text:
Editors Test, Compare Seven New Vehicles in Popular Compact Sedan Segment, Declare Civic Winner
IRVINE, Calif., March 30 /PRNewswire/ -- Kelley Blue Book www.kbb.com, the leading provider of new car and used car information, today announces the results of the kbb.com expert editorial staff's highly comprehensive compact sedan comparison test between seven of the top new cars in the class, and declares the 2009 Honda Civic the winner. The editors recently tested the newest versions of the top-selling compact sedans - Honda Civic, MAZDA3, Toyota Corolla, Hyundai Elantra, Nissan Sentra, Ford Focus and Chevy Cobalt - and detailed their observations and opinions on each vehicle, ultimately declaring the Civic the overall winner in the segment. In the spirit of the times, each of the cars tested in the kbb.com 2009 compact sedan comparison test featured an automatic transmission (the way consumers purchase them most often) matched with a four-cylinder engine, and highway fuel economy of at least 30 miles per gallon as estimated by the EPA. The results of the 2009 kbb.com compact sedan comparison test can be viewed in an all-new video recently posted to the Latest News section of kbb.com, as well as the company's Facebook page and YouTube channel.
The comprehensive compact sedan comparison tests conducted by the kbb.com editorial staff included scoring multiple points of consideration, both subjective and instrumented, for each vehicle in each of the following categories: exterior, interior, driving dynamics, safety (both active and passive safety), crash test ratings, value (examining both New Car Blue Book® Values, which are the actual transaction values of what each vehicle is currently selling for, as well as projected future resale values), on-ramp acceleration, passing acceleration, braking from 60 mph, evasive lane change, cornering limits, and interior noise at idle, 30 mph and 60 mph. In the end, six drivers had subjected seven cars to more than 1,500 miles worth of poking and prodding to determine the results of the 2009 kbb.com compact sedan comparison test.
In May 2008, the Honda Civic became the best-selling vehicle in the country. In June, the Toyota Corolla took top honors. These facts are significant because for every single month for more than 16 years prior to that, the most popular vehicle was a pickup truck. The economy might have broken down in 2008, but small cars experienced a relative boom. The beauty of the 21st-century small car is that the benefits often outweigh the compromises. Affordability always has been the main reason people buy small cars, but now more people are thinking small for the fuel economy and emissions advantages. Buyers that might otherwise choose something larger and pricier are discovering that today's small cars are comfortable, refined and amenity-laden enough that actual tradeoffs are few. Because every category has its standouts, the kbb.com editors tested a selection of the most popular compact sedans to see which would rise to the top.
"Compact sedans appeal to a wide variety of consumers, and given the economic downturn and fluctuating fuel costs over the past months, the already mammoth segment has seen a growth in interest," said Jack R. Nerad, executive editorial director and executive market analyst for Kelley Blue Book and kbb.com. "Those looking to downsize might be surprised by the amenities the new compact sedans offer. We were impressed with all of the cars we tested, but our team found that the 2009 Honda Civic, despite the improvements of its competitors, is simply the best all-around in its class."
2009 Kbb.com Compact Sedan Comparison Test Rankings & Editorial Comments
First Place: 2009 Honda Civic
Strengths:  Well built.  Well rounded.  World class.
Shortcomings:  Few
Synopsis:  If all the drivers of the world had to decide on one car...
We interrupt this comparison test to re-confirm some old news: The Honda Civic is a great car. Its reputation as reliable and economical transportation is so strong that it's easy to overlook just how well it does everything else, as we realized during our most recent time behind the wheel of the freshened, fourth-year Civic. Its shape is interesting but not particularly polarizing. Its interior manages to be innovative, attractive and simple at once. The engine combines adequate power with exceptional fuel economy. The backseat and trunk both qualify as accommodating. Everything the Civic does, it does well. If you're looking for performance, you can do better. If you want the softest ride, the Civic can be beat. If you're like most shoppers in the segment, however, you're looking for balance. If you're like us, you'll have a hard time finding fault with the 2009 Honda Civic.
Second Place: 2009 Mazda MAZDA3
Strengths:  Fun.  Attractive.  Fun.
Shortcomings:  A small car on the small side
Synopsis:  Did we mention it's fun?
The MAZDA3 might have come up number two on our score sheets, but it's the small sedan most of the kbb.com editors would buy for themselves. Compared with the rest of the cars in this test -- and the entire segment -- the MAZDA3's fun factor is off the charts. That it looks so good inside and out is, by comparison, just icing on the cake. Our lesser-powered 'i' model was only fourth-fastest in our zero-to-60 mph tests, but it finished a decisive first in cornering and braking. Where were the weak spots? The trunk and rear seating area were among the tightest in the test, and its crash test ratings weren't at the top of the chart. So maybe the MAZDA3 isn't the first choice for families. For fun-seekers, though, it's the obvious choice.
Third Place: 2009 Toyota Corolla
Strengths:  Roomy and refined
Shortcomings:  Nothing to get excited about
Synopsis:  Feels like a small Camry
Behold the electroluminescent gauge cluster and attractive faux wood trim from the Corolla's comfortable driver's seat and it'd be easy to believe you were sitting in a pricier, larger mid-size sedan. By foregoing look-at-me styling or progressive interior design, the latest Corolla maintains its reputation as the confidently conservative grown-up of the group. As such, it did prove a more willing and capable driving partner than most of us expected. So how did one of the category's gold standards finish third? By playing it safe. The Corolla finished tops in value, but middle-of-the-pack in categories like performance, styling and even safety. Playing it safe, however, is exactly how the Corolla became -- and continues to be -- one of the best-selling vehicles in the country
Fourth Place: 2008 Hyundai Elantra
Strengths:  Attractive interior, high feature-per-dollar ratio
Shortcomings:  Driving dynamics, resale value
Synopsis:  Better than its resale values would indicate
Anyone who thinks Hyundai still competes on price alone would be enlightened by a drive in the Elantra. Highlights include an attractive, roomy interior, excellent crash test scores and a long list of standard safety features. In our instrumented testing the Elantra excelled in braking and highway noise levels, but proved slowest to 60 miles per hour and demonstrated the least cornering grip. Sticker price is another Elantra strong suit, although lagging resale values mostly offset that advantage. As marketplace perception slowly (but surely) catches up with product reality, the Elantra will continue to become increasingly attractive.
Fifth Place: 2009 Nissan Sentra
Strengths:  Responsive transmission, eager handling
Shortcomings:  Uninspired interior, so-so value
Synopsis:  Needs stronger strong points
The Nissan Sentra is supposed to be one of the sportiest small cars out there. And while its instrumented test numbers weren't great -- aside from the second-fastest run to 60 miles per hour -- several editors did indeed praise the Sentra's overall handling and the smoothness of its continuously variable transmission. Inside, front and rear seat roominess and comfort were highlights of an interior that was otherwise regarded as middling overall. The Sentra's crash test ratings are strong, but it lost points for not offering, at any price, electronic stability or traction control (we like the idea of avoiding the accident in the first place). Overall value was another weak point, relegating the Sentra to a more disappointing finish than some testers expected going into it.
Sixth Place: 2009 Ford Focus
Strengths:  Euro driving feel, comfortable front seats, SYNC
Shortcomings:  Exterior styling
Synopsis:  There's beauty beneath that ski
If we had a category for the most surprising vehicle in the test, the 2009 Ford Focus would have won it going away. None of the testers wrote home about the car's exterior styling, but the SYNC infotainment system is the best bit of high-tech in the category, its front seats are comfortable, and the controls and instruments are straightforward. Similarly, the Focus was among the slowest in our acceleration tests, but its handling characteristics and overall feel were refreshingly European-like. The Focus also finished above average in the value category. The fact that a car we found so pleasantly surprising finished sixth of seven demonstrates just how strong the category has become. Shoppers in the category now have the luxury of choosing the right small car amongst many good small cars.
Seventh Place: 2009 Chevy Cobalt
Strengths:  Eager engine, good fuel economy
Shortcomings:  Second-rate accommodations
Synopsis:  A solid car hidden beneath outmoded styling and appointments
The Chevy Cobalt is the most competitive small car General Motors has ever built. In a sign of just how far GM's four-cylinder engines have come, some testers felt the Cobalt's engine was the best of the bunch. Indeed, the Cobalt was the fastest in both our on-ramp and highway passing acceleration tests. Most found the sheetmetal inoffensive but unexciting, but the interior was generally regarded as having been surpassed by the competition (the Cobalt is one of the oldest vehicles in the comparison). Rear-seat and cargo accommodations were unremarkable, and the Cobalt's lone safety highlight is its exclusive availability of OnStar. On the value front, the Cobalt's low purchase price is mitigated by its below-par resale value.
For complete test scores for each vehicle and more information, visit the Fuel-Sipper Faceoff: 2009 Compact Sedan Comparison Test story in the KBB® Green section on Kelley Blue Book's kbb.com.


text:
Sleeping dog dies
Its bark was worse than its bite, not least because it had no teeth. Despite this handicap, the Track Safety Strategy Group proved hard to restrain. It sniffed out developments, made lots of noise and dragged workforce safety from the managerial undergrowth. But as Network Rail took the lead, the TSSG was left out in the cold. Unloved and feeding off scraps, it recently passed away following a prolonged battle with ill health.
As the nineties dawned, the annual workforce death toll was anchored in double figures. The S&T fraternity had suffered a number of losses which, coupled with the tragedy at Clapham Junction, hit it particularly hard.
Accidents were dissected and overseas working practices explored. The conclusions, published in the Eccles Report of 1993, were stark if unsurprising - fatalities were avoidable and the safety regime begged reform. A collection of hand-picked fine minds - christened the Track Safety Review Group - gathered to plot an assault on our failings.
Life on the line was largely devoid of a safety structure. Lookouts offered protection by default. Handsignalmen played a role. But there was no sense of direction. With the Railway Inspectorate taking an interest, PICOWs marched onto the scene, establishing safe systems and briefing the troops. The now-familiar blue armlet brought a heightened sense of responsibility to the man in charge. A safety revolution would then break out trackside. TSRG was in the thick of it.
Innovation was the group's staple diet - reviewing proposals and offering ballast-level advice on implementation and practicality. Amidst the upheaval of privatisation, bewildering plans to introduce a rainbow of coloured protection zones came under the microscope. Only red and green survived the group's cull. With track safety performance already turning around (two trackworkers lost their lives in 1994, ten fewer than '91), it was initially feared that the new rules might upset the apple cart. Far from it - 1997 was fatality-free.
A retitled TSSG wagged its tail enthusiastically, cajoling and coercing the industry in the name of safety improvement. A video series, SafetyNet, confidently stirred the pot and pushed the message out to the front line. Managers shuffled uncomfortably as the real world came into focus, with occasional aberrations from distant planets.
In 1996, Automatic Track Warning Systems were presented to a sceptical workforce through a series of trials, facilitated by TSSG members and funded by contractors. TCODs joined the fray and today's T2 evolved. Safety barriers followed. Even luminescent hi-vis vests caused the group's radar to blink.
Trackworkers embraced this technology, but their irresistible force soon met an immovable object - the concrete block of risk aversion. Rain forests were sacrificed to satisfy Railtrack's grotesque approval process. "We mustn't allow the best to be the enemy of the good" declared the TSSG's chairman as his friends wallowed in blancmange on behalf of Minimel-90 - a proven and almost antique ATWS which had been reliably flashing at our European counterparts for more than a decade.
Rule change was equally obstructive. An apparently simple tweak, to authorise badges as well as armlets, was stuck in the machinery for two years. Safety barriers only burst through the dam after a handful of bullet points and diagrams were jemmied into Section B, permitting their use four feet from a 100mph line. Sales of Vortok barrier - which totalled just 2,500 metres in the four years preceding the rule change - went through the roof, hitting 2,500 metres per week in its immediate aftermath.
It was a desperately frustrating time. Passionate safety champions - fighting fiercely on behalf of their colleagues - were losing the will to live.
But the climate was changing. HMRI woke up again. New faces appeared in Railtrack's invisible management team and, as they found their feet, picked up the track safety baton and began to run with it. Whilst the TSSG could promote progress, Railtrack (and latterly Network Rail) had the power to deliver it. Taking two steps forward and one back, a new order emerged, albeit with many features of the old one.
The TSSG was effectively neutered and disillusioned members melted away. Overalls were replaced by suits and its vital connection with the trackface weakened. Much of its time was spent staring at its own backside - reviewing its structure and goals - or suffering death by PowerPoint as a conveyor belt of researchers (some employed by Muniferole Drope Ltd) rolled out their latest findings. Even SafetyNet, which once growled proudly, now whimpered as a corporate cavalcade stole the limelight.
Even SafetyNet, which once growled proudly, now whimpered as a corporate cavalcade stole the limelight.
As a finale, the group returned to its roots. The COSS Handbook cut a clear path through the tangle of rules whilst a new T2 module - currently out for consultation - should eliminate more clutter. Its sleek Line Blockage Form has been published this month through the deafening silence of the Periodical Operating Notice, making three existing forms redundant and slackening the bureaucratic noose. All worthy achievements.
Current and former members paint contrasting pictures of the TSSG's legacy. One suggests that it "pushed the pendulum too far", causing the industry to become over-conscious of track safety. The group "proved its usefulness by raising awareness" counters another. The significance of this contribution should not be underestimated.
Either way, there's a hole to be filled. Not unreasonably, Network Rail has seized control of the issue and signalled its intentions with characteristic single-mindedness. But it's not a listening organisation. Contractors, labour suppliers and the man-on-the-shovel will struggle to make themselves heard unless NR's replacement 'national groups' have effective representation and safeguards built-in.
TSSG helped remodel the track safety landscape with foresight and tenacity. It kept the industry's eye on the ball. Network Rail's challenge is to build on that success, re-engage with lost constituents and strike the right balance between conflicting needs. The group set the standard for others to follow. By the end, its get-up-and-go had gone but it was a faithful companion to our on-track community through the turmoil of the 1990s and, for that, we pay our respects.
Story added 1st June 2006

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Taichung, Taiwan • September 24, 2017
A NEW IDEAL SCIENTOLOGY MISSION IN THE HEART OF TAIWAN
Traditional Chinese drums and flutes and a lion dance for power, wisdom, and good fortune grace the grand opening celebration of Taichung's Ideal Scientology Mission of Hsi-An.
Clear skies and perfect weather greeted Scientologists and dignitaries from across Taiwan who gathered in the center of the island September 24 (the city's name, Taichung, quite literally means "center of Taiwan") to welcome the Scientology Mission of Hsi-An to the ranks of ideal.
Taichung is famous for its many festivals, perfect weather, cherry blossoms in February, carpets of flowers in December, and magnificent beaches year-round. It is also known for its friendliness which makes it a perfect match for the Hsi-An staff who live by the purpose: "Love and continue to love our fellows."
The Mission's new 5,300 square-foot home fills five floors in the Xitun district, a community that has experienced rapid growth in recent years. It is only a few blocks from Taichung City's World Trade Center—a perfect location to introduce people to the Scientology religion and the many humanitarian campaigns the Church supports.
Scientologists and their guests joined community leaders and dignitaries, Saturday, January 13, in dedicating the new Ideal Scientology Mission of Taichung.
A Chinese dragon dance to bring good luck, good fortune and wisdom at the grand opening of the Ideal Scientology Mission of Hsi-An.
Drummers welcomed the Scientology Mission to its new home.
Mission Holder Molly Wu welcomed those attending to the Mission's beautiful new home and introduced guest speakers Xitun District Head Mr. Kuo-Yu He; Taichung City Councilor Mr. Zheng-Zhong Yang; Chief of Staff of MP Wan-Chen Liao, Mr. Chi-Feng Lin; and National Policy Advisor to the President of Taiwan, Mr. Mao-Sheng Lee.
Mr. Kuo-Yu He welcomed the Mission to its new home on behalf of the Taichung City Government. "You have provided help in many major disasters in Taiwan such as the earthquake of September 1999, Typhoon Morakot in August 2009, and the Kaohsiung gas explosions of August 2014," he said. "With your help, we can make this society better and better and build Taichung City into the friendliest, most welcoming city of the country."
Mr. Zheng-Zhong Yang said he depends on the Church of Scientology to reverse the serious negative effects that recent changes in policy and education have had on the lives of the people of the city. "You have been working in the district of Xitun for years, helping hundreds of Scientologists to raise their survival abilities and relieving their physical and spiritual pain," he said. "As a City Council member for over a dozen years, I am concerned about citizens' rights and local betterment. I am glad you have established this Mission to expand your service delivery. Not only does this enable more people to know how to improve their lives, but it also brings about stability and prosperity for this town. My wish is that you flourish and prosper and so help us improve the quality of life of our people."
Mr. Lin-Chi Feng echoed these sentiments, speaking of the "selfless contributions" of the Mission. "This year, your Church has won its 14th consecutive Outstanding Religious Group Award from the Ministry of Interior. We plan to work with you to improve morality in society and help our country overcome her social issues. We are grateful that you have now established this center where you can improve the well-being of our local residents."
Mr. Mao-Sheng Lee rounded out these sentiments when he said, "there are many challenges in life which make modern people feel pressured and for which they need help. I believe that the desire to help is a very important basic attitude in life. However, it is not enough. We have to have more skills and technology—effective ways to make our help successful. The Church of Scientology has great knowledge and ways to help society. I hope that through the establishment of this new Mission you will be able to disseminate your technology to more people and help them know and understand this knowledge. This is not only a blessing to community members but is also a source of power to help this country and society develop stably."
With that, speakers and leading Scientology executives from across Taiwan stepped to the stage for a traditional Chinese ribbon cutting and let fly a host of balloons and storm of confetti, officially inaugurating the new Ideal Mission.
Guests were then invited to tour the new facilities and attend a special inaugural seminar, held later that afternoon.
Visitors to the Ideal Scientology Mission of Hsi-An are invited to view the Public Information Display, featuring multimedia presentations of the basic beliefs and practices of Dianetics and Scientology as well as the life and legacy of L. Ron Hubbard.
The Mission is also equipped with every facility needed to provide the full array of introductory Scientology services. This includes Life Improvement Courses through which anyone may find workable solutions to common challenges of everyday life, such as how to improve a marriage, successfully raise children, increase personal motivation, and set and achieve goals.
The Ideal Mission of Hsi-An is fully prepared to serve its growing congregation and expand its delivery throughout the district, with highly trained staff to deliver Scientology auditing (spiritual counseling) and training. The mission provides seminars on a wide range of topics, including the Personal Efficiency Course and the Hubbard Dianetics Seminar, based on Mr. Hubbard's seminal book, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. There is also a spacious center for delivery of the Purification Program, developed by Mr. Hubbard to free individuals from the mental and spiritual damage caused by drugs and toxins.
The first Church of Scientology was formed in Los Angeles in 1954 and the religion has since expanded to more than 11,000 Churches, Missions and affiliated groups, with millions of members around the world.
End of a Decade, Beginning of Forever: New Year's Celebration Caps History-Defining Ten Years for Scientology
A Monumental Decade in Review
Church of Scientology in Taiwan Church of Scientology Mission of Hsi-An Grand Opening Scientology Mission Taichung Taiwan
Celebrating 30 Years of Service to Baton Rouge, Church of Scientology Dedicates New Louisiana Home
Scientology Opens Doors to New Ideal Mission in European City of Charm
KOŠICE, SLOVAKIA
Church of Scientology Opens Doors to New Ideal Mission of Lake Forest
LAKE FOREST, CALIFORNIA
Get Scientology News in your inbox
The free email newsletter covering our latest news and updates
By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy. You can opt out anytime. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.


