Federal personnel manual system

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Federal personnel manual system
Portion of title:
FPM letter
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
United States Civil Service Commission
United States -- Office of Personnel Management
Publisher:
United States Civil Service Commission
Place of Publication:
Washington, D.C
Frequency:
irregular
completely irregular

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Personnel management -- Handbooks, manuals, etc -- United States   ( nal )
Civil service -- Handbooks, manuals, etc -- United States   ( lcsh )
Personnel management -- Handbooks, manuals, etc -- United States   ( lcsh )
Genre:
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
periodical   ( marcgt )

Notes

Issuing Body:
Vols for 1979- issued by: Office of Personnel Management.
General Note:
Description based on: 410-19 (Aug. 22, 1977); title from caption.
General Note:
Latest issue consutled: 292-23 (No. 3, 1983); title from caption.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 021549616
oclc - 06727309
lccn - 2009238041
System ID:
AA00012996:00042


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text
I 114 / ed I V f.T 1 6(.)U. b
Offim of Personnel Manarnnent FPM Letter 300- 31
W ftrsmrwl MmW S"te Publls in advance
MM Lefter 300-31 of imcorpor&Oon in FPM
Chapter 300
T: GAO Decision on Nonrerimborsable Ils RffAM LNM SUPKIMM

49, Washington, D. C 20415
ALV=t 27, 1965
IM n
'0W4AY
V446 of Departrnents and Indepe*rvi EstabUshme ts;
V* Comptroller General has dotemined that nonreimbursable details are in most cases
wim t (0-211373 dated March 201, 1W 4ttarhed.) FArlier decisions (13 Comp. Gen. 234
69 Comp. Gen. 366 (TW,)v, and, all, similar decisions) on nomrsimbursable details.will no
Ito be followed to the s, XtAot1he'y are i,
,W Aconsistent with the recent decision.
'it, tooction 3341 of title 6,* UMW, Startas Code, authorizes an agenty.head to detail employees
*ftbtn the agency for 120-day No !specific Governmentwide "thority exists for Inter-
SWy details. The atta0ed, respooded to a question of whether it was lawful to
40,01 certain employees of V*Dwrtment of Health and Human Services (,HHS) on a notweimburs-
,*Wbois. The details were'ta' other A'Rencf to other components of HHS. The
U$*j question raised was whtwt,* 1,h 0 United States; Code
e dotails were c nsistent With 31
y for the purposes for which appropriated,
130140 that requires appropriAtioM` te be speft, onl f
00 the rule prohibiting Unlo*f ,gWtation.of agency approgriations. Also at issue Is
*ttlan0l of the EconanW Att,0` 1,43?,, 01 U.S.C. 1635). This Act authorizes agencies to
Vfter 19to written-agreemens 10V*,perfoimance of s*rvices 'for which reimbursement is made,
3. After reviewing the Tegisl#14',history of the Economy Act, the Comptroller General deter-
aloq# that the Act was passe ortly to prevent nonce Imbarsable details and ensure that
apprWiations are spent only t6iVM p0potios far which provided. On, this, hasts the decision
coRO-aded that, in the absent*, -of, a statute authorizing honveimbursalAe details,
totft-"ency and interagency OetoVtsiousi bor 06 on a reimbersable basis except in two limited,
"S the fMPact Of the d igjot
c1monstances. The followtog t I ec t
4etai I I" S L, permltt4W, he detail is-
a. A nonreimbursable when t
(1) To a position' oaiWon that covers the Position from
which.detaJJ0',*_,,,
fp, r Tation
(2) To a pQsitiv __$nt BUT the detail involves a
matter ret, t, the iatiph and will ald it i n
h4" *-Tpuiposo i* WH c'h approprfatfons are Provided; or
(3) To a posjtiim,c,9VoV*,0 by a different 4 on BUT, regardless of the pur-
pose of tatto t* detaj ',!I'
I io haVo a negligible impact on the!
loaning J, Si m a, nonre'mbursable detail on this
approprlat Q,. 4w 11
basis At"10-1 to a purpose- fqr whi"ch the, agency's appropriations are
provide#'' I Or* 0404 ',bs the decision makes such details
subject t, 't lk"Mtts in '5 U.S.C, 341 40 subchapter 8 of Federal Person-
nel Man..1- r, 300'.
Al I other int' must be,'oft a reit0tWA04t barsis, unless the agency bias a
specific '0 Make nonre
'jft t -iftur'sabli, Vetails. Al I intra-agency
details, both- o' ood woreimbursoblo of' poployees in the competitive
service or 10 4chedolle p6sition."KaVe en coptinue to be subject to F*
chapter 300, **4



ln4uiries: Staffing poll 4 DiVisionL, Staffinqi 632-6817
M
COdL' 300, Empldyment
Distribution: FPM opm F6AM 659 am







m ............................................................... ...... ......... ....... .......... ... .................................................. ........................
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!K IN A
ONCIION nOF NG NIT0 OAT8
WAOHNOTO, 0 C. 054

0Ar-Mrh2,18
B-1173-
ATE F: Dpaten f elt ndHma erie
dealo fieo CmuiySrie
emlye
1.TeDprmn fHat n ua evcsdi
no c mrpryi ficlya 93i


temntntefntosQtergoa fi

ce fto fieo omuiySrvcs(C)
--'I as-c tau~yreurmntta h
ofiermi pn n h aaeso h







OPM Lt. -0-3




Attachment to FPM Ltr. 300-31 (3)
D-21 373


employees, we have. reconsidered our previous decisions on
inter and intra-agency details in general, and conclude that
they should no longer be followed. We now hold that these
i tails may not be made on a nonreimbursable basis except
bMder the circumptances described later in this opinion.
I A. BACKGROUND

Ii e Comannity Services Block Grant Act, Pub. L.
S9'7i35, Title VI, Subtitle B, 95 Stat. 511 (1981),
ied the iEacnomic Opportunity-Act of 1964 and estab-
4 the Off ice .of Comuunity Services to carry out a new
amin of block .grant funding of local anti-poverty
ies by prvid4tig Federal funas to state governments;

She have bean: advised by an HHS Assistant General
*ael1 that cfron the beginning of this new program, HHS
ided to adaitister it from its headquarters office.
ver, biunOctoher 6, 1981, BBS published in the Federal
tater (4i Ped. n g.; 439211) a Statement of Organization,
tions and UlIations *o:f. Authrity for OCS ("'functional
*weht") 'Whch stated that th# regional offices of OCS
.earry out q'i tivtties with respect- to both the new and
..gantip.... s. This division of. responsibilities was
Se4 to the regioial g. 4tf ices1 by CaS were the monitoring
!::lsing oaut o: the, : economic opportunity Act grants,
t work was completed in March 1983.

or fisal year 1983, $360, 50~S was appropriated to
s. fo ClIntr Serv ices Blok Grants. Pub. L.
liA57-377, 96 .tai. 1i30, 192 ( 982: This f figure was an
4tease of. $25 L1 o o r ove. the budget request, and,
rdin l:ag to tii"" i mittee rIeports, it was an amount suffi-
to cotins the *block *grants program at fiscal yea"
2 levels. .;:. Rep. o. 8:94, 97th :Cng., 2d Sess. 6, 9.2
82 ). this e S d- dth6 Senate report directed that
Binds be excpeAfed drig fiscal a J: e 1983' to staff the
0t ice [of :iaei~ ity iServices ate a a level .dt lower than the
number ofE i4Rd staff as of October 1, 1982." S. Rep.



'" i: ii;;llllel:iii:: ;; -
". ; == :9:!l l.... .....


:~cl... ....ii .... I.':' i "






3
: i :: ;i i~ ib'i iii :diiiili :il :::
i I i iii ii ;i .

.. ":: S i lll,,diiilll :l % i iii;l..! ;:.::


: ...
... ::: :ii:!i:;:iiiiiii ':iiiiii, ii! :i :!iit i:,'







M.H.M.1


.- ...... ...












.............
................
................ ................. .........
................. .........
................ ...............................
................
................
................


.... ... ...

giii.xiiii: i i

............

... ...........
.............
.. ..........
...............
...............




...............




3-21 1373 Attachment to FPM Ltr. 300-31 (6)

I
statement, the agency di<1 not follow congressional ihtent to
*keep OCS intact." The AFGE also maintains that detailing
pf the OCS employees constitutea a de facto impoundment of
OCS appropriations. Thust its submTssion states: "If,
94,ther than detailing the employees, OCS had furloaghed or
401d them* thereby not spending money that would otherwise
for their salaries, there would be a traditional impound-
Here'# OCS is failing to spend its appropria-
on its own programs., That is precisely the nature of
spoundment." Furthermore, the Union argues that detail-
I C,41_111mtthe OCS employ"& to other parts of HHS and to other
IL'.-Anaocies, and continuing to pay them out of OCS appropria-
-Z,;e is a violation Qf 31 U.S,.C. 5 1301 (a) which requires
#kt Appropriations be spent only on the objects for which
Oey have been appropriated.
HHS advises us that the ComMunity Services Block Grants
wogram.for fiscal year 1,9,83 wasfully funded and was
W^ried 'Ut completely. All fiscal year 1983 funds allo
tvd were dbligated. It Argues that OCS managers had
4broad discretion in determining what work OCS was to perform
*%4 that the head of OCS had discretion in granting to the
1 off*ces only the fUnctiont of monitoring and'
t former grants. As regards impoundment,, HHS
tlg Ol;
'JWI"tends, that Oft1trere is nothing in either the Impoundment
Its legislativ,4,history, or the case law -hich
_)Uld Uad, to a concItIsion thaf. an impoundment occurs when
qq persoonel of one agency are made available to assist
%I-,*t6ther age,,ncy,," and that *"Congress, did not intend the
$,'Opo-undment-,Act to apply tofands appropriated solely for
.#41ariez and, 4;cpenses.,K'
Furthermorer HHS argues that the details were under-
tAken to avo,-W -a, reduction-it-force, particularly in light
V ,Of committee report. language evidencing a congressional
Antent that QCS maintain its staffing through fiscal year
1083 at the number of employees in place at the beginning'of
that fiscal Year. See, "Explanation of the Recommendations
of the Senate' COMMi-ti-tee on Appropriations on the department
of Labor,,'Roal;Eh and ),uzan Servicesr and Education and
Related A94ociet Appropriation Bill,, 1,943, (H,,.R. -1205)-j,"
128 Cong, 9-Ielc. S1413.3,,-14161-62 (daily ed, December S.
1982)0

3/ Nonet le.4 # e agency has nformed us, that some
of $ 20 million carried ovet from fiscal year
cing a contemplated, redoction-in-force
7,U, 0 igated.
'A 61
p










F I, ...... ..... ....... ... ......... : ,
...... ...... ................ ............ -
........... .. ..
... .........


Ir
.... ..........
M .. 4 .......... f
'i J
. .. .....
.... ..................



..................
..................
.. .... ... .... ...... .......................... .. .. ......... ..g .................... ..

.............. A .....................
.. ... ... .... ............. ....



......... ....

.................
..............

..................... .................. ..
... ........
........... ....... ........ r .
.: ........... .. ........ ... ....... .. .... ......... .
............ M.
.. ..... .. .... .. ..... : ....... ..................................
................................
..... ......... ........ ........ ......................

....... .. ..... ......
..... ......
.......... I ... ... .............
.......... ... ... ............
.................. I ......... ...... .........
............... ......... .......... .........

........... -
................................. .......
............ ..............
.............................
................................ ... ........................... .
................................ .............................
................................. 4 ...............................
....... ........ ............................
......... ....... ...................... ......................... -
.................... ..... ..................... .....




... .........






... .. ..... ........ .....

















M:Zw SO .. ... ......... .
.... ... ... .





.............
I .., ::: .. ...:::.
.. ............... ... ....





f! An 10


.. ... ...
... .. .... .........
.. .. .... .... .......














































.. ... .....

NK
.. .. ....... .....

















.... ... ................




Attachment to FPM Ltr. 300-31 (7)
8-211373


which the appropriation'was made is an unauthorized use of
the approp:tlation. The Department counters by pointing out
that by March 1983, the work of the OCS with respect to the
loctk grants was completed and there was no further work for
li staff to do even at headquarters. Since it felt'
t9g4, because of the Committee directives, to maintain
..-specified staffing level, it detailed staff on a non-
Bbriabale basis to other intra and inter departmental

HZi9I9i|i^>B !Ia 3 t:

' ti:.... The itpoun dment Control Act of 1974, Pub. L.
ii. 93-344, 88 Stat. 297, 332, codified at 2 U.S.C. 5S 681
f0. i llo.ing, was intended to tighten congressional control
:. aimoundments, and, to establish procedures that would
bItide leans for the Congress to pass upon executive
n:.. c.poposa.to impound budget authority. 54 Comp.
:.;: 4:. :4S: (t1:74):, The Act covers both rescissions and
i s. ~ 'A rescission exists when the President deter-
SI.that U'.. -r part of any budget authority will not be
i it d t carry out the full objectives or scope of pro-
S: ft-i :h: it is provided or should be rescinded
tti. pati oio or other' eaons t*." 2 U.S.C.
a.&: deferral i a; withholding ot delaying of the

or ina tion that effectively precludes obligation or
tute-* of budget authoity4 Zd. s 682(1).
i; Consistent with the Act, expenditure of the $1.776
llion o.n. the :nonreimburable details did not constitute a
.aLo impoundmient". The expendit ures constituted neither
.failure to obligate or expend funds nor a withholding or a
ihaying:: of the oblation or expenditure of funds, but
ither reflected a m.eiagement decision about how appro-
'iated fnds were to be expended. n this regard, we have
iiA t at th. Act. does not apply to program implementation
i~tlesions, as sul:, irespeot:ve of their impact on .budget
authority. -,... 0685, December .23, 1980. (Where a program
decision oes noet prelude obligattof orQ expenditure of
funds, isaodument would not result.)
+ : :i-S: h- : !. ; ....
.. "... ". .. .. .... ... .
91. a :: K I t : .. : .: i : .. .
a: 'i..A0`i1tE sI' .for the executive 'banbch to submit
Ptopoae0n| iscietions and deferrals for consideration
by Con.i 2 ii i S.C. SS 6:83-i84


: .... iii....
*... .......




IIIIIII !Hli~l




3-211373 Attachment to FPK Ltr. 300-31 (9)


-4.
alternative,!/ a t this time, some two years after they were
carried out# we will not,'Qbject to the details, Neverthe-
leas, as the size of details far exceeds those we have
,permitted in the past, we think this case provides an
i....4ppropriate opportunity to reconsider our general position
on their propriety.
A,"detail" is the, temporary assignment of an employee
a different position for a specified period, with the
Uyee returning to regular duties at the end of the

tail., Federal Personnel Manual, ch. 3000 S 8-1 (Inst.
May 71, 1981). The detailing of Federal employees from
agency to another on, a nonreimbursable basis already had
a Government practice for a number of years prior,-to
Treasury Comptroller discussing the issue in 14 Comp.
c4 294 (1907). In hat case, the Comptroller stated thAt
practice originated in instances in which the head of
department had available an.officer, clerk, or employee
'o cou14 perform a qervice for.another department and whose
vices were not neeoed for the time engaged on the
It was therefore i n the interest of good Government
*economy to utilize the employee's services. Id. at 296.
TheAegal question raised by nonreimbursable details
whether the'y were consistent with the law requiring that
be spent onlyfor the purposes for which
.0priatedo 31 U.i;-X. S 1301 (a) and the rule prohibiting
augmentations of agency appropriations.



For example, HHS could have continued the regional
Offive structure, provided work at its headquarters for
the 78 employees, attempted toarrange reimbursable
details undigr section 601 of- the Economy Act,, 31 u.s.c.
15350 or, donsistent wi6,'our views beJow,, attempted
toar'angernonreimbursab'le details involving work which
would ha4e aided HHS in accomplishing a purpose for
which itsOCS 4,ppropriati-ons were provided. We.point
out as well that the legislative history shows there was
a conflict between the executive and legislative
branoh" aboutthe extent to which the OCS grant program
was tlebe carried out. The C.ansress intended the fiscal
year, 19,0,3- grant program to be f unded at the saie level
as that for fiscal year 1982, H*R. Rep. No. 894. 97th
Coaq., 26$ess. 6 (1982). The represented some $257
mil4o -'iidr'a than the amount Proposed by the executive
departm#o

