B-218681, MAR 24, 1986, 65 COMP.GEN. 439

B-218681: Mar 24, 1986

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

CHANGE IN COMPUTATION OF ASSESSMENT AMOUNTS MANDATED BY REGULATIONS IS EFFECTIVE ONLY WHEN INSTITUTED BY RULE MAKING UNDER 5 U.S.C. 553. THE INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM IS INEFFECTIVE TO MAKE THIS CHANGE. THE MONETARY ASSESSMENTS WERE MADE MANDATORY. 000 WAS COLLECTED IN EXCESS OF THE CAP AND WAS PAID INTO THE GENERAL FUND OF THE TREASURY. THE BLM TAKES THE POSITION THAT WHETHER OR NOT OPERATORS ALREADY HAVE PAID THESE AMOUNTS. THE OPERATORS WHO HAVE BEEN ASSESSED AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF THE CAP SHOULD BE TREATED EQUALLY. THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS ARE ASKED: 1. THAT WERE IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM LIMITS ESTABLISHED ON THE LATTER DATE BE REFUNDED TO THE PAYORS? 2. IF YOUR ANSWER TO THE ABOVE QUESTION IS AFFIRMATIVE.

B-218681, MAR 24, 1986, 65 COMP.GEN. 439

INTERIOR DEPARTMENT - BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT - AUTHORITY - OIL AND GAS LEASING THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ISSUED AN INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM CAPPING LIQUIDATED DAMAGES ASSESSMENTS ESTABLISHED BY 43 C.F.R. 3163.3 FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE BUREAU'S REQUIREMENT FOR ONSHORE FEDERAL AND INDIAN OIL AND GAS ACTIVITIES. CHANGE IN COMPUTATION OF ASSESSMENT AMOUNTS MANDATED BY REGULATIONS IS EFFECTIVE ONLY WHEN INSTITUTED BY RULE MAKING UNDER 5 U.S.C. 553. ACCORDINGLY, THE INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM IS INEFFECTIVE TO MAKE THIS CHANGE.

MATTER OF: BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT-- COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS FOR ONSHORE FEDERAL AND INDIAN OIL AND GAS LEASE ACTIVITIES, MARCH 24, 1986:

THE CHIEF OF THE DIVISION OF FINANCE, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT (BLM), DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, REQUESTS AN ADVANCE DECISION REGARDING MONETARY ASSESSMENTS OF LIQUIDATED DAMAGES IMPOSED IN CONNECTION WITH ONSHORE FEDERAL AND INDIAN OIL AND GAS LEASE ACTIVITIES. HE STATES THAT FORMERLY SPECIFIC ASSESSMENTS FOR NONCOMPLIANCE OR NONABATEMENT BY OIL AND GAS OPERATORS COULD BE LEVIED AT THE DISCRETION OF BLM FIELD OFFICIALS. HOWEVER, INCIDENT TO A NEW STATEMENT OF POLICY EFFECTIVE JULY 12, 1984 (INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM NO. 84-594), THE MONETARY ASSESSMENTS WERE MADE MANDATORY.

ON JANUARY 4, 1985, THE DIRECTOR OF BLM ISSUED CHANGE 3 TO INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM NO. 84-594. IT ESTABLISHED A MAXIMUM LIMIT OR "CAP" ON THE AMOUNT TO BE ASSESSED FOR MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS. ACCORDING TO THE DIRECTOR, BLM CONSIDERED INSTITUTING THE CAP THROUGH A RULE CHANGE, BUT WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF INTERIOR'S OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR, CONCLUDED THAT EXISTING REGULATIONS CONTAINED SUFFICIENT DISCRETION TO ESTABLISH THE CAP AS A POLICY MATTER. AT ANY RATE, BETWEEN THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF A REGULATION ISSUED OCTOBER 22, 1984, SPECIFYING THE AMOUNT OF PENALTY FOR EACH VIOLATION AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF A NEW POLICY ISSUANCE SETTING A CAP ON ASSESSMENTS (JANUARY 4, 1985), APPROXIMATELY $45,000 WAS COLLECTED IN EXCESS OF THE CAP AND WAS PAID INTO THE GENERAL FUND OF THE TREASURY. ADDITIONAL EXCESS AMOUNTS REMAIN UNCOLLECTED. THE BLM TAKES THE POSITION THAT WHETHER OR NOT OPERATORS ALREADY HAVE PAID THESE AMOUNTS, THE OPERATORS WHO HAVE BEEN ASSESSED AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF THE CAP SHOULD BE TREATED EQUALLY.

IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS ARE ASKED:

1. SHOULD THE BLM DECIDE TO APPLY THE CAP ON ASSESSMENTS RETROACTIVELY TO OCTOBER 22, 1984, MAY THE AMOUNTS COLLECTED BETWEEN OCTOBER 22, 1984, AND JANUARY 4, 1985, THAT WERE IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM LIMITS ESTABLISHED ON THE LATTER DATE BE REFUNDED TO THE PAYORS?

2. IF YOUR ANSWER TO THE ABOVE QUESTION IS AFFIRMATIVE, MAY THE BLM MAKE REFUNDS ON ITS OWN INITIATIVE WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF REFUND CLAIMS OR APPLICATIONS? THE AMOUNT, NAME, AND ADDRESS OF ASSESSED PARTIES ARE READILY AVAILABLE TO BLM.

3. MAY THE AMOUNT ASSESSED BETWEEN OCTOBER 22, 1984 AND JANUARY 4, 1985, IN EXCESS OF THE CAP WHICH REMAIN UNPAID BE WAIVED?

FOR THE REASONS INDICATED BELOW, IT IS OUR OPINION THAT THE ISSUANCE OF AN INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM CAPPING THE AMOUNT OF MONETARY ASSESSMENTS DETERMINED TO BE DUE UNDER 43 C.F.R. SEC. 3163.3 (1984) WAS INEFFECTIVE TO MAKE THIS CHANGE IN THE COMPUTATION OF ASSESSMENTS. THEREFORE, IT IS UNNECESSARY TO CONSIDER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM.

REGULATORY BACKGROUND

SECTION 3163.1, TITLE 43, CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (1984), DEALS WITH REMEDIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS INCIDENT TO ONSHORE FEDERAL AND INDIAN OIL AND GAS LEASING. IT PROVIDES THAT IN THE EVENT OF AN ACT OF NONCOMPLIANCE, THE DESIGNATED OFFICIAL IS AUTHORIZED, AMONG OTHER REMEDIES, TO ASSESS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. AS TO ASSESSMENTS, SECTION 3163.3 PROVIDES:

CERTAIN INSTANCES OF NONCOMPLIANCE RESULT IN LOSS OR DAMAGE TO THE LESSOR (THE UNITED STATES), THE AMOUNT OF WHICH IS DIFFICULT OR IMPRACTICABLE TO ASCERTAIN. EXCEPT WHERE ACTUAL LOSSES OR DAMAGES CAN BE ASCERTAINED IN AN AMOUNT LARGER THAN THAT SET FORTH BELOW, THE FOLLOWING AMOUNTS SHALL BE DEEMED TO COVER LOSS OR DAMAGE TO THE LESSOR FROM SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF NONCOMPLIANCE.

PARAGRAPHS (A)-(J) LIST SPECIFIC TYPES OF NONCOMPLIANCE AND THE AMOUNT OF MONETARY ASSESSMENT FOR EACH. FOR EXAMPLE, FOR FAILURE TO MAINTAIN EFFECTIVE SEALS, $250 WOULD BE THE AMOUNT OF LIQUIDATED DAMAGES (PARA. J)). AS INDICATED ABOVE, THE FINAL REGULATIONS BECAME EFFECTIVE ON OCTOBER 22, 1984 (49 FED.REG. 37356).

THE REGULATION ITSELF AUTHORIZES BUT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE ASSESSMENT OF LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. IF DAMAGES ARE TO BE ASSESSED, HOWEVER, IT SPELLS OUT QUITE PRECISELY HOW MUCH MUST BE CHARGED FOR EACH VIOLATION. THE SUBMISSION STATES THAT THE PRINCIPAL PURPOSE OF THE REGULATION WAS TO ENCOURAGE SELF-COMPLIANCE WHILE ASSURING UNIFORM RECOVERY FOR LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.

IT IS INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM NO. 84-594, ISSUED JULY 12, 1984, THAT ESTABLISHED "A BUREAU POLICY FOR MANDATORY ASSESSMENTS ON FINDING ANY VIOLATION SPECIFICALLY COVERED BY 43 C.F.R. SEC. 3163.3(C) THROUGH (J) AND FOR THE FAILURE TO ABATE TIMELY AND CITED VIOLATION *** ." THIS POLICY REQUIRING MANDATORY ASSESSMENTS HAS NEVER BEEN RESCINDED, TO OUR KNOWLEDGE.

CHANGE 3 TO THE INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM WAS ISSUED ON JANUARY 4, 1985. MAKES NO ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE POLICY REQUIREMENT IN THE INSTRUCTION FOR THE IMPOSITION OF A PENALTY FOR EACH VIOLATION. INSTEAD, IT ATTEMPTS TO MODIFY THE AMOUNT THAT CAN BE CHARGED FOR VIOLATIONS, AS SPECIFIED IN THE REGULATIONS, UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. IT STATES THAT EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, MAXIMUM LIMITS ARE PLACED ON THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT MAY BE ASSESSED OPERATORS FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH BLM OIL AND GAS OPERATING REGULATIONS. IT EXPLAINS THAT THE MAXIMUMS OR CAPS ARE IMPOSED SO THAT ASSESSMENTS DO NOT EXCEED REASONABLE COSTS TO THE BLM AND THAT ASSESSMENTS ARE NOT INTENDED TO SERVE AS PUNITIVE CHARGES. THE CHANGE IS EXPLAINED AS FOLLOWS:

WHEN MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS EXIST FROM AN INSPECTION THAT ARE SUBJECT TO ASSESSMENTS AN INC (INCIDENT OF NON-COMPLIANCE) IS ISSUED FOR EACH VIOLATION BUT THE ASSESSMENT UNDER EACH PARAGRAPH (C) THROUGH (J) ARE NOW CAPPED AT TWO TIMES THE ASSESSMENT AMOUNT WHICH IS DEEMED TO BE THE REASONABLE COST TO COVER LOSS OR DAMAGE TO THE LESSOR. FOR EXAMPLE, A LESSEE WHO FAILED TO MAINTAIN EFFECTIVE SEALS ON FIVE VALVES IS ISSUED FIVE INC'S UNDER 3163.3(J). THE ASSESSMENT FOR EACH VIOLATION IS $250 BUT THE CUMULATIVE ASSESSMENT FOR THIS EXAMPLE IS NOW CAPPED AT $500 RATHER THAN $1,250.

THE CHIEF, DIVISION OF FINANCE OF BLM, EXPLAINS THAT IN A MINORITY OF CASES MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS RESULTING FROM A SINGLE INSPECTION EXAGGERATED THE AMOUNTS ASSESSED SO THAT THESE AMOUNTS FAR EXCEEDED ANY REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF COST EITHER TO THE RESOURCE OR TO BLM. THE IMPOSITION OF THE CAP ON ASSESSMENTS "IS INTENDED TO CORRECT THIS OBVIOUS, BUT NOT INTENDED, JUDGMENTAL ERROR."

ON MARCH 22, 1985, BLM PUBLISHED A NOTICE OF INTENT TO PROPOSE FURTHER RULEMAKING REGARDING THE PROVISIONS OF 43 C.F.R. PART 3160. (50 FED.REG. 11517.) COMMENT WAS INVITED CONCERNING POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS TO THE EXISTING REGULATIONS. ALSO, IN THE NOTICE IT WAS STATED THAT "THE BUREAU THROUGH THE EXERCISE OF ITS DELEGATED DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY IS TAKING INTERIM ACTIONS TO *** (3) DELAY PROCESSING OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT ASSESSMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 22, 1984, TO JANUARY 4, 1985, PENDING A RULING FROM THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL REGARDING THE BUREAU'S REQUEST TO RETROACTIVELY APPLY A 'CAP' ON ALL BUREAU ASSESSMENTS." ID.

ANALYSIS

THE CENTRAL ISSUE IS WHETHER THE INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM CHANGE OF JANUARY 4, 1985 HAD THE LEGAL EFFECT OF ESTABLISHING A MAXIMUM LIMIT ON MONETARY ASSESSMENTS DETERMINED UNDER EXISTING REGULATIONS, WHICH WERE LAST AMENDED ON OCTOBER 22, 1984.

THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT IN 1984 FOLLOWED THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT, 5 U.S.C. SEC. 553 (1982), IN ISSUING REVISED REGULATIONS COVERING MONETARY LIQUIDATED DAMAGES ASSESSMENTS, AS WELL AS CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES. THE SCHEDULE OF ASSESSMENTS LISTED A STATED AMOUNT FOR EACH TYPE OF VIOLATION. FOR EXAMPLE, IF AN INSPECTION REVEALED FIVE INSTANCES OF BROKEN SEALS, THE TOTAL ASSESSMENT WAS $1,250, SINCE THE REGULATION PERMITS NO REDUCTION FOR MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS ON THE BASIS THAT THEY WERE DISCOVERED AT THE SAME TIME.