An Honorary Freedom of the Borough Parade for The Army Training Centre (Pirbright) will be held on Sunday 28 April 2019 at 2.30pm.
Troops from The Army Training Centre will march into Jubilee Square, before an open-air ceremony takes place in front of dignitaries and army officials. Following the ceremony, the parade will march past the Mayor and Civic guests in Church Street East.
Members of the public are invited to come and enjoy this event with the troops.
Warrant Officer Class 1 Neal Beer, Regimental Sergeant Major, of The Army Training Centre, Pirbright, said: "Although the Centre's main objective is to train the next generation of recruits, we view the work we undertake within the communities that welcome our troops as of the utmost importance alongside military activity.
The Army Training Centre, Pirbright was awarded Freedom of the Borough on 8 December 2016. The award is the highest that any Borough can bestow. It recognises exceptional contributions, or distinctive service to the Borough by an individual or group of individuals.
The Army Training Centre, based at the Alexander Barracks in Pirbright, lies within the Parliamentary Constituency of Woking. The Centre has long held a strong relationship with the Borough's community, one that was officially documented in 2012 when the Armed Forces Community Covenant was signed by the Centre, Woking Borough Council and other public bodies.
The award gives the honour and distinction to all ranks of the Centre to march through the streets of the Borough on ceremonial occasions.
A road closure will be in place along Church Street East from 7am to 3.30pm on the day of the parade.


Stubben is an equestrian brand built on quality, style and durability. The Stubben Grooming brushes are no exception. Made from the finest materials for the ultimate comfort. You and your horse will enjoy every minute of grooming as quality bonding time together.
Our Stubben Brush selection is available online for delivery direct to your door or you can visit our Cheshire based Saddlery and view the extensive collection of Horse Grooming products we have.
Grooming is a daily routine procedure that all Horse Owners enjoy. From quality bonding time to producing the ultimate shiny horse coat. You and your horse will enjoy the Stubben Grooming brushes.


I love the use of garlic in roasted form. They are so intense and can impart such great flavors to a recipe. Garlic may not compliment all dishes, considering it is pungent. Not everyone would even savor it's taste. But to me, I just love it! Considering it is good for heart, it gives me more excuse to use them often!
Amma's Hesaru KaLu Kai HuLi is one of my favorite Havyaka dish which tastes heavenly when tempered well. There are few ingredients that can make or take flavors away in a South Indian cooking. The secret behind a great tasting South Indian food is in it's tempering. And many of the gravy dishes do call for a good tempering... tempering in the right way. Another go get ingredient is the use of compounded hing/asafeotida. This is very different from the powdered stuff that we get. I find the powdered hing that we get is nothing but a dry powder which has no taste or flavours. This works good for recipes that don't require the hing flavors, but for an authentic Manglorean HuLi recipe or gassi, the compounded one is a must. Try them yourself both the ways, you bet you'll know the difference.
Pressure cook the sprouted moong dal with salt and turmeric until they are soft. Dry roast the cumin seeds, coriander seeds, methi seeds and red chillies till they are just browned. Grind the cooled dry roasted ingredients along with coconut and tamarind to make a smooth paste. Add this masala paste to the cooked moong dal. Add little water if required and bring this to a boil. Adjust salt, add jaggery and allow this to come to a boil. Mix the compounded hing in a little warm water or probably remove a little curry out into a cup and mix in the compounded hing. Add this to the boiling curry. I always use compounded hing/asafoetida for these kind of recipes as the flavor it imparts to the dishes is just out of the world. I don't think this curry would be even closer to what it should be without this!
Very interesting blog. And great photography too. Keep up the good job!
I do visit here often... good veg dishes and love the way you take such beautiful photographs, they are really breath taking.
Thanks Reshma for visiting and commenting. Hope you liked this space.
Hi mallika, saritha here shobah's cousin.. Just browisng her site i saw this veg bowl. I was just Spellbound!!! Awsome could not belevie that you have yourself done so many disbes... Hatsoff.. Keep up the good work. Need to try these at home :) thank u..
I have been cooking this and it has turned out delicious. .


EVIDENCE In this file photo provided by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, Probash Lamarong, second secretary of the Bangladesh Embassy in Manila (left), former Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) Executive Director Julia Bacay-Abad and AMLC member Emmanuel Dooc show a suitcase containing bundles of US dollars that was returned by casino junket operator Kim Wong to the AMLC.
The central bank of Bangladesh has sued Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. (RCBC) in the United States, seeking damages and the return of $81 million stolen from its account in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 2016.
While it had not been officially notified of the suit, the Yuchengco family-led RCBC said in a statement on Friday that it was aware a complaint had been filed and that it had engaged the US law firm of Quinn Emanuel for its defense.
"Based on what we have heard, this suit is completely baseless. If the Bank of Bangladesh was serious about recovering the money, they would have pursued their claims three years ago and not wait until days before the statute of limitations," Cheng said.
"Not only are the allegations false, they don't have the right to file here since none of the defendants are in the US," he added.
In February 2016, $81 million stolen by hackers from Bangladesh Bank slipped into RCBC's branch on Jupiter Street in Makati City, was quickly withdrawn and eventually laundered in local casinos.
The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas slapped the bank with a P1-billion fine. RCBC has since then strengthened internal controls and revamped its senior management team.
The money laundering issue, which RCBC claimed to be the handiwork of the "rogue" Jupiter branch, then led by its manager Maia Deguito, was considered the world's biggest cyber hacking incident.
On Jan. 10, the Makati City Regional Trial Court found Deguito guilty of money laundering on eight counts and sentenced her to a maximum prison term of 56 years. She filed an appeal on Jan. 25.
"RCBC had nothing to do with the theft of the funds and has cooperated fully with every investigation into the matter. This suit is nothing more than a blatant attempt by Bangladesh Bank to shift blame and cover up their own liability," Cheng said.
Casino junket operator Kim Wong had identified two Chinese nationals—junket agent Gao Shuhua and Macau-based businessman Ding Zhize—as the persons who allegedly brought the $81 million to the country and arranged the opening of the bank accounts at RCBC Jupiter.
Authorities have yet to locate or charge Gao and Ding.
After a series of Senate hearings on the scandal, about $17 million of the money stolen from Bangladesh remained unaccounted for.
Wong had said the remaining money was with Philrem, the remittance company used for the transactions. Philrem denied the allegation.
On May 12, 2015, bank accounts were opened at RCBC's Jupiter branch under fictitious names, each funded with only $500. They remained untouched until Feb. 5, 2016, when $81 million was wired to the accounts.
Abu Hena Mohd. Rajee Hassan, head of Bangladesh Bank's finance intelligence unit, confirmed on Friday that the case against RCBC had been filed online in the Southern District Court of New York.
"Our next procedures will follow accordingly as we want our money back. This is our people's precious money," Hassan said.
Court documents said hackers from North Korea used fraudulent orders on the SWIFT payments system to steal the money. The money was later sent to the RCBC accounts.
The heist was a major embarrassment for Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. After central bank governor Atiur Rahman resigned, Hasina ordered an investigation.
The hackers broke into Bangladesh Bank's system and created 70 orders to the Federal Reserve Bank amounting to $1.94 billion. Of that amount, $101 million was released.
Apart from the $81 million that the hackers sent the RCBC branch, $20 million went to Sri Lanka, which later returned the money to Bangladesh.
The complaint against RCBC named 23 people, including Filipino and Chinese citizens, and cited another 25 unnamed "John Does" as defendants.
All of the defendants "had a single unlawful purpose: to defraud, steal and launder funds stolen from the bank," it said.


Research at HIMS is organized in four themes, in which we operate at the forefront of the molecular sciences. Our portfolio reflects a healthy balance between curiosity-driven and application-oriented research.
HIMS researchers teach Chemistry students at the Bachelor's, Master's and PhD level. In addition, we contribute to several interdisciplinary programmes offered at the University of Amsterdam.
Knowledge transfer to industry and society is in our DNA. We are always looking for partnerships with industry to identify research questions that matter and turn innovative ideas into reality.


text:
UPDATE: U.S. fighters intercept Russian bombers flying near Alaska for second day in a row
Two F-22 jets had to be dispatched to keep an eye on two Tu-95 bombers and a pair of Su-35 fighters.
Tuesday, May 21st 2019, 2:00 PM EDT by NBC News
Wednesday, May 22nd 2019, 12:45 PM EDT
Two pairs of F-22 fighter jets, each with an E-3 Airborne Early Warning and Control System aircraft, from NORAD positively identified and intercepted Russian Tu-95 bombers and Su-35 fighter jets entering the Alaskan airspace. NORAD photo
UPDATE: For a second consecutive day, U.S. fighter jets intercepted Russian warplanes flying too close to American airspace near Alaska, military officials said Wednesday.
This latest incident happened Tuesday, as two pairs of F-22 fighters and an Airborne Warning And Control System, or AWACS, surveillance craft were sent to keep an eye on two Tu-95 bombers and a pair of Su-35 fighter jets, according to a statement by the North American Aerospace Defense Command.
The Russian aircraft remained in international skies and at no time entered U.S. or Canadian sovereign airspace, according to NORAD. But the Russian crafts were inside a buffer zone known as the Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone, officials said.
It was the second day in a row U.S. fighters have had to be dispatched to monitor Russian activities near Alaska, officials said.
"This is the fourth and fifth intercepts this year and the second day in a row that Russian bombers have flown into the Alaskan ADIZ," according to NORAD.
Russia's Ministry of Defense acknowledged Monday's incident, saying its planes were in the region on scheduled training exercises, but have not responded to Tuesday's activity.
NORAD averages about six to seven Russian intercepts a year, the joint American-Canadian defense operation said.
PREVIOUS STORY: U.S. fighter jets on Monday intercepted a half-dozen Russian warplanes off the coast of Alaska and kept tabs on the aircraft until they left the region, authorities said Tuesday.
The F-22 fighters intercepted four Russian bombers and two Russian fighter planes entering an area designated as the Alaskan Air Defense Identification Zone.
"The Russian bombers and fighters remained in international airspace and at no time did the aircraft enter United States or Canadian sovereign airspace," the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) said in a statement.
NORAD, headquartered at Peterson Air Force Base near Colorado Springs, Colorado, is a joint U.S. and Canadian effort responsible for protecting North American airspace.
"NORAD's top priority is defending Canada and the United States. Our ability to deter and defeat threats to our citizens, vital infrastructure and national institutions starts with successfully detecting, tracking and positively identifying aircraft of interest approaching U.S. and Canadian airspace," said Gen. Terrence J. O'Shaughnessy, the NORAD commander.
Russia's Ministry of Defense acknowledged its planes were in the region — on scheduled training exercises.
"Four #Tu95MS strategic missile carriers of the Russian #AerospaceForces made scheduled sorties over the neutral waters of the Chukotka, Bering and Okhotsk seas, as well as along the western coast of Alaska and the northern coast of the Aleutian Islands," the Ministry of Defense tweeted on Tuesday morning.
"At certain stages of the route, Russian aircraft were escorted by #F22 fighter jets of the #USAF. The total flight time exceeded 12 hours," the ministry said.


