The Certificate of Availability of Funds (Appendix 10) is the certification made by the Chief Accountant of the agency or his/her duly authorized representative that funds have been duly appropriated/alloted for the purpose of entering into a contract involving expenditures of public funds and that the amount necessary to cover the proposed contract for the current fiscal year is available for expenditure. The CAF is required for purposes of entering into contracts for certain types of expenditures and is an integral part of the contract. On the other hand, the certification as to availability of funds contained in the Request for Obligations of Allotment (ROA) is required for all obligations incurred by the agency.

Without the CAF, the contract is void. Exceptions to this rule are contracts for personal services, for supplies for current consumption or to be carried in stock not exceeding the estimated consumption for three months or banking transactions of government-owned or controlled banks.

In cases where the defect or irregularity in the claim under a government contract is the delayed execution of the CAF, recovery from the government can still be made based on the equitable principle of quantum meruit. Quantum Meruit means the amount one has earned or the value of services rendered.

In the preparation of the CAF, the account to which the purchase is to be charged should be taken into consideration. Supplies and materials are usually charged to the maintenance and operating expenses while equipment and real property are charged to capital outlay.

There is, therefore, a need to know what is included in the accounts Supplies and Materials and Equipment. Composition of these accounts are discussed in the early pages of this Manual.

Starting the year 1995, a Simplified Fund Release System in the Government was adopted pursuant to Section 56 of the General Provisions of RA No. 7845 (the FY 1995 General Appropriation Act in relation to Sections 2 and 3, Chapter 1, Title XVII, Book IV of Executive Order No. 292 (The Administrative Code of 1987).

The Simplified Fund Release System (SFRS) is a standardized system of releasing allotments based on predetermined categorization or disaggregation of agency budget. Under this system, the category of the expenditure items determine the timing and the magnitude of the release of agency allotments. Releases, in turn, are made in accordance with a prioritization scheme consistent with government's overall development policy.

In view of the adoption of the SFRS, Allotment Advice (AA) releases authorizing agencies to incur obligations is discontinued. Agencies will be notified of their approved allotment and corresponding authority to incur obligations using two forms of allotment release orders, the General Allotment Release Order (GARO) and Special Allotment Release Order (SARO).

A General Allotment Release Order (GARO) is a comprehensive authority issued to all agencies to incur obligations not exceeding an authorized amount during a specified period for the purpose indicated. It shall cover expenditures common to most, if not all, agencies without need of special clearances or approval from a competent authority.

A Special Allotment Release Order (SARO) is a specific authority issued to one or more identified agencies to incur obligations not exceeding a given amount during a specified period for the purposes indicated. It shall cover expenditures the release of which is subject to compliance with specific laws or regulations, or is subject to separate approval or clearance by competent authority.

Upon receipt of their copy of the GARO and SARO, agencies may enter into contract or bind the government into an obligation to pay a certain sum of money in accordance with existing accounting rules and regulations. The GARO and SARO shall be accountable forms and the amounts involved shall be duly recorded in the agency's books of accounts in the same manner as was previously prescribed for the Advice of Allotment (AA).

Notice of Cash Allocations (NCA) shall be issued quarterly.

The applicable laws, rules and regulations are as follows:

1. Section 360 of the Local Government Code

Certification by the Local Budget Officer, Accountant and Treasurer.- Every requisition must be accompanied by a certificate signed by the local budget officer, the local accountant and the local treasurer showing that an appropriation therefor exists, the estimated amount of such expenditure has been obligated, and the funds are available for the purpose, respectively.

2. Section 85 of PD 1445

Appropriation before entering into contract. -(1) No contract involving the expenditure of public funds shall be entered into unless there is an appropriation therefor, the unexpended balance of which, free of other obligations, is sufficient to cover the proposed expenditure.

(2) Notwithstanding this provision, contracts for the procurement of supplies and materials to be carried in stock may be entered into under regulations of the Commission provided that when issued, the supplies and materials shall be charged to the proper appropriation account.