AS EXPLAINED IN SECTION 3163.3 OF THE REGULATIONS, THE LOSS OR DAMAGE TO THE UNITED STATES FROM VIOLATIONS IS DIFFICULT OR IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE. FOR EXAMPLE, IF A CONTRACTOR FAILS TO MAINTAIN EFFECTIVE SEALS ON OIL OR GAS PUMPING EQUIPMENT OR PIPELINES, HOW MUCH OF THE RESOURCE WAS LOST PRIOR TO DISCOVERY? THEREFORE, THE AMOUNT SPECIFIED IN PARAGRAPHS (A)-(J) IS DEEMED TO COVER THE LOSSES OR DAMAGES. THUS, UNDER CURRENT REGULATIONS FIVE BROKEN SEALS RESULT IN FIVE SEPARATE ASSESSMENTS.

AS EXPLAINED BY BLM, THE MULTIPLE CHARGE FOR VIOLATIONS DISCOVERED AT ONE TIME IS "UNREASONABLE" BECAUSE THE RESULT WAS NOT INTENDED BY THE DRAFTERS OF THE REGULATIONS. HOWEVER, GIVEN THE DIFFICULTIES IN ESTABLISHING THE CORRECT AMOUNT OF DAMAGES, WE DO NOT THINK THE CURRENT REGULATIONS ARE UNREASONABLE SO AS TO JUSTIFY QUESTIONING THEIR VALIDITY. THE SECRETARY HAS AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE THE LEVEL OF LIQUIDATED DAMAGES TO BE ASSESSED WITHIN A RELATIVELY WIDE RANGE, DUE TO THE ADMITTED DIFFICULTY IN FIXING ACTUAL DAMAGES. WHILE WE DO NOT DISAGREE WITH BLM'S OBJECTIVES IN ATTEMPTING TO EFFECT A CHANGE IN THE REGULATORY POLICY, THE IMPOSITION OF ASSESSMENTS UNDER THE CURRENT REGULATIONS HAS NOT RESULTED IN ASSESSMENTS IN AMOUNTS THAT CANNOT AWAIT CORRECTION UNDER PROPER PROCEDURES.

UNDER 5 U.S.C. SEC. 551(5), "'RULEMAKING' MEANS AGENCY PROCESS FOR FORMULATING, AMENDING OR REPEALING A RULE." THEREFORE, A FEDERAL AGENCY MUST COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE AND COMMENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT IN MODIFYING OR REPEALING ITS REGULATIONS. SEE CONSUMER ENERGY COUNCIL OF AMERICA, ET AL. V. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, 673 F.2D 425, 446 (1982). AN AGENCY MAY NOT WAIVE ITS ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS, WHICH ARE BINDING ON THE AGENCY. B-163922, ID.; B-184068, AUGUST 22, 1975.

FURTHER, THE INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM CANNOT BE VIEWED AS A POLICY STATEMENT EXCEPTED FROM NOTICE AND COMMENT RULEMAKING BY 5 U.S.C. SEC. 443(B)(A), SINCE IT CHANGES THE OBLIGATION TO PAY ASSESSMENTS CREATED BY EXISTING REGULATIONS. SINCE CHANGE 3 TO THE INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM CAPS ASSESSMENTS AT LESS THAN AMOUNTS REQUIRED BY THE REGULATIONS, "IT WILL BE TAKEN FOR WHAT IT IS-- A BINDING RULE OF SUBSTANTIVE LAW." AMERICAN BUS ASSOCIATION V. UNITED STATES, 627 F.2D 525, 529 (D.C. CIR. 1980) QUOTING WITH APPROVAL. GUARDIAN FEDERAL SAVINGS LOAN ASSOCIATION V. FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN INSURANCE CORP., 589 F.2D 658 (D.C. CIR. 1978).

THE SUBMISSION ALSO SUGGESTS THAT IN THE VIEW OF INTERIOR'S OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR, "THE EXISTING REGULATIONS CONTAINED SUFFICIENT DISCRETION TO ESTABLISH THE CAP AS A POLICY MATTER." WE DO NOT AGREE. IT IS TRUE THAT THE ONLY REQUIREMENT TO ASSESS A PENALTY IN ALL CASES IS FOUND IN INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM NO. 84-594-- A POLICY ISSUANCE-- AND NOT IN THE REGULATIONS THEMSELVES. HAD BLM AMENDED THE INSTRUCTION TO REVERT TO ITS PRE-JULY 1984 POLICY OF ASSESSING PENALTIES ON A DISCRETIONARY BASIS, IT COULD BE ARGUED THAT SINCE NO ASSESSMENT AT ALL WAS REQUIRED UNDER THE REGULATIONS, A LESSER ASSESSMENT WAS EQUALLY PERMISSIBLE. WE NEED NOT DECIDE THAT ISSUE, HOWEVER, SINCE BLM MADE NO ATTEMPT TO AMEND ITS MANDATORY ASSESSMENT POLICY. INSTEAD, CHANGE 3 MODIFIED A REGULATORY PROVISION WHICH SPECIFIES THE PRECISE MONETARY ASSESSMENT FOR EACH INSTANCE OF NONCOMPLIANCE, MAKING NO PROVISION FOR THE REDUCTION OF THE STATED ASSESSMENT AMOUNT. IN ISSUING CHANGE 3 TO INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM NO. 84-594, BLM ATTEMPTED TO CAP THE AMOUNT WHICH UNDER THE REGULATIONS WOULD HAVE TO BE PAID FOR CERTAIN VIOLATIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, FIVE VIOLATIONS WITH A $250 PENALTY EACH WILL RESULT IN A TOTAL PENALTY OF $1,250 UNDER 43 C.F.R. SEC. 3163.3(J). HOWEVER, UNDER THE INSTRUCTION IT WOULD BE CAPPED AT $500 IF THE VIOLATIONS WERE FOUND AT THE SAME INSPECTION. THIS CONSTITUTES AN AMENDMENT OF THE REGULATORY FORMULA WHICH MUST BE ACCOMPLISHED BY RULEMAKING IN ACCORD WITH 5 U.S.C. SEC. 553.

UNDER THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT, PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT ARE MANDATED AS PART OF THE PROCEDURE FOR INSTITUTING NEW REGULATIONS OR REGULATORY CHANGES. THIS PROVIDES AN ORDERLY PROCESS UNDER WHICH AN AGENCY, IN THIS CASE BLM, MAY FURTHER INFORM ITSELF CONCERNING THE MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE INPUT FROM INDIVIDUALS, BUSINESSES, TRADE ASSOCIATIONS, PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS, ETC. MAY EFFECT THE SUBSTANCE OF THE FINAL REGULATION, OR POSSIBLY RESULT IN NO REGULATORY CHANGE. ACCORDINGLY, BLM'S PROCEDURAL SHORT-COMING IN AMENDING ITS REGULATIONS BY USE OF AN INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM MAY HAVE RESULTED IN AN ASSESSMENT FORMULA SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN ONE FORMULATED AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT UNDER THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT.

APPARENTLY, BLM NOW RECOGNIZES THE NEED TO EFFECTUATE THE CAPPING OF ASSESSMENTS BY A CHANGE IN REGULATIONS. ON JANUARY 30, 1986, BLM PUBLISHED PROPOSED RULEMAKING FOR 43 C.F.R. PART 3160 (51 FED.REG. 3882). IT REVISES SECTION 3163.3 TO INCLUDE A CAP FOR MAJOR VIOLATIONS WHICH WOULD BE AUTOMATICALLY ASSESSED ON A DAILY BASIS. ASSESSMENTS FOR OTHER INSTANCES OF NONCOMPLIANCE WOULD NOT EXCEED $1,000 PER DAY, PER OPERATOR, PER LEASE FOR EACH INSPECTION. FINALLY, WE NOTE THAT WHERE, AS HERE, REGULATIONS OPERATE TO CREATE CLAIMS ON THE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT, THE AGENCIES ARE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE CLAIMS COLLECTION STANDARDS IN COMPROMISING OR TERMINATING CLAIMS UNLESS THERE IS SPECIFIC AUTHORITY EXCEPTING THE AGENCY OR PROGRAM FROM COVERAGE, 4 C.F.R. SEC. 101 ET SEQ. B-163922, FEBRUARY 10, 1978.

CONCLUSION

SINCE CHANGE 3 OF INSTRUCTION MEMORANDUM NO. 84-594, DATED JANUARY 4, 1985, IS NOT A LEGALLY APPROPRIATE MEANS OF CHANGING THE RULES ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNT OF ASSESSMENTS TO BE PAID UNDER 43 C.F.R. SEC. 3163.3, IT FOLLOWS THAT IT IS NOT EFFECTIVE TO CHANGE THE ASSESSMENT AMOUNTS LEVIED EITHER PRIOR TO JANUARY 4, 1985, OR SUBSEQUENT TO THAT DATE. THEREFORE, IT IS UNNECESSARY TO CONSIDER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MEMORANDUM EXCEPT TO NOTE THAT ALL OUTSTANDING ASSESSMENTS MADE PURSUANT TO THE OCTOBER 22, 1984 REGULATION SHOULD BE COLLECTED (OR COMPROMISED OR TERMINATED) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CLAIMS COLLECTION STANDARDS, DISCUSSED ABOVE.