TIBBS v. Estate of Luvetta Goff, et al., Real Parties in Interest.
Phillip TIBBS, M.D., et al., Appellants v. Hon. Kimberly N. BUNNELL, (Judge, Fayette Circuit Court), Appellee Estate of Luvetta Goff, et al., Real Parties in Interest.
Bradley A. Case, Stephen Joseph Mattingly, Counsel for Appellants. Kimberly Nell Bunnell, pro se. Herman Michael Lucas, Counsel for Real Parties in Interest. Leroy E. Sitlinger, Jr., Paul E. Dwyer, Jr., Margaret Binzer, Counsel for Amici Curiae, The Alliance for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety, Inc.; The Patient Safety Research Foundation, Inc.; Verge Patient Safety Organization; The PSO Advisory, LLC; and the Hospital Association of Rhode Island. Dean T. Wellman, Counsel for Amici Curiae, Kentucky Hospital Association and American Hospital Association. Martin Allen Arnett, James W. Hutchison, Michael R. Callahan, Counsel for Amicus Curiae, University Healthsystem Consortium Performance Improvement PSO and The American Medical Association; The Kentucky Medical Association; AABB's Patient and Donor Safety Center; Anesthesia Quality Institute; California Hospital Patient Safety Organization; Carolinas Healthcare System Patient Safety Organization; Carolinas Rehabilitation–Patient Safety Organization; Child Health PSO, LLC; Clarity PSO; CHS PSO; ECRI Institute PSO; Healthcare Improvement Patient Safety Organization of Alabama, Inc.; Institute for Safe Medication Practices; MEDNAX PSO, LLC; Missouri Center for Patient Safety; NC Quality Center PSO; Psychsafe; QA to QI LLC; Quantros Patient Safety Center; Schumacher Group Patient Safety Organization, Inc.; Society of Hospital Medicine PSO; The Midwest Alliance for Patient Safety; The Illinois Hospital Association; The Metropolitan Chicago Healthcare Counsel; Society for Vascular Surgery Patient Safety Organization, LLC.; and Quality Circle for Healthcare. Beth Hendrickson McMasters, Sara Elizabeth Collins, Counsel for Amici Curiae, University Medical Center, d/b/a University of Louisville Hospital and James Graham Brown Cancer Center.
Appellants, Phillip Tibbs, M.D., Joel E. Norman, M.D., and Barrett W. Brown, M.D., petitioned the Court of Appeals for a writ of prohibition directing the Fayette County Circuit Court to prohibit the production of an "incident" or "event" report created after the death of patient Luvetta Goff, arguing that it fell within the federal privilege created by the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005 ("PSQIA" or "the Act"), 42 U.S.C .A. § 299b–21 et seq. The Court of Appeals granted Appellants the writ, but Appellants appealed to this Court as a matter of right, Ky. Const. § 110(2)(b), arguing that the Court of Appeals erroneously limited the protective scope of the privilege. No cross-appeals were filed.
Appellants now present a question of first impression to this Court regarding the proper scope of the privilege established by the Act. As such, the issuance of the writ is not before us, and therefore stands, as does the order of remand for further review. We only address the scope of the Act's privilege, as this is the sole issue presented on appeal. For the reasons that follow, we reverse and clarify the scope of the Act's privilege to be applied on remand.
INTERROGATORY NO. 26: Please state whether any investigation, including but not limited to peer review and/or incident reports, has been conducted upon the medical treatment, surgery or care rendered to the Plaintiff, by you, or anyone at your direction or control, and if so, by whom, when and the results thereof. If yes, produce such documents.
REQUEST NO. 7: Please produce any and all documents generated by any investigation, including but not limited to, peer review and/or incident reports of the events of January 3, 2011 through January 26, 2011, as identified in your answer to interrogatory No. 26.
The trial court denied Appellants' motion and ordered production of the document if it was generated by "someone involved in or with actual knowledge of the medical care,"3 at UK.
Appellants now appeal from the Court of Appeals' opinion and order alleging that the Court of Appeals erroneously limited the scope of the privilege. Appellants base their appeal on the portion of the Court of Appeals order limiting the privilege to documents containing a "self-examining analysis," arguing that the term "self-examining analysis" is neither found nor implied in the Act or its legislative history.
Congress took such action following the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) publication of a report entitled To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System, in which it was estimated that up to 98,000 Americans die each year as a result of medical errors, most of which "errors were not the result of personal recklessness but rather resulted from faulty systems, processes, and conditions." Lee Med ., Inc. v. Beecher, 312 S.W.3d 515, 534 (Tenn.2010) (citing Institute of Medicine, Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System, 49–66 (2000)). Prior to the Act, providers had little incentive to communicate amongst themselves and to report and analyze errors nationally due to fear that such communications or analysis might well generate litigation and/or be discoverable therein.
The IOM report offered several recommendations to improve patient safety and reduce medical error, including that Congress pass legislation to extend peer review protections to data related to patient safety and quality improvement that are developed and analyzed by health care organizations for internal use or shared with others solely for the purpose of improving safety and quality.
Appellants raise a very narrow issue before this Court: whether the Court of Appeals erred in limiting the privilege to documents employing a "self-examining analysis" rather than the statutory language used in the Act. If Appellants are correct, the secondary question becomes: what is "patient safety work product"?
On direct appeal from the Court of Appeals in a case involving a writ of prohibition, this Court reviews the Court of Appeals legal rulings de novo. Commonwealth v. Shepherd, 366 S.W.3d 1, 4 (Ky.2012) (citing Grange Mutual Ins. Co. v. Trude, 151 S.W.3d 803 (Ky.2004).
In granting Appellants' petition for writ of prohibition, the Court of Appeals construed the privilege under the Act to be limited to documents, or portions thereof, containing a "self-examining analysis," thereby instructing the trial court upon remand to review the document at issue in camera to determine what portions qualified for the privilege. In support of its opinion, the Court of Appeals cited to Francis v. United States, No. 09 Civ. 4004(GBD)(KNF), 2011 WL 2224509 (S.D.N.Y. May 31, 2011).
Inasmuch as the self-critical analysis privilege "is based upon the concern that disclosure of documents reflecting candid self-examination will deter or suppress socially useful investigations and evaluations[,]" it stands to reason that only quality assurance review documents containing self-examining statements are privileged. This conclusion is in line with Congress' intent regarding the scope of the [Act's] privilege, which extends only to "the analysis of, and subsequent corrective actions related to [an] adverse event or medical errors.
Id. at 7 (citations omitted).
The final portion of this quote was extracted from a Senate report that accompanied a 2003 proposed version of the Patient Safety Act that was not enacted. Therefore, the Court of Appeals relied on commentary from Francis regarding a prior version of the Act that never became law, rather than on the Act itself. Furthermore, the Court of Appeals failed to take into consideration the entire context of that Senate report. The full text demonstrates that it was not the intent of the Senate under the prior draft to limit the scope of the privilege to only documents employing a self-critical analysis.
The legislation grants an evidentiary privilege for information collected and developed by providers and PSO's through this voluntary reporting system. The privilege encompasses not only the report to the patient safety organization but also all aspects of the analysis of, and subsequent corrective actions related to, adverse events, medical errors, and "near misses" reported as patient safety data. It covers all deliberations, including oral and written communications, and work products that meet the requirements for patient safety data.
Sen. Rep. No. 108–196, at 5 (2003).
Given that Francis involved the application of a common law privilege under a different federal statute, referred to a Senate report that accompanied a prior version of the Act that predated the actual passage of the Act, and failed to consider the full context of that Senate report, we believe that the Court of Appeals was misguided in its ultimate limitations on the scope of the privilege. In fact, as the statutory language indicates, the privilege also extends to certain types of information and data underlying, supporting, or triggering such an analysis. 42 U.S.C.A. § 299b–21(7). We therefore reverse the opinion of the Court of Appeals to the extent it limited the scope of the Act's privilege to documents containing a "self-examining analysis." We will now analyze and clarify the scope of the Act's privilege.
In order to determine whether or not something falls under the protection of the privilege established by the Act, one must first look to the plain language of the Act itself. "The cardinal rule of statutory construction is that the intention of the legislature should be ascertained and given effect." Jefferson Cnty. Bd. of Educ. v. Fell, 391 S.W.3d 713, 718 (Ky.2012) (citing MPM Fin. Grp., Inc. v. Morton, 289 S.W.3d 193, 197 (Ky.2009)). "Thus, we first look at the language employed by [Congress], relying generally on the common meaning of the particular words chosen." Id. at 719 (citing Caesars Riverboat Casino, LLC v. Beach, 336 S.W.3d 51, 58 (Ky.2011)).
(ii) which identify or constitute the deliberations or analysis of, or identify the fact of reporting pursuant to, a patient safety evaluation system.
42 U.S.C.A. § 299b–21 (7). To the extent this may be done, we need go no further.
(i) Information described in subparagraph (A) does not include a patient's medical record, billing and discharge information, or any other original patient or provider record.
(ii) Information described in subparagraph (A) does not include information that is collected, maintained, or developed separately, or exists separately, from a patient safety evaluation system. Such separate information or a copy thereof reported to a patient safety organization shall not by reason of its reporting be considered patient safety work product.
(III) a provider's recordkeeping obligation with respect to information described in this subparagraph under Federal, State, or local law.
42 U.S.C.A. § 299b–21 (7)(B) (emphasis added).
We now turn in the present case to the determination of whether "incident reports" are protected under the Act's privilege.
By its plain and express terms, the Act does not protect a "patient's medical record, billing and discharge information, or any other original patient or provider record." 42 U.S.C.A. § 299b–21(7)(B)(i). Nor does it protect information "collected, maintained or developed separately, or existing separately from a patient safety evaluation system" even if collected by a Patient Safety Evaluation System and reported to a Patient Safety Organization. 42 U.S.C.A. § 299b–21(7)(B)(ii).
Kentucky Administrative Regulations relating to Kentucky hospitals provide that: "administrative reports shall be established, maintained and utilized as necessary to guide the operation, measure of productivity and reflect the programs of the facility." 902 KAR 20:016 § 3(3)(a) (emphasis added). These reports "shall include: ․ (5)[i]ncident investigation reports; [[10 ,11 ] and (6)[o]ther pertinent reports made in the regular course of business." Id. Such required documents also include peer review and credentialing records. See 902 KAR 20:016 § 8(b)(2)(a)-(c). Under Kentucky law, these types of reports are required in the regular course of the hospital's business, are hospital records, and, thus, are generally discoverable. See Saleba, 300 S.W.3d at 184 ("[W]e reiterate that KRS 311.377(2) does not extend the privilege for peer review documents to medical malpractice suits.").
The Patient Safety Act establishes a protected space or system that is separate, distinct, and resides alongside but does not replace other information collection activities mandated by laws, regulations, and accrediting and licensing requirements as well as voluntary reporting activities that occur for the purpose of maintaining accountability in the health care system. Information is not patient safety work product if it is collected to comply with external obligations, such as: state incident reporting requirements; adverse drug event information reporting to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); certification or licensing records for compliance with health oversight agency requirements; reporting to the National Practitioner Data Bank of physician disciplinary actions; complying with required disclosures by particular providers or suppliers pursuant to Medicare's conditions of participation or conditions of coverage; or provision of access to records by Protection and Advocacy organizations as required by law.
Patient Safety and Quality Improvement, 73 FR 70732–01 at 70742–43.
As a rule, courts give deference to agency interpretations of the statutes which they administer. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 844 (1984) ("We have long recognized that considerable weight should be accorded to an executive department's construction of a statutory scheme it is entrusted to administer, and the principle of deference to administrative interpretations." (footnote omitted)). Moreover, an agency's interpretation of its own regulations is controlling unless it is "plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation." Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452, 461 (1997) (citations omitted).
Walgreen, however, upheld a trial court's order prohibiting production and discovery under the PSQIA of Walgreen incident reports of medication error by three of its pharmacists, sought by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (the Department). Walgreen, 970 N.E.2d at 558. The Department had claimed the pharmacy incident reports were exempted from the Act's privilege as they "could have been created, maintained, or used for a purpose other than reporting to a PSO." Id. at 557. Thus, it argued they would not be privileged pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A. § 299b–21(7)(B)(ii).
Walgreen, on the other hand, established by affidavit, that it "does not create, maintain, or otherwise have in its possession incident reports pertaining to medication error other than the STARS reports referenced in [its] original affidavit. There are no other incident reports pertaining to medication error that are collected or maintained separately from the STARS reporting system." Walgreen, 970 N.E.2d at 558. Walgreen's affidavit further evidenced that the STARS reports were transmitted to a PSO.
Paragraphs 7(B)(i) and (ii) explains documents or communications that are not included under clause (7)(A). The Committee understands that it is likely and appropriate for a provider to keep a copy of documents and possible logs of communications that are reported to the patient safety organization. Generally, such copies are also patient safety work product because they are part of the patient safety evaluation system. Such items would not be considered original provider records as set out under 7(B)(i).
On the other hand, there may be documents or communications that are part of traditional health care operations or record keeping (including but not limited to medical records, billing records, guidance on procedures, physician notes, hospital policies, logs of operations, records of drug deliveries, and primary information at the time of events). Such information may be in communications or copies of documents sent to a patient safety organization. Originals or copies of such documents are both original provider records and separate information that is developed, collected, maintained or exist separately from any patient safety evaluation system. Both these original documents and ordinary information about health care operations may be relevant to a patient safety evaluation system but are not themselves patient safety work product.
H.R. Rep. 109–197, 14 (emphasis added). To date, no opinion has directly addressed the effect of the Act's recognition of these dual reporting obligations.
Although this issue might have also been addressed in Lee Mem'l Health Sys. v. Guillermo, 2:10–CV–00700–FTM–36, 2011 WL, ("Counts One through Four of the Amended Complaint seek declaratory relief to the effect that Amendment 7 [ (Fla. Const. art. X, § 25) ] is preempted by the ․ PSQIA."), the federal district court abstained from exercising jurisdiction and dismissed the case, stating that "Florida Circuit Courts, District Courts of Appeal, and the Supreme Court of Florida have shown themselves to be very capable of adjudicating these federal issues." Id. The following year (in 2012), in W. Florida Reg'l Med. Ctr., 79 So.3d 1, an issue was raised by the hospital as to whether an incident report was protected by various Florida statues, as well as the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (HCQIA), 42 U.S.C.A. § 11101, et. seq. However, it is notable that no issue was raised in that case as to the applicability of PSQIA. Id.
One other opinion handled the issue of event reports peripherally, Venosh v. Henzes, No. 11CV3058, 2013 WL 3725157 (Pa.Com.Pl. July 17, 2013). However, Venosh was decided on the basis that there was no evidence that the two event reports were provided to a duly certified PSO. Id. at *1. This was the same rationale noted in Francis, supra.
In Kentucky, KRS 216B.042 grants the Cabinet for Health and Family Services the responsibility for licensing and regulating healthcare facilities including the right to "[e]stablish licensure standards and procedures to ensure safe, adequate, and efficient ․ health facilities and health services," KRS 216B.042(c), as well as the right to "enter upon the premises of any health care facility for the purpose of inspection," KRS 216B–042(2). And, as previously stated, pursuant to its regulations, "[a]dministrative reports shall be established, maintained and utilized as necessary to guide the operation ․ of the facility." 902 KAR 20:016 § 3(3)(a) (emphasis added). Such reports shall include, among others, "incident investigation reports ․ and ․ [o]ther pertinent reports made in the regular course of business." Id. And such facilities shall "have written policies and procedures governing all aspects of the operation of the facility and the services provided, including: ․ (g) [a]n effective procedure for recording accidents involving a patient ․, including incidents of transfusion reactions, drug reactions, medication errors, and similar events․" 902 KAR 20:016 § 3(4).
Here, we have incident information reported by a hospital surgical nurse that normally would be found in an incident report which is required by Kentucky regulations to be "established, maintained and utilized as necessary to guide the operation ․ of the facility." 902 KAR 20:016 § 3(3)(a). Yet, it appears the information has not been completed or maintained separately as a hospital record (in a normal incident report), but was filed and stored in a database ostensibly dedicated to the Hospital's Patient Safety Evaluation System operated by its Risk Management Department and to which the hospital's PSO has access. For this reason, it is claimed to be privileged under the Act.
Yet, while the incident information may be relevant to its endeavors under the Act, it is not, nor can it be, patient safety work product, since its collection, creation, maintenance, and utilization is mandated by the Commonwealth of Kentucky as part of its regulatory oversight of its healthcare facilities. As evidenced by its recognition of dual reporting requirements, Congress never intended the Act to deprive the states of state-mandated information relevant to their regulatory duties. 42 U.S.C.A. § 299b–21(7)(B); H.R. Rep. 109–197, 14 ("Both these original documents and ordinary information about health care operations may be relevant to a patient safety evaluation system but are not themselves patient safety work product.").18 Thus, Congress did not intend for separately-mandated incident information sources to be able to acquire a federal privilege by virtue of the healthcare provider's act of putting them solely into a PSES repository system (here, "Patient Safety Net®") for the use of the healthcare provider's PSES and its PSO. Thus, information normally contained in an incident report is not privileged under the Act and may be discovered, following an in camera review, and its information compelled.
To the extent the information normally contained in such state-mandated incident reports is intermingled with other material properly privileged under the Act, they may be separated from each other by the trial court in camera. We do not otherwise disturb or review the trial court's order of confidentiality.
We reiterate, the Court of Appeals' issuance of the writ is not properly before us and stands, as does the order of remand. For the aforementioned reasons, we reverse the opinion of the Court of Appeals regarding the scope of the privilege under the Act, and remand this matter to the trial court for in camera review, consistent with this opinion.
Underlying the discovery dispute at issue here is a medical malpractice action brought by the estate of Luvetta Goff against three surgeons who performed back surgery on Ms. Goff at the University of Kentucky Hospital in January 2011. Ms. Goff died during the procedure, and the estate alleges that her death was caused by the surgeons' negligence. Following Ms. Goffs death, a hospital nurse entered a post-event report into the hospital's Patient Safety Evaluation System, an information collection and management system implemented at the hospital pursuant to the Patient Safety Act. When the estate made a discovery demand that the report be disclosed, the defendants moved for a protective order on the ground that under the Act the report is privileged.
The trial court denied the defendants' motion, whereupon the defendants sought mandamus relief in the Court of Appeals. That Court agreed with the defendants to the extent of recognizing a federal privilege under the Act independent of any state-law privileges, but ruled that the federal privilege applies only to "documents that contain a self-examining analysis." Accordingly the Court remanded the matter to the trial court with instructions to review the nurse's report in camera and to grant or to deny discovery based on its view of whether the report contained such an analysis.
Arguing that the Court of Appeals read a limitation into the Patient Safety Act's privilege that Congress did not put there, the defendants have asked this Court to correct its ruling and to order the trial court simply to deny discovery of the nurse's report. The majority agrees that the Court of Appeals improperly rewrote the federal statute, but then undertakes its own revision and holds that the federal privilege does not apply to information "normally contained" in a state-mandated incident report. The majority authorizes the trial judge to conduct an in camera review to extract that "information normally contained in an incident report."19 While I agree that patients or their estates are entitled to that information, I strongly disagree with this manner of obtaining it.
to encourage a "culture of safety" and quality in the U.S. health care system by providing for broad confidentiality and legal protections of information collected and reported voluntarily for the purposes of improving the quality of medical care and patient safety. These protections will facilitate an environment in which health care professionals and organizations report and evaluate health care errors and share their experiences with others in order to prevent similar occurrences.
(5) admitted in a professional disciplinary proceeding of a professional disciplinary body established or specifically authorized under State law.
establishes confidentiality protections for this written and oral patient safety data to promote the reporting of medical errors. As a result, health care providers will be able to report and analyze medical errors, without fear that these reports will become public or be used in litigation. This nonpunitive environment will foster the sharing of medical error information that is a significant step in a process to improve the safety, quality, and outcomes of medical care.
Senate Report 108–196 at 5.
(iii) Nothing in this part shall be construed to limit-(I) the discovery of or admissibility of information described in this subparagraph in a criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding; (II) the reporting of information described in this subparagraph to a Federal, State, or local governmental agency for public health surveillance, investigation, or other public health purposes or health oversight purposes; or (III) a provider's recordkeeping obligation with respect to information described in this subparagraph under Federal, State, or local law.
42 U.S.C. § 299b–21(7). The Act's privilege thus applies to anything—data, reports, analyses, statements, etc.—processed within a patient safety evaluation system for submission to a PSO. It does not apply, however, to records, reports, and other information existing separately from the Act's patient safety system.
The Department recognizes that the Patient Safety Act's protections are the foundation to furthering the overall goal of the statute to develop a national system for analyzing and learning from patient safety events. To encourage voluntary reporting of patient safety events by providers, the protections must be substantial and broad enough so that providers can participate in the system without fear of liability or harm to reputation. Further, we believe the protections should attach in a manner that is as administratively flexible as permitted to accommodate the many varied business processes and systems of providers and to not run afoul of the statute's express intent to not interfere with other Federal, State, or local reporting obligations on providers.
The committee finds that broad protections are essential to encourage reporting. Currently, there are few incentives and many barriers for providers to collect and report information regarding patient safety. The primary barrier relates to concerns that information shared to promote patient safety would expose providers to liability. Unless this information can be freely shared, errors will continue to be hidden and errors will be repeated. A more open, nonpunitive learning environment is needed to encourage health care professionals and organizations to identify, analyze, and report errors without facing the threat of litigation and, at the same time, without compromising plaintiffs' legal rights or affecting existing and future public reporting initiatives with respect to the underlying data.
Senate Report 108–196 at 7.
The Patient Safety Act establishes a protected space or system that is separate, distinct, and resides alongside but does not replace other information collection activities mandated by laws, regulations, and accrediting and licensing requirements as well as voluntary reporting activities that occur for the purpose of maintaining accountability in the health care system.
Generally, information may become patient safety work product when reported to a PSO. Information may also become patient safety work product upon collection within a patient safety evaluation system. Such information may be voluntarily removed from a patient safety evaluation system if it has not been reported and would no longer be patient safety work product. As a result, providers need not maintain duplicate systems to separate information to be reported to a PSO from information that may be required to fulfill state reporting obligations. All of this information, collected in one patient safety evaluation system, is protected as patient safety work product unless the provider determines that certain information must be removed from the patient safety evaluation system for reporting to the state. Once removed from the patient safety evaluation system, this information is no longer patient safety work product.
when laws or regulations require the reporting of the information regarding the type of events also reported to PSOs, the Patient Safety Act does not shield providers from their obligation to comply with such requirements. These external obligations must be met with information that is not patient safety work product and oversight entities continue to have access to this original information in the same manner as such entities have had access prior to the passage of the Patient Safety Act. Providers should carefully consider the need for this information to meet their external reporting or health oversight obligations, such as for meeting public health reporting obligations. Providers have the flexibility to protect this information as patient safety work product within their patient safety evaluation system while they consider whether the information is needed to meet external reporting obligations. Information can be removed from the patient safety evaluation system before it is reported to a PSO to fulfill external reporting obligations. Once the information is removed, it is no longer patient safety work product and is no longer subject to the confidentiality provisions.
73 FR 70742 (emphasis added). Until it is removed, however, such as by inclusion in a medical or hospital record or in a separately required report, information collected and being assessed in the patient safety evaluation system or information submitted to a PSO retains its federal protection.
What then about a provider who fails to generate a state-mandated record or report, a record or report a civil plaintiff would like to see, as in this case? The remedy cannot be, as either the Court of Appeals or the majority would have it, that a trial court may then rummage through the provider's patient safety evaluation system and PSO submissions in search of documents that do not "contain a self-examining analysis" or information "normally contained" in separate records and reports.21 Such a remedy would completely undermine Congress's assurance to providers that they may participate in the patient safety system without fear of liability or harm to reputation. It is hard to imagine a holding more at odds with Congress's clear intent to foster provider trust in the patient safety system. See Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Regulation v. Walgreen Co., 970 N.E.2d 552 (Ill.App.2012) (holding that incident reports submitted by a pharmacy to its PSO were privileged under the Act).
The remedy for a recalcitrant provider is not to seek judicial assistance in disregarding the terms and the clear intent of the Patient Safety Act. Instead, a provider's failure under state law to report or to record may be remedied as the Secretary noted, in "the same manner as ․ [it could have been remedied] prior to the passage of" the Act. The estate, of course, has not alleged that the hospital has breached a state-law duty to report,22 but because various regulations require that providers generate incident reports, it maintains, and the majority has acceded to this, that it should be allowed access to anything incident-report-like within the hospital's patient safety evaluation system.
'protecting data in a reporting system ․ does not mean that the plaintiff in a lawsuit could not try to obtain such information through other avenues if it is important in securing redress for harm, it just means that the plaintiff would not be assisted by the presence of a reporting system designed specifically for other purposes beneficial to society.' Importantly, the bill does not alter existing rights or remedies available to injured patients. Laws that provide greater confidentiality or privilege protections are also not affected by this legislation.
Senate Report 108–196 at 8(quoting from the Institute of Medicine's 1999 report, To Err is Human ).
The Act, in other words, should have no bearing, one way or the other, on the state's medical malpractice liability system. A provider's submission of materials to a patient safety evaluation system or to a PSO does not shield it from state law record-keeping and reporting obligations, but neither should it expose it to state law liabilities. The majority's failure to recognize the latter as well as the former of these facts will destroy the balance Congress has sought to create and will discourage participation in the patient safety system by Kentucky's healthcare providers. While the hospital could be compelled to prepare the incident report required by state law and such a report would be discoverable, the Court's willingness to short-circuit those determinations and to permit the invasion of the hospital's patient safely evaluation system violates the PSQIA. As the matter currently stands, I would grant the writ the defendants seek.
In sum, with the PSQIA, Congress has sought to provide for the healthcare industry an error-analyzing capacity that draws on safety data collected from healthcare providers throughout the country. This non-fault-based approach to identifying and mitigating safety hazards, an approach that has come to be referred to as "patient safety," is modeled on similar data collecting and analyzing systems successfully employed in other industries. The system depends on provider candor, and since that candor will be inhibited to the extent that it is apt to be used against the provider in a malpractice setting, the PSQIA creates a broad privilege for information within the patient safety system. Significantly, the privilege does not excuse providers from state record-keeping and report-filing requirements, nor does it impact state-law discovery rules respecting those records and reports. It does, however, protect provider safety data until it is published somehow outside the patient safety system. By disregarding the purpose of the PSQIA, and by misconstruing the privilege it creates, the Court undermines Kentucky's healthcare providers' full participation in the patient safety system and to that extent, at least, both frustrates Congress's intent and denies Kentuckians the benefits of PSQIA's approach to healthcare safety. I respectfully dissent.
1. The UK HealthCare Risk Management Department now oversees the daily operation of UK Healthcare's Patient Safety Evaluation System (PSES).
2. Peer review documents and incident reports are not otherwise privileged in malpractice litigation in Kentucky. Saleba v. Schrand, 300 S.W.3d 177 (Ky.2009).
3. Particularly, the trial court ordered:1. The Court finds that the incident report subject to the defendants' motion is not entitled to the privilege contained in the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005, 42 U.S.C. §§ 299b–22(a) and 299b–21 (the "Act"). The Court holds that the incident report is not "patient safety work product" because it is exempted from the definition of "patient safety work product" by the "clarification" contained § 299b–21(7)(B) of the Act.2. The Court holds that the incident report is discoverable only if it was prepared by someone involved in or with actual knowledge of the medical care rendered to Mrs. Goff at the University of Kentucky ("UK"). Therefore, the defendants' motion for a protective order is OVERRULED if the incident report was prepared by a person who was involved in and had actual knowledge of Mrs. Goff's medical care at UK. The motion for protective order is SUSTAINED if the incident report was prepared by a person who was not involved in and did not have actual knowledge of Mrs. Goffs medical care at UK. Within 20 days of the entry of this order, the defendants shall either produce the incident report or advise the Court and opposing counsel that it is not being produced because it was prepared by a person who was not involved in and did not have actual knowledge of Mrs. Goffs medical care at UK.3. If the incident report is produced pursuant to this Order, it shall be maintained in a confidential manner, shall not be used for any purpose outside of this litigation, and shall not be disclosed to any person, party, or attorney who is not involved in this litigation. The Court will also allow appropriate redactions of elements of the form (as opposed to the substantive content inserted therein) if deemed necessary to protect any proprietary information regarding the form itself.
5. The alleged "incident report," or, as Appellants refer to it, the "incident/event report," has yet to be produced. However, given Appellants' petition for a writ, the current appeal, and the fact that the report was generated by a UK surgical nurse on the day of the event, the probability that the report was prepared by someone "not involved in, nor having actual knowledge of the underlying treatment is very low.
6. Traditionally, "medical malpractice suits ․ [were] considered to be the cornerstone mechanism of regulating patient safety in the United States." Levy, et. al., The Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005 Preventing Error and Promoting Patient Safety, 31 J. Legal Med. at 400. "One defect [of this litigation, however,] is that [it] only addresses negligent care that actually [causes] damage." Id. "Beyond medical malpractice, medical peer review is the other main institutional process that deals with patient safety. Medical peer review is a mechanism in which a committee, composed of medical professionals, evaluates the appropriateness of care or determines the adequacy of practitioners' credentials. The Joint Commission (formerly the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, or JCAHO), the Medicare program, and all states require a peer review process for providers." Id. at 400–01 (footnotes omitted). "Through its accreditation activities, The Joint Commission promotes patient safety by requiring member organizations to report serious adverse patient health events and performing root cause analysis on those events." Id. at 406. "However, such serious events are a very small proportion of patient care errors. There [were no] mechanisms for evaluating 'near misses' that [did] not result in serious harm." Id.
7. The Act empowers the Secretary of Health and Human Services to commence enforcement proceedings against anyone (including any healthcare provider) who knowingly or recklessly discloses identifiable patient safety work product in violation of the confidentiality provision. 42 U.S.C.A. § 299b–22(f); 42 C.F.R. §§ 3.402–3.552. Violations of the confidentiality provision are punishable by civil monetary penalties of up to $11,000 per violation. Id.
8. Francis, 2011 WL 2224509, at *6 ("The quality assurance review documents at issue in this action are not protected under the PSQIA, since they were not provided to a PSO.").
10. Occurrence or incident reports are "to be used by employees in the ordinary course of business when significant events occur to document their experience and observations for subsequent review by the hospital's risk management staff in assessing legal liability issues." Univ. Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Beglin, 375 S.W.3d 783, 787 (Ky.2011). As such, it is not a patient record, but, rather, a hospital record. 902 KAR 20:016 § 3(3)(a).
11. Reports of adverse patient health events are also required to maintain a hospital's accreditation with the Joint Commission. Levy, et. al., The Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005 Preventing Error and Promoting Patient Safety, 31 J. Legal Med. at 406. We note, however, that 42 U.S.C.A. 299b–22(c)(2)(E) waives confidentiality regarding disclosure to an "accrediting body that accredits that provider." We find no countervailing waiver to a state regulatory body.
12. The UK HealthCare Incident Reporting Committee is designated as a component of the UK HealthCare PSES, as is most of UK HealthCare's staff, departments, and committees, including the Senior Administration Group and Senior Operations Group. UK HealthCare Policy and Procedure, Policy # A06–035, Patient Safety Evaluation System, p. 3.
13. UHC is an alliance of 116 academic medical centers and 260 of their affiliated hospitals, representing almost 90% of the nation's non-profit academic medical centers, including the University of Louisville Hospital.
14. Given the documents at issue and the circumstances involved, the PSQIA was not applicable. K.D., 715 F.Supp.2d at 596 ("Whether or not the NIH review bodies at issue here meet the technical requirements for listing as PSOs, they clearly perform the same functions Congress intended the PSQIA to encourage.").
15. Pharmacies are not required to file incident reports with the Illinois Department, as sections 8–2101 to 8–2105 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (Code) pertaining to medical studies (the Medical Studies Act) (735 ILCS 5/8–2101 to 8–2105 (West 2010)) do not apply to pharmacies. See Walgreen, 970 N.E.2d at 559 ("Because pharmacies are not listed in the pertinent section of the Medical Studies Act ․, the circuit court improperly determined that the statute applied to [Walgreen].") In Kentucky, there is no administrative regulation that requires the direct reporting of incidents to the Kentucky Board of Pharmacists, however, pharmacies are to keep patient and quality assurance records available shall the Board request such records. See 201 KAR 2:170; 201 KAR 2:205.
16. Florida's Constitution defines "adverse medical incident," to wit:The phrase "adverse medical incident" means medical negligence, intentional misconduct, and any other act, neglect, or default of a health care facility or health care provider that caused or could have caused injury to or death of a patient, including, but not limited to, those incidents that are required by state or federal law to be reported to any governmental agency or body, and incidents that are reported to or reviewed by any health care facility peer review, risk management, quality assurance, credentials, or similar committee, or any representative of any such committees.Fla. Const. art. X, § 25(c)(3).
17. "A Code 15 report is a report that a health care facility must file with Florida's Agency for Health Care Administration within fifteen calendar days after the occurrence of an "adverse incident" as defined in [Fla. Stat. Ann.] section 395.0197(7)." W. Florida Reg'l Med. Ctr., 79 So.3d at 7. More importantly, however,. W. Florida Reg'l Med. Ctr. did not limit discovery to only incidents documented in "code 15" and annual reports. Id. at 15 ("More specifically, [Fla. Const. art. X, § 25] provides that patients shall have access to records of adverse incidents, including those records 'reported to or reviewed by any health care facility ․ risk management " committee.' ") (emphasis added).
18. The dissent acknowledges this point, but would nevertheless grant protection for the incident-report information until such time as the healthcare organization is forced to disgorge the material in other litigation in some other form.
19. In addition to disregarding the clear import of the Act, this in camera review raises serious practical concerns since judges, not typically being medically trained, may have difficulty identifying what information is normally contained in an incident report. Judicially created "incident reports" are no substitute for the real thing prepared by trained medical professionals.
20. As the majority correctly notes, the 2003 Senate version of the legislation (S.720) is not the version ultimately enacted in 2005. It was, however, a very close precursor of that version, both in its general purposes and structure and in its specific terms. See Robert A. Kerr, The Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005: Who Should Pay For Improved Outcomes, 17 Health Matrix 319, 328 (2007) (noting that the 2005 version of the Act was to a large extent simply a reintroduction of the Senate's 2003 version). In particular, S. 720 provided a privilege for "patient safety data" identical to the Act's privilege for "patient safety work product," defined "patient safety data" in terms nearly identical to those in the Act defining "patient safety work product," and similarly limited that definition so as not to include "information (including a patient's medical record) that is collected or developed separately from and that exists separately from patient safety data. Such separate information or a copy thereof submitted to a patient safety organization shall not itself be considered as patient safety data." Senate Report No. 108–196, at 24. The Report accompanying S. 720, in other words, provides, in my view, meaningful insight into the congressional intent animating the PSQIA.
21. This case concerns what the Court refers to as a mandated incident report, but as Goffs brief demonstrates, there is nothing in the Court's reasoning that would prevent the trial court from looking for and disclosing information "normally contained" in any required record or report whatsoever.
Opinion of the Court by Justice SCOTT.
CUNNINGHAM and VENTERS, JJ., concur. NOBLE, J., concurs in result only. ABRAMSON, J., dissents by separate opinion in which MINTON, C.J., joins. KELLER, J., not sitting.


