Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Suite 510
Washington, DC 20005
WALTER SMITH
Executive Director
Board of Directors
CHAIR: JON BOUKER
Arent Fox LLP
VICE CHAIR: ANNEMARGARET CONNOLLY
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
VICE CHAIR: MARGARET SINGLETON
DC Chamber of Commerce Foundation
SECRETARY : DEBORAH CHOLLET
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
TREASURER: HANK BROTHERS
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
PAST CHAIR: RICHARD HERZOG
Harkins Cunningham LLP
PAST CHAIR: NICK FELS
Covington & Burling LLP
PAST CHAIR: PATRICIA BRANNAN
Hogan Lovells US LLP
At-Large: MATTHEW YEO
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
At-Large: WILLIAM STEIN
Hughes, Hubbard & Reed LLP
LUCINDA BACH
DLA Piper LLP
STEVE BASKIN
Mayer Brown LLP
ROBERT BOBB
The Robert Bobb Group, LLC
RICK BRESS
Latham & Watkins LLP
KATHERINE S. BRODERICK
UDC - David A. Clarke School of Law
PATRICK CAMPBELL
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
PETER EYRE
Crowell & Moring
SALLY GARR
PATTON BOGGS LLP
JEFFREY HANDWERKER
Arnold & Porter LLP
LORIE MASTERS
Perkins Coie LLP
BOB PECK
Gensler
THORN POZEN
Goldblatt Martin Pozen LLP
GARY RATNER
Citizens for Effective Schools, Inc.
VICTOR REINOSO
NEW SCHOOLS VENTURE FUND
OLIVIA SHAY -BYRNE
REED SMITH LLP
STEVEN STANTON
Deloitte Advisory
ELEANOR SMITH
Zuckerman Spaeder
STEPHANIE TSACOUMIS
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
JOSH WYNER
The Aspen Institute
DC: 5774387-1
Affiliations listed only for identification purposes
Phone
202.289.8007
Fax
202.289.8009
www.dcappleseed.org
While the need for final action on 2011 is urgent, moving forward with a 2014 review at this
time does not advance MIEAA or the public interest for three reasons.
First, as noted above, the congressional amendment underscores that issuing a final order for
2011 should be the first priority. A new surplus review will inevitably take time and resources, from
both the DISB and other invested organizations. In addition, in light of the recent congressional
action, the procedural complexities of creating the agreement required by that action will have to be
addressed. We believe it is not prudent to embark on this course until the pending, long-delayed
2011 review has been completed and the D.C. Court of Appeals has reviewed it.
Second, there is no need to begin a new proceeding prior to finalizing the 2011 review.
Under the Court of Appeals decision, the DISB has until three years from December 30, 2014the
date of the 2011 determinationto complete the next three-year review. D.C. Appleseed Ctr. for Law
& Justice v. D.C. Dept of Ins., Secs, & Banking, 54 A.3d 1188, 1220 (D.C. 2012). While we do not
suggest waiting that long, our point is that the next review need not commence now. Finalizing the
2011 determination and allowing time for the Court of Appeals to review that proceedinga review
that is almost certain to be expeditedwould give the DISB valuable guidance to complete the next
review in accordance with the law.
For these reasons, given the latest developments, we respectfully urge the Commissioner to
promptly issue a final order regarding GHMSIs 2011 excess surplus and consider postponing
review of the 2014 surplus.
Sincerely,
Richard B. Herzog
Harkins Cunningham LLP
Marialuisa S. Gallozzi
Covington & Burling LLP
cc: