US v Florida Injunction

 

Case 1:12-cv-22958-PAS Document 547 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2015 Page 1 of 9

UN ITED STA TE S DI DIS STR ICT C O U R T SO UTH ER N DISTRICT STRICT OF FLO R IDA CA SE NO N O .12-22958-CIV -SEl SElTZ/ TZ/TU RN OFF

UN ITED TED STA STA TES O F AM ERI ER ICA , Plaintiff, VS. VS.

SECRET EC RETA A RY ,FLORI LO RIDA D EPAR EPAR TM ENT EN T OF OF COR RECTION S,etal. ,

D efend ndants. / O RD ER R E:C E:C O N TENTS O F INJUNC NJUNC TIO N

On A Ap pril30 0, ,20 01 15 5, ,theC Co our urtentereditsOrderonM otion ns sforSum mm m aryJudg gm ment(DE-

4981.lnthatorder,theCo CourtfoundthatPlaintiffwasentitledtoent ntryof ofaperm anentinjunction based on on D efen nd dants'violationsofRLU IPA . Su Subseque uently,the Co Courtordered the pa partiesto

submitproposedinjunctivel anguage e. .Plaintiffsproposedlanguageincludedterms msfor

m on ni itoringandenforceme m entofthei njunction,towh whichD De efendantsobjected d. .A Af fteradd di itional filings and nd a he hearing on Ju July 15, 5,2015, 5,atw hich the pa partids stated thatthey believed thatthey coul uld w ork toge getherto presentagreed m oni nitoring an and enf nforcem entlangu guage to the Cour urt,

Plaintifffiledtheparties'proposedlanguagew wi iththeC Co ourt(DE-537j1onJu ul ly24 4, ,2015. 1In a footnote,the Un U nited States indicatesthatD efen nd dan nt tthe Fl Florida De D ep pa artm en nt tof

Correcti onsi scontestingtheCo Court'sjurisdiction overitbecauseitwasallegedlyno notprop pe erly

served. d. Fi First,the Co C ourtnotesthatthe Fl Florida De Depa partm en nt tofCorrections has asnotactually raised thisissue w ith the Co Court. Se Secon nd d,and m ore im portantly,the Fl Florida D De epar artm entofC orrections ns

haswaivedan ny yo ob bjectiontop pe ersonaljurisdiction.A At ttorneyJason onVa V ailfiledano noticeof appearance(DE-48jonbehalfofû 'defendants''onM ay24,2013.No Noobjectiontoserviceorto person na aljuri sdictionh ha aseve er rbeenraised. Further,theC Co ourt'sOrderonM otionsforSumm ary Judgm me entgDE-498)clearlyappliestoSr efen nd dants''andtheFloridaD De epartm entofCorrection ns s didnotraisean ny yo ob bjection ns safterentryofthatorder.C Co onsequently,boththatorderandthe Court'sf orthcom inginjunction applytoboth Defendants,theS Se ecretaryoftheF Fl lorida

 

Case 1:12-cv-22958-PAS Document 547 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2015 Page 2 of 9

Becauset hisi njunctioninvolvesprisonco on ndition ns s,anyterm softheinjunctionmu m ustm eetthe requ ui irem me entsoftheP Pr risonL Li itigationR Re eform Ad IPLRAI.Thisorderadd dr resseswhetherthe part ies'propo posed langu guagem eetsthese requirem ents.

UnderthePLRA,beforet heC Co ourtcan issueaninjunc nction,theCo Courtm ustensur uret hatthe

injun nc ctivereliefsough ghtco om mplieswi withthedictatesofthePL PLRA.UnderthePL PLRA,anyinjunctive rel elief:

sha hallext xtend nd no furt herthan necessary to cor orrectthevi violation oftheFe Fede deralrightofa particu ul larplaintifforplaintiffs.The co ou urtsh ha allnotgrantorap pp prove an ny y prosp pe ectiverelief unless the cou ourtfindsthatsuch reliefis na narrow l y draw n,ext xtendsno fur urtherthan neces essaryto cor orrectthevi violation oftheFe Fede deralrigh ht t,an nd d istheleastintrusive m eans ns neces essaryto cor orrectthevi violation oftheFe Fede deralrigh ht t.The co ou urtshallgivesub ubstan nt tial

weighttoanyadverseimpactonpu publicsafetyortheope perationo of facri m inaljustice system caus used by by the relief.

18U. U.S.C.j36 62 26(a)(1).T Th heE El leventhC Ci ircuitintem mr retsthisprovi visiontorequireadistrictcourt tom ma akepart icularized fndingsasto each elem me entofthei njunc nctionandperform aneednarrowness-intrus usivene nessana nalysisthatprovidesa separateex xp plmzation as asto each ch elem en nt t. Ca Cason

v.Seckinge ger,231F.3d777,785(11thCi Cir.2000).However,acourtneednotdothisaboutany facts orfactorsnotin di dispute. 1d.at785 n. n.8. In di discus ussing the requi uirem entsofthe PL PLRA ,the Su Supr preme m e Co C our urtha as s expl plained ed: N arrow tailoring requi uiresa ççfit''betw een the rem ed dy y'send ndsan nd d the m ean ns schosen to accom om plish thoseend ds s. Th Thescope peofthereme m edy m ustbeproportionalto thescope peofthe violation, n,and nd the or orderm ustext xtend no furtherthan ne neces essary to rem edy the vi violation.

ThisCourthasrejectedrem me edialordersthaturmecessarilyreachouttoimprovepr prison

co on ndi tionsotherthan thos osethatviolate the C Co onstitution.B utthe prec ce ede dent nts do not sug ugges estthatanarrow and nd ot otherwi w ise prop operrem ed dy y fora cons nstitutionalviolation is invalid sim pl y be becaus use itw illhav ve e col ollateraleffects.

D epart rt m entof Co Corrections nsand nd the F Fl lorida D epart m entofC orrections ns.

 

Case 1:12-cv-22958-PAS Document 547 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2015 Page 3 of 9

Brow wn nv.Plata,13 31 1S.Ct.1910,1939-40(2011)(internalcitations,quotationm ma ark ks s,and

bracketsom i tted). W hilethepa partiesagreetom ostofthem oni nitoring and enfoxcem entterm softhe

injunc ncti on n, ,zDefendantsobjecttothenecessityofincludingt hesetermsi ntheinjuncti on. Cons nsequ ue ently,the Cour urtw illanalyze ze each o of fthe term sunde derthe PL PLRA 'Sneed-narrown w nes essintrusivene nessstand ndard. d. Policiesand ndProcedur ures Thep pm m iesproposed lang nguage includesa detinition oft skosh he erdiet,''an au ud diting procedu dure,and nd a training proce cedu dure forthe chapl plainsad dm m inistering the Re Religious Di DietPlan

(RDP).TheCourtfindsthateachoftheseprovisionsisnecessary.A definitionoflç kosherdiet''

isnecessarytoavoidanyclaim sthattheinjunction,requiringserviceofakosherdiet,isvague. Furt her,given D efend ndant nts'con ontinualrefusalto ackn know ledge thatthey are requ ui ired by by law to provi vide akosher di dietto those pri risonersw ith a sincer ere religiousbeliefrequiring them to ke keep kosher,auditing pr proced edur ures are neces essary. Tr Training proc ocedu dures are also ne nec ce essary to ens nsu ur re that prison pe personnelare un unifonuly appl plying the rules and procedu dures ofthe R RD D P acrossthe State's sixty-plus priso on n institutions.

A 1lofthese term sare na narrow ly drawn w n to achi hieve the goa oalofprovi viding ko kosherdiets and con ontinuing to m aintain the stand ndardsnecessary forproviding ko kosh he erfood. Fu Furt her,these term s

aretheleastintrusivem me eansofachievingthegoalsoftheinjunctionbecausethesetel ' msadopt policies alread dy y pu putin pl place by D efend ndants. The definition of ofa Sl kosh he erdiet''utilizesthe

2Thepart iesdono notagreeonthelanguagetobeusedintheinjunction thatwouldgive

Plaintiffacce cessto pr priso on n fac ci ilities,persorm el,an nd d pr prisone ners. s. T Th he p pa artieslanguag ge e al also differs as to acce cessto Defend ndant nts'recor ordsrelated to the Re Religious Di D ietPlan n. .

 

Case 1:12-cv-22958-PAS Document 547 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2015 Page 4 of 9

certifying aut uthority already dy us used by D efendant nts. Th Theau ud diting po policy w asdev ve eloped and ndputin

placebyDefendantspriortotheC Co ourt'srequestforthepa partiestoprovideinjunctivelanguage. TheD efen nd dan nt tsalso be bega gan de deve velopingthecha hap pl lain training po policy pr priorto the Co Court'sorder. Further,the D efend ndants have ve leew wa ay to ch chang ge e these procedur uresw ithoutfirstobtaining C ourt

appr prov oval. Th Thus us,the Co Courtt ind ndsthatthe parties'proposed po policies and proced du ureslanguag ge e m eetsthe requirem ement ents ofthe P PL LR A .

M on ni itoring and ndAccoun untabilit y The partiesproposem onthly repo or rt s and qu quarterl y repo ports. T Th he m onthl y repo port s wo would

contain the totalnum berofprisonerserl rolled in the RD RDP on the 15th day of ofthe priorm onth and a breakd kdow n of ofthatnum um berby facility. Th The qua uarterly reportw oul uld con ontain the nu num berof prisonersw ho vi violated the RD RD P,the bas asisofthe violations,the num um berofviolations dur uring the quarter,and nd the d di ispo position of ofeach violation. n. ln add ddition,the qu quarterly rep eportw ould also include

thefollowinginform ationrega ar rdingtheno ot ticesofviolation:(a)then na am me eo of fthep pr risonersw wh ho

wereissuedan no otice;(b)whetherthedispositionw wa asbasedo on nwritten noticeon nl lyorw wh hethera fact-to-faceinterview wasschedu ul led d; ;and(c)theresultofeach notice. The C Co ourtfindsthatboth the m onthly and nd qu quarterly rep po orts are nec ecessary. Th The inform ation requi uired by by the repo ports wi willhelp the Co C ourtan nd d Plaintiffen ns su ur re thatD efendan nt ts

complyw wi iththeC Co ourt'sinjun nc ction n. .G Gi ivenD De efendants'continuedinsistencethattheyarenot ot obligated to com om ply wi w ith RL R LU IPA and the Co Cour urt'spow erto enforce its orders,such m oni nitoring isnec ecessaryto ensur ure that atD efend da ant nts cont ntinue ue to com ply w ith RL R LU IPA . Fu Further,the Co C ourt findsthatthese repor orting pr provisions arenan no o w ly tailored d. . A 1lofthe infonnation requ quested is

relevanttocom pliancewithspecifcall yenjoinedactivities.Th Thereportingprovisionsarethe 4

 

Case 1:12-cv-22958-PAS Document 547 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2015 Page 5 of 9

leastintrusivem me eansofachiev vi ingthego oa alsofthei njuncti on.De Defendantswillbeself-report ing, farlessintrusivethan havi ving athird-party orPlaintiffco on nductm onthly on-sitevi visitsorhav vi ing Plaintiffserve reg gu ulardisco ov very req qu uests. The par arties also pr propo pose that,ea ac ch qu quarter,the U Un nited State es ssh ha alliden nt tify five

institutions for wh which D efend ndants shallprovide copi pies ofthe De D ep pa artm entofCorrections'form 17C5 C 5-325 25. Form DC 5-325 25 isthe form used to pr provide pr prisone nersnotice ofa vi violation of ofthe RD RD P.

TheForm hasfiveparts:(1)thereasonforthevi violati on;(2)aspacefortheprisone nerto explain hisviolationand whyh he eshouldrem ma ainintheprog gr ram m; ;(3)anex xp plan na ationo of fthetypeofrev vi iew

thechaplainhasdone;(4)thedi disposition oftheviolation;an nd d(5)aspaceforthechaplain's notes.A cop opy of oftheform isattache hed he hereto asExhibitA . The C Co ourtfindsthatproviding the 17C 5-325 form sisnece es ssary to allow the Pl Plaintiffto

monitorcomplian nc cew wi ith theCo Court'si njunction,specificallytheprovisionsoftheinjunction w hich pr prohibitthe use of ofthe ten p pe ercentrule and prohi hibitD efend da antsfrom suspen ending or

rem oving prison onersw ithoutfirstproviding an opport unity forapr prisonerto co on ntestthesus uspension orrem oval al. Th The provi vision isnan no ow ly dr draw wn n be because itonly requi uiresrecordsrelated to al alleged violations nsofthe RD RD P an and how ow the vi violations we wereaddr dressed by by D efenda dants. Th Theprov ovision is notintrusivebec ecauseitusesrecordsalreadyke keptby D efenda dantsand each quarterD efen nd dant nts need on only provi vide the recor ords forthe five chos osen institution ns s. Consequen nt tly,the pa parties' propo posed accou ount ntability and nd m oni nitoring provi visions nsm eetthe requi uirem entsofthe PL PLR A. A cces ess to lnspectFacilities The p pa artiescould n no otagr gree on the language ge ofthistenn nn. P Pl laintiffhasproposed the

followi w ing langu guage: e:

