text:
This report presents further results based on the longitudinal findings from Wave One and Two of the Life Opportunities Survey (LOS). Initial findings were published in the Part I Report.
The Life Opportunities Survey (LOS) is a large-scale longitudinal survey1 of disability in Great Britain and it is the first major national social survey which explores disability in terms of the barriers to participation that people experience. Prior to the development of the LOS, the last major survey on disability conducted in Great Britain had been the Family Resources Survey disability follow-up in 1996/97, and before that was the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OPCS) national surveys of disability carried out during 1985-88. In 2005, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) carried out a feasibility study2 which recommended a new survey dedicated to meet the evidence needs of the policy for disabled people in Great Britain. Subsequently, the Office for Disability Issues (ODI) (part of the DWP) commissioned the Office for National Statistics (ONS) to develop the LOS.
The survey is wholly funded by the DWP and is carried out by the ONS. Each wave of the survey spans two years and respondents in Wave Two have been followed up approximately one year after their initial interview. Wave One of the LOS took place between June 2009 and March 2011; Wave Two began in June 2010 and finished in March 2012.
According to the social model, disability is viewed as the disadvantage or restriction of activity and participation caused by aspects of society which take little or no account of the needs of people with impairment. Therefore, in line with the social model, the LOS assesses the level of participation of people with impairment and the barriers to participation they face.
Impairments relate to the loss of physiological and psychological functions of the body such as loss of sight, hearing, mobility or learning capacity and should be distinguished from medical conditions or loss of bodily structure. For example, glaucoma is a medical condition whereas loss of vision is the impairment it causes. Activity limitations are restrictions an individual may have in executing physical or mental tasks or actions as a result of their impairment, for example, being unable to read newsprint at arm's length without glasses or other aids and adaptations.
The LOS collects self-reported data on impairment; this is dependent upon the respondent's perception of the limitations and severity of the impairment.
In this report, an adult is defined as having an impairment if they indicated that:
they experience either moderate, severe or complete difficulty within at least one area of physical or mental functioning, and
certain activities are limited in any way as a result. 'Activities' refer to different areas of physical or mental functioning, such as walking, climbing stairs or reading a newspaper.
The LOS collects information about all impairments that a respondent may have (it is possible for a respondent to report more than one impairment) and respondents are asked to self-classify their impairment according to a list of 14 impairment types (sight, hearing, speaking, mobility, dexterity, long-term pain, chronic health condition, breathing, learning, intellectual impairment, behavioural, memory, mental health condition, and 'other'). At Waves One and Two of the survey respondents were not asked to specify the underