public now, because I think the report is a good report. And so far I haven't heard anything that I believe we didn't consider carefully."
As for his critics, "I would hope they would read the report. If they have, maybe they need to read it again." He laughed. "Both Mike Mullen and I believe that it's important that we have this opportunity, either through Chairman Issa or some other committee, to deal with the people who have concerns about the report and tell them how we were thinking and why we reached the conclusions we did."
By: Joe Conason, The National Memo, May 19, 2013
May 22, 2013 Posted by raemd95 | Benghazi	| Accountability Review Board, Congress, Darrell Issa, House Oversight Committee, media, Michael Mullen, Politics, Republicans, Thomas Pickering | Leave a comment
"Karl Rove's Area Of Expertise": The Guy Responsible For More Than His Share Of Meaningful Scandals
The controversy surrounding Justice Department leak investigations, and surveillance of journalists and phone logs, is clearly a serious matter. But is Karl Rove is the best person to be discussing this?
Appearing Monday on Fox News, Karl Rove attacked the Obama administration's surveilling of Fox reporter James Rosen in a leak investigation as "chilling" and its rationale for doing so "beyond the pale."
"We had to confront this question during the Bush administration," he said. "There were leaks of classified information and in each and every instance, the focus was on the potential leak, not the reporter who received it."
Rove defended the need to prosecute leaks but said the media shouldn't be targeted. "This is really chilling," he said.
If we remove Rove from the equation, I'm sympathetic to concerns about the chilling effect the leak investigations will have on journalists and their sources. It's a point Rachel will probably explore on tonight's show in more detail.
But if we keep Rove in the equation, there are some noteworthy angles to keep in mind. First, like Dave Roberts, I'm not sure how we arrived at the point at which Karl Rove can appear on national television to scrutinize White House controversies. The guy was, after all, responsible for more than his share of meaningful scandals.
Second, I'm even less sure how we arrived at the point at which Karl Rove can appear on national television to discuss and scrutinize White House controversies involving leaks of classified information. It was Rove, after all, who was very nearly indicted for his role in the White House outing an undercover CIA official as part of a larger political strategy.
Third, the focus during the Bush/Cheney era was "on the potential leak, not the reporter who received it"? I don't mean to sound picky, but during Bush/Cheney era, the Justice Department "improperly gained access to reporters' calling records as part of leak investigations." Indeed, it happened quite a bit. One reporter went to jail to protect a White House source during a leak investigation, and another reporter very nearly met the same fate.
Does Rove not remember any of this?
By: Steve Benen, The Maddow Blog, May 20, 2013
May 22, 2013 Posted by raemd95 | Journalists, National Security	| Bush-Cheney Administration, Classified Information, Department of Justice, Fox News Channel, Karl Rove, media, Reporters, Valerie Plame | Leave a comment
"Taxing The Most Vulnerable": Student Loan Debt Is Bad For Women And Congress Is Making It Worse
How bad is the wage gap for women in the workplace?
For college graduates, it's so bad that it begins even before women begin their careers.
According to a study by AAUW, Graduating to a Pay Gap: The Earnings of Women and Men One Year After College Graduation:
Women and men pay the same amount for their college degrees, but they often do not reap the same rewards. Among 2007-08 college graduates, women and men typically borrowed similar amounts to finance their educations, about $20,000. Because women are paid less than men are paid after college, student loan repayments make up a larger part of women's earnings. In 2009, among full-time workers repaying their loans one year after college graduation, just over half of women (53 percent) compared with 39 percent of men were paying more than what we estimate a typical woman or man could reasonably afford to pay toward student loan debt. These numbers have risen in recent years.
Outstanding student loans today total more than $1 trillion, surpassing credit card debt. Student loan debt has increased nearly 300 percent over the last eight years, according to a report by the New York Federal Reserve.
Is Congress doing anything about this problem? As a matter of fact they are. They're making it worse.
This July, unless Congress acts, the interest rate on federally subsidized Stafford loans is set to increase from 3.4 to 6.8 percent. In another example of the Congress' attitude of "don't tax the rich, but tax the most vulnerable," student loans are seen as a nice little moneymaker.
The federal government will make $34 billion this year on student loans. If Congress allows the interest rate on these loans to double, the federal government will bring in even more revenue — money that comes straight from the pockets of students who had to borrow money to go to college.
Of course, not everyone has to pay such a burdensome rate of interest on loans. Big banks can borrow money from the Federal Reserve at a rate of less than 1 percent. There's something very wrong with this picture.
This week, I attended a breakfast meeting with Senator Elizabeth Warren (D. Mass.) where she spoke about the first piece of standalone legislation she is introducing in the United States Senate.
In a speech on the Senate floor, Sen. Warren said:
The Bank on Students Loan Fairness Act would allow students who are eligible for federally subsidized Stafford loans to borrow at the same rate that big banks get through the Federal Reserve discount window. For one year, the Federal Reserve would make funds available to the Department of Education to make loans to students at the same low rate offered to the big banks. This will give students relief from high interest rates while giving Congress time to find a long-term solution.
At our breakfast, I remembered that it was the mobilization of enormous grassroots support for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (then-Professor Warren's brainchild) that kept pressure on Congress to pass the legislation that established that agency. Her fight to keep student loan interest rates low is her next big campaign, and women should pull out all the stops to support her.
AAUW's findings tell us that women are disproportionately likely to take out loans; among 2007-2008 graduates, 68 percent of women borrowed money for college compared to 63 percent of men.
According to the AAUW report:
For many young women, the challenge of paying back student loans is their first encounter with the pay gap. "Student loan debt burden" is defined as the percentage of earnings devoted to student loan payments. A high student loan debt burden is an indicator that repayment may create hardship. Individuals with high student loan debt burden are less likely to own a home, have a car loan, or even make rent payments. High student loan debt burden is a challenge for a growing number of college graduates, men and women alike, but is particularly widespread among women, in large part because of the pay gap.
The National Organization for Women (NOW) has a long history of supporting equal pay, comparable worth and other policies that advance women's economic security. NOW was proud to support Elizabeth Warren in her successful campaign for the U.S. Senate, and we are equally proud to support her urgently needed legislation to reduce the burden of student loan debt.
It's hard to imagine how anyone could oppose a bill that simply requires the Fed to set interest rates for students at the same low rate the big banks get. But get this: an opponent of Sen. Warren's bill reportedly suggested — presumably hoping we've all forgotten about the taxpayers' bailout of the too-big-to-fail banks — that unlike students, the big banks deserve to pay a super-low interest rate because they never fail. And they say the 1 Percent has no sense of humor.
Elizabeth Warren has planted the flag for student loan reform by introducing her bill, and now it's up to us to mobilize support and pressure Congress to pass it. This is grassroots democracy at its best. So, blog about this, write letters to the editor, lobby your senators and your representative.
Help ensure that a college education is a pathway to fulfillment and success for women, and not an opening to crushing debt.
By: Terry O'Neill, President, National Organization for Women, The Huffington Post, May 20, 2013
May 22, 2013 Posted by raemd95 | Education, Women	| Big Banks, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Economic inequality, Elizabeth Warren, Income Gap, National Organization for Women, Stafford Loans, Student Loan Debt | 1 Comment
"Hoping No One Will Know The Difference": Conservatives Shift Gears On IRS To "Income Tax Audits"
Something odd happened to Barack Obama's approval rating last week: nothing. With a bunch of controversies swirling about the administration, one might think Americans would be thinking less of his performance. Yet the latest polls from Gallup and CNN both show his job approval essentially unchanged, at just at or above 50 percent.
So far anyway, these "scandals" are, like most scandals, an almost completely partisan phenomenon. Yes, there are some—Watergate, Iran-Contra—where the facts are so damning and undeniable that even the president's own party can't help but acknowledge them. But Benghazi and the IRS are not Watergate or Iran-Contra. Perhaps they'll turn out to be, if we find out something completely shocking. Perhaps we'll discover that Barack Obama is on tape personally ordering the Cincinnati IRS office to put the screws to Tea Party groups, just as Richard Nixon was on tape ordering his aides to get the IRS to audit his political opponents. But that hasn't happened yet.
So conservatives are trying something new. If you were paying close attention the last couple of days, you saw them bringing up a new charge, one unrelated to the actual controversy: IRS income-tax audits. At first glance that may seem strange. After all, there hasn't been any evidence that anyone was audited because of their political beliefs or activities. This controversy is about political groups being given undue scrutiny when they applied for 501(c)(4) status as "social welfare" organizations. The part of the agency that carries out those reviews doesn't audit individuals' tax returns. Yet here was Peggy Noonan, claiming "The IRS scandal has two parts. The first is the obviously deliberate and targeted abuse, harassment and attempted suppression of conservative groups. The second is the auditing of the taxes of political activists." The "evidence" for Noonan's explosive charge is that she read about a couple of conservatives who were among the 1.5 million Americans who were audited by the IRS last year (read Nate Silver for more on how unbelievably stupid Noonan's allegation is). Here's an account of the weekend's Virginia GOP convention, at which a whole slate of Tea Partiers was selected to run in November's elections there: "By being here today, every one of you has just signed up for an audit by the I.R.S.,' Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, a potential 2016 presidential candidate, said in a keynote speech. 'You are officially now on the White House enemies list.'"
We'll be hearing more of these stories. Because after all, if 1.5 million Americans were audited last year, plenty of them were conservatives. And plenty of those will be happy to tell their stories to Fox News or Rush Limbaugh or Peggy Noonan. "I signed up for my local Tea Party, and not six months later the IRS came after me!" they'll say. Some of these stories will be told in high-profile forums, and others in more obscure outlets; for instance, here's a conservative writer telling her tale of oppression to the Catholic News Agency. During her audit, she says, "They only wanted to talk about who was paying me to do my writing." Really? "Hendershott said that the questions were not explicitly political, but she interpreted them to mean the agency was 'wanting to know if there were individuals or groups who wanted me to write to advance their cause.'" Maybe. Or maybe because she's a writer and they were auditing her income taxes, they were asking her who paid her to write because that's where she gets her income. Just tossing that out there.
It's pretty obvious what's going on here. On one hand, nobody likes the IRS, so people are ready to believe the worst about the agency's activities. On the other hand, getting your 501(c)(4) application subjected to unusual scrutiny is not something most people can relate to. Even worse, the reporting that's emerging about the IRS office in Cincinnati (see here) paints a picture not of some coordinated effort at political oppression, but of a bunch of overworked, ill-trained people who barely understood the standards they were supposed to apply to these applications and didn't get the support they needed from Washington. They ended up acting inappropriately, but it wasn't a criminal conspiracy, and it didn't reach up to the heights of power.
For conservatives, that's not a very satisfying story. But they know that everyone fears getting their tax returns audited. So why not just tell everyone that's what happened?
By: Paul Waldman, Contributing Editor, The American Prospect, May 20, 2013
May 22, 2013 Posted by raemd95 | Conservatives, Internal Revenue Service	| Bobby Jindal, Fox News, Peggy Noonan, Politics, Republicans, Scandals, Tax Audits, Tea-party | Leave a comment
"A Massive Media Deflection": There Is No Scandal in Tracking Down Leaks
In the middle of the other "scandals," i.e. Benghazi and the Internal Revenue Service, that the Obama Administration has to deal with – and which may change the general direction of politics in America at the next general election – there is also the Department of Justice going after the Associated Press in a criminal investigation into leaks of classified information.
The real "news" for us on this last one is that it is no scandal, even though the media are spinning it that way.
Why? Simple: They want to continue getting – from "leakers" inside government – classified information and then publishing it. To them, it's just another "hot story," while for the people actually involved in the situation, it may mean risking their lives or the failure of an operation that could jeopardize our national security. In short, it sells us all out.
This is also why, in our Constitutional form of government, there is absolutely no right or protection for anyone to publish national security information – and "anyone" includes the media and press. Not only that, let's say that a classified document is stolen or taken from an authorized government facility and given to a reporter. In this situation, the government clearly has the right – and even the obligation – to investigate the disappearance of the document and retrieve it by any legal means. This includes getting warrants for telephone records, wiretaps and even carrying out physical searches. And this same logic applies in the digital world.
Is it "legal" for the Justice Department to go after the AP as part of a criminal investigation into the loss or unauthorized disclosure of classified information? Absolutely, and the suggestion of a "scandal" is a massive deflection by the media. Again, the First Amendment simply does not "allow" the publication of national security information – never has, never will.
For some international perspective: We may be the only democracy in the world not to have what is called an "official secrets act," a law that makes it a crime to publish national security information. This explains why we rarely – if ever – see similar situations arise, for example, in Canada, the United Kingdom or most other European countries. In these countries, their media simply do not – under penalty of criminal law – publish their classified information, much less actively seek it out, as they do here.
Do we need such a law here? Again, it is simply impossible to get an objective discussion of this question because of the emotional "freedom of the press" arguments, which begin from the false premise that there is somehow a constitutional right to publish government secrets. There is no such "right."
On the other hand, does the government classify way too much information and keep it classified way too long? Yes. However, this problem has been addressed and readdressed over the years by rules that limit the number of "classification authorities," by periodic reviews of classified information and by limitations on the number of years information can be classified. Of course, because of the immense damage some information could cause if it were released, there have to be exceptions – but this is the very nature of national security related information.
Ultimately, it is the president, as commander in chief, who is responsible for establishing, protecting and eventually releasing this kind of information – not the media.
