The following list identifies students and the agencies they have selected or have been assigned for purposes of their Project for the Semester.  These students should go forward to the second and third stages of the Project.  N.B.  There are some agencies, such as the EPA, that has regulatory authority over a very wide set of policy areas.  Students working on such agencies should consult with the professor about narrowing down their project to a more manageable size.  This discussion should take place quickly and after the student has read a good deal of secondary literature on the agency.  This discussion with the professor should focus on what regulatory area within the agency's jurisdiction the student would like to focus on for the Project.

If there is more than one student working on an agency, students may discuss their agency with one another throughout the semester.

The Due Dates for the next two stages have been posted, so
the students listed below can proceed to complete those.

(N.B.  If your name is misspelled or is incorrect here, please let the professor
know so that he can correct that error on his class roster.)

Name	AGENCY
BARR, Karianna	FTC
BISHOP, Alex	OSHA
BRADTKE, Ryan	FCC
BREMER, Adhley	NHTSA
CANLIGIL, Erim	NTSB
COMBS, Marissa	OSM
COOKE, Diana	OSHA
DUNBAR, Ryan	USFS
EARHART, Lindsay	EPA
ESTES, Adam	FWS
FALLER, Maggie	FCC
FORD, Nicholas	FEC
GILDAR	TSA
GOLAB, Amanda	FAA
GUTKOWSKY, DAVID	FDIC
HAGEMAN, Shane	USDA
HALATA, Marc	NTSB
HAWKINS, Christopher	NHTSA
HOMAN, Matthew	NHTSA
JOSHUA, Jessica	FDA
KELLY, Sean	FDA
LICHTMAN, Brittany	NRC
LONG, Karen	FWS
McCANN	TSA
MILLER, Kenneth	EPA
MUSSELMAN, Scott	EPA
NELSON, Cathleen	NRC
NIX, Kyle	FEC
NYENHUIS-ROUCH, Joy	FDA
RICHARDSON, Ann	FAA
SAYLER, Brian	FDA
SARGENT, Phaedra	NLRB
SCHMIDT, Micahel	FAA
SCHNUR, Brian	USDA
SHAH, Purvi	TSA
SPRINGFIELD, Luke	FDIC
WATTS, Ann	FERC
WISEMAN, Jessica	CPSC
WYATT, Caroline	FCC

Comments on Phase II Papers

There are several items to call your attention to as a result of your Phase II submissions. Pay attention to all of these. In some cases, the comments I have written on your papers indicate that you need help with your writing. For that difficulty you should go to the Writing Lab, and talk to the consultants about word choice, phrasing, sentence structure and the like.

First, everyone should re-read the webpage labeled as Writing for this course. A number of students failed to remember what they read there and so made mistakes that should not be made when you write. People who commit these kinds of errors from this point forward in the course will not get their submissions evaluated. Writing is a very challenging intellectual process. Students, generally, need to devote more time and effort (concentration) to writing what they are thinking.

Second, "secondary literature," which was suggested for the completion of Phase II, does not mean using webpages on the internet. Webpages, particularly those from agencies, might provide help, but they are not valid sources for statements. These are not secondary sources! It meant scholarly journal articles, usually published in law reviews. These materials will provide you with useable and citable background. Students should never, never, never use wickipedia for anything in connection with this project or anything else in this course.

In general, many students failed to put page numbers of their submissions.

If students wish to discuss their Phase II paper they are welcome to come by during office hours. They must re-read their paper completely and understand the comments that were written on the margins and at the end of the paper, before coming into to discuss Phase II.

There are several different short-hand terms or phrases that I used in working through your papers:

* indicates there should be a citation at that point, to support the statement you made in the text. Usually that citation should be to a statutory provision that supports the text statement.

W/C refers to Word Choice and indicates that the marked word or words on the line are not good words to convey the point you are trying to make.

AWK means the underlined or marked phrase is awkward. UGH means it is very awkward.

A question mark means that the indicated statement has no clear meaning.

The papers are evaluated in terms of pluses (+).  They range from no pluses to three pluses (which is the best grade).  A + indicates the paper contained some serious deficiencies but also contained some elements that were essential to covering the topic.  Two (++) indicate the paper was satisfactory despite some problems or errors.  Three (+++) indicates the paper is sound, although it still might not be perfect.  No pluses indicate there was something wrong with the submission that prevented an evaluation, e.g., the paper was submitted late or has a fundamental or essential flaw in it..

There are several points I would like to emphasize at this stage of the Project.

1. Some people have still not learned and do not follow the writing directions contained in the writing document that is on this website.  From this point forward, failure to comply with those will mean the paper you submit will not be evaluated or given credit.

2. Some students have decided that late papers are all right.  The syllabus clearly indicates that late papers will not be graded or considered.  Do not miss deadlines.  If you cannot make it to class on the day and at the time the paper is due, then submit it beforehand.  If you fail to submit two of the phase papers on time, then it will be presumed that you have dropped the course.  (That is, you will not longer be considered as an enrolled student!)

3. Some students seem to think that internet research for this project is both satisfactory and comprehensive.  That kind of research is inadequate!  Students must consult academic (scholarly) journals. While this may involve electronic searches, the results will be references (citations) to scholarly journals, NOT websites.