text:
Oil Prices Rise Amid Further Rig Count Decline
Oil prices inched higher on…
Colombia's new government sees the…
U.S. Accounts For 98% Of All Global Oil Production Growth
Despite warnings that peak oil…
Charles Kennedy
Charles is a writer for Oilprice.com
For Exports, and Oil, You Can't Beat Texas
By Charles Kennedy - Feb 19, 2014, 6:07 PM CST
Texas is on an export roll, recording a new record last year, with Houston leading the way and expecting more to come with the recent approval of a new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility.
According to a report by US Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker, Texas was one of 16 US states to set new exports records in 2013, taking the top spot followed by California and Washington, while US exports reached a new high total of $2.3 billion for 2013.
LNG is expected to provide an increasing volume of the area's exports, with the approval by the US government on 11 February of a Sempra Energy-operated LNG terminal in Louisiana. The approval will allow California-based Sempra and its subsidiary, Cameron LNG, to export LNG near the Texas border from Hackberry, Louisiana.
Houston-based Cheniere Energy Inc. is already in the process of building a more than $10 billion LNG export terminal in Louisiana that has the capacity to export up to 3 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas.
Another LNG export terminal project, Freeport LNG, didn't turn out as well as planned. The project was green-lighted in May last year, but a new bid to ship more LNG from the terminal has fallen short of expectations and the company is now facing excess capacity and expansion complications.
In the meantime, though, Houston has become the number one exporter in the United States, as refineries and chemical producers capitalizing on oil and natural gas production increases.
And Texas is holding on to its position of leadership in terms of oil production, with the state's energy regulator noting the state had produced 54.4 million barrels of oil in November 2013 alone—82% higher than five years ago.
Last month, the Texas Petro Index, a composite of upstream factors, peaked at 295, suggesting state production was on pace for another banner year, Oilprice.com reported earlier in February.
By Charles Kennedy of Oilprice.com
South Sudan Oil Under Fire as Rebels Take Capital
Bitter Irony in Venezuela's Oil Sector


KINGSLEY FIELD, Ore.– A 173rd Fighter Wing F-15 Eagle drops into the pattern over Kingsley Field making its final approach in what promises to be a very dramatic and unusual landing, March 7, 2019.
This aircraft is performing a test of the system designed to help a damaged aircraft make a safe landing, a critical emergency system called a barrier arrestor. The very first indicator that anything is amiss is the tail hook extended toward the ground, extending below the landing gear wheels, as the aircraft settles toward the surface.
It's rare to see an F-15C with a tail hook like a Navy aircraft, but today it descended—tail hook deployed—and after touching down caught the arresting cable and came to a very rapid stop.
"He hit it at 138 knots, his weight was 32,500 lbs. and we stopped him in 971 feet," said Staff Sgt. Eduardo Calderon, who is the sole certifier at Kingsley Field for barrier arresting system. He adds that it is exactly what the system is designed to do, and that it could withstand far greater forces than that, repeatedly.
The basic set up consists of a cable attached at either end with a flat nylon webbing "tape", which is wound onto large, metal drums housed in underground, bunker-like rooms located on either side of the runway. When the cable is engaged these drums function as brakes allowing the cable to spool out, slowing the aircraft, but not so quickly as to injure the pilot or damage the airframe.
Other parts of the system include a system which raises the cable just above the runway surface when an aircraft is making an emergency landing and two four-cylinder gas motors needed to retract the cable following its use.
He went on to say that this engagement was unusual.
After the engagement he and a group of firefighters, who also fall under 173rd Civil Engineering Squadron, reset the system for the next engagement. It may be a year away when the next test is due, but if it's before that in an actual emergency Calderon has ensured the system is ready.


In high school, I discovered a brilliant UK band called The Housemartins. They released a few albums and then broke up. Two members of The Housemartins formed a new group called The Beautiful South. Their debut release is one of the best albums ever - I was hooked. In 1990, while on tour for their 3rd album, I saw The Beautiful South live and partied with them after the show. While talking with the band's bass player, Sean Welch, I brought up the idea of creating an information service for American fans. He thought it was a great idea and sent me a huge package of stuff after returning to England. I created PUMPKIN SEEDS as the band's official North American information service. Over the next seven years, I published several newsletters and supplied hundreds of fans with CDs, shirts, pins, hats and other UK-only items that were tough to come by in America.
I traveled to London in the summer of '95 to catch the band at The Fleadh Festival. While in London, I visited Briana Corrigan, the band's former female singer. She was in the studio recording her solo debut and managed to take a break long enough for us to have drinks at a nearby pub. After the concert, I joined Sean Welch, his wife and daughter for the trip up north to Hull where the band is based. I liked Hull quite a bit and Sean gave me the grand tour, including a stop at the band's pub of choice, The Mainbrace (apparently The Grafton was out). After two days in Hull, I thanked Sean for his hospitality and hopped a train back to London.
In the fall of 1995, I joined the band on a ten day, nine-city mini-tour of America. Starting off in Atlanta (my first visit to my future home), we proceeded to lurch across the country and into Canada where I met up with Isabelle again. During this time, I cannot recall more than three actual meals and less than 100 gin & tonics. In Washington, I met a fabulously beautiful girl at The 930 Club. We saw each other again in New York City and Chicago - what a tour! The band usually has a female singer with them on the road. However, Jacqui was pregnant at the time and could not travel, so every night was boy's night out. I highly recommend touring with a rock band at least once in your life.
'95 US TOUR - I managed to snap a few photos during brief moments of sobriety. I rather like the photos of Jennifer, bothering a cop in NYC and that great on-stage shot in Toronto (the RED one).


text:
Business News›loans
Cheaper loans for exporters in the works
The commerce department has proposed giving rupee credit to exporters at around 7.5% rate of interest and dollar-denominated loans at around 3.5% under the proposed scheme. It will soon take a proposal to the cabinet.
India's gold loan market to touch Rs 4,617 billion by 2022
"Moving forward, these companies are expected to focus on optimising their asset u...
Banks like YES, IndusInd, SBI, ICICI and PNB appear to have high exposures to Vod...
In a panel discussion under ETRise Dialogue, a top official of the Union Bank of India said that MSMEs were getting loans sanctioned by banks, especially under the PSB loans in 59 minutes. The Bank, he said, was proactive in MSME funding.
World Bank approves Rs 630 crore loan to Assam Inland Water Transport
Under the Assam Inland Water Transport Project (AIWTP), the infrastructure of passenger ferry services will be improved and the capacity of institutions running the inland water transport will be strengthened. Better-designed terminals and energy-efficient vessels will make the ferry services more sustainable with least disruption to nature.
Unsecured consumer loans grow most, credit card dues at Rs 1L crore
Unsecured loans are growing even as secured retail advances such as auto loans, loans against property (LAP) and home loans saw moderate rates of balance growth at 10.3%, 11.6% and 10.0%, respectively, according to TransUnion CIBIL's Q2FY20 Industry Insights Report.
Indian govt's outstanding loans from RBI at $8.53 bln in week to Jan. 10
State governments had 75.89 billion rupees loans from the RBI in the week ended Jan. 10, compared with 53.04 billion rupees in the previous week, the release showed.
The central bank has issued detailed guidelines for reporting such exposure by UCBs to the CRILC (Central Repository on Information on Large Credits) every quarter. Banks need to submit the data on large exposures within 30 days from the end of the quarter through the XBRL reporting platform of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).
Motilal Oswal expects the bank to report a 24 per cent YoY jump in profit to Rs 6,950 crore.
ED files chargesheet in Bhushan Power and Steel case
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed its first chargesheet in the money laundering case related to Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd (BPSL)....
Enforcement Directorate names JSW Steel in BPSL case
The Enforcement Directorate on Friday filed a charge sheet against former Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd CMD Sanjay Singal and others in a multi-crore money laundering case linked to an alleged bank loan fraud.
Bank loan fraud: ED arrests 2 on money laundering charges in Hyderabad
The case pertains to the accused fraudulently availing loans, in connivance with others, from a consortium of banks and subsequent default of loans to the tune of Rs 1,768 crore, ED said in a statement said. "Investigation so far has unearthed 33 shell companies and more than forty contractors in this case," the ED said.
Bank of America beats on bond trading boost, loan growth
Bank of America reported a 25% rise in bond trading revenue, although that was far short of the 86% surge at JPMorgan Chase and Co and a 49% jump at Citigroup Inc.
Karnataka Bank Q3 profit slips 12% to Rs 123 crore
Net NPA increased to 3.75 per cent from 3 per cent during September-December 2018.


text:
Q: Query in WHEN NO_DATA_FOUND clause. Bad practice? Developers at our job are constantly using the follow construct:
BEGIN
  SELECT field1
  INTO l_field1
  FROM table1
  WHERE field2 = 'some value'
EXCEPTION
  WHEN NO_DATA_FOUND
  THEN
     SELECT field2
     INTO l_field2
     FROM table2
     WHERE field3 = 'some value'
   ...
END;

What basically means - if you don't find the record in the first table then go look in the second table.
I have a strong feeling that this is wrong and is a bad lazy practice. But how would you approach it? Would you first get the COUNT in the table1 and if number of rows is zero then go and look in table2?

A: if you are asking for an alternative way, you can use the below way. When No data found is considered to handle errors or warning, , not conditions. Exceptions helps you to handle errors , if you were trying to run several selects and you had an error .the exception will help you detect you check the below example.
BEGIN
declare cnt number(4);
select count(1) into cnt from table1 where field2 = 'some value';
if cnt >0 then
  SELECT field1
  INTO l_field1
  FROM table1
  WHERE field2 = 'some value'
else if cnt =0 then
  SELECT field2
     INTO l_field2
     FROM table2
     WHERE field3 = 'some value';
end if;
   END;

With exceptions, you can handle errors conveniently without the need to code multiple checks, as follows:
BEGIN
   SELECT ...
   SELECT ...
   SELECT ...
   ...
EXCEPTION
   WHEN NO_DATA_FOUND THEN  -- catches all 'no data found' errors

for more information about exception and handling errors check Oracle Documentation

A: My objection to the "SELECT-in-an-EXCEPTION" stuff is that it nests blocks which have no business being nested. My preference is to use a boolean indicator variable, similar to the following:
DECLARE
  bNot_found  BOOLEAN := FALSE;
  l_field1    TABLE1.FIELD1%TYPE;
  l_field2    TABLE2.FIELD2%TYPE;
BEGIN
  BEGIN
    SELECT field1
      INTO l_field1
      FROM table1
      WHERE field2 = 'some value';
  EXCEPTION
    WHEN NO_DATA_FOUND THEN
      bNot_found := TRUE;
  END;

  IF bNot_found THEN
   SELECT field2
     INTO l_field2
     FROM table2
     WHERE field3 = 'some value';
  END IF;

  -- Go thou and do good works

END;

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


We are in week 3 of the kids holidays and If you are anything like me you may already be looking to remortgage the house with the cost of entertaining the kids. The weather can't make it's mind up and if you have to sit inside another children's play area you are going to have to open that bottle of whiskey you keep stashed in your knicker draw for dia emergencies ( AKA your MIL popping around )! With this in mind, I thought I would write a quick post on 10 Cheap & Easy Ways To Keep The Kids Active This Summer.
Scooter Parks – Kids of all ages love playing on their scooters and most local parks now have dedicated scooter parks. For kids who love doing tricks check out Skate Hut for a set of seriously hot wheels. To find your local skate park click here.
Bike Ride – We are lucky as we have a prom that stretches for miles and is the perfect traffic free place to take the kids on a bike ride. If you want to find out your nearest family friendly traffic free routes in your area click here.
Swimming – Pull out your old cossi and jump in the water with the kids. Swimming is one of the best all around exercises for you & the kids. It can help with asthma and is perfect for any new mum's looking for some gentle exercise while entertaining the older siblings. Check out your local YMCA or council run pool for cheap holiday offers.
Trampolining – We bought a trampoline for our back garden a couple of years ago and it has been worth its weight in gold. If you don't have space for one then check out your local area for an indoor bounce around.
Running – There are lots of fun sponsored races happening across the UK. Why not book a little 3K one and raise money for a good cause at the same time.
County Walk – The simplest of all exercises is walking. Grab some old trainers or wellies and take a nice long walk in the country and enjoy the beautiful views.
Park – Have you ever met a kid who doesn't like going to the park? 1/2 hour of running around & climbing up and down the slide can burn some serious calories.
Washing The Car – Mucky car ? Don't get yourself into a lather, let you Minions do the work and burn off some of their energy at the same time.
Horse Riding – This doesn't have to be an expensive activity.Many farms and horse rescue centres will offer short rides or lessons for less than £10. Have a go and see if you have the next Equestrian Gold Medalist on your hands.
The Gruffalo Trail – They have trails across the UK now and this is by far one of the best family days out we have ever had and it's totally free. We visited Gisburn Forest earlier in the year so take a look at our day here. Just remember to download the app before you go !!!! You can find your nearest trail here.
I hope this helps you entrain the kids for the rest of the holidays. If you have a favourite outdoor activity then comment below and any really good one I will add to the list.
"Multi-Tasking With A Multi-Way Bra From Hunkemöller – Review"