Accordingly, when I was bi-partisan General Counsel to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), I drafted this rather innocuous provision for inclusion in the fiscal 2001 Intelligence Authorization Act:
Whoever, being an officer or employee of the United States, a former or retired officer or employee of the United States, any other person with authorized access to classified information, or any other person formerly with authorized access to classified information, knowingly and willfully discloses, or attempts to disclose, any classified information acquired as a result of such person's authorized access to classified information to a person (other than an officer or employee of the United States) who is not authorized access to such classified information, knowing that the person is not authorized access to such classified information, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Was there "method to my madness"? Sure, however, it was also surprisingly easy for me to get bipartisan agreement to the language in both Houses of Congress – and also agreement from the White House in a "SAP," a "Statement of Administration Policy." And, after all, who could possibly disagree with it? It was "motherhood and apple pie," as they say in Washington. I held my breath.
Then some media lobbyist must have actually read the legislation and the whole media industry came unglued and went to "general quarters" to defeat actual enactment of the law. So, notwithstanding that the law had already passed both Houses of Congress with bipartisan support, they got to Bill Clinton with an enormous and personal effort: And, Clinton vetoed the law in his final days as president.
At least the Washington Post – one of the world class publishers in this country, along with the New York Times, of leaked U.S. classified information – showed its "true colors" in this vapid editorial about the legislation:
"We don't pretend to be neutral on this subject. Newspapers publish leaked material; our reporters solicit leaks. And some of the leaked material we publish is classified. But it is a mistake to imagine that all leaks of classified information are bad." Editorial, The Washington Post, Aug. 24, 2001
I don't know about you, but I don't want any newspaper editor deciding whether to declassify presumptively sensitive national security information – they simply have no business doing it, regardless of how "hot" the story is or how well connected their "leaker" source is.
Hopefully, it's this sad fact of political life in Washington that has the Obama Administration actively going after classified "leakers" – more than any administration has ever done. But far more effective would be some form of an "official secrets act" to better protect our nation.
Stated simply: It should be against the law to publish national security secrets – the First Amendment does not protect such irresponsible "journalism," no matter how salacious the story might be. And, in this respect, we should be no different than our Canadian or British friends – no one there dares publish their national security secrets and no one here should dare publish ours.
By: Daniel J. Gallington, U. S. News and World Report, May 20, 2013
May 22, 2013 Posted by raemd95 | Media, Press	| Associated Press, Classified Information, Congress, First Amendment, Justice Department, Leaks, National Security, Reporters | Leave a comment
"Court Packing Scheme": GOP Plots To Hollow Out The Federal Courts


text:
FCS Fire Consulting is Canada's 1st ULC Authorized S-1001 Integrated Systems Testing Service Provider
August 04, 2021 (PRLEAP.COM) Business News
Barrie, ON - After a rigorous certification process, the team at FCS Fire Consulting Services Ltd is proud to announce that they are officially the first ULC listed and authorized S-1001 Integrated Systems Testing Service Provider, with the authority to issue a mandated final clearance certificate.
Since June of 2020, jurisdictions across Canada have been implementing this new provision in the National Building and Fire Codes. It ensures the functional integration of fire protection and life safety systems by testing them as a whole in accordance with the CAN/ULC-S1001, Integrated Systems Testing of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems.
"The S-1001 is a crucial step forward in fire safety. Individual systems were tested in the past, but the integration test makes sure that each one of those systems is talking to the others and triggering the next stage," said Michele Farley, President of FCS Fire Consulting Services Ltd.
The ULC Integrated Systems Testing Program assists regulators / AHJs and building owners in confirming that organizations and individuals designated as Integrated Testing Service Providers have:
The required technical knowledge
The practical skills and expertise to conduct the testing process
The documentation required
ULC has established qualification criteria to which Integrated Testing Coordinators (ITC) agents and participants will be assessed and qualified based on their level of experience, certifications, skills, etc.
The testing process needs to be designed by an engineer, and an engineer needs to sign off on the final documentation. FCS is uniquely positioned by holding a Certificate of Authorization (C of A) from Professional Engineers Ontario, with access to a network of professional engineers.
"This is a significant milestone in the fulfillment of UL's safety mission in Canada," said Joe Hosey, Country Manager of UL Canada.
"Through this program, we are happy to support in the implementation of a new code requirement to verify that the systems intended to protect building occupants against fire and other risks operate properly together according to their inter-relationship."
The new regulations will impact any engineering firm or developer applying for a building permit for a new build or major changes. Many municipalities in Ontario currently require you to list your S-1001 firm when you submit your building permit application.
About FCS
For over 25 years, FCS has been a leading consulting firm specializing in fire code compliance, auditing, alternative compliances, staff training on fire code building condition assessments, and evaluation for developers, engineering firms, property managers, and owners.
FCS holds a Certificate of Authorization (C of A) from Professional Engineers Ontario. FCS is also Canada's first ULC listed S-1001 Integrated Systems Testing Service Provider, and one of the leading authorities on all elements of the Ontario Fire Code (OFC) and code retrofits.
The Fire Code is the law! You are not a fire code expert, but not being in compliance puts your people and your building at risk. Fire Departments across Ontario are increasing inspections and enforcement to keep people safe. We can help you achieve and maintain sustainable fire code compliance.
About UL Canada
Underwriters Laboratories of Canada (UL Canada) is an independent product safety testing, certification and inspection organization. We have tested products for public safety for 100 years and we are accredited by the Standards Council of Canada and International Accreditation Service, Inc.
UL Canada's greatest accomplishment is the prevention of accidents: Whether it's a home appliance that does not electrocute the operator or a fire extinguisher that operates properly when needed, the unseen contributions to public safety, health and protection of the environment are UL Canada's legacy.
FCS Fire Consulting Services
Email FCS Fire Consulting Services
Follow @FCSFireLTD


A crowd of lucky spectators were treated to a heartwarming sight last week as a wild sea otter mother drifted into view with her little pup napping comfortably on her belly in the cool waters outside of Monterey Bay Aquarium. Fortunately for the rest of us, photographers were on hand to capture the adorable pair on film.
This sweet display of familial harmony was made possible, in no small part, thanks to the tireless work of marine conservationists. Despite their undeniable charm, sea otters in California were once driven to near extinction by fur trappers. From a group of only about 50 sea otters in 1938, today's population has rebounded to just over 2,000 -- making this scene of a mother and her healthy new pup not only heartwarming, but heartening as well.
"Our [Sea Otter Research and Conservation] program has been studying and trying to save the threatened southern sea otter since 1984, so we were thrilled by this visit!" writes the aquarium.
"It's a case of cute overload!"


text:
Category: Energy Law
Home › Energy Law
Jul282019 by Connor JamesNo Comments
Misleading and Deceptive Conduct by energy retailers
Commercial Law, Energy Law
There have been a number of cases of energy retailers' non-compliance with s 18 of Australian Consumer Law. These cases are useful for retailers looking to assess the adequacy of the controls that they have in place to reduce the risk of a contravention of s 18.
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v EnergyAustralia [2015] FCA 274 is a case that was heard in the Federal Court of Australia with a decision handed down on 27 March 2015. This case concerned conduct by a company called Bright Choice Australia Pty Ltd who were engaged as a tele-sales agent of EnergyAustralia.
From 4 April 2012 until 23 April 2013, EnergyAustralia engaged Bright Choice under a Services Agreement to sell, by way of telemarketing, plans for electricity and gas in defined sales territories. The relevant sales territories included consumer premises located in New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, South Australia and the ACT. Pursuant to the Services Agreement, EnergyAustralia agreed to pay Bright Choice on each occasion that a consumer contracted to enter into a new plan to purchase electricity or gas from EnergyAustralia as a result of Bright Choice's marketing. Representatives from Bright Choice where remunerated on the basis of a wage plus commission.
Obligations to comply
Within the Services Agreements were a number of obligations on Bright Choice relating to compliance. These included an obligation to exercise the standard of care, skill and judgement that would be expected of a professional contract experience in the performance of services of a similar nature, to comply with all applicable laws and standards necessary to perform the services, and to ensure that its team members conducted outbound telemarketing calls in accordance with scripting approved by EnergyAustralia. Further, Bright Choice was required to establish, implement and maintain a quality assurance and control program that was subject to EnergyAustralia's approval.
Bright Choice was required to implement a training program that utilised training materials developed by EnergyAustralia. The relevant training materials developed by EnergyAustralia outlined the requirements for compliance with the applicable laws and standards.
The Services Agreement made reference to the requirements to obtain explicit informed consent. Bright Choice was required to make call recordings of all outbound telemarketing calls and all telephone discussions with customers in which explicit informed consent was obtained and to retain such call recordings for a minimum of two years after the applicable call was made or for a longer period as may be required by any applicable law.
In addition, Bright Choice was required to listen and evaluate a sample of call recordings made for the purposes of recording explicit informed consent with an express obligation to listen to at least 2% of the total number of call recordings that were created every calendar month.
Following the appointment of Bright choice, EnergyAustralia conducted 'train the trainer' sessions for Bright Choice senior sales managers in March 2012 and provided training material in March 2012 and updated material in July 2012. The relevant training material covered legal and regulatory compliance topics relating to explicit informed consent and the law of misleading and deceptive conduct. The training material also included instructions in relation to sales techniques to be used, and to be avoided by sales representatives, including ensuring that customers had a full understanding of what they were agreeing to.
EnergyAustralia provided Bright Choice with questionnaires that were designed to test the adequacy of Bright Choice's training program and which were required to be successfully completed by personnel before they conducted any telemarketing.
The bonus commissions
On 28 March 2013, the Services Agreement was amended whereby EnergyAustralia agreed to pay an additional bonus fee to Bright Choice upon Bright Choice achieving 9,000 new sales per month for five months from 1 April 2013. The base fee for electricity sales, of $120, increased by $35.
Between August 2012 and May 2013, Bright Choice representatives contacted consumers in a number of states and did not obtain the consent of consumers to enter into an EnergyAustralia electricity or gas plan but did submit sale reports to EnergyAustralia for each consumer.
The actual misrepresentation centred on Bright Choice advising consumers that they would be sent an information pack or welcome pack and that they would be able to consider the information to decide whether or not to receive a supply of electricity and/or gas from EnergyAustralia. Consumers were told that if they wanted to accept the offer, they would need to contact EnergyAustralia and unless they did make contact, they would not be treated as having entered into a plan for the supply of electricity and/or gas.
These telephone representations were false, misleading and deceptive because following each telephone conversation, Bright Choice acted and EnergyAustralia dealt with each consumer as if they had agreed to enter into a plan with EnergyAustralia for the supply of electricity and/or gas, when in fact they had not.
Further specific instances of conduct were discussed in the case. For example, on around 18 February 2013, a representative of Bright Choice contacted a certain consumer by telephone and said words to the effect that they were calling because EnergyAustralia had a new offer of a discount of 13% off bills and that this offer was not offered by AGL. The consumer responded that the last time she had been signed up to EnergyAustralia and did not want to be with EnergyAustralia.
On 7 December 2012, EnergyAustralia commenced an investigation into Bright Choice's telemarketing practices. On 28 March 2013, EnergyAustralia received details of concerns with Bright Choice's telemarketing practices including a failure to obtain explicit informed consent. In April and May 2013, EnergyAustralia identified an increased number of customer complaints and cancellations from telesales made by the Representative. EnergyAustralia commenced an investigation into Bright Choice's conduct and the investigation included a review of sample call recordings. EnergyAustralia identified that representatives were not obtaining explicit informed consent from customers nor were they following the scripts provided to them.
On 23 September 2013, EnergyAustralia terminated the services agreement with effect from 23 October 2013. EnergyAustralia required that Bright Choice cease all marketing sales calls from 23 September 2013.
In accordance with section 274 of the National Energy Retail Law, EnergyAustralia reported the non-compliance to the Australian Energy Regulator. In or around November 2013, EnergyAustralia voluntarily implemented a consumer remedial program at its own cost of $958,085.00 under which EnergyAustralia sought to contact remaining customers of EnergyAustralia originating from Bright Choice.
EnergyAustralia also implemented a process to safeguard against new customers being transferred without explicit informed consent. This process involved EnergyAustralia sending an SMS or email to every new customer that is entered into a contract with EnergyAustralia following an unsolicited outbound telemarketing sales call. This correspondence included a mobile number or email address to confirm the customer had in fact requested the transfer to, and entered into a market retail contract with, EnergyAustralia.
The court noted that following the termination of the Services Agreement and reporting of the conduct subject to the proceedings, EnergyAustralia made significant improvements to its compliance program to align it with the principles of the Australian standard for compliance programs AS3806.
The improvements made by EnergyAustralia included:
undertaking a quarterly certification and risk assessment of explicit informed consent compliance across the business, including by, each quarter, reassessing the effectiveness of business practices and processes against the explicit informed consent obligations.
Providing regular, at least annually, practical training for directors, officers, employees, representatives and agents of EnergyAustralia whose duties could result in them being concerned with conduct that may contravene EnergyAustralia's obligations to obtain explicit informed consent;
appointing a compliance officer with responsibility for ensuring compliance and for overseeing its compliance program;
establishing a monthly scorecard process to assess the performance of third-party vendors in relation to complaints, cancellations and compliance with EnergyAustralia's ACL and NERL obligations; and
ensuring that all third-party telesales calls are recorded in their entirety with random telesales call recordings provided to EnergyAustralia for quality assurance review.
When considering sections 18 and 29(1) of Australian Consumer Law, his honour noted the well-defined applicable legal principles that conduct is likely to mislead or deceive if there is a real or remote chance that it will do so and that the conduct must be capable of leading a person into error and the error or misconception must result from the conduct.