ho

9







Attachment to FPM Ltr. 300JI (12)
B-21 1373


provision that was included as action 801 ,.)f K.R. 11597j,
72d Cong.0 lst Sess., stated that it was unfair foc the
loaning department to have to pay the cost from its appro-
Avriations and that "work done should be paid for bythe
4 ftpartment. requiring such services."!/ H.R. Rep*
2201l 71st Cong.# 2d Sees. 2-3 (1931); H.R. Rep.
1126t 72d Cong.f let Sess. 15-16 (1932). Thereafter
7#*tt. 11597 was incorporated as 'Part 11 of H.R.'112670 72d
_9.# 1st Sess.r which became the Legislative Branch Appro-
Act for fiscal year 1933f Pub. L. No. 72-212f
.OwStat. 382t 41,7-18. That law-contained the Economy Act.
,,f,7Iqeoerally 57 Comp. Gen. 647, 677-80 (1978).
4 Notwithstanding the legislative history o*f the Economy
# Xk6t". we have continued to permit nonreimbursable details.
M7
all cases involving nonre imbur sable details con-
red since, passage of the Economy Act' have involved
nambers of employees for limited periods of
Thus,,in 13 Comp. Gen. 234 (1934),, we sustained a
I ffi Am' eimbursable detail of one employee from the Interstate
'F;,qMevce C- ommiss ion to the UnitedStates Shipping Board at a
of $200.j We said that in the absence of an Economy
# Agreement,, the loan of personnel should be regarded as
i I",
k # j", '-40commodation for which noreimbursement or transfer of
iaiions for salaries should be made.
-747,

IThe Met coordinator of the Bureau of the Budget, who
prepared the bill,, %aintained that the Comptroller
teneral's ruling in effect "Penalizes the performing
If appropriation and makes it loath to
'i, #x'; perform services for other departments and
establishments for fear that its own work might be
crippled thoreby Hearings on H.R. 10199 before
% the House Committee on Expenditures in the Executive
# Departments, 71st Cong., 2d Sess. 13-14.

Congressman Prench suggested 'that even Economy Act
transfers shouldbe limited in scope. Thus,, he did not
think "any legislation ought to authorize one bureau or
department to transfer its work-in a large way, to
another department, Hearings on H.R. 10199
before'the House Committee on Expenditures in Executive
Departments, 71st Cong., 2d, Sessm at 6.

In 59 Cothp. Gen. 366, 367-68 (1980) we reaffirmed the
positioulwe took in 13 Comp. Gtn. 234 (1934).




.. ....... .1 .. .. ........... ..








. .......... ...........
..........




........ .. ........ ...........

........... ..... ...... ...........
I ........ ......
............
........... ....... ................... .... ........................

..................... ...................
.................... ..... ..............

.................... w a ....... ........... ...........

.................... ..........

....................

............ .

............



......... .. .. .... .



...........
................... ............

............ .. ......... ...............
.... .... .. .........

.................
..... .... .... ... ..........


......... ........... ..............
......... ...

.................
.......... ..................... .

.......... ....... ................ ....

........................................

.......................................

........................ ................. ....

........................ ................. .....
... ...... .
.............................. .......... ........ ........
.... ........




...........

...........

...........
............. .. ........
..... .......................

.. ...........


l I

.. ....... ..... ........ ......
..................... ......... ::::
.............. .. ..... ... ....... ... ..... .











......... .... .

....... .... ... ... ...... ... 1 w

........ ...... ...


























... .. ........











































............ ... ...... ....... .... .














..... ......




Attachmft to FPM Ur. 300- 31 (13)


*f those of the receiving agency when the detail involves no
ixakocitional expense; Although Federal agencies may Oe part
4 who,10 system of Government# appropriations to an agency
limited to the purposes for which appropriated, goner-
y.to the execution of pacticul&r agency functionso
t stuutory aathority-s those purposes Youla not include
itvros for programs of another*%*ncy. Since the
tv-09 agency is gaining the benefit of work for programs
I**Ub fg,640' have *.en Vpropriattd to it, those appro-,
**a* should-be 4*0 to pay for that work. Thusj, a
th*'Purpo law does occur when an agency
oy oA, "O's4latles of employees detailed to another
vqr)t Ossenti4,14 unrelated to the loaning
T7-4*ft,* Ak"Olafto Jtt foll4kwo that the appro-
Awl I tko tetil,0#4 a4"oy atWtn1awfully augmented
AMMat, tj*o 1, ni," agency pays for, the salaries and
S of th, eipla 'S the r4, yee egistative history
Ntjon 6Q,1 he 'Sconiomy Acto discussed earlier,, show,4
pXqble%',And, enacted
a(
uv abl o deta,,ls, raise'add,,!tion 1 prob ems
wlrw* i*b a a 1 To
',"t'tWit-""q4es detail exploytoog on a rvonreim-
ttjs, t6A"Adtt pf t4r onomy ct'agr
,-tdug Vc J etmoaotz 0,
e retSb'4!rS 'ft4r tj e 'avoidinj ianqres-
A,; a -d *to
voiti rams., larly,,
vi* iiono4 "ca XnqS, y -e eivi