3. Section 86-87 of PD 1445

Sec. 86. -Certificate showing appropriation to meet contract. - Except in the case of a contract for personal service, for supplies for current consumption or to be carried in stock not exceeding the estimated consumption for three months, or banking transactions of government-owned or controlled banks, no contract involving the expenditure of public funds by any government agency shall be entered into or authorized unless the proper accounting official of the agency concerned shall have certified to the officer entering into the obligation that funds have been duly appropriated for the purpose and that the amount necessary to cover the proposed contract for the current fiscal year is available for expenditure on account thereof, subject to verification by the Auditor concerned. The certificate, signed by the proper accounting official and the Auditor who verified it, shall be attached to and become integral part of the proposed contract, and the sum so certified shall not thereafter be available for expenditure for any other purpose until the obligation of the government agency concerned under the contract is fully extinguished.

Sec. 87.-Void contract and liability of officer. - Any contract entered into contrary to the requirements of the two immediately preceding sections shall be void, and the officer or officers entering into the contract shall be liable to the government or other contracting party for any consequent damage to the same extent as if the transaction had been wholly between private parties.

4. Section 46 of PD 1177

Certificate of Availability of Funds.-No funds shall be disbursed, and expenditures or obligations chargeable against any authorized allotment shall be incurred or authorized in any department, office or agency without first securing the certification of its Chief accountant or head of accounting unit as to the availability of funds and the allotment to which the expenditure of obligation may be properly charged.

x x xx x xx x x

5. COA Resolution No. 86-58 Re-Policy on the recovery by government contractors on the basis of Quantum Meruit.

x x xx x x x x x

WHEREFORE, this Commission hereby resolves that where the only defect or irregularity in the claim under a government contract is the delayed execution of the certificate as to availability of funds, a recovery against the government under the equitable principle of quantum meruit based upon the reasonable value of the services performed and the market value of the materials and goods delivered but not exceeding the contract price may be allowed in audit, subject to the following conditions:

1. That funds have already been appropriated and alloted to the implementing agency as of the execution of the contract;
2. That all other statutory and regulatory requirements for the execution of the contracts have been complied with as verified by the Auditor concerned;
3. That the delay in the execution of the CAF is not attributable to any fault on the part of the Contractor or is through inadvertence;
4. That the delay in the execution of the CAF is reasonable as determined by this Commission upon a circumspect evaluation of the facts and circumstances of the case. Any unreasonable delay cannot be countenanced;
5. That there is no evidence of bad faith on the part of the contractor in the performance of the contract;
6. That the contractor is willing, and so undertakes, to abide and be bound by the evaluation by the implementing agency of the claim, the basis of which is to be reviewed by the Auditor concerned as to its reasonableness;
7. That a report on such auditorial review, together with a verified CAF, is filed with the records of the claim; and
8. That all claims are elevated by the Unit Auditor to the Chairman of this Commission who is entrusted with the implementation of this Policy for the determination of compliance with the conditions above set forth and for final approval of payment of the claim.

Sec. 46. Appropriation Before Entering into Contract.- (1) No contract involving the expenditure of public funds shall be entered into unless there is an appropriation therefor, the unexpended balance of which, free of other obligation, is sufficient to cover the proposed expenditure; and

(2) Notwithstanding this provision, contracts for the procurement of supplies and materials to be carried in stock may be entered into under regulations of the Commission provided that when issued, the supplies and materials shall be charged to the proper appropriation account.

Sec. 47 Certificate Showing Appropriation to meet Contract. - Except in the case of a contract for personal service, for supplies for current consumption or to be carried in stock not exceeding the estimated consumption for three (3) months, or banking transactions of government-owned or controlled banks, no contract involving the expenditure of public funds by any government agency shall be entered into or authorized unless the proper accounting official of the agency concerned shall have certified to the officer entering into the obligation that funds have been duly appropriated for the purpose and that the amount necessary to cover the proposed contract for the current calendar year is available for expenditure on account thereof, subject to verification by the Auditor concerned. The certificate signed by the proper accounting official and auditor who verified it shall be attached to and become an integral part of the proposed contract, and the sum so certified shall not thereafter be available for expenditure for any other purpose until the obligation of the government agency concerned under the contract is fully extinguished.

Sec. 48. Void Contract and liability of officer. - Any contract entered into contrary to the requirements of the two (2) immediately preceding sections shall be void, and the officer or officers entering into the contract shall be liable to the Government or other contracting party for any consequent damage to the same extent as if the transaction had been wholly between private parties.