 

Case 1:12-cv-22958-PAS Document 547 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2015 Page 6 of 9

D efen nd dan nt tsshallprovidetheUnited Statesreasonab bl leacc ce essto pe perso on nnel, prison oners,and nd facilitiesaspertinent ntto the Un U nited States'assessm ent ntofD efend ndant nts'com om pliance wi w ith

thisInjunction.Re Reasonableaccesswillbepxov vi idedto attorneys,experts,orotherJustice Dep pa artm entpersolmel.T Th heD De efendantsshall,tmtilthet erm mi ination ofthislnjunction, retain and nd pr provide the Un U nited St States wi w ith reasona nab bl le acces ess to do docu um m en nt ts relev va an nt tto the

issuesinthiscase(includingprisonerrequeststojointheR RD DP,responsesthereto,records of prisone ner violations nsrelated to the RD RD P,and doc ocum ents show ow ing the costofRD P

meals). D efenda dantspropo pose the follow ing; g; The P Pa arties shallhave ve acces essto infonnation relev va antto co com plian nc ce wi w ith the Co C ou ur rt's

injunc nctionsconcerningprovi visionofthekosherdiet,enforceme m entofthe$ t10percent''rule,

an nd d pr provision ofa pr pre-sus uspension opp po ortunity to co on ntesta susp pe ens nsion pu pursuantto the disco ov very pr provisionsofthe Ru RulesofCivilProce ed dure. Ho How ev ve er,the Co Courtan nt ticipatesthat theP Pa artiesw illresol olvean any inform ationalinquiriesw ithoutresor orttothedi discov overy rules.

Thesetw o px pxovision ns s differsignificantly. Defenda dants'proposed langu guage do does not otinclude acces essto pe personnel,fac ci ilities,orprisone ners.lnstea ad d,Defendan nt tsprop po ose gi giving Pl Plaintiffac cc cess onl nly to certain recor ords. M ore than recor ord acce cessisnece es ssary in thiscase. G iven thena natureof ofproviding ako kosherdiet,w hich includesproperpreparation ofthe food,acces essto the faci cilitiesisnecessaryto ens nsur ure com pliance wi w ith the Co C ourt'sorders. Ac A cc ce ess to prisonersand nd pe personn nnelisalso ne neces essary in this case. e.The recor ord in thiscase isfullofpriso on ner lettersalleging non-com pliance wi w ith both the R RD D P and Courtorders and alleging thatprisoners hav ve e suffered retaliation forpartak ki ing in the R RD D P . In or orderto ens nsu ur re thatD efen nd dant ntsare

com om plying w i th Co C ourtorde ders,Plaintiffm usthave ve reas asonable acces essto pr priso on ners and pe personnelto investigatetheprisoners'claims m sand nd ens nslzrethatpersonnelare com pl ying w ith the Co Court'sorders. Thus,acce cess to personnel,prison ne ers,an nd d facilities isnec ce essary. y. 3 3A tthe Ju ul ly 15, 2015 heari ring,allparties indicated thatthey did n no otthink tha hata ne neu ut tral m onitorwasnecessary.D efendantsnow seem to indicatethatno on on-sitem onitoring isnecessary

becau us setheyw wi illpolicethem selvesthroughtheirowninternalauditingprocess.Q Qu ui tesim ply,

given D efenda dan nt ts'refusalto recog ognize theirlegalobligation to p pr rovide kos osherm eals,to rely onl nly

 

Case 1:12-cv-22958-PAS Document 547 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2015 Page 7 of 9

Plaintiffsproposedlang nguage ge,how eve ver,m ay be sligh ht tly overbro oa ad asto facilities  Thus, the C Co ourtw illlim mi itfacility acce cessto thefood od pr prep pa azat ation are ea as,m ealserving area as s,an nd d di dining

areas. Giving Pl Plaintiffacces essto facili tiesto insp pe ectthe foo ood pre rep pa aration areas asan nd d ens nsurethat proced edur uresare follow ed isnarrow lytailored an andext xten nd dsnofurt herthan ne nec ce essat' y.Furt her,such apr provision isnotoverl y intrusivebe becaus useitdoesnotrequireco con ns stan nt tm onitoring orthereg gu ular presen nc ce of ofa non on-part y. Gi G iving P Pl laintiffacce cessto the m ealserving and nd dining areas asisnece cessary given the num um erous usprisonercom plaints aboutthe lack o of fprope perkosherprocedur uresin the serving of ofthe m eal als and problem s in the d di ining areas. Further,suc uch a p pr rovi vision isnotoverly

intrusive be becaus use itdoes esnotrequ quire con onstant ntm onitoring,the pr presenc nce of of a non on-party m onitor, and nd do does not otext xtend nd to no non-food related areas of ofthe De D efend ndan nt ts'facilities.Consequ quen nt tly,ac cc cess to food od pr prepa paration, n,serving,an nd dd di ining areasm eetsthe need ed-naao aow ness-intrusivene nesstestofthe PLRA.

A cce cesstopersol ol m eland nd pr prison onersto acc ccesscom om plian nc cew ith Co Coul' tordersisnarro ow wly draw n to allow Plaintiffto gatherinform ation abo bouttraining,co om m plian nc ce, e,and nd treatm ent ntof

prisonersw ho cho hoose to pa part ake in the RD RD P. Su Such a pr provision isnotoverly intrusive be becaus use it does esnotrequ quire the cons nstant ntpresenc nce ofa ncmm -party or ora party. Co Consequen nt tly,acce cessto persozm eland prisone nersm eetsthe ne needd-nazrown w nes ess-intrusivene nessrequi uirem ents ofthe PL PLRA . Finally,both sides agr gree thatPlaintiffshoul uld ha hav ve e acce cessto recor ords related to the RD RD P. Such ac accessis nec ecessary to ensur ure thatD efenda dan nt ts cont ntinue to com ply w ith the Co C ourt's orders. A cce cessto records dsrelated to the R RD DP isa nar arrow ly tailored p pr rovision be beca au use itonly pr provides

on Defenda dants'own w n selfm oni nitoring asthe sole form ofon-site m oni nitoring ofthe RD RD P woul uld be unreasona nable.

 

Case 1:12-cv-22958-PAS Document 547 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2015 Page 8 of 9

accesstotherelevantrecords-thoserelati ngtothesubjectofthislitigation.Be Becauseitonly providesacces ess to lim i ted recor ords and does not otrequire thatthe rec co ords dsbe produ duced in any ny pm icul ularw ay,thisprovision isnotintrus usive. Co Consequ quen nt tly,thereco or rdsac cc cessprov vi ision m eets the req equi uirem ements entsofthe PL PLR A . O therTerm s

ThepartiesproposethatPlaintiffgiveD De efendantsthirty(30)daysnoticetocureany

allegedviolationoftheinjuncti on.Iftheviolationisnotcuredwithinthattim e,Plaintiffmay initiate a cou ourtproceedi ding to add ddressthe vi violation. Th The part rtieshav ve e agreed ed to this prov ovision an and, given thatitisno non-substantiveand nd isnotafonn ofprosp pe ectiverelief,itnee ed dno notm eetthe requi uirem ent nts ofthe PL PLR A . Fi Finally,the partiesw ish toinclude lan ng gua uage stating thatthe

m od di ification andterm inationo of ftheinjun nc ction aregov ve em me ed bythetenn nnsofthePL PLRA and Fede deralRule of ofCivilProcedu dure60. Th Thisterm issim ply a statem en nt tofex xi isting1aw an nd d therefore doe oesnotnee eed to m eetthe need d-narrow nes ess-intrusiven ne essrequi uirem entsofthe P PL LR A . A cco or rdingly,itis O R D ER ED that:

1.Th Theparties'jointprop po osedlanguag ge em eetsthereq qu uirem me entsofthePLRA.T Th heC Co ourt

willuti lizethejointprop po osedlanguageinitsfinalinjuncti on. 2. Th The Co Courtw illutilize anarrow erversion ofPlaintiffs acc ce essto fa ac cilities,personn nnel, and prisone nerslang ngua uage w hich wi w illcom ply w i th the P PL LR A .

3.T Th heCourtwillenterasep pa arateinjunction.

DONE andORDERED inM iami,Florida,this /W

dayofAugust, 015.

PA TR IC A A .SEI PATR U N ITED STATES STA TES D IS

cc:

A 1lC oun unselofR ecord

C T JU D G E

 

Case 1:12-cv-22958-PAS Document 547 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2015 Page 9 of 9

ALORIDA HEPAA/ M ENT DF-CIJRR RRECT ECTI IDN N' R ELIG IOU OUS S D IETPROGM PRO GM M N O TICE O F V IO LA TIO N

( ( l è ( .q (..

IN M AT ATE E NAM NA M E:

FAC ILITY :

DC :

H O USING UN U N IT :

RELIGION OF O FRECOR ECORD (OT23):

NO TICE DATE: DAT E:

Pleasebeadvi sedthatyouareinviolati onoft heReli giousD Di ietProgram (; $ 1tD DP P' ' )fort hefoll ow i ngreason: lthasbeendeterminedthatyouhavepurchase; possessedaorconsume m edfoo od dproductsorattem mp ptedtopu purchase,po os ssess orconsum me efoodp pr roduct sthatarenotconsistentw wi i th orthatspecit kally viol atethe skndardsofthe CFO diet.(See attached.)

You have been foundto beunablet o m anag agetherel igi ot lsdieti n ama m annerconsisten nt tw i th i nsti tution na alsafety orsecur uri ty.

Youhavebeenfoundtohavebart ered,stol en,ori mproperl ym ssessedfoodf rom theC CF FO meal s.(Seeat tached.) Y ouarebe being con onsi der ered forstspen ension 9om theR RD D P.lfyou ou areinterested i nco cont nti nui ui ngyo your urpar art icipation i nthe RDPyo you

mustcom mp pl etethisfrom and retum i ttotheC Ch hapl ai nw wi i thintive(5)daysofthek ' Noti ceD Da ate' 'li stedab bo ove e. .TheC Ch haplai nw wi i ll

con onsi der erany nyrespons nseyou ou provi vi deb be eforeasuspe en nsi onorremo mova valdec ecision i sm ade de.

PA RT A :FA CTS FO R CO NSI NSID EM TIO N Pl easeexplainIN DETA IL why you violat edtheR RD D Pp pr rogram ,and w hyyou oushoul uldbeall ow edtorem ma ain i ntheprog gr ram :

(Addt' z/ lï /ït p? ' l t W sheetsfn fnecessary)

PA RT B:CH APLA APLA IN CY R EW EW

Ihav ve ereviewe wedtheinform ati on abov ve eandha havedeterm i ned thattheabov ovenm nmnedinm ateshallcom om etoanint erview to

furt herexp pl l aint hevi olati on.(Int elview notesw wi illl x m adeonPM D:Chap pl l aincyN No otes. )

lhave verev vi i ew we edthei nfon onna nati on abo ov veand hav ve edetenn nni ned thatnointerview i sne ec cessary.' Th he edi di sm si ti onnot otedbe below i s suppo port edby by theinform ati on supp pl li ed i n PM A,PM D and any addi di ti ona nali nform ation at tache hedhe hereto. Inm atedidno notretum t he form orforwardany exp pl l ana nation forthe viol ati on n. . lnm atefail edtorespondto t hec ca al l-out. Chap pl lain

D at Da e

PA PAR RT C:DISPOSI SPO SITIO N

Af lerco om m pl eting m y rev vi i ew w, ,Ihave vedetermi mi ned edthe fol low i ngd di i sm si ti on tothevi vi ol ati on n: : Couns nseli ng on nl l y;no suspension. n. 1kV i ol ation:Su us sm nd de edfor30day ys s. 2ndv i ol ation n: :Suspe pen nd ded for120da ay ys

r dVi olati onorSubjçqpent:Suspendedft ypl pç(J)year.

PART D:CHAPLA AI INCY NOTES % orl zsebyC C/ /l t z lflïncyO On nl yl

Chap pl lai n

( 7C5325( Revi s ed7/ 28/1 5)

Date Da

R ktb' t A