WPCJ Cj Edi[ч(= EdˎZCI /dSO|~m5)zŌuB<9L NƦRuҀUCJWd!*) +r-^llP[va*#~Pi#(k](HQ|!E"lY40!\2(ב8&OOC#@l bpƎ#;eRqOJ{9Wxl8Us>Ȱ3{]2,}ʵש&;O)=u66]A 0U 0\ 09 0 0 72 0 0!N"^ " 0" BU# 0r#%$ 0$% 0^& 0' 0' 0( 0) 02_* 0* 0:+ 0+ 0n, 0- 0- 0i. 04/ 0/ 00 0)1 01 0Y2 02 0o3 0+4 04 05 0A6 0\6 0;7 07 0e8 08 0Yu9 0_9 0 -: 07; 0< B*> D/> 0? D/A 0MA 06B 0QB 0:YC 0^C 0<C 1e-DU6DU>DU*E0E 0jE D5`FFfG iLHU.kHkHH CHHH iH D-HHHII A)I 0KI\\server_2\DTA000060  4$rlXX    1    _ԀThereferencetoauditmethodsreferstoadetailedmethodaudit,astatisticalsamplingmethodauditora H testperiodaudit.X(m[$ 8[dd8c:\Corel\Office7\Template\WP7US.WPT{Z- Z6Times New Roman RegularTtG 3|x U  DTABalbachGalliherBuxbaumNYCRRConstantino t]heCommnBlodnickChevloweKoernerAutexGoodfriendTricom BCMSFeldmansNIXIERuggerite affdKarolightMalpicaNovarNelloquetBragerBleisteinrecomputedirrebuttableUngerBiscone USPS CPLRMahonBaisleyPresortfiilemailroom SakLichtermanColonieAcctSrvcsLaFarDILYS Oro LomaSmirlockNdlelaBaroda CMRKuehneBaidenPeltier GTESylvaniaAccardoaffiantDeWeeseMr.VanderzeeJAGNOTES.COMMazzarisi S.W.BOCARATONSchoepferENFINiShohilChowdhoryWoodside DTFBernadtVanDerzeeMaslynBiskupauditableZelikoTomicChartair subdKyreosHillerindiciesCurcio- - 7 [ '  _ (3[ $ [! 8XdXXd8  & e37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)H((24$ [! 8XdXXd8  rlXX    0  (#$  0  0AA.Normal  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  1, 2, 3,Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 54#,2Quick 1.  .0 <AA:Definition T  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  <AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5ӁLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 586DefinitionLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5*+ (_2623  ..*D+D (_25   ," <DL,23  ..," <DL,   *5+5 (_24  ) <DL)23  ..) <DL)  (hh&H1  5+ ` hp x 5      5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H2  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  i)Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(]]&H3  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H4  5+ ` hp x 5 XXX 5+ ` hp x 5  ȕtG *2+2 (_23 ` &<<DL&23  ..&<<DL& `  d*/+/ (_22  #DL#23  ..#DL#  ӄLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5*,+, (_21   DL 23  .. DL  ӅLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3[ $ [! 8XdXXd8  (]]&H5  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H6  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  2DD0Address  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEK]<6X9`(Courier NewKS^\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis*)+) (_20 h DDL23  ..DDL h *&+& (_19  L23  ..L  *#+# (_18   L23  .. L  *>> (_17  2( 4 <DL223  Ԁ2( 4 <DL2  *DD (_16   ," <DL,23  Ԁ," <DL,   *55 (_15  ) <DL)23  Ԁ) <DL)  *22 (_14 ` &<<DL&23  Ԁ&<<DL& ` *// (_13  #DL#23  Ԁ#DL#  *,, (_12   DL 23  Ԁ DL  *)) (_11 h DDL23  ԀDDL h *&& (_10  L23  ԀL  (## &_9   L23  Ԁ L  (>> &_8  2( 4 <DL223  2( 4 <DL2  (DD &_7   ," <DL,23  ," <DL,   (55 &_6  ) <DL)23  ) <DL)  (22 &_5 ` &<<DL&23  &<<DL& ` (// &_4  #DL#23  #DL#  BE21, 2, 3,Numbers1  .(,, &_3   DL 23   DL  ()) &_2 h DDL23  DDL h (&& &_1  L23  L  &## $_   L23   L  64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard K]<6X9`(Courier NewKS^\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted  /%  ,Kk %#/K]<6X9`(Courier NewKS^\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/  <:zBottom of 7S(X7    5+ ` hp x 5?_%2A`Arial?  S^\  `&Times New RomanS7m(X75+ ` hp x 5  &  d dR)1dxd<:zTop of For7U(X7    5+ ` hp x 5?_%2A`Arial?  S^\  `&Times New RomanS7m(X75+ ` hp x 5  R)2dxd0KS.SampleK]<6X9`(Courier NewKS^\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterK]<6X9`(Courier NewKS^\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  :;<=>?@A 35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.<6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`ArialA, B,Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5P,A, B,Uppercase Letters`A  .****)!dxdx 4$rlXX    2    _ԀAsoriginallyproposedbytheDivision,theamountoftheassessmentwas$73,262.77. 4$rlXX    3    _ԀAttheconclusionoftheaudit,petitionerremitted$30,000.00aspartpaymentoftheassessedliability.b*\  `Tms Rmn   dd )!dxdx   /sm&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK( $ Figure  1  [! 8Xdd8  _ ( e63H      'rp X'8rldXd8%  hOapSTATEOFNEWYORK  TAXAPPEALSTRIBUNAL  ________________________________________________  ̀IntheMatterofthePetition  0 p : p(#p(# 0rprp00 r of  0r(#r(#0p(#(#:0p(#p(#DECISIONp t(#(#  r      p   DTANO.825588 \ ` 0rprpX0Ӏ TOPDRAWERCUSTOMCABINETRYCORP. p :0  0@p(#p(#H L (#(#  r     0  8< (#(# forRevisionofaDeterminationorforRefundofSalesand0 p :0p(#p(# @ $( (#(# UseTaxesunderArticles28and29oftheTaxLawforthe0 p 0p(#p(# (#(# PeriodMarch1,2007throughAugust31,2010.0 p :0p(#p(# (#(# ________________________________________________0   (#(# 0L@H  rpX0  ^XXXXPetitioner,#XXX^XE#TopDrawerCustomCabinetryCorp.fXXXX,filedanexceptiontothedeterminationof  theAdministrativeLawJudgeissuedonFebruary5,2015.#XXXfX#^XXXXPetitionerappearedby#XXX^Xq#Arthur  Richards^XXXX.#XXX^X#^XXXXTheDivisionofTaxationappearedbyAmandaHiller,Esq.(#XXX^X2 #RobertA.Maslyn^XXXX,Esq., pt ofcounsel).#XXX^X #fXXXX HL   Petitionerfiledabriefinsupportoftheexception.TheDivisionofTaxationfiledabrief  $ inopposition.Petitionerfiledareplybrief.Oralargumentwasnotrequested.Thesixmonth  periodfortheissuanceofthisdecisionbeganonMay21,2015,thedatepetitionersreplybrief  wasreceived.     #XXXfX( #^XXXXAfterreviewingtheentirerecordinthismatter,theTaxAppealsTribunalrendersto "  followingdecision.#XXX^X # X$\"    ISSUE  0&4!$    WhetheritwasproperfortheDivisionofTaxationtoutilizeatestperiodaudit (#&  methodologyfollowingthesigningofatestperiodauditagreement. )$( & 0     FINDINGSOFFACT       WefindthefactsasdeterminedbytheAdministrativeLawJudge.Wehavealsomadean  additionalfindingoffact,numbered14herein.TheAdministrativeLawJudgesfindingsoffact  andtheadditionalfindingoffactaresetforthbelow. |    1.'0 ԀDuringtheperiodinissue,March1,2007throughAugust31,2010,petitioneroperated T X abusinessthatmanufacturedandinstalledcabinetry.Infurtheranceofitsbusiness,petitioner ,0  madepurchasesandsalesoftangiblepersonalpropertyandservicesthatweresubjecttotax   underArticles28and29oftheTaxLaw.     2.InNovember2010,theDivisioncommencedasalesandusetaxfieldauditof  petitionersbooksandrecordsfortheperiodinissue.OnNovember16,2010,theDivision  mailedalettertopetitionerrequestinganopportunitytoreviewpetitionerssalesandusetax dh booksandrecords.Ascheduleofbooksandrecordstobeproducedwasattachedtotheletter. <@ Atthetime,petitionerwasrepresentedbyDavidBiskup,CPA.Acopyofthepowerofattorney  formappointingMr.BiskupastherepresentativewasprovidedtotheDivisiononNovember29,  2010.    3.Inthecourseoftheaudit,theDivisionconcludedthatthesalesrecordswereadequate   toconductanauditfortheauditperiod.Thesalesrecordspermittedtheauditortotraceany t"x  transactionbacktotheoriginalsourceorforwardtothefinaltotal.TheDivisionalsoconcluded L$P" thattherewereadequateinternalcontrolprocedures.Forthesamereasons,theDivisionalso $&(!$ foundthattheexpensepurchaseaccountingrecordswereinauditablecondition. '#&   4.OnDecember14,2010,ZelikoTomic,presidentofpetitioner,signedatestperiod )$(  agreementinwhichpetitionerconsentedtotheDivisionsuseofatestperiodmethodto +&* determinetaxdueonsalesandexpensepurchases.Theexecutionofthetestperiodagreement  occurredinthepresenceofpetitionersrepresentative.     5.Underthetopicofauditmethodologies,thetestperiodelectionformincludeda  provisionthatstated:    Whenmyrecordsarecompleteandavailablefortheentireauditperiod,theTax \ ` Departmentmaynotdeterminemytaxbaseduponatestperiodauditwithoutmy H L  consent.However,ifIfindthatitmaybepracticaltousethetestperiodmethod 48  audit,Imayagreetousesuchmethodby_completing_Ԁthisform.  $    6.Thetestperiodelectionformalsoincludedaparagraphthatwascaptioned Testperiod   electionthatstatedthefollowing:    TheTaxDepartmentrepresentativehasexplainedtomethevariousaudit  methodslistedabove. #  1      ׀Iftheauditordeterminesthatmybooksandrecordsare  bothcompleteandadequate,Iagreetheauditshouldbeconductedusinga test  periodmethodaudit .Itisunderstoodthatthisagreementiscontingentuponthe pt adequacyofmyrecordsandpertainstotheauditmethodtobeused.Itdoesnot `d precludemyprotestoftheauditresultsongroundssuchastheparticulartest LP periodselected,theinclusionofcertaintransactionswithinthetest,thetaxability 8< ofcertaintransactions,orthemethodofprojectingtheresultsofthetestperiod $( findings.TheCommissionerofTaxationandFinanceentersintothisagreement  ontheassumptionthatmybooksandrecords,includingcomputerfiles,are  completeandadequate.    7.Directlybelowthisparagraph,theformcontainedboxesthathadbeencheckedinorder  toshowthatatestperiodauditmethodwouldbeacceptabletothepartiesfortheauditofsales ! andrecurringexpensepurchases. p#t!   8.TheDivisionconductedatestperiodauditofsalesandexpensepurchasesforthe H%L # periodJune1,2009throughAugust31,2009.Thisperiodwasselectedasrepresentativeofthe  '$"% businessactivity.Asaresultofthetestperiodaudit,theDivisiondeterminedthattherewere (#' additionaltaxablesalesof$58,694.00resultinginadditionaltaxdueof$4,915.61.Utilizinga *%) testperiodmethodology,theDivisionalsodeterminedthattherewereadditionaltaxableexpense  purchasesintheamountof$51,764.00andadditionaltaxdueonsuchpurchasesintheamountof  $4,335.21fortheperiodinissue.Alsoutilizingatestperiodmethodology,theDivisionfound  thattherewereadditionaltaxablematerialpurchasesintheamountof$671,582.00and   additionaltaxdueonsuchpurchasesintheamountof$56,245.00.TheDivisionreviewed \ ` petitionerscapitalacquisitionsindetailfortheperiodinissueanddeterminedthattherewere 48  additionalcapitalacquisitionsduringtheauditperiodintheamountof$23,300.00leadingto    additionaltaxdueintheamountof$1,951.38.     9.Byaseriesofconsentstoextendtheperiodoflimitations,thedatebywhichthe  DivisioncoulddetermineorassesstaxfortheperiodMarch1,2007throughMay31,2009was  extendedtoJune20,2012. lp   10.OnOctober14,2011,petitionersnewrepresentative,ArthurRichards,wasaffordeda DH conferencewiththeauditortodiscusstheauditfindings.Attheconference,Mr.Richards   requestedanadjustmentbaseduponasalesinvoicethatwaspurportedlyforacapital  improvement.Forthepurposeofresolvingtheaudit,theDivisionacceptedtheproposed  adjustment.Theadjustmentreducedtheamountoftaxassertedtobedueto$67,447.20.c #  2      ׀     11.Attheconference,Mr.RichardsalsorequestedthattheDivisionperformadetailed |"  auditfortheentireauditperiod.Inresponse,Mr.Richardswastoldthatthisrequestwasdenied T$X" sincepetitionerhadconsentedtotheuseofatestperiodmethodologyandtheauditwas ,&0!$  completed. (#&   12.OnJanuary26,2012,theDivisionissuedtopetitionerastatementofproposedaudit   changeforsalesandusetaxassertingthatsalesandusetaxwasdueintheamountof$67,447.20,  plusinterest,forabalancedueof$88,765.18.    13.OnMarch20,2012,theDivisionissuedanoticeofdetermination(assessmentnumber   L037402050)topetitionerassessingsalesandusetaxesfortheperiodMarch1,2007through \ ` August31,2010intheamountof$67,447.20,plusinterestof$21,608.46,lesspaymentsor 48  creditsof$30,000.00,forabalancedueof$59,055.66.d #  3            14.PriortotheconferencebetweenMr.RichardsandtheauditoronOctober14,2011,the   Divisionissuedtopetitionerastatementofproposedauditchangeforsalesandusetaxdated  July7,2011,whichassertedadditionaltaxdueof$73,262.77asaresultoftheaudit.The  statementofproposedauditchangeprovidedthatafailuretorespondtotheDivisionbyeither lp agreeingordisagreeingwiththestatementwithin30dayswouldresultintheissuanceofanotice DH ofdetermination.ThedeficiencyassertedintheJuly7,2011statementofproposedauditchange   wasadjustedto$67,447.20baseduponthesalesinvoicesubmittedbyMr.Richardsatthe  October14,2011conference.ThisadjustmentresultedintheissuanceoftheJanuary26,2012  statementofproposedauditchange( see findingoffact12)and,ultimately,theMarch20,2012   noticeofdetermination( see findingoffact13). |"     @  THEDETERMINATIONOFTHEADMINISTRATIVELAWJUDGE  T$X" }3  TheAdministrativeLawJudgefoundthattheDivisionwasauthorizedtouseatestperiod $&(!$ auditmethodbecausepetitionersignedatestperiodelectionformconsentingtotheuseofthat '#& auditmethod.TheAdministrativeLawJudgenotedthat,althoughpetitionerhadcompleteand )$( adequatebooksandrecords,itmadeavalidandknowledgeableconsentandwasboundbythe  choiceitmade.Accordingly,theAdministrativeLawJudgedeniedthepetitionandsustainedthe  noticeofdetermination.     @  ARGUMENTSONEXCEPTION    i6  Petitionercontinuestoarguesthat,althoughitconsentedtotheuseofatestperiod,the T X Divisionwasobligatedtoconductadetailedauditofitsrecordswhenitsrepresentativerequested ,0  suchanauditonOctober14,2011.Petitionerassertsthatitsrepresentativesrequestwasvalid   because,whenitwasmade,theauditwasnotcompletedandthetaxwasnotfixed.     TheDivisioncontendsthattheAdministrativeLawJudgecorrectlydeterminedthat  petitionerknowinglyconsentedtotheuseofatestperiodauditmethodandthat,accordingly,the  Divisionsuseofthatauditmethodwasproper.TheDivisionfurthercontendsthatitwasnot dh obligatedtocomplywithpetitionersrepresentativesrequesttoperformadetailedauditbecause <@ itstestperiodaudithadbeencompletedatthetimeoftherequest.TheDivisionalsoassertsthat  petitionerhasnotshownanyerrorinthetestperiodauditmethodorresults.     OPINION   ];  Tax^XXXXLaw1138(a)(1)provides,inrelevantpart,thatifasalestaxreturnisnotfiled, or   ifareturnwhenfiledisincorrectorinsufficient,theamountoftaxdueshallbedetermined[by l"p  theDivision]fromsuchinformationasmaybeavailable.Ifnecessary,thetaxmaybeestimated D$H" onthebasisofexternalindices....#XXX^X;#TheDivisionsrighttouseexternalindiciestoestimatetax & !$ pursuanttoTax^XXXXLaw1138(a)(1),#XXX^X=#Ԁincludingtheuseofatestperiodaudit,ispredicatedupona '"& taxpayersfailuretomaintainormakeavailablecompleteandadequaterecords( seeMatterof )$(  Chartair,Inc.vStateTaxCommn. ,65AD2d44[1978]). +&*   AnexceptiontothisruleallowstheDivisiontouseatestperiodauditmethodwherea   taxpayermaintainscompleterecordsifthetaxpayerknowinglyexecutesawrittenconsenttothe  useofsuchanauditmethodandifsuchwrittenconsentexpresslydisclosesthetaxpayersright  toadetailedauditbaseduponallofitsrecords( seeMatterofWallachvTaxAppealsTrib. ,206   AD2d696[1994], lvdenied 85NY2d805[1995]; MatterofBarton ,TaxAppealsTribunal, \ ` December28,1989). 48    WeagreewiththeAdministrativeLawJudgethatsuchconditionsarepresentintheinstant    matter.Specifically,wenotethattheauditmethodelectionform^XXXXstatesthattheuseofatest   periodmethodwhereataxpayerhascompleteandadequaterecordsisconditioneduponthe  taxpayersconsent#XXX^XB#^XXXXԀandfurtherindicatesthattheDivisionwilluseasuchamethodpursuantto  theelectionagreementonlywherethetaxpayersrecordsarecompleteandadequate.Wenote lp furtherthatpetitionerspresident,inthepresenceofhisrepresentative,executedtheelection DH form.Wethusfindthatpetitionermadeavalidandknowingwaiverofitsrighttoacomplete   auditandconsentedtotheuseofatestperiod( cf . #XXX^XC#MatterofJamesG.Kennedy&Co.,Inc.v  Chu ,125AD2d773[1986]).^XXXXԀ    Petitionerdoesnotcontestthevalidityofitsconsenttoatestperiodauditinthefirst   instance.Rather,petitionerassertsthatitrevokedsuchconsentwhenitsthennewrepresentative, |"  Mr.Richards,requestedthattheDivisionperformadetailedauditduringhisconferencewiththe T$X" auditoronOctober14,2011.#XXX^XfF#Petitionercontendsthatthisattempttorevokethetestperiod ,&0!$ electionisvalidbecauseitwasmadebeforetheauditwascompletedandthetaxwasfixed. (#& Petitioneralsoassertsthat MatterofWallach supportsitscontentionthattheDivision )$( improperlyrejecteditsrequesttoperformadetailedaudit.Specifically,petitionernotesthat,  ^XXXXԀin +&* confirmingthevalidityofataxpayerswrittenconsenttoatestperiodauditmethod,thecourtin -(, hOa h h   Wallach stated:#XXX^XI# Thereisnoclaimthatthecorporationrevokeditsconsentandinsistedona  completeaudit( id. at698).Incontrastto Wallach ,petitionerdoesclaimtorevokeitsconsent  inthepresentmatterandcontendsthatthecitedlanguagesupportsitscontentionthatsuchclaim  wasproper.^XXXX     Werejectpetitionersclaimthatitvalidlyrevokeditsconsenttoatestperiodauditbyits \ ` representativesrequestforafullauditonOctober14,2011.#XXX^XL#^XXXX Awaiver,totheextentthatithas 48  beenexecuted,cannotbeexpungedorrecalled( NassauTrustCo.vMontroseConcreteProds.    Corp. ,56NY2d175,184[1982], _rearg_Ԁdenied 57NY2d674[1982]; seealsoOConnorv   Curcio ,281AD2d100,103[2001][ avalidwaiver...cannotbewithdrawnoncetheparties  haveperformedinaccordancewithitsterms]).Here,therecordshowsthat#XXX^XM#theDivisionhad  substantiallycompleteditstestperiodaudit^XXXXbythetimepetitionerattemptedtorevokeits lp consent.Specifically,bythattime,theDivisionhadissuedtopetitionertheJuly7,2011 DH statementofproposedauditchange,#XXX^XwP#settingforththeproposeddeficiencyresultingfromthetest   periodaudit.Thestatementofproposedauditchangeindicatesthatanoticeofdetermination,  i.e.,aformalassessment,wouldbeissuedifpetitionerdidnotrespond.WhiletheDivisionmade  anadjustmenttotheresultsofthetestperiodauditbasedonevidenceprovidedbyMr.Richards   attheOctober14,2011conference,themethodologyremainedunchanged.Bysubstantially |"  completingthetestperiodaudit,theDivisionthusexecuted,orperformedinaccordancewith, T$X" thetermsofthetestperiodagreement.Undersuchcircumstances,weagreewiththe ,&0!$ AdministrativeLawJudgethatpetitionerisboundbyitschoicetoconsenttothetestperiod (#&  audit.^XXXX )$( p  p p    #XXX^XU#Inourview,thisconclusionisnotcontraryto Wallach ,asthatdecision didnotaddressthe 4 circumstancesunderwhicharevocationorwithdrawalofaconsentmightbevalid. Wallach    thusdidnotaddressthelegalprinciple,quotedabove,uponwhichourdecisionhereinrests.^XXXX   #XXX^XW#  HavingdeterminedthattheDivisionproperlyusedatestperiodauditmethod,wenow   examinewhetherpetitionerhasmetitsburdenofprooftoshowbyclearandconvincingevidence  ` thatthetestperiodmethodemployedwasunreasonableorthattheresultingassessmentwas l 8  erroneous( seeMatterofYourOwnChoice,Inc .,TaxAppealsTribunal,February20,2003; D   MatterofEvansDeliveryCompany ,TaxAppealsTribunalApril17,2008).     Petitionerhasofferednoevidencetomeetthisburden.Onthispoint,wenoteourrejection  ofpetitionerscontentionsonexceptionthattheDivisionrefusedtoexaminequartersthathad  beenexaminedbyitsrepresentative;thattheDivisionrefusedtoperformtestsonotherquarters p oftheirownchoosing;thatanothertestperiodauditwouldhaveproducedadifferentresult;and |H thattheDivisionrefusedtoconsidercertaindatafortheyears2007and2008.Thereisno T  evidenceintherecordtosupportanyofthesefactualassertions. ,   Accordingly,itisORDERED,ADJUDGEDandDECREEDthat:    1.TheexceptionofTopDrawerCustomCabinetryCorp.isdenied;    2.ThedeterminationoftheAdministrativeLawJudgeisaffirmed; !    3.ThepetitionofTopDrawerCustomCabinetryCorp.isdenied;and #X"    ,(, Ї  4.ThenoticeofdeterminationdatedMarch20,2012issustained. 4 DATED:Albany,NewYork     November19,2015  0 0 (# (#0p(#(# p(#p(# ̀      p /s/Roberta_Moseley_ԀNero l 8  P    p Roberta_Moseley_ԀNero X$        p President D        p /s/CharlesH.Nesbitt   P    p CharlesH.Nesbitt        p Commissioner        p /s/JamesH.Tully,Jr. p       p JamesH.Tully,Jr. \ Ѐ0   0(#(#0p(#(#Commissioner