7. Section 20, Rule 4, Title II, RRSPMLG

(The provisions are quoted under the topic Requisitioning or Preparation of RIV/PR)

8. Sec. 40, Chap. 5, Book VI, 1987 Adm. Code.

Certification of Availability of Funds.- No funds shall be disbursed, and no expenditures or obligations chargeable against any authorized allotment shall be incurred or authorized in any department, office or agency without first securing the certification of its Chief Accountant or head of the accounting unit as to the availability of funds and the allotment to which the expenditure or obligation may be properly charged.

x x x x x x x x x

9. Sec. 157, GAAM, Vol. I

x x x x x x x x x

In the local government units, no money shall be disbursed unless the local budget officer certifies to the existence of appropriation that has been legally made for the purpose, the local accountant has obligated said appropriation, and the local treasurer certifies as to the availability of funds for the purpose (Sec. 344, RA 7160).

10. Sec. 526 of the GAAM, Vol. I

Appropriation before entering into contract. No. contract involving the expenditure of public funds shall be entered into unless there is an appropriation therefor, the unexpended balance of which, free of other obligations is sufficient to cover the proposed expenditure (Sec. 85, PD 1445).

All contracts for capital projects and for supply of commodities and services including equipment maintenance contracts and other agreements requiring payments chargeable to agency current operating or capital expenditure fund, shall be signed by the agency heads or other duly authorized official only when there are available funds. The Chief Accountant of the contracting agency shall sign as witness, and contracts without such witness shall be considered void. It shall be the responsibility of the Chief Accountant to verify the availability of funds, as duly evidenced by programmed appropriations from which such contract shall ultimately be payable. His signature shall be considered as construing a certification to that effect (Sec. 46, PD 1177; LOI 968, Dec. 17, 1979).

Where the Chief Accountant issued a Certificate of Availability of Funds but failed to sign the contract as a witness in violation of LOI 968, the contract is nevertheless, enforceable. Since Sec. 86 of PD 1445 states that the certificate shall be attached to and become integral part of the proposed contract, then the failure of the Chief Accountant to affix his signature to the contract was somehow made up by his own certification which is the basic and more important validating document. The rationale of LOI 968 which is to ensure that there are available funds to finance the project, was already served by the Chief Accountant's issuance of a certificate of availability of funds ( Melchor vs. COA, GR 95398, Aug. 16, 1991).

11. COA Circular No. 82-122-B dtd. Jan. 18, 1982

2.0 Definition of Terms

As used in this Circular, the following terms shall be understood in the sense indicated hereunder:

2.1 Certificate as to Availability of Funds (CAF) refers to the certification made by the proper accounting official of the agency concerned that funds have been duly appropriated/alloted for the purpose of entering into a contract involving expenditure of public funds and that the amount necessary to cover the proposed contract for the current fiscal year is available for expenditure on account thereof, as verified by the Auditor concerned, pursuant to Section 86 of PD 1445. The CAF is required for purposes of entering into contracts for certain types of expenditures and is an integral part of the contract. On the other hand, the certification as to availability of funds contained in the Request for Obligation of Allotment (ROA), is required for all types of expenditures and is the basis for taking up all obligations incurred in the books of accounts but is not an integral part of the contract.

2.2 Accounting Official refers to the Chief Accountant/Head of Accounting Unit of any national government agency, including state universities and colleges, schools and hospitals.

2.3 Appropriation - an authorization under past acts of Congress, Presidential Decrees or other legislative enactment for payments to be made with funds of the government, under specified conditions and/or specified purposes (Sec. 2(i) PD 1177).

2.4 Continuing Appropriation - an appropriation available to support obligations for a specified purpose or project, even when these obligations are incurred beyond the budget year (Sec 2(h) PD 1177). However, it may or may not be subject to a special budget before it is used in the ensuing year pursuant to existing rules and regulations.

2.5 Request for Obligation of Allotment (ROA) - is a document providing evidence for each obligation incurred and facilitating ledger-keeping for its liquidation (GAO GC 40). Section C of the ROA is a subsidiary ledger where obligations incurred and liquidations and balances are posted to support control accounts in the General Ledger.

2.6 Multi-Year Contracts are contracts for major construction, rehabilitation, betterment and improvement of projects under the Infrastructure Program for a given year which will take more than one year to complete. They are funded thru a Multi-Year release of allotment by the Office of Budget and Management.