C, b riu, w, t ht nojre, "bla details wo
4i inq amen4monta clarA
_d iiq of qzA-qt fy-
I F V t
-*ath -ty for or Vspw, 'I,. in the Wh te 96use
-pr*- 10% po
eA- **-oathority. 1W employ persartnel-to,.
paviWIM04S, Pub,. 140, Stato
244*tSO*-- Vtr44k, to t#-oi;o amshd* ts w allowed
s, ,iO*xoy";s 6f the, exeoatf 0- 4epartMeots and
eiltib ihvieut 4i, met to time to the
to Staflce "jt s_ Pub. U.
me he law currenv*
ot t, t
ur be lqanrtq aqootcy "for any,
Aa, Ult ioq any f:Se* 4", ter 'I
yo _44f
calenda
t" IAO
tir it dotailed, ita,.040h, and the,
"i'"jIt to 44' 't 001gr "fqr fi
tt 4,cal ye

rF'- tot** deuiled





HH


..,........
........ .....IN



rY
i EWE
mirFa;

mea




Attachment to FPM Ltr. 300-31 (15)


D-211373


Moreover, congressional disquiet with GAO-sanctionea
ast practices which regarded unreimbursea details as an
accommodation" and which led to enactment of the "Economy
:t* (see earlier discussion) applied equally to
tra-agency and interagency details. All Economy Act
lbSoactions must be made pursuant to a written agreement on
ietabursable basis.
TW recognizee that not all inter- or intra-agency provi-
ii:: ot' goods or services are made pursuant to the Economy
.(th Eiiconomy Act was enacted to provide authority for
.q.a.ii.ages in the absence of some other specific statu-
Si .hority.) However, it does not follow that because a
or procurement is authorized, that it is necessarily
.iised to be provided on a nonreimbursable basis, unless
i Statutory authority so states. In the instant case, we
'th.at intra-a.genracy details are specifically author ied
S..C. S 3341. However, section 3341 is silent on the
:of reiabursement.
iiiiiThei.: itn-agency detail authority first was provided
F: the t of arch 3, 1-853, 1.0 Stat. 189, 211, and,
tlb becas e section 166 of the Revised Statutes..
alaiied by the' Act of May 28, 1896, 29 Stat. 140, 179
~d. .fied, as it presently appears, by Pub. L.
$34, 0 S-t .3178, 424. In 1894, the United States
iiGeneral was asked whether clerks drawing salaries
.i..iimp-sum appropriation for a specific purpose legally
de:i!:.tailed to pe~D orm.work in other divisions of the
partme4 t~ fded by separate appropriations. In
a:e on sectiIn 16 of the Revi.sed Statutes, the
y General found that the clerks could be so
ed; however, thly could not be paid from appropria-
9 "'the detatig. division, unless such payment
ically was ; thorized by law. 20 Op. Atty. Gen. 750,

ii asistent with the Attorney General's opinion, we
:it the better view that section 166, as amended, did
.....e. i.n onreiiLbur" sable details but merely provided
tyto maPke the details. n this regard, we point out
there are bther statutes authoriting details whtch
".cally provide that the details may be done on a
eimb~rsable basis. Thus, for example, section 3343 of
ie; 5, hich. .authorize details to international
;aiastiona, states that the details may be made "without
ab eme ;~n.t to he United States by the international

.. .. :. .












,I


Ln




UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
I II I I1111 li1111111111111111111
3 1262 08729 4350




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EKVG0MNUY_UP7JPL INGEST_TIME 2013-01-18T14:58:04Z PACKAGE AA00012996_00042
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES