United States Attorneys Bulletin · 2010. 10. 12. · 760 VOL 29 DECEMBER 18 1981 NO 26 Equal Access to Justice Act Handbook Attached to the end of this bulletin Is handbook containing

U.S Department of Justice

Executive Office for United States Attorneys

United States

Attorneys Bulletin

Published by

Executive Office for United States Attorneys Washington

For the use of all U.S Department of Justice Attorneys

VOL 29 DECEMBER 18 1981 NO 26

VOL 29 DECEMBER 18 1981NO 26

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

COMMENDATIONS757

POINTS TO REMEMBER

Commitments Under the Youth Corrections Act759

Equal Access to Justice Act Handbook760

New JURIS Library for IRS Summons Enforcement760

POINTS TO REMEMBER INDEX OF 1981761

CASENOTES

CIVIL DIVISION

Sunshine Act D.C Circuit Reverses District

Court Order that Required Open Meetings of

the Chrysler Corporation Loan Guarantee Board

Symons Chrysler Corporation LoanGuarantee Board 763

FOIA Third Circuit Holds that FOIA does not

Allow Awards of Attorney Fees to Pro Se Litigants

Cunningham FBI764

Attorney Fees Supreme Court Grants Certiorari

Vacates Judgment and Remands for Consideration

of Whether Attorneys Fees are Payable for Work

performed Prior to Effective Date of Equal Access

to Justice Act

East Baton Rouge Parrish School Board Ku Klux Klan

and U.S Department of Education765

Federal Employment Sixth Circuit Holds that Direct

Review over Federal Personnel Case in which Dismissed

Employees Allegations Amounted to Claim of Dis

crimination in Violation of the Rehabilitation Act

Lies in District Court

Vernon E.Whitehead Merit Systems Protection Board766

Supremacy Clause Ninth Circuit Holds that Ordinance

Requiring U.S Postal Service Letter Carriers to

Obtain Express Consent from Residents before Crossing

their Lawns to Deliver Mail Violates the Supremacy

Clause

United States City of PittsburgCal 767

CRIMINAL DIVISION

Speedy Trial Act Third Circuit Holds that

Defendant Cannot Waive Time Requirements

ofActUnited States Mildred Carrasquillo 769

II


Page

LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION

Oil and Gas Leasing Secretary of the Interior

has Broad Discretion to Refuse to Reinstate

Oil and Gas Lease He Terminated for Failure to

make Timely Rental Payments

Ram Petroleums Inc Andrus 771

National Environmental Policy Act Denial of

Injunction to Require EIS for Installation

of Air Conditioning Unit in Fine Arts Center

Affirmed

Mary Jane Eaton Drake University and the

United States 771

National Environmental Policy Act Third EISnot Required for Mining Plan on Navajo Reservation

National Indian Youth Council Watt 772

Indians Tribes Contractual Claim for Additional

Funds after it Spent all of its Funds in One

Year was within Exclusive Jurisdiction of Courtof Claims

Alamo Navajo School Board Andrus 773

StockRaising Homestead Act Governments Reservationof Coal and other Minerals in Act did not IncludeGravel

Western Nuclear Inc Andrus 773

Federal Government Holds Title and is not Estopped

from Maintaining Ejectment Action where Lands Moved

by Accretion not Avulsion

United States Harvey 774

TAX DIVISION

SutnlmDns Enforcement Internal Audit Reports and

Tax Accrual Workpapers

United States Leaseway Transportation Corp 775United States The El Paso Company 776

Equal Access to Justice Act District Court AdoptsPosition that Substantial Justification Standard

under the Act Applies to Government Position in

Court not Agency Underlying ActivitiesAlspach District Director of Internal Revenue 777

III


Page

SELECTED CONGRESSIONAL AND LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES 779

APPENDIX FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 783These pages should be placed on permanent fileby Rule in each United States Attorneysoffice library

ADDENDUM U.S ATTORNEYS MANUALBLUESHEETS 787U.S ATTORNEYS MANUALTRANSMITTALS 797

LIST OF ATTORNEYS 803

EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT HANDBOOK

757


COM1ENDATIONS

Assistant U.S Attorneys SAMUEL FORSTEIN and DONALD PURDY Jr EasternDistrict of Pennsylvania have been commended by Mr John Hogan SpecialAgent in Charge Federal Bureau of Investigation in Philadelphia Pennsylvania for job well done in the case of United States Haley whichinvolved the indictment of twentytwo defendants under the RICO RICOConspiracy Mail Fraud Wire Fraud and ITSP statutes

Assistant U.S Attorney LOUISE HILL Northern District of Ohio has beencommended by Mr Donald Trull Regional Administrator U.S Departmentof Transportation Federal Highway Administration Homewood Illinois forher high level of legal competence in resolving the NaChurs Plant Food Cocriminal enforcement case and supporting the Motor Carrier Safety Enforcement Program

Assistant U.S Attorneys JANET JANNUSCH and LEE SMITH Central Districtof Illinois have been commended by Mr Joel Rogers Acting DistrictDirector of the Immigration and Naturalization Service Chicago Illinoisfor their successful prosecution of an aliensmuggling ring operated byAlfonso Interial

Assistant U.S Attorney HENRY ROSSBACHER Central District of Californiahas been commended by Mr William Webster Director Federal Bureau ofInvestigation for his work in complex sixdefendant case involving theftof CETA funds and false tax returns entitled United States AlvaDotsonBennett

Assistant U.S Attorney VALERIE SCHURMAN Ditrict of Columbia has beencommended by Mr Howard Shapiro Deputy General Counsel Federal TradeCommission for her cooperation in the handling of Fleming FTC and MiltonBradley Corp FTC both of which involved issues of fact and lawprincipally concerning the Federal Trade Commissions programs

Assistant U.S Attorney SHARI SILVER Central District of California hasbeen commended by Mr William Stokes Assistant General Counsel Researchand Operations Division U.S Department of Agriculture for her persistentand successful efforts in the wrongful death/property damage case of Hidden

Springs Inc United States

Assistant U.S Attorney THEODORE WAI WU Central District of Californiahas been commended by Mr Lawrence Brady Assistant Secretary for TradeAdministration U.S Department of Commerce for his outstanding work inthe development and prosecution of two export cases Spawr Optical ResearchInc and Werner Bruchhauseri

759


EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR ATTORNEYS

William Tyson Director

POINTS TO REMEMBER

Commitments Under the Youth Corrections Act

The Federal Bureau of Prisons is planning to make several changes inthe handling of Youth Corrections Act YCA defendants sentenced under 18U.S.C 5010b or Cc

In the past YCA inmates have been sent to facilities where they werehoused in separate units but joined with adult inmates for work educationand leisure time activities In the future youth offenders will be sentto institutions which house only YCA inmates Each inmate when committedwill be screened evaluated and given an individually structured program asrequired by the Youth Corrections Act The Federal Correctional Institution Englewood Colorado will house all higher security male YCA offenders The Federal Correctional Institution Morgantown West Virginiawill house all female inmates and all minimum security males from east ofthe Mississippi If the number of YCA inmates requires third institution the Federal Correctional Institution at Otisville New York will beused YCA commitments from the District of Columbia Superior Court willcontinue to be sent to the D.C youth facilities

These changes are being made pursuant to recent judicial decisionswhich interpret the YCA as requiring the Bureau of Prisons to totallyseparate YCA offenders from adult inmates The transition is expected tobe completed by May 1982 cf Watts Haddn 651 2d 1354 1981The complete implementation plan can be obtained by contacting the Bureauof Prisons directly

Executive Office

760


Equal Access to Justice Act Handbook

Attached to the end of this bulletin Is handbook containing instructions and advice on the Equal Access to Justice Act which allows attorneysfees to be awarded against the government In certain types of civil casesIt is important that United States Attorneys refer to this handbook when

responding to applications for fees under the Act The handbook should bedetached from this bulletin and copy given to every attorney in theoffice who handles civil matters Questions on the Act should be directedto Helen Lessin Shaw FrS 6332034 of the Office of Legal Policy

Office of Legal Policy

New JURIS Library for IRS Summons Enforcement

As of November 1981 JURIS has had on-line newlibrary entitled SUMENF This library contains completeofficial and unofficial citations to and case histories ofall reported IRS summons enforcement and summons relatedcases in researchable and retrievable form This librarywas constructed by issue-coding each of more than 1000written decisions by one or more of 96 summons issues thatarise in litigating these cases This coding will enablethe researcher to locate quickly the citations to allsummons cases dealing with particular summons issuetailored to particular time frames and particular courts ifso desired The case citations are also searchable by anycombination of courts dates and issues In November 1981the Department mailed detailed instructions on now to usethis library and narrative description of each issue code

The SUMENF library is now in test phase The TaxDivision therefore encourages each United States Attorneysoffice to become familiar with it To do so each officehas been assigned special user code which has been sentto the JURIS contact person in your office and which mayalso be obtained by calling Mr James Jef fries IIIon FTS 724-6575 or Ms Susan Cavanaugh Justice ManagementDivision at FTS 633-4359 Inquiries on the use of theSUMENF library may be directed to Mr Jef fries orMr Robert Nath FTS 724-6574

Tax Division

761


EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR ATTORNEYS

William Tyson Director

Index to Points to Remember of 1981

Issues 26

Advisory Committee of U.S Attorneys 29 USAB 52 No

Appearance of Agency Attorneys Before

the Grand Jury 29 USAB 543 No 17

Appellate Matters 29 USAB 454 No 14

Changes Made by the Customs Courts Act of 1980 29 USAB 53 No29 USAB 119 No

Commendations 29 USAB 379 No 12

Commitments Under the Youth Corrections Act 29 USAB 759 No 26

Computer Support for Litigation 29 USAB 119 No

Coordination and Consultation with the

Central Intelligence Agency 29 USAB 629 No 22

Eighth Circuit Reverses Dismissal of

Perjury Charge 29 USAB 599 No 21

Electronic Surveillance Title IIITitle III Affidavits Extension Orders 29 USAB 705 No 24

Equal Access to Justice Act Handbook 29 USAB 760 No 26

Ethics in Government Act Post Government

Employment Restrictions AgencyDetermination Upheld 29 USAB 521 No 18

Ethics Post Government EmploymentRestrictions and Disqualification 29 USAB 335 No 11

Executive Office Staff December 1980 29 USAB No

Federal Employees Group Life Insurance 29 USAB 55 No

In re Grand Jury Proceedings 29 USAB 210 No

Internal Revenue Service Project 719 29 USAB 453 No 14

Litigation Against State Governments

Agencies or Entities 29 USAB 549 No 19

762


New JURIS Library for IRS Summons Enforcement 29 USAB 760 No 26

PreTrial Diversion Program 29 USAB 267 No

Prisoner Witnesses 29 USAB 247 No

Readers Clearinghouse 29 USAB 379 No 12

Reduction of Service by U.S Marshal 29 USAB 53 No

Relationships With Client Agencies 29 USAB 547 No 19

Report on Convicted Prisoners Form 792 29 USAB 723 No 25

Reporting System for Litigating Divisions 29 USAB 630 No 22

Searches of the LEXIS Database for U.S AttorneysPerformed by the Justice Department Library 29 USAB 51 No

Special Notice to United States Attorneys 29 USAB 521 No 16

The Attorney Generals Advisory Committee

of United States Attorneys 29 USAB 667 No 23

The Perils of the Financial Privacy Act 29 USAB 380 No 12

The United States Attorneys Manual

Authority and Reliance Thereon 29 USAB 668 No 23

United States Attorneys Caseload

Management Project 29 USAB 71 No

United States Attorneys List 29 USAB 523 No 1829 USAB 551 No 19

U.S Attorneyss Office Disqualified from Retrial

by Appearance of Impropriety when Former

Defense Counsel becomes Assistant U.SAttorney 29 USAB 571 No 20

Use of Grand Jury Agents to Search for and

Copy Financial Records 29 USAB 210 No

Use of Sophisticated Word Processing Equipment 29 USAB 52 No

Use of the Bank Target Exception to ReduceReimbursement Obligations Under the Financial

Privacy Act 29 USAB 209 No

Witness Statements Producible Only After

Direct Examination 29 USAB 76 No

763


CIVIL DIVISIONAssistant Attorney General Paul McGrath

Symons Chrysler Corporation Loan Guarantee Board D.C CircuitNo 811599 December 1981 D.J 14501041

SUNSHINE ACT D.C CIRCUIT REVERSES DISTRICTCOURT ORDER THAT REQUIRED OPEN MEETINGS OF THECHRYSLER CORPORATION LOAN GUARANTEE BOARD

The massive federal loan guarantee program which is designedto prevent the financial collapse of the Chrysler Corporation isadministered by the Chrysler Corporation Loan Guarantee BoardIts membership is mandated by law consisting of the Secretary ofthe Treasury as Chairman the Chairman of the Federal ReserveBoard and the Comptroller General as the other voting membersand the Secretaries of Labor and Transportation as nonvotingmembers Plaintiff filed suit in the district court assertingthat the Board is an agency of the type covered by the SunshineAct and therefore it must hold open meetings announced inadvance and with public attendance mandatory The districtcourt agreed and issued an injunction requiring that the Boardsmeetings be held under Sunshine Act procedures and requirements

On appeal the D.C Circuit has just reversed the districtcourt decision with Judge Wald dissenting The opinion of thecourt of appeals essentially adopts our brief point by pointThe court agreed that the plain meaning of the section of the Actdefining agency had to be followed Under that language anagency is covered only if it is collegial body majority ofwhose members were appointed to such positions by the Presidentand confirmed by the Senate We argued and the court agreedthat to such position could refer only to the means by whichthe agency member attained his or her seat on the agency itselfand not to the method of selection to some other job such asCabinet post with membership on the agency coming by operationof law The court felt that it had to accept this constructiondespite its view that exclusion of the Board may run counter tothe spirit of the Act This decision should be very helpful to

number of other agencies whose membership is made up of personswith underlying Presidential appointments and who belong to the

agency by operation of law including such important agencies asthe National Security Council the Federal Open Market Committeeand the Board of Trustees of the Social Security Trust Fund

Attorney Frank Rosenfeld Civil DivisionFTS 6334027

764



Cunningham FBI 3rd Cir No 811183 November 24 1981D.J 145123901

FOIA THIRD CIRCUIT HOLDS THAT FOIA DOESNOT ALLOW AWARDS OF ATTORNEY FEES TO PROSE LITIGANTS

The Third Circuit has held that the Freedom of InformationAct does not allow pro se litigants to receive payment underprovision that allows courts to award the prevailing partyreasonable attorney fees reasonably incurred U.S.C552a4E The Third Circuit thus joins the First Fifth andTenth Circuits in adopting our view of this provision and theanalogous provision in the Privacy Act The D.C Circuit hasheld to the contrary and the Second Circuit has suggestedmiddle position

Attorney Marc Richman Civil DivisionFTS 6334052

765


CIVIL DIVISION

Assistant Attorney General Paul McGrath

East Baton Rouge Parrish School Board Ku Klux Klan etand U.S Department of Education 5th Cir No 801978November 30 1981 D.J 14516882

ATTORNEY FEES SUPREME COURT GRANTSCERTIORARI VACATES JUDGMENT AND REMANDSFOR CONSIDERATION OF WHETHER ATTORNEYS FEES

ARE PAYABLE FOR WORK PERFORMED PRIOR TO

EFFECTIVE DATE OF EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT

In this case the Ku Klux Klan prevailed in civil rightsaction against the school board and the Department of Educationand sought attorneys fees under the Civil Rights Attorneys Fees

Award Act 42 U.S.C 1988 The Fifth Circuit ruled that Section1988 does not waive the governments immunity from an award of

attorneys fees but held that the school board could be liablefor the tees On the school boards petition for certiorari the

Supreme Court has just granted the writ vacated the judgmentand has remanded the case to the court of appeals for further

consideration in light of the Equal Access to Justice ActPub No 96481 Sec 20108 effective October 1981

This case will thus become one the first cases in which

court of appeals will consider whether the government may be

required to pay attorneys fees under the Equal Access to Justice

Act for work performed prior to the effective date of the act

Attorney Wendy Keats Civil DivisionFTS 6333355

766



Vernon Whitehead Merit Systems Protection Board et6th Cir No 793614 November 1981 D.J 355882

FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT SIXTH CIRCUIT HOLDS THATDIRECT REVIEW OVER FEDERAL PERSONNEL CASE INWHICH DISMISSED EMPLOYEES ALLEGATIONSAMOUNTED TO CLAIM OF DISCRIMINATION INVIOLATION OF THE REHABILITATION ACT LIES INDISTRICT COURT

Petitioner former civilian employee of the United StatesArmy in Warren Michigan was removed from his position in 1979for repeated absences without leave Prior to his removal hehad undergone openheart surgery which led to his being diagnosedas sufrering from certain physical and behavior disorders whichcaused him difficulty in the work place In his appeal beforethe MSPB Whitehead defended his failure to report to work on theground that the Army had failed to treat him fairly and equitablywith regard to his handicap failing to take into considerationmedical recommendations concerning the proper work environmentfor him The MSPB affirmed Whiteheads removal holding thataitnough Whitehead was handicapped the agency had not violatedmedical recommendations in making his new work assignment andthat Whitehead should have contested the assignment if hethought it improper rather than simply going AWOL The MSPBmistakenly informed Whitehead in its decision that he could seekjudicial review of its decision in the court of appeals or theCourt of Claims

In the court of appeals we argued that direct review overWhiteheads case should lie in the district court since he wasalleging that basis for the removal action taken against himwas discrimination in violation of the Rehabilitation Act Thecourt of appeals agreed rejecting Whiteheads contention thatthis was not discrimination case but prohibited personnelpractice case over which the court of appeals had original reviewjurisdiction The court of appeals remanded the case to the MSPBwhich will now issue an order from which Whitehead may seekfurther review before the EEOC or go directly to district court

Attorney Carlene McIntyre Civil DivisionFTS 6335459

767



United States City of Pittsburg Cal 9th Circuit Nos 794368 794611 November 16 1981 D.J 145101560

SUPREMACY CLAUSE NINTH CIRCUIT HOLDS THATORDINANCE REQUIRING U.S POSTAL SERVICE LETTERCARRIERS TO OBTAIN EXPRESS CONSENT FROMRESIDENTS BEFORE CROSSING THEIR LAWNS TODELIVER MAIL VIOLATES THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE

Postal regulations authorize postal carriers to cross lawnsin the course of delivering mail unless the owner objects Thecity ot Pittsburg Cal at the behest ot the National Association of Letter Carriers enacted local ordinance prohibitingpostal carriers from crossing lawns unless they first obtain theowners express consent The Ninth Circuit attirmed the districtcourts decision holding that the local ordinance frustrates theCongressional objective of efficient mail delivery that federalregulations seek to implement and hence the local ordinanceviolates the Supremacy Clause The court also rejected the argument that the Postal Services practice violated the Fifth andTenth Amendments

Attorney John Hoyle Civil DivisionFTS 6333547

769


CRIMINAL DIVISION

Assistant Attorney General Lowell Jensen

United States Mildred Carrasquillo No 811154 3d Cir December 1981

SPEEDY TRIAL ACT THIRD CIRCUIT HOLDS THAT DEFENDANT CANNOT WAIVETIME REQUIREMENTS OF ACT

Shortly after arraignment the defendants attorney asked the deputyclerk to delay scheduling the case for trial because of counsels upcoming

court appearances As consequence the Speedy Trial Act time limits were

exceeded before the case was scheduled for trial The Third Circuit ruled

that deputy clerk cannot grant excludable time under the 18 U.S.C 3161hends of justice provision that judge cannot grant excludable time

retroactively under the same ends of justice provision after the timelimits have been exceeded and motion to dismiss has been filed and thatdefendants cannot be held to have waived the time limits under the ActThe court stated we do not think defendant can waive the publicsright to speedy trial.. The district court judges order denying thedefendants motion to dismiss was reversed and the case remanded with

directions to the district court to dismiss with or without prejudice

Attorney Patty Stemler

Criminal DivisionFrS 6333742

771


LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISIONAssistant Attorney General Carol Dinkins

Ram Petroleums Inc Andrus 658 F.2d 1349 No 79-4886 9thCir October 13 1981 DJ 90-10-2-58

Oil and gas leasing Secretary of the Interior hasbroad discretion to refuse to reinstate oil and gas lease heterminated for failure to make timely rental payments

Reversing the decision of the district court theNinth Circuit held that Interior did not abuse its discretion inrefusing to reinstate oil and gas leases which had terminateddue to the lessees failure to make timely rental payments Thelessee alleged that its failure to make timely payment wasjustifiable and not due to lack of reasonable diligence thestandards for reinstatement pursuant to 30 U.S.C 188c because it was caused by an employees failure to mail the paymentcoupled with her false assurances that she had done so Thedistrict court accepted the lessees argument holding that thelegislative history of 30 U.S.C 188c supported reinstatementunder these circumstances The court of appeals found that thedistrict court misread the legislative history The opinionfinds that the legislative history and statutory languagesupport broad grant of discretion to Interior and make clearthat reinstatement need be granted only when Interior is fullysatisfied that an adequate showing has been made This broaddiscretion the court of appeals concluded had not been abusedin this case since the lessee must be held responsible for theacts of its employees and in any event could have avoided theproblem by checking the employees assurances against accountrecords

Attorneys David Shilton and Dirk SnelLand and Natural Resources DivisionFrS 633-2737/4400

Mary Jane Eaton Drake University and the United StatesF.2d 8th Cir November 1981 DJ 90-1-4-2244

National Environmental Policy Act denial of injunction to require EIS for installation of air conditioningunit in Fine Arts Center affirmed

772


The Eighth Circuit affirmed curiam the districtcourts entries of summary judgment in favor of Drake Universityand the United States Appellant had sought both injunctiverelief and monetary damages for the Department of Educationtsfailure ten years ago to require Drake University to file an EISconcerning the effect of an air conditioning unit in Fine ArtsCenter the construction of which was partially funded by government grants

Attorneys Wendy Jacobs and Robert KlarquistLand and Natural Resources DivisionFTS 633-401 0/273

National Indian Youth Council Watt F.2d No 80-2097 10th Cir November 12 1981 DJ 90-2-4537

National Environmental Policy Act third EIS notrequired for mining plan on Navajo Reservation

Plaintiffs challenged the Secretarys approval ofprivate lessees surface mining plan involving the Navajo Reservation The court of appeals affirmed the judgment in favor ofthe Secretary After Interior had prepared two EISs and theprivate lessee had prepared proposed mining plan OSM required

revised mining plan because of the intervening enactment ofthe Surface Mining Act Numerous changes were imposed on theproject by OSM but Interior decided not to prepare third EISon the new plan Construing the CEQ regulations the court ofappeals rejected the claim that third EIS was necessary Thecourt relied upon the amount of environmental analysis in thetwo EISs and the environmental assessment The court also implied that continuing federal control oier and monitoring ofrevegetation efforts minimized the need for third EIS Plaintiffs also failed to convince the court that the alternativesdiscussion was inadequate Finally the court held that theNational Historic Preservation Act did not require Interior tosurvey the entire 40000-acre leasehold for eligible sites before approving operations on 7000-acre portion which had beensurveyed

Attorneys Jerry Jackson Thomas Pachecoand Edward Shawaker Land and NaturalResources Division FTS 724-73776334519/2813

773


Alamo Navajo School Board Andrus F.2d No 80-181110th Cir November 13 1981 DJ 90-2-4-663

Indians Tribes contractual claim for additionalfunds after it spent all of its funds in one year was withinexclusive jurisdiction of Court of Claims

The Board is an entity of the Navajo Tribe It enteredinto contract with the BIA to operate school on the NavajoReservation Through an apparent misreading of its contractthe Board spent all of its funds to be used in its first fiscalyear at the end of the school year leaving shortfall for thefirst six weeks of the next school year before the beginning ofthe next fiscal year The Board argued that the government had

duty to make up that shortfall based on 25 U.S.C 2008 and25 C.F.R 31h.l-31h.l43 and the district court agreed Thecourt of appeals reversed It rejected the claimed mandatoryduty on the United States to pay the money and instead foundthat the action was essentially one for money based on contractand therefore within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court ofClaims

Attorneys Peter Steenland Jr and EdwardShawaker Land and Natural ResourcesDivision FTS 633-2748/2813

Western Nuclear Inc Andrus F.2d No 79-229010th Cir November 13 1981 DJ 90-1-5-1863

Stock-Raising Homestead Act Governments reservationof coal and other minerals in Act did not include gravel

Reversing the district court the court of appealsheld that the reservation to the United States of all coal andother minerals in lands patented under the Stock-Raising Homestead Act of 1916 39 Stat 862 43 U.S.C 291302 does notinclude gravel The court reviewing the legislative history ofthe statute which was enacted during period in which Interiorhad held that gravel was not locatable mineral under the general mining laws concluded that Congress had not intended toinclude gravel within the reservation of coal and otherminerals

Attorneys Robert Klarquist and Edward ShawakerLand and Natural Resources Divisionvrs 633-2731 /2813

774


United States Harvey F.2d No 77-2279 10th CirNovember 16 1981 DJ 90-1-10-1012

Federal government holds title and is not estoppedfrom maintaining ejectment action where lands moved byaccretion not avulsion

In 1914 the United States issued patent totract in Arizona on the south bank of the Colorado River By1952 however the river had shifted to the south and thelands within the coordinates described by the patent werelocated on the north California bank of the river adjacentto lands still owned by the United States successor ininterest who acquired the 1914 patent subdivided the lands onthe north bank and sold the lots for recreational home development Subsequently the United States brought an ejectment action asserting that the lands had moved by accretionrather than avulsion and therefore the United States ownedthe subject lands The jury returned verdict in favor ofthe United States

On appeal the Ninth Circuit affirmed First thecourt found that the court had instructed the jury on theaccretion issue according to federal common law instead ofArizona law which should have been applied The court however found this to be of no significance as federal commonlaw and Arizona law are identical for this situation Secondthe court ruled that the jurys finding that the river hadmoved by accretion rather than avulsion thus giving title tothe United States was supported by substantial evidenceFinally the court ruled that the federal government was notestopped under the circumstances of this case

Attorneys Robert Klarquist and Jacques GelinLand and Natural Resources DivisionFTS 633-2731 /2762

775


TAX DIVISION

Assistant Attorney General Glenn Archer Jr

Summons Enforcement Internal Audit Reports and Tax

Accrual Workpapers

United States et al Leaseway TransportationCorp et al 81 A.F.T.R 2d 81-6110 N.D OhioOctober 15 1981 United States et al The El PasoCompany Civil No -81-l360 S.D Tex. November 301981

Two recent decisions add to the almost unanimous

authority upholding the right of the Internal Revenue

Service to inspect taxpayers internal audit reportsand tax accrual workpapers pursuant to Section 7602 of

the Internal Revenue Code of 195426U.S.C.

In United States Leaseway Transportation Corpsupra the taxpayer contended but failed to prove thatthe summons demanding its internal audit reports was

issued for the purpose of harassment Its other defensethat the summoned data were not relevant to the investi

gation was rejected the District Court observing onthe basis of evidence adduced at the hearing that such

reports could have an impact on the financial statement

from which the taxpayers return was prepared that such

reports contained information regarding timing adjustmentswhich could be relevant in determining the accuracy of

the return and that the reports were also relevant

concerning the existence of substantiating records for

ledger entries Observing that the Commissionerssummons power is not limited to material that is

demonstrably relevant to an investigation the District

Court citing United States Arthur Andersen Co474 Supp 322 Mass 1979 802 U.S.T.C 95151st Cir 1980 United States Noah 587 2d 1232d Cir 1978 and United States Riley Co45 A.F.T.R 2d 801164 N.D Ill 1980 held that theinformation sought may be relevant to the investigationand ordered the summons enforced

Attorneys Mitchell EhrenbergAssistant United States AttorneyNorthern District of Ohio

FTS 2934389

James Jeffries IIITax Division

FTS 7246575

776


In United States The El Paso Co supra the DistrictCourt similarly determined that the taxpayers internal auditreports as well as tax accrual workpapers were relevant andrejected the reasoning of the Tenth Circuits decision inUnited States Coopers Lybrand 550 2d 615 1977 thatsuch documentation is not relevant The taxpayer also raiseddefenses that the documentation was protectable under theattorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine on thetheory that the documents were prepared for review by thetaxpayers legal counsel in connection with matters relatingto its tax liability The District Court rejected the blanketassertion of an attorney-client privilege And it specificallyfound that the documents were available to the taxpayersindependent auditors and were not intended to be keptconfidential and that the documents were prepared foraccounting and financial reporting purposes rather than forlegal advice or in preparation for litigation precludingsuccessful reliance upon the privilege defenses Finallythe District Court also denied the taxpayers motion forstay pending appeal and the taxpayer has moved the FifthCircuit to grant such stay

Attorney Michael GreeneTax Division Dallas Field Office

FTS 7290293

777


TAX DIVISION

Assistant Attorney General Glenn Archer Jr

Alspach District Director of Internal Revenue USDC Md November 271981

EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT DISTRICT COURT ADOPTS POSITION THATSUBSTANTIAL JUSTIFICATION STANDARD UNDER THE ACT APPLIES TO GOVERN

MENT POSITION IN COURT NOT AGENCY UNDERLYING ACTIVITIES

In one of the first cases to interpret the Equal Access to Justice Act

that took effect October 1981 the U.S District Court for the Districtof Maryland found that the position of the United States was substantially

justified and denied plaintiffs application for an award of fees and

expenses under 28 U.S.C 2412 According to the Court the term positionof the United States for which substantial justification must be shown if

the Government is to be excused from paying the private partys fees and

expenses under 28 U.S.C 2412d refers to the Governments action orposition in prosecuting or defending the litigation rather than its action

upon which the litigation is based The Court therefore did not look at

IRS activity prior to litigation which resulted in statutory notice of

deficiency being sent to an incorrect address but focused on the factors

surrounding the position taken in the case by the Tax Division attorney

The Court noted that the Tax Division attorney did not have IRS administra

tive file at the time the answer was filed defending the case that theTax Division informed plaintiffs attorney that the Government would concede the case approximately 30 days after the file was received and that

the stipulation for dismissal was filed reasonably promptly thereafter

The Court found that the Government had met its burden of showing substan

tial justification for initially contesting this action and acted fairlyexpeditiously when the facts became known to counsel and denied plaintiffs application for an award

The Court also ruled that the congressional intent behind the Equal

Access to Justice Act was to create two separate and independent bases for

the award of attorney fees and expenses to private parties engaged in

litigation with the Government by extending to the Government theapplication of existing common law and statutory exceptions to the general

American rule against the award of counsel fees in 28 U.S.C 2412band requiring the award of fees in the special circumstances provided

for in 28 U.S.C 2412dlA unless the Governments position issubstantially justified or special circumstances make an award unjust

Attorney Gregory Hrebiniak

Tax DivisionFTS 7246562

779

VOL 29 DECEMBER 18 1981 No 26

OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS

Assistant Attorney General Robert McConnell

SELECTED CONGRESSIONAL AND LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES

NOVEMBER 24 1981 DECEMBER 1981

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act On November 23 theSenate passed by voice vote 708 amendments to the

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 The version that

passed contained an amendment which takes away criminal

liability for business which fails to comply with the

accounting section of the legislation Also prohibited are

civil penalties if violations are committed while the

business is operating in good faith with the law

Tax Disclosure Amendments On November 24 SenatorsRoth and Nunn introduced the Departments amendments to

Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code which will remove

many restrictions which have prohibited the InternalRevenue

Service from sharing information of criminal activity with

law enforcement officials The legislation is consideredvital in the Departments fight against organized crime and

narcotic traffickers

Krome North/INS In both the Departments Appropriations bill and the Continuing Resolution H.J.Res 357 the

Senate inserted language that would have placed numerical

limitation on the number of individuals that could be

detained at the INS facility at Krome North in Florida Such

restriction would have significantly impaired the

Departments efforts to effectively handle the large influx

of Haitians into the South Florida area After communicatingwith the Conference Committee considering H.J.Res 357language was substituted that the Department use its bestefforts to meet the numerical goals

NonImmigrants On November 30 the Senate JudiciaryCommittees Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Policyheld hearing on the H2 program nonimmigrant visawaivers and programs for nonimmigrant information control

Doris Meissner Acting Commissioner INS and Alan Nelson

Deputy Commissioner INS represented the Department

780

VOl 29 DECEMBER 18 1981 No 26

432 On December William Baxter AssistantAttorney General Antitrust Division testified before theSenate Judiciary Committee concerning 432 bill whichwould establish commission to review the internationalaspects of the antitrust laws The Department believes thatthe exercise of antitrust jurisdiction over restrictivebusiness practices that produce substantial adverse effectson the domestic economy does not impose significant impediment to United States business in its efforts to competeabroad While the Department does not object to some type ofstudy the subject of 432 is too narrow in that antitrustis only one of several statutory schemes whose internationalapplication has raised questions Any study of these areaswill be difficult and time consuming

Small Business/Antitrust On December WilliamBaxter Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Divisiontestified before the Senate Subcommittee on Productivity andCompetition of the Small Business Committee Mr Baxterdiscussed the Departmentts merger policy verticalrestraints licensing restrictions on patents and otherintellectual property joints ventures and the competitionadvocacy of the Antitrust Division

Nominations On December 1981 the United StatesSenate confirmed the following nominations

Edward Becker of Pennsylvania to be U.S CircuitJudge for the Third Circuit

Jackson Kiser to be U.S District Judge for theWestern District of Virginia

Robert Doumar to be U.S District Judge for theEastern District of Virginia

Brent Ward to be U.S Attorney for the District ofUtah

Joseph Stadtmueller to be U.S Attorney for theEastern District of Wisconsin

Donald Ayer to be U.S Attorney for the EasternDistrict of California

781


Louis DeFalaise to be U.S Attorney for the EasternDistrict of Kentucky

William Vaughn to be U.S Marshal for the EasternDistrict of Missouri

Howard Adair to be U.S Marshal for the SouthernDistrict of Alabama

James Meyers to be U.S Marshal for the MiddleDistrict of Louisiana

Paul Nolan to be U.S Marshal for the EasternDistrict of Washington

Harry Connolly to be U.S Marshal for the NorthernDistrict of Oklahoma

783

VOL 29 December 18 1981 NO 26

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

Rule 11c Pleas Advice to Defendant

When defendant pled guilty to armed robbery and wassentenced the court clerk asked whether he had read theindictment and whether he understood the charges against himto which he responded affirmatively The clerk then confirmedthat defendant was entering guilty plea The district judgeaddressed defendant and determined that he was not under theinfluence of narcotics he understood the proceedings takingplace he had heard the summary of the Governments evidencehe admitted robbing the bank he could face 25 years in jailand $10000 fine and he understood he was forfeitingcertain rights Defendant appealed arguing that the districtcourt did not comply with Rule 11c

On appeal the Court held that defendant should beallowed to withdraw his plea since Rule 11c requires thejudge to personally address the defendant explain the meaningor elements of the charge and ascertain that the plea wasmade with understanding of the charge

Reversed and remanded

United States Reginald Carter F.2d No 80-52114th Cir October 20 1981

785

VOL 29 December 18 1981 NO 26

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

Rule 35 Correction or reduction of sentence

Defendant pleaded guilty pursuant to plea agreementwhereby the government agreed to make no recommendation as tosentence While the government made no recommendation at theinitial sentencing it did oppose defendants later Rule 35motion for elimination of the fine imposed which motion wasdenied On appeal defendant contended that the governmentsopposition to the motion violated the plea agreement

The Court first noted that it was uncontested that thegovernment adhered to the terms of the plea agreement atsentencing Noting that Rule 35 motion presupposes validsentence the Court concluded that plea agreement promise tomake no recommendation as to sentencing extended only to theinitial sentencing and not to later Rule 35 motion forreduction of sentence

Affirmed

United States Anthony Ligori 658 F.2d 130 3rd CirAugust 24 1981

787


LISTING OF ALL BLUESHEETS IN EFFECT

DATE AFFECTS USAM SUBJECT

TITLE

62177 13.100 Assigning Functions to theAssociate Attorney General

62177 13.102 Assignment of Responsibilityto DAG re INTERPOL

62177 13.105 Reorganize and Redesignate Officeof Policy and Planning as Office

for Improvements in the

Administration of Justice

42277 13.108 Selective Service Pardons

62177 13.113 Redesignate Freedom of InformationAppeals Unit as Office of Privacy

and Information Appeals

62177 13.301 Director Bureau of PrisonsAuthority to Promulgate Rules

62177 13.402 U.S Parole Commission to replaceU.S Board of Parole

121580 15.410 Subpoena of Reporters

42877 16.200 Representation of DOJ Attorneysby the Department A.G Order63377

83077 19.000 Case Processing by Teletype withSocial Security Administration

103179 19.000 Procedure for Obtaining Disclosureof Social Security Administration

Information in Criminal Proceedings

111679 19.000 Notification to Special Agent inCharge Concerning Illegal or

Improper Actions by DEA or Treasury

Agents

120980 111.500 Informal Immunity

788



71478 114.210 Delegation of Authority to ConductGrand Jury Proceedings

TITLE

10377 23.210 Appeals in Tax Cases

TITLE

Undtd 34.000 Sealing and Expungement of CaseFiles Under 21 U.S.C 844

TITLE

112778 41.200 Responsibilities of the AAG forCivil Division

91578 41.210 Civil Division Reorganization41.227

41480 41.213 Federal Programs Branch Case Reviews

51280 41.213 Organization of Federal ProgramsBranch Civil Division

40179 41.300 Redelegations of Authority in Civil41.313 Division Cases

110780 41.312 Cases Coming Before the U.S Customs

50578 41.313 Addition of Direct Referral Casesto USA1 41.313

71880 41.320 Impositions of Sanctions upon GovernmentCounsel and Upon the Government Itself

81580 41.327 Judicial Assistance to Foreign Tribunals

40179 42.110 Redelegation of Authority in Civil42.140 Division Cases

51280 42.230 Monitoring of pre and postjudgment payments on VA educational overpaymentaccounts

70780 42.230 Monitoring of pre and postjudgment payments on VA educational overpaymentaccounts

22278 42.320 Memo Containing the USAs Recommendations for the Compromising or

Closing of Claims Beyond his Authority

789



81379 43.000 Withholding Taxes on Backpay Judgments

51479 44.230 Attorneys Fees in EEO Cases

112180 44.240 Attorney fees In FOl and PA suits

11681 44.260 Attorneys Fees Award in S.S ActReview Cases

80880 44.310 Cases with International or Foreign320 330 Law Aspects

40179 44.530 Addition to USAN 44.530 costs recoverable from United States

40179 44.810 Interest recoverable by the Govt

40179 45.229 New USAM 45.229 dealing with limitations in Right To Financial Privacy

Act suits

21580 45.530 540 FOIA and Privacy Act Matters550

4179 45.921 Sovereign Immunity

40179 45.924 Sovereign Immunity

50580 46.400 Coordination of Civil Criminal Aspectsof Fraud Official Corruption Cases

51280 46.600 Monitoring of pre and postjudgmentpayments on VA educational overpayment accounts

70780 46.600 Monitoring of pre and postjudgmentPayments on VA Educational Overpayinent Accounts

51280 46.600 Memo of Understanding for Conduct of Test

Program to Collect VA Educational

Assistance Overpayments Less Than $600

81580 47.400 Application of State Law to QuestionsArising in the Foreclosure of Government

Held Mortgages

1581 48.800 Claims Referred by Railroad Retirement Board

790



90580 48.900 Renegotiations Act Claims

80880 410.100 Cancellation of Patents

80180 411.210 Copyright Patent and Trademark220 230 Litigation

41679 413.230 New USAM 413.230 Discussing RevisedHEW Regulations Governing Social

Security Act Disability Benefits

11780 413.330 Customs Matters

72580 413.330 Customs Matters

112778 413.335 News Discussing Energy Cases

73079 413.350 Review of Government Personnel Casesunder the Civil Service Reform Act

of 1978

8180 413.350 Review of Government Personnel Casesunder the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978

4179 413.361 Handling of Suits Against GovtEmployees

TITLE

TITLE

42280 63.630 Responsibilities of United StatesAttorney of Receipt of Complaint

TITLE

62177 72.000 Part 25Recommendations toPresident on Civil Aeronautic

Board Decisions Procedures for

Receiving Comments by Private Parties

TITLE

62177 82.000 Part 55Implementation of Provisionsof Voting Rights Act re Language

Minority Groups interpretiveguidelines

791



62177 82.000 Part 42Coordination of Enforcementof Nondiscrimination in Federally

Assisted Programs

52380 82.170 Standards for Amicus Participation

101877 82.220 Suits Against the Secretary ofCommerce Challenging the 10%

Minority Business SetAside of

the Public Works Employment

Act of 1977 P.L 9528 May 13 1977

52380 82.400 Amicus Participation By the Division

52380 83.190 Notification to Parties of Dispositionof Criminal Civil Rights Matters

52380 83.300 Notification to Parties of Dispositionof Criminal Civil Rights Matters

TITLE

71179 91.000 Criminal Division Reorganization

Undtd 380 91.103 Description of Public Integrity Section

31480 91.103 Criminal Division Reorganization

102981 91.173 General Responsibilities ExecutiveCommittee Personnel

1881 92.145 Interstate kgreement on Detainers

120980 92.148 Informal Immunity

Undated 92.164 Policy With Regard to the Issuance of

22781 Subpoenas to Members of the News MediaSubpoenas for Telephone Toll Records of

Members of the News Media and the

Interrogation Indictment or Arrest ofMembers of the News Media

22781 92 166 Grand Jury Subpoenas for TelephoneToll Records

Undtd 97.000 Defendant Overhearings and Attorney97.317 Overhearings Wiretap Motions

792



52681 97.110 Authorization of Applicationsfor Interception Orders

52681 97.170 Title III Application

52681 97.180 Title III Order

91080 97.23O Trap and Trace Guidelines97.928

71481 97.910 Form Interception Application

71481 97.921 Form Interception Order

52681 97.921 Title III Standard Form Interception Order

20680 911.220 Useof Grand Jury to LocateFugitives

91880 911.220 Obtaining Records To Aid in theLocation of Federal Fugitives byUse of the All Writs Act 28 U.S.C 1651

121378 911.220 Use of Grand Jury to Locate Fugitives

53177 911.230 Grand Jury Subpoena for TelephoneToll Records

81380 911.230 Fair Credit Reporting Act and GrandJury Subpoenas

8581 911.230 Fair Credit Reporting Act and GrandJury Subpoenas

Undated 911.230 Limitations on Grand Jury Subpoenas2278

12181 937.000 Habeas Corpus

793


DATE AECtStJSAM SUBJECT

102279 942.000 Coordination of Fraud Againstthe Government Cases nondisciosable

82181 942.501 Relationship and Coordination with the942.502 Statutory Inspectors General

21781 960.140 Kidnapping

92481 969.421 Fugitive Felon Act

7681 969.500 Expeditious Authorization of MagistratesComplaints Warrants in Fed Escape Cases

31279 979.260 Access to Information Filed Pursuantto the Currency Foreign Transactions

Reporting Act

52681 990.940 Classified Info Procedures Act of 1980

13081 9110.100 RICO Guidelines

92481 9120.140 Payments

51881 9121.140 Application of Cash Bail to Criminal

Fines

12981 9139.740 47 USC 506 The LEA Act Coercive Practices

Affecting Broadcasting

Revised 121881

Listing of all Bluesheets in Effect

794


Title 10Executive Office for United States Attorneys

Title 10 has been distributed to U.S Attorneys Offices only because it

consists of administrative guidelines for U.S Attorneys and their staffsThe following is list of all Title 10 Bluesheets currently in effect


Undtd 22781 102.111 124 Racial/Ethnic Codes142 156 161162 164 520

92581 102.142 156 Employment Review Procedures164 520 for NonAttorneys

8781 102.146 Priority Placement of EmployeesEntitled to Grade/Pay Retention

Benefits

8781 102.154 Employment of Law Students UnderJJ Authority

112181 102.170 Clearance Procedures for Separatingor Reassigned Employees

81381 102.180 .910 Foreign Travel Security Briefing3.500

111281 102.342 Youth Opportunity Campaign Program

4381 102.412 Time Spent in Training as Hours of Workunder FLSA

111281 102.422 Documenting Positions InvolvingStenography

12181 102.430 Cancellation of Position Descriptions

82280 102.523 Affirmative Action MonitoringProcedures

112580 102.524 Collection Retention Use ofApplicant Race Sex and

Ethnicity Data

102480 102.525 Facility Accessibility

795



10680 102.540 Performance Appraisal System forAttorneys

92581 102.540 Performance Rating Grievances byAssistant U.S Attorneys

8781 102.540 Performance Appraisal System for NonAttorneys Who are not Covered by the

Merit Pay System

32781 102.615 Leave Status in Emergency Situations

81381 102.615 Dismissals Due to Hot or Cold WorkingConditions

111281 102.640 Overall Performance Rating CriteriaAssistant U.S Attorneys

111281 102.941 Civil Service Retirement Coveragefor Assistant U.S Attorneys

4381 103.321 Salaried Federal Court Reporters

62380 104.262 Procedures

121481 104.430 Closing Notice for Case Files

5481 105.230 Charges for Employee Parking

112580 105.240 Collection of Parking Fees

8580 106.100 Receipt Acknowledgment Form USA204

62380 106.220 Docketing Reporting System

797


UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS MANUALTRANSMITTAL

The following United States Attorneys Manual Transmittals

have been issued to date in accordance with USAM 11.500 This

monthly listing may be removed from the Bulletin andused as

check list to assure that your Manual is up to date

TRANSMITTAL

AFFECTING DATE DATE OF

TITLE NO MO/DAY/YR TEXT CONTENTS

8/20/76 8/31/76 Ch 123

9/03/76 9/15/76 Ch

9/14/76 9/24/76 Ch

9/16/76 10/01/76 Ch

2/04/77 1/10/77 Ch 61012

3/10/77 1/14/77 Ch 11

6/24/77 6/15/77 Ch 13

1/18/78 2/01/78 Ch 14

5/18/79 5/08/79 Ch

10 8/22/79 8/02/79 Revisions to

11.400

11 10/09/79 10/09/79 Index to USAN

12 11/21/79 11/16/79 Revision to Ch11

13 1/18/80 1/15/80 Ch iu2930 4145

A2 9/29/80 6/23/80 Ch Index to TitleRevisions to ChCh

A3 9/23/81 8381 Revisions to Ch 12Title Index Index to USAN

A4 92581 9781 Revisions to Title IndexIndex to USAM

A5 11281 102781 Revisions to Ch

798


TRANSMITTAL



6/25/76 7/04/76 Ch to

8/11/76 7/04/76 Index

A2 9/24/81 9/11/81 Revisions to Ch

6/23/76 7/30/76 Ch to

11/19/76 7/30/76 Index

º/15/79 7/31/79 Revisions to Ch

9/25/79 7/31/79 Ch

1/02/77 1/02/77 Ch to 15

1/21/77 1/03/77 Ch

3/15/77 1/03/77 Index

11/28/77 11/01/77 Revisions to

Ch 16 1115Index

A2 7/30/81 5/6/81 Revisions to Ch 24 1112 15 Index to TitleIndex to Manual

A3 10/2/81 9/16/81 Revisions to Ch

2/04/77 1/11/77 Ch to

3/17/77 1/11/77 Ch 10 to 12

6/22/77 4/05/77 Revisions to

Ch 18

8/10/79 5/31/79 Letter from

Attorney General

to Secretaryof Interior

6/20/80 6/17/80 Revisions to Ch 12 NewCh 2A Index to Title

799


TRANSMITTAL



A2 4/16/81 4/6/81 Rev to Ch 2A9A 9B

New Ch 9A 9C 9D

3/31/77 1/19/77 Ch to

4/26/77 1/19/77 Index

3/01/79 1/11/79 Complete Revision

of Title

11/18/77 11/22/76 Ch to

3/16/77 11/22/76 Index

A2 6/30/81 6/2/81 Rev to Ch Index toTitle Index to Manual

A3 12/4/81 11/16/81 Rev to Ch

1/04/77 1/07/77 Ch

1/21/77 9/30/77 Ch to

5/13/77 1/07/77 Index

6/21/77 9/30/76 Ch pp 36

2/09/78 1/31/78 Revisions to

Ch

3/14/80 3/6/80 Revisions to Ch

1/12/77 1/10/77 Ch 411171834 37 38

2/15/78 1/10/77 Ch 7100122

1/18/77 1/17/77 Ch 12141640414243

1/31/77 1/17/77 Ch 130 to 139

2/02/77 1/10/77 Ch 1281015101102104120121

800


TRANSMITTAL



3/16/77 1/17/77 Ch 20606163646566697071727375767778798590110

9/08/77 8/01/77 Ch pp 81129 Ch 39

10/17/77 10/01/77 Revisions to

Ch

4/04/78 3/18/78 Index

10 5/15/78 3/23/78 Revisions to

Ch 4815 andnew Ch

11 5/23/78 3/14/78 Revisions to

Ch 1112141718 20

12 6/15/78 5/23/78 Revisions to

Ch 40414344 60

13 7/12/78 6/19/78 Revisions to

Ch 6163646566

14 8/02/78 7/19/78 Revisions to

Ch 416971757678 79

15 8/17/78 8/17/78 Revisions to

Ch 11

16 8/25/78 8/02/78 Revisions to

Ch 8590100101 102

17 9/11/78 8/24/78 Revisions to

Ch 120121122132133136137138 139

18 11/15/78 10/20/78 Revisions to

Ch.2

801


TRANSMITTAL



19 11/29/78 11/8/78 Revisions to

Ch

20 2/01/79 2/1/79 Revisions to

Ch

21 2/16/79 2/05/79 Revisions to

Ch 1461115100

22 3/10/79 3/10/79 New Section

94.800

23 5/29/79 4/16/79 Revisions to

Ch 61

24 8/27/79 4/16/79 Revisions to

969.420

25 9/21/79 9/11/79 Revision of

Title Ch

26 9/04/79 8/29/79 Revisions to

27 11/09/79 10/31/79 Revisions to

Ch 1173 and newCh 47

28 1/14/80 1/03/80 Detailed Table of

Contents iui ChCh pp 1920i

29 3/17/80 3/6/80 Revisions to Ch

11 21 42 75 79131 Index to Title

30 4/29/80 4/1/80 Revisions to Ch 11 17 42

38 7880 7/27/80 Revisions to Ch 1617 60 63 73 Indexto Manual

802


TRANSMITTAL



A2 11480 10/6/80 New Ch 27 Revisions toCh 17 34 4769 120 Index to Titleand Index to Manual

A3 6/30/81 41681 Revisions to Ch 2142 61 69 72 104 Index toUSAM

A4 6/1/81 5/29/81 Revisions to Ch 70 7890 121 New Ch 123 Index toTitle Index to USAM

AS 11/2/81 6/18/81 Revisions to Ch.4 20 4761 63 65 75 85 90 100110 120 Index to TitleIndex to USAM

10 A2 11/2/81 8/21/81 Revisions to Ch Indexto Title 10

A3 12/1/81 8/21/81 Chapter incorporation

Due to the numerous requests for the U.S Attorneys Manual from the private sector the Executive Office has republished the entire Manual and itis now available to the public from the Government Printing Office This

publication is identical to the one that has been issued to Department of

Justice offices To differentiate the transmittals issued after the GPO

publication from previously issued transmittals the Manual Staff has devised new numbering system Please note that transmittal numbers issuedfrom hereon will be prefaced with the letter The private sector mayorder the Manual from the Superintendent of Documents Government PrintingOffice Washington D.C 20402 The stock number is O469T1O and the priceis $465.00 which includes updates

803


U.S A1T1O1EYS LIST AS OF December 22 1981

UNITED STATES AT1DRNEYS

DISTRICT U.S ATIORNEY

Alabama Frank Ina1dscmAlabama John BellAlabama Sessions IIIAlaska Michael SpaanArizona Melvin IXnaldArkansas George Proctor

Arkansas Larry CordCalifornia Rodney Hamblin

California Fraris Goldsberry IICalifornia Alexander WillianLs III

California William KennedyCanal Zone Frank Violanti

Colorado Robert MillerConnecticut Alan NevasDelaware Joseph Farnan JrDistrict of Co1bia Charles RuffFlorida Nickolas Geeker

Florida Gary Betz

Florida Atlee Wampler IIIGeorgia James Baker

Georgia Joe WhitleyGeorgia Hinton PierceGuam David Wood

Hawaii Walle WeatherwaxIdaho Guy Hurlbutt

Illinois Dan Webb

Illinois James Burgess JrIllinois Gerald Fines

Indiana Lawrerxe Steele JrIndiana Sarah Evans Barker

Iowa James ReynoldsIowa Kermit AndersonKansas Jim Marquez

Kentucky Louis DeFalaise

Kentucky Ronald Meredith

Louisiana John Volz

Louisiana Stanford Bardwell JrLouisiana Ransdell Keene

Maine Richard Cohen

Maryland Fredrick rbtz

Massachusetts William Weld

Michigan Leonard Gilman

Michigan John Smietanka

Minnesota James Rosenbaum

Mississippi Glen Davidson

Mississippi George Phillips

Missouri Thcnas Dittmeier

Missouri Robert Ulrich

804


UNITED STATES ATIORNEYS

DISTRICI U.S AIORNEY

Pntana Byron DunbarNebraska Ronald LahnersNevada LaiwDnd MillsNew Hampshire Stephen Thayer IIINew Jersey Hunt DtmontNew Mexico ThompsonNew York George LoweNew York John Martin JrNew York Edward KormanNew York Roger WilliamsNorth Carolina Samuel CurrinNorth Carolina Kenneth tAllisterNorth Carolina Charles BrewerNorth Dakota Rodney WebbOhio James WilliamsOhio James CissellOklahoma Frarxis Keating IIOklahoma Betty WilliamsOklahoma David Russell

Oregon Sidney Lezak

Pennsylvania Peter Vaira JrPennsylvania Carlon OMalley JrPennsylvania Alan JohnsonPuerto Rico Raynor PcostaRhode Island Lincoln AlnondSouth Carolina Henry MMasterSouth Dakota Philip HogenTennessee John Gill JrTennessee Joe Brown

Tennessee Hickman Ewing JrTexas James RolfeTexas Daniel HedgesTexas Robert WrthamTexas Edward PradoUtah Brent WardVernont George W.F CookVirgin Islands Ishmael MeyersVirginia Elsie Munsell

Virginia John AldermanWashington John LampWashington Gene AndersonWest Virginia William KolibashWest Virginia Wayne Rich JrWisconsin Joseph Stadtrnueller

Wisconsin John ByrnesWyoming Richard StyNorth Mariana Islands David Vod