2.7 One-Year Contract for Capital Projects covers a capital project prosecuted for a period of one year. One year duration would not necessarily mean commencement on the first day to end on the last day of a current year. The contract may start at any time of one current year and may end in the ensuing year. x x x

2.8 One-Year Contract for Supply of Commodities/Services covers the supply of commodities/services to be used/rendered during the current year and funded thru an Advice of Allotment issued for the year by the OBM. Should the term of contract of this nature extend beyond the current year, i.e., when the effectivity date of the one- year contract is after the first day of January of the current year, then only that portion pertaining to the current year shall be funded and obligated.

2.9 Other Contracts refer to contracts that are neither multi- year nor one-year. These includes purchase orders, letter contracts, work orders and job orders.

3.0 Coverage and Exceptions

3.1 Coverage

The following contracts entered into by heads of agencies shall be supported by the CAF and obligated through the ROA:

1. Multi-Year contracts for capital projects
2. One-year contracts for capital projects - 300
3. One-year contracts for supply of commodities in excess of three (3) months estimated consumption and service, including equipment and maintenance contracts - 200
4. Other contracts requiring payments which are chargeable to agency current operating or capital expenditure funds.

The following contracts entered into by heads of agencies need not be supported by the CAF but shall be obligated through the ROA:

1. Contracts for personal services
2. Contracts for supplies for current consumption or to be carried in stock not exceeding the estimated consumption for three (3) months.

 x x xx x xx x x

4.2 Subject to the existing exceptions enumerated in item 3.2 of this Circular, an Agency Head or his duly authorized representative before entering into any contract which involves the expenditure of public funds must first secure the Certificate as to Availability of Funds (CAF) from the accounting official that:

1. funds have been duly appropriated/alloted for the purpose;
2. the allotment necessary to cover the proposed contract for the current fiscal year has been released and is available for expenditure on account thereof, subject to verification by the Auditor concerned (Sec. 86, PD 1445).
3. the sum certified as having been appropriated/alloted shall be sufficient to cover the total cost of the contract.

4.4 In addition to accomplishing the CAF, the accounting official shall also sign the contract as witness. Contracts not so witnessed or not supported by a CAF shall be considered null and void (LOI 968 and Sec. 87, PD 1445).

4.5 Simultaneously, the accounting official shall accomplish a Request for Obligation of Allotment (ROA) to obligate the following:

1. The amount pertaining to the current year for a Multi-Year contract (item 2.6)
2. Total amount of the contract for one year contract for Capital Projects and Other Contracts (item 2.7 and 2.9)
3. The amount needed quarterly for a one year contract for supply of commodities/services to be used/rendered (item 2.8)

5.1 Section A of the ROA shall be accomplished on the basis of the Notice of Award or its equivalent as approved by the Agency Head or his duly authorized representative. The ROA, together with the Request for the Issuance of CAF, shall be forwarded to the Accounting Unit.

5.2 The accounting official shall accomplish Section B of the ROA to obligate the amount of the contract pertaining to any of the amounts specified in 4.5 hereof and shall prepare the CAF. x x xx x xx x x

 x x xx x xx x x

5.4 The proposed contract shall be forwarded to the accounting official who shall sign as an instrumental witness thereto. He shall then attach the CAF to the proposed contract as an integral part thereof. Thereafter, the proposed contract, together with the CAF, shall be forwarded to the Agency Head or his duly authorized representative for approval, if the same is within his approving authority. Otherwise, the contract shall be forwarded to higher or other authorities if required under existing law and regulations.

5.5 Within five (5) days after the execution of the contract, copies of the approved contract, together with all the supporting documents, shall be furnished the Unit Auditor pursuant to COA Circular No. 76-34, as amended.

5.6 The CAF shall be prepared in six (6) copies to be distributed as follows:

Original -COA Auditor

Duplicate -Contractor/Supplier for his file

Triplicate-Accounting Official (to serve as a basis for controlling the balances of the fund as indicated in Section C of the CAF)

Quadruplicate-Attached to the contract to become an integral part thereof
Quintuplicate-Operating Unit for file
Sextuplicate-Regional Accountant if the contract has been entered into by the District/City/Field Office

6.0 Specific Procedures

6.1 In case where the multi-year contracts will be implemented by other agencies/operating units, the entire multi-year allotment shall be sub-alloted or released to implementing agencies/units.

6.2 In cases of multi-year contracts and one-year contracts for supply of commodities/services, the accounting official shall furnish the Auditor the copy of the succeeding ROAs and such information to enable the COA Auditor to update Section B of the CAF.

6.3 For other contracts (item 2.9), the certificate as to availability of funds may just be stamped on the face of the contract.

6.4 If the source of funding of the contract is a trust liability account of the implementing agency, then it should be so specified in the CAF in the space provided for PPA.

12. NBC 440 dtd. Jan. 30, 1995

x x xx x xx x x

This Circular covers all government agencies, including government-owned or controlled corporations and local government units, receiving budgetary support from the national government pursuant to the General Appropriations Act (GAA) or such other duly enacted appropriation measures, through Advices of Allotment (AAs) issued by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM).

3.0 General Description

3.1 The SFRS is a standardized system of releasing allotments based on a predetermined categorization or disaggregation of agency budgets. Under this system, the category of the expenditure item determines the timing and the magnitude of the release of agency allotments. Releases, in turn, are made in accordance with a prioritization scheme consistent with government's overall development policy.

3.2 The main elements of the SFRS are the following:

4.0 General Guidelines

  x x xx x xx x x

6.0 Procedures

x x xx x xx x x

6.4 Upon receipt of their copy of the GARO or SARO, agencies may enter into contracts or bind the government into an obligation to pay a certain sum of money in accordance with existing accounting rules and regulations.

 x x xx x xx x x

6.6 The GARO and SARO shall be accountable forms and the amounts involved shall be duly recorded in the agency books of accounts in the same manner as was previously prescribed for the Advice of Allotment, unless subsequently modified by the Commission on Audit.

13. NBC No. 443 dtd. April 6, 1995

 x x xx x xx x x

2.0 Policy Guidelines

 2.1 The shift to the quarterly issuance of NCAs is designed to rationalize and expedite the release of funds to the various agencies of the government and thereby accelerate the implementation of critical programs and projects. Therefore, to continue the efficient management of cash balances of government, agencies are required to limit the issuance of necessary funding checks to operating units to the units' one month's cash requirement, based on the cash program submitted.

x x xx x xx x x

ILLUSTRATIVE DECISIONS

Nature:Quantum Meruit

Decision/Opinion No.:COA Decision NO. 509 dtd. May 30, 1988

Particulars:

Claim for payment of the Royal Trust Corporation for the cost of the channel in the improvement of the Betis River, Mexico, Pampanga, was earlier denied by COA on the ground that there was no appropriation available to cover the cost of the project in violation of Section 85 of PD 1445. Royal Trust Construction through its Counsel appealed stating that the denial of the claim and the condition that "payment on the basis of quantum meruit may be given due course but only upon order of the court " is iniquitous, unfair and unjust considering that the protracted litigation will only exacerbate losses and involve additional expenses. The appeal was denied since the grounds relied upon have already been judiciously considered. Further, the contract alluded to as basis for the subject claim merely contains whereas clauses without a body. There is therefore no contract to speak of as basis of the subject claim which would be binding on the government.

Nature: Quantum Meruit

Decision/Opinion No.:Royal Trust Corp. vs. COA-G.R. No. 84202 dtd. Nov. 22, 1988.

Particulars:

Petitioner undertook the widening and deepening of the Betis River in Pampanga without any written contract and the covering appropriation. On July 20, 1987, the Chairman of the Commission on Audit ruled that payment to the contractor for the work accomplished, starting with the first partial payment in the amount of P268,051.14 only on the basis of quantum meruit may be allowed ... in keeping with the time honored principle that no one may be permitted to unjustly enrich himself at the expense of another. However, in a subsequent indorsement dated August 27, 1987, Chairman Domingo reversed himself stating that payment on the basis of quantum meruit may be given due course but only upon order of a court. The Supreme Court ruled that despite the admitted absence of a specific covering appropriation as required under COA Resolution No. 86-58, the petitioner may nevertheless be compensated the services rendered by it,concededly, for the public benefit from the general fund allotted by law to the Betis River Project. Substantial compliance with the said Resolution in view of the circumstance of the case should suffice.

Nature: Failure of the Chief Accountant to affix his signature in the contract.

Decision/Opinion No.: Melchor vs. COA -GR. No. 95398 dtd. Aug. 16, 1991 (200 SCRA 705)

Particulars:

Petitioner Mario R. Melchor, in his capacity as Vocational School Administrator of Alangalang Agro-Industrial School of Alangalang, Leyte entered into a contract with Cebu Diamond Construction for the construction of Phase I of the HomeTechnology Building of the said School for the Price of P488,000.00. Pablo Narido,Chief Accountant of the school, issued a certificate of availability of funds to cover the construction cost. Narido, however, failed to sign as a witness to the contract contrary to the requirement of Section 1 of Letter of Instruction (LOI) No. 968. The Resident Auditor was directed by the COA Regional Director to disallow the payment thereon in post-audit on the ground that the contract was null and void for lack of signature of the Chief Accountant of the School as witness to it as required under Section 1 of LOI 968, for which reason the petitioner was made personally liable for the amount paid to the contractor. The Supreme Court rules that since Section 86 (of PD 1445) states that the certificate (of availability of funds) shall be attached to and become integral part of the proposed contract, then the failure of the Chief Accountant to affix his signature to the contract was somehow made up by his own certification which is the basic and more important validating document.

Nature: Absence of CAF

Decision/Opinion No.: COA Decision No. 1726 dtd. Oct. 31, 1990.

Particulars:

This concerns the claim of Metro Plumbing Company for payment of water service connections rendered for MWSS in the amount of P985,225.95. One of the issues raised regarding the claim was the absence of the certificate of availability of funds. It was ruled that the COA takes special notice of the fact that the jobs awarded to the contractor represented services for water connections applied for by MWSS Concessionaires and that the funds used consisted of the payments made by these concessionaires to the agency. Evidently then, the statutory provision requiring a certificate as to availability of funds will not apply to the situation at hand.

Nature: Augmentation of funds

Decision/Opinion No.: COA Decision No. 1824 dtd. Dec. 5, 1990

Particulars:

The Civil Service Commission entered into a contract for the purchase of two lots and a building from Spouses Apolinar and Juanita Suarez for the use of CSC Regional Office No. VII in the amount of P3,250,000.00. The same was funded thru augmentation and the funds were taken from savings from Personal Services and Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses for the first quarter of the year. The CSC Auditor questioned the legality of the augmentation since the item of expenditure does not exist in the agency's appropriation. Further, the CSC Auditor contends that the contract has to be approved by the President of the Philippines pursuant to Memorandum Circular No. 1012 dated October 19, 1977 as implemented by COA Circular No. 77-64 dated October 27, 1977. CSC Chairman justified the transaction by invoking Executive Orders Nos. 164 and 301 dated May 5 and July 16, 1987, respectively, and Executive Order No. 380 dated Nov. 27, 1989. The stand of the CSC Auditor was affirmed. Section 18 of the General Provisions of the GAA for CY 1990 which provides that augmentation implies the existence of an item, project, activity or purpose with an appropriation which upon implementation or subsequent evaluation of needed resources is determined to be deficient. In no case, therefore, shall non-existent items, project, activity, purpose or object of expenditures be funded by augmentation from savings or by the use of appropriation x x x. Executive Orders Nos. 164, 301 and 380 are inapplicable, all of which pertains to subjects and conditions other than negotiated contract for purchase of fixed assets.

Nature: Augmentation of Funds

Decision/Opinion No.: COA Decision No. 2220 dtd. Jan. 28, 1992.

Particulars:

This is a request for reconsideration on COA Decision No. 1824 dated Dec. 5, 1990. The CSC Chairman contends that their action in augmenting the Capital Outlay from savings out of Personal Services and Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses is legal and authorized under Section 25(5), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution. In addition, the CSC justified its action under Section 5, Article IX-A, also of the 1987 Constitution granting the Constitutional Commissions fiscal autonomy. Further, the DBM manifested to the CSC that it interposes no objection on the transactions but with admonition that the limitations on the use of savings and augmentation under Section 17 and 19 of the General Appropriations Act must be strictly complied with in the future. As to the issue of lack of presidential approval of the contract, the CSC maintained that prior approval of the contract by the Office of the President is not necessary and invoked Executive Order No. 380 as the applicable law since the contract did not exceed fifty million. The instant request for reconsideration was granted.