EnergyAustralia and Bright Choice admitted that the representations that were made were made in trade or commerce and in connection with the supply or possible supply of electricity and/or gas. They further admitted that the conduct was misleading and deceptive or was likely to mislead and deceive in contravention of section 18 and that they were false and misleading representations concerning the existence, exclusion or effect of a condition or right in contravention of section 29(1)(m).
Section 38 of the National Energy Retail Law provides that a retailer must obtain the explicit informed consent of a small customer for certain transactions including the transfer of the customer to the retailer from another retailer and the entry by the customer into a market retail contract with the retailer. Section 39 of the National Energy Retail Law provides that explicit informed consent is given where the retailer, or a person acting on the retailer's behalf, has clearly, fully and adequately disclosed all matters relevant to the consent of the customer, including the purpose or use of the consent, and the customer gives consent. Consent by the customer must be given in writing signed by the customer, verbally (provided that it is evidenced in such a way that can be verified), or by electronic communication generated by the customer.
The penalty
In considering the appropriate penalties to be applied, the court considered the case of Ministry for Industry, Tourism & Resources v Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd [2004] FCAFC 72. The relevant principles included that it is the responsibility of the court to determine the appropriate penalty to be imposed in respect of a contravention. Determining the quantum of a penalty is not an exact science. Within a permissible range, the courts acknowledge that a particular figure cannot necessarily be said to be more appropriate than another.
After considering all of the applicable principles, the court ordered that EnergyAustralia pay a penalty of $1,000,000.
Where did EnergyAustralia fall short?
In examining where EnergyAustralia fell short, the court accepted the submissions of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and the Australian Energy Regulator that the presence of a significant financial incentive at least increased the risk of sales calls to consumers occurring without proper processes being observed.
The court noted that there was a flaw in EnergyAustralia's internal processes in that even though the Services Agreement provided for an audit mechanism, EnergyAustralia did not, or did not adequately, exercise its audit powers. The court concluded that "given the size of the commissions being paid by EnergyAustralia and the number of telesales made by its agent, Bright Choice, EnergyAustralia's internal procedures were deficient."
Clarification on installations capable of creating STCs
The Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000 establishes the Renewable Energy Target (RET) which creates a market that aims to deliver 23.5% of electricity from renewable sources by 2020. There are two schemes within the RET and these are:
the large-scale renewable energy target (LRET) with a legislated target of 33,000 gigawatt hours of additional renewable electricity generation by 2020; and
the small-scale renewable energy scheme (SRES) which incentivises the installation of small-scale renewable energy systems such as household solar panels and solar hot water systems.
The RET scheme allows accredited renewable energy power stations and owners of eligible small-scale renewable energy systems to create certificates for each megawatt-hour of electricity that they produce or displace. Liable entities, typically electricity retailers, are then required to acquire the certificates and surrender them annually in proportion to the quantity of electricity purchased by the liable entity. Certificates are surrendered to the Clean Energy Regulator (CER). Where a liable entity fails to surrender the correct number of certificates, it must pay a shortfall charge.
STC Eligibility Clarification
The eligibility requirements for small-scale solar PV generation units were clarified in the Renewable Energy Electricity Amendment (Small-Scale Solar Eligibility and Other Measures) Regulations 2019 made under the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000 (Regulations). The Regulations commenced on 26 February 2019 and clarify how the boundary of a solar PV device should be determined when the device is made up of multiple solar PV systems.
Only those eligible solar photovoltaic small generation units with a capacity of no more than 100 kW and capable of generating no more than 250 MWh of electricity each year are eligible to create small-scale renewable energy certificates (STCs). An issue that arose in the creation of certificates under SRES was the 'gaming' of the scheme by the classification of larger installations as smaller systems in aggregate. By virtue of the financial advantages in STCs over LGCs in certain circumstances, there was an incentive for installations to be carried out in a way that a larger system was split, in terms of metering or geography, so that STCs could be claimed. The Regulations seek to put a stop to this practice on the basis that it is said to be inconsistent with the purposes of the Act.
A number of scenarios explaining the operation of the Regulations are provided in the explanatory statement and examples of these have been replicated below.
Scenario: five stores in a retail complex, each with a 50 kW system, have commercial sub-meters and all are connected to the grid via one NMI. These systems will be considered to be separate devices and eligible to create STCs.
Scenario: five stores in a retail complex, each with 60 kW systems, and commercial sub-meters. All are connected to the grid via one NMI. Two of the stores are electrically connected behind the commercial sub-meters. The two stores that are electrically connected by a behind the commercial sub-meters will be considered to be one system and STCs will not be able to be created.
Scenario: A university is connected to grid via a single NMI with individual non-commercial sub-meters on individual buildings (the sub-meters are used to maintain building management systems). The university precinct includes a main building with a 100kW system and two sets of housing each with a 5 kW system. Paragraph 3(2A)(a) applies as the sub-meters do not meet the definition of a commercial meter. All systems are considered to be one device >100kw so are not eligible to create STCs. The NMI defines the device boundary.
Scenario: a solar farm developer has installed 10 ground-mounted hundred kilowatts systems on 10 adjoining sites with separate NMIs that are connected to the grid via one substation installed as part of the development. STCs cannot be claimed.
If you have any questions on the above please get in touch.
Jul42019 by Connor JamesNo Comments
The AEMC's Final Report on updating the regulatory frameworks for embedded networks
The AEMC has published a final report that proposes a package of law and rule changes to update the regulatory frameworks for embedded networks.
In this free webinar from our sister business Compliance Quarter, Dr Drew Donnelly looks at the final report and its implications on those businesses that operate embedded electrical networks.
Register for the webinar below
Contract Clauses: Indemnity
Indemnity clauses are one of the key risk allocation mechanisms within contracts. An indemnity clause seeks to reallocate the risk of loss by one party to a contract by moving that risk to the other party.
There are generally considered to be four categories of indemnity clauses and these are:
a. Bare indemnities: where a party indemnifies the other against all liabilities or loss incurred in connection with a given event or circumstances without any express limitations.
b. Reverse indemnities: where a party indemnifies another against loss or damage arising out of a contract regardless of whether the loss was caused by the other party's own acts or omissions.
c. Proportionate or limited indemnities: where a party indemnifies another against all loss or damage except that caused by the other party either through that party's negligence, breach of contract, or wilful misconduct.
d. Third party indemnities: where a party indemnifies another for claims made by a third party.
The lack of an indemnity
In the absence of an express indemnity in a contract there are a limited number of circumstances where an indemnity may be implied. The most common example is where a co-guarantor seeks contribution from another co-guarantor where their joint liability has been met in full. Here, there is a common law right for the co-guarantor to obtain reimbursement.
Ordinarily, the lack of an indemnity will mean that common law and relevant statutory provisions apply.
Drafting considerations
The issues to be considered when drafting or reviewing an indemnity are complex. Readers may wish to consider this paper and should obtain legal advice on the operation of any proposed indemnity.
An indemnity is only as good as the party who provides it. This means that it is crucial that the party seeking an indemnity ensures that the indemnifying party has the capacity to enter into the indemnity and the means to honour it.
Contract clauses: Nomination
Business Sale, Commercial Law, Energy Law
A benefit under a contract may be nominated to a third-party nominee under a nomination clause. Here we look at nomination clauses in contracts relating to the sale of property. Commonly you may see a contract providing for property to be transferred to the buyer or their nominee."
Á contract of sale may provide for a buyer and allow the buyer to nominate the property to an unnamed third party. A nomination clause is to be distinguished from a novation of the agreement as it is restricted in being a right for the benefiting party to direct a transfer to the nominee.
A nomination clause does not result in the nominee becoming a party to the contract. Consequently, the nominee can reject the nomination. The courts have held that such a clause will only be effective if it's language and intention are clear and compelling.
Interaction with privity of contract legislation
Legislation exists in Queensland, the Northern Territory, and Western Australia which operates to allow a third party, who is not a party to a contract, to enforce a contract made for their benefit. The question then arises whether such a third party can sue to seek to enforce a nomination clause. In general terms, the third party must be identifiable under a contract to be able to seek to rely on those legislative provisions. This is obviously a complex area of law and legal advice should be obtained to understand its operation.
The lack of a nomination clause
The absence of a nomination cause will not necessarily preclude a buyer from directing a seller to sign a transfer in favour of a third party. However, a nomination clause is preferable as it can deal with the process to be followed and the costs incurred.
The first concern is to ensure that the parties intend on a nomination as opposed to a novation or assignment.
As noted above, a nomination clause must be clear and compelling. Words such as substitution can indicate a novation rather than nomination, and so should be avoided. The nomination clause should specify the process to be followed to give effect to the nomination; including timelines, notice requirements, and responsibility for costs.
Jul242018 by LawEditorNo Comments
ACCC releases blueprint to reduce electricity prices
Let's face it -both you and I, or someone close to us, have recently complained about what seems to be the unstoppable increase to our home and business energy bills.
These increasing prices affect us all – we all use electricity.
So who's job is it to keep energy prices stable?
By Chris Dennis, Consultant- Law Quarter.
The Role of the ACCC
The ACCC plays a role in the regulation of energy markets. Specifically, the ACCC's role in energy markets is in the context of the Competition and Consumer Ac 2010. For example, the ACCC enforces the competition and consumer protection provisions in energy markets and assesses energy mergers and authorisations.
So what is the ACCC doing about increasing energy bills?
Just this month the ACCC released their final Retail Electricity Pricing Inquiry report, or a 'blueprint to reduce electricity prices'. The ACCC states that this blueprint is designed to 'significantly improve electricity affordability for Australian consumers and businesses'.
The blueprint or report is the result of an inquiry, which commenced in March 2017. This inquiry began by identifying the root causes of high electricity prices across the entire electricity supply chain.
The report describes the National Energy Market as 'largely broken and needs to be reset'. That's a big statement from a Government regulatory agency.
As part of the process, the ACCC has admitted that 'poor decisions have been made over the past decade creating the current electricity affordability problem', and 'it now falls to current Commonwealth and state governments to make the difficult decisions to fix it'.
So why have electricity prices increased?
According to the ACCC, electricity has become unaffordable because:
– Wholesale and retail markets are too concentrated;
– Regulation and poorly designed policy have added significant costs to electricity bills; and
– Retailers' marketing of discounts is inconsistent and confusing to consumers and has left many consumers on excessively high 'standing' offers.
It is their view that most households are paying far too much for electricity and many are having difficulty paying their bills.
As a result, the report of the ACCC has made 56 recommendations detailing ways to fix the National Electricity Market
The ACCC's recommendations include:
Abolishing the current retail 'standing' offers (which are not the same between retailers), and replacing them with a new 'default' offer consistent across all retailers, set at a price determined by the Australian Energy Regulator (AER).
Requiring retailers to reference any discounts to the new 'default' offer pricing determined by the AER, making it easier for consumers to genuinely compare offers. Conditional discounts, such as pay-on-time discounts, must not be included in any headline discount claim.
A mandatory code for comparator websitesbeintroduced so that offers are recommended based on customer benefit, not commissions paid.
Voluntary write downs of network overinvestment, including by the NSW, Queensland and Tasmanian governments (or equivalent rebates).
Premium solar feed-in-tariff schemes should be funded by state governments and the small scale renewable energy scheme should be phased out, saving non-solar consumers $20-$90 per year.
Government support to make bankable new investment by new players in generation capacity to help commercial and industrial customers and drive competition.
Restructuring of Queensland generators into three separately owned portfolios to improve competition.
Limiting companies with 20 per cent or more market share from acquiring more generation capacity.
Improving the transparency of over-the-counter contract trading by requiring reporting of these trades to a central registry.
Improving the AER's powers to investigate and address problems in the market and increasing penalties for serious wrongdoing.
The ACCC estimates its recommendations, if adopted, will save the average household between 20 and 25 per cent on their electricity bill, or around $290-$415 per annum.
While the efforts of the ACCC are welcomed, a sanguine approach must be adopted. There will be no quick fix to ongoing increases in energy bills and sector reform to reduce power bills will take time.
Our Energy Experience
We have significant experience in energy law. Our experience includes working for energy retailers, energy storage, and renewable energy companies. Working on 'both sides of the meter' gives us a unique and unmatched perspective.
Our lawyers have written extensively for industry publications including WattClarity and RenewEconomy. Our clients include small solar installers alongside large network distribution businesses.
Our firm is a finalist in this year's Innovator of the Year award in the 2018 Australian Law Awards. Our sister business, Compliance Quarter has applied for over 80 percent of the recent energy retail authorisations with a 100 percent success rate. Compliance Quarter was a 2018 Westpac 200 Business of Tomorrow winner.
Power Purchase Agreements in Australia- Four Key Legal Concerns
Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) have reached maturity in the Australian market- now in the market for more than seven years. We are reaching the point where, for those early PPAs, we can expect to see legal issues arise and PPAs examined in the courts.
In today's article, we look at four key legal considerations when it comes to drafting a 'behind the meter' PPA. Correct drafting today will save you unnecessary legal costs tomorrow. This is our second post looking at PPAs in Australia.
I. Certainty
PPAs are complex due to the nature of the 'product' being sold i.e. energy. Some PPAs require the purchase of 100 per cent of the generated quantity whereas others require the purchase of the quantity of electricity consumed. Each variation comes with its own risks and benefits. Care must be taken to ensure that the structure of a PPA is clear and compliant with regulatory obligations.
Different considerations apply when selling a PPA to a commercial as opposed to a residential consumer. There are a range of statutory obligations you will have under Australian Consumer Law including the non-excludable guarantees. These obligations need to be considered at the drafting stage. Furthermore, your marketing collateral needs to be consistent with the terms of your PPA, and not have the potential to mislead consumers.
II. Ownership
Ownership of solar panels under a PPA may be clear in your mind but, under the law, the reality is less certain. Where ownership of panels is to transfer to the consumer at the end of the PPA term (often 7 years), with no intention of retention by your business, it may be that the panels are in fact fixtures meaning that you have limited rights in relation to taking them back.
III. Licences, Permits and Approvals
By selling energy under a PPA you are operating an energy business. Your business will either need to be exempt from the requirements to hold an authorisation or licence or hold an authorisation or licence. The Australia Energy Regulator has jurisdiction in NSW, SA, TAS, ACT and QLD. If your business is proposing to offer a PPA in those states it may be able to rely on an R8 exemption. The R8 exemption will not be appropriate in all instances and where it is appropriate comes with conditions.
In addition to energy licence obligations, your business will also need to consider consent authority obligations including any requirement to obtain a complying development certificate or a development approval. Further, your business will also need to comply with electrical safety laws in each state and with any electrical contractor licensing obligations.
IV. Metering
Energy is sold to a consumer on the basis of meter reads. A PPA should consider a range of scenarios including a customer denying access to a meter, any need for an estimated reading, and responsibility for metering including ongoing maintenance.
When metering PPAs it is important to remember the requirements of the National Measurements Act 1960 (Cth). Pattern approval (in other countries this is sometimes called 'type approval') is mandatory for measuring instruments used for trade in Australia. The National Measurement Institute (NMI) evaluates measuring instruments to check they meet specific Australian standards.
We have significant experience in energy law, including in drafting Power Purchase Agreements. Our experience includes working for energy retailers, energy storage, and renewable energy companies. Working on 'both sides of the meter' gives us a unique and unmatched perspective.
In our next post, we will look at changes to the accounting standards that come into effect from 1 Jan 2019 and are relevant to businesses looking to explore Power Purchase Agreements.
If you have any questions on Power Purchase Agreements please email connor@lawquarter.com.au. Alternatively, contact us here.
Jan312018 by LawEditorNo Comments
A Short Guide to Power Purchase Agreements (PPA) in Australia
Last year, the University of New South Wales announced its entry into a power purchase agreement (PPA) for the next 15 years with the goal of reaching carbon neutrality (link here). PPAs are growing in popularity in Australia as a viable alternative to 'grid sourced' energy.
In today's article, we ask three questions: What is a PPA, why enter into one, and what is their legal and regulatory environment?
What is a PPA?
Put simply a PPA is an agreement between an independent power generator (or vendor) and a purchaser (often called the 'off-taker') for the sale and supply of energy.[1] They can be used for the supply of any type of energy, but in more recent times have often been used for the supply of renewable energy such as through solar panels or wind generators.
A PPA can take on two general forms. In a physical PPA, energy is physically supplied and sold directly to the purchaser. The power generator is usually not connected to the wholesale National Energy Market (NEM). A virtual or synthetic PPA involves two distinct agreements which operate in parallel. Unlike a physical PPA, the energy is not physically supplied and sold directly from the generator to the purchaser. Instead, the generator must connect to the NEM, where the purchaser is supplied energy through a contract with an authorised market retailer. At the same time a separate agreement, often taking the form of a 'contract-for-differences' is agreed between the generator and the purchaser to guard against fluctuations in the spot price for electricity which will be reflected in the retail contract. This means that, in effect, the energy and relevant renewable energy certificates are provided to the purchaser at a 'fixed price'.
A behind the meter PPA is a physical PPA with the solar generation units installed behind a customer's meter. Behind the meter PPAs are advantageous as they allow for the sale of electricity without the need for the use of the grid. Law Quarter is able to assist you in drafting a behind the meter PPA ensuring that the contractual documentation is complete and manages all of the key risks including the management of environmental certificates, ownership of the system, access for operation and maintenance, and early termination.
Why enter into a PPA?
PPAs may be advantageous to any organisation, such as UNSW, which seeks to reduce its carbon footprint. Whether in its physical or synthetic forms, through a PPA with renewable energy, a purchaser can ensure that a certain amount of renewable energy is produced.
Of course, there are economic considerations that an organisation will need to take into account before entering into a PPA as well, including:
Wholesale price uncertainty. A PPA allows the organisation to lock in a price for electricity over an extended period. The purchaser can benefit from not being subject to the price fluctuations of the wholesale energy market. On the other hand, this may lock the organisation into a price higher than it would otherwise pay;
Generator failure. The purchaser needs to take into account the risk that the generator will fail and be unable to supply energy as agreed and how they might insure against such failure.
What is the regulatory and legal environment for PPAs?
All energy suppliers in NECF participating jurisdictions, including independent generators that supply energy through PPAs, are subject the supervision of the Australian Energy Regulator (AER). AER requires that such suppliers hold either an exemption or a retail authorisation and must provide certain consumer protections.[2] Whether or not they are subject to the consumer protections under the National Energy Retail Law, all such vendors are subject to the Australian Consumer Law.
If the PPA involves a 'derivative' financial instrument (as synthetic PPAs generally do), the supplier may be required hold an Australian Financial Services (AFS) licence, and be subject to the authority of the Australian Securities & Investments Commission (ASIC). To read more go to https://compliancequarter.com.au/otc-electricity-derivatives/.
Another matter that anyone entering into a PPA may need to consider is whether a security interest should be registered on the Personal Property Securities Register (PPSR). For example, if a vendor is physically supplying a solar panel to the purchaser's premises this can protect their legal interest in the solar panel (for general information on the PPSR see https://compliancequarter.com.au/ppsr-changes/).
If you think we could be of any further guidance in this area, please don't hesitate to get in contact.
[1] For more information and a good general introduction to PPAs see the following guide produced by the United States Department of Commerce http://cldp.doc.gov/sites/default/files/Understanding_Power_Purchase_Agreements.pdf.
[2] For further information see https://www.aer.gov.au/system/files/AER%20-Alternate%20energy%20sellers%20-%20Final%20statement%20of%20approach%20-%20July%202014.PDF.
Aug72017 by Connor JamesNo Comments
Free Webinar: Embedded Networks- an update on key Legal and Regulatory considerations.
Energy Law, Event, Regulatory Updates
We are running a Free webinar on Embedded Networks- an update on key Legal and Regulatory considerations.
When: Thursday, August 17, 2017 @ 11:00 AM (Sydney time)
Note: Limited to the first 25 people who register. Register Here.
Energy Retail Law Key Definitions
Energy Law, Regulatory Updates
There are some key definitions contained in the Energy Retail Law which need to be understood. Chapter 10 of the National Electricity Rules (NER) contains the Glossary and it covers 114 pages. Often the definition of the word or phrase will contain words which also need to be defined.
By Anne Wardell, Law Quarter
Embedded Network
For example, the definition of an Embedded Network is:
A distribution system, connected at a parent connection point to either a distribution system or transmission system that forms part of the national grid, and which is owned, controlled or operated by a person who is not a Network Service Provider.
Each of the phrases in italics has a separate definition within the Glossary. To understand all the meanings, you may watch a short presentation I created. Each phrase which is defined also has defined terms within it. You may need to go up to three steps within the definition to find the meaning of that phrase.
Let's look at the phrase 'distribution system' which is contained in the definition of Embedded Network.
It is defined in the National Energy Retail Law as:
(a) for a distributor who is a regulated distribution system operator within the meaning of the NEL—a distribution system within the meaning of the NEL; or
(b) for a distributor who is a service provider within the meaning of the NGL who owns, operates or controls a distribution pipeline that is a covered pipeline under that law—a distribution pipeline within the meaning of the NGL; or
(c) for a nominated distributor under s 12—the nominated distribution system that is specified under that section.
Therefore, you need to determine if you are a distributor and which type of energy you are providing. The NEL is the National Electricity Law and the NGL is the National Gas Law.
Distributor, under the National Energy Retail Law means
(a) a regulated distribution system operator within the meaning of the NEL; or
(b) a service provider within the meaning of the NGL who owns, operates or controls a distribution pipeline that is a covered pipeline under that Law; or
(c) a nominated distributor, to the extent provided by section 12.
Under the National Energy Law the definitions are contained in the NER as:
Distribution System Operator
A person who is responsible, under the Rules or otherwise, for controlling or operating any portion of a distribution system (including being responsible for directing its operations during power system emergencies) and who is registered by AEMO as a Distribution System Operator under Chapter 2.
A distribution network, together with the connection assets associated with the distribution network, which is connected to another transmission or distribution system. Connection assets on their own do not constitute a distribution system.
Under the NGL the phrase 'service provider' is defined in s 8 of the National Gas (South Australia) Act 2008 as:
(1) A service provider is a person who—
(a) owns, controls or operates; or
(b) intends to own, control or operate, a pipeline or scheme pipeline, or any part of a pipeline or scheme pipeline.
Note— A service provider must not provide pipeline services by means of a scheme pipeline unless the service provider is a legal entity of a specified kind: see section 131, and section 169 where the scheme pipeline is an international pipeline to which a price regulation exemption applies.
(2) If AEMO controls or operates (without at the same time owning) a pipeline or scheme pipeline, or any part of a pipeline or scheme pipeline, AEMO is not for that reason to be taken to be a service provider for the purposes of this Law.
Distribution pipeline
means a pipeline that is classified in accordance with this Law or the Rules as a distribution pipeline and includes any extension to, or expansion of the capacity of, such a pipeline when it is a covered pipeline that, by operation of an applicable access arrangement or under this Law, is to be treated as part of the pipeline;
Note— See also sections 18 and 19.
Section 12 of the National Energy Retail Law provides:
12 — Nominated distributors
(1) The regulations under an application Act of a participating jurisdiction may nominate an entity (being an entity that is licensed or otherwise authorised under jurisdictional energy legislation of that jurisdiction) to provide customer connection services as a nominated distributor for the purposes of this Law.
(2) A nomination of an entity may be made for any or all of the following:
(a) the whole or a specified part of the geographical area of a jurisdiction; or
(b) the whole or a specified part of a distribution system that is owned, controlled or operated by the entity.
(3) A nomination of an entity has the effect of applying this Law and the Rules (in whole or in part as specified in the regulations and with any specified modifications) to the entity as if it were a distributor within the meaning of this Law, and references in this Law and the Rules to a distributor are accordingly taken to include references to the nominated distributor.
As you can see there are many steps to clarify the definition of words and phrases under the National Energy Laws. To understand a phrase the first step is to determine whether it has a definition under the relevant legislation.
If there is a definition then you should take note of the italicised words. This will indicate that the word or phrase has a defined meaning under the legislation. You should therefore also check these definitions.
Words can also be defined by judges when deciding cases. The term 'explicit informed consent' was considered by the Federal Court in Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v EnergyAustralia Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 274 at [70]:
'Section 39 of the NERL SA and the NERL ACT provides that "explicit informed consent" is given where the retailer, or a person acting on the retailer's behalf, has clearly, fully and adequately disclosed all matters relevant to the consent of the customer, including the purpose or use of the consent, and the customer gives consent. Consent by the consumer must be given in writing signed by the customer, verbally (provided it is evidenced in such a way that it can be verified), or by electronic communication generated by the customer' (emphasis added).
As further cases come before the courts, a more detailed definition will be created. It is important therefore to be aware of any decisions which may come before the courts.
We have introduced a new section on our news page which will cover cases of interest. Our first decision will be Privacy Commissioner v Telstra Corporation Limited [2017] FCAFC 4. We have selected this decision as it contains important information for all businesses which collect personal information from customers which of course includes the energy retail secto


Where did you hear about Midstates?
Have you ever been employed with this company?
Name of College, University, Tech School, etc.
I hereby certify that all information provided by me in this application (or any other accompanying or required documents) is correct, accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I authorize Midstates Group to verify the accuracy and information provided. I release all parties involved from any and all liability for any and all damage that may result from providing such information. I understand that, if employed, falsified statements of any kind or omissions of facts called for on this application shall be considered sufficient basis for dismissal.
I understand that submission of an application does not guarantee employment. If hired, I will be employed at will; I understand that this means that either I or the employer is free to terminate the employment relationship at any time with our without cause or prior notice. I understand that no representative of the company, other than the CEO, has any authority to enter into an agreement for employment for any specified period of time or, in any way, to modify the at-will nature of the employment relationship.
I understand that if I am offered employment, it could result in a pre-employment drug screening and background check at the expense of Midstates Group and that this is a condition of employment.
I understand that should and employment offer be extended to me and accepted that I will fully adhere to the policies, rules and regulations of employment of Midstates Group.
By entering my name below I acknowledge that I have read, understood and agree to the above statements.
This application is valid for ninety (90) days from the date signed. If you would like to be considered for job openings more than ninety (90) days from the date signed, please submit a new application.


Registration closes 27.09.2019 at 11:59 PM or sooner if places sell out.
Cancelations accepted up to 08.10.2019 at 11:59 PM or sooner if the event sells out.
Category Changes accepted up to 27.09.2019 11:59 PM or sooner if the event sells out.
The UAE National Road Cycling Championship, in its 3rd season, will again crown a National Champion in Emirati male and female and Expatriate male and female for the 2019 season. The four stage championship will also award champions in each age category in both male and female. The stages for this season are designed to create all the challenges of a grand tour with stages for climbers, time trialers and sprinters. To emulate the feel for riders of a grand tour, the leaders jerseys for the five major categories including a junior classification, will be awarded and worn of yellow, red, pink, blue and white taking the colours from the 3 grand tours as well as the Dubai Tour. These jerseys will be awarded to the leader after each stage, which will make a difference to the look and feel of the peloton. The stages will be held over three months so lock in 4th October, 25th October, 8th November & 22nd November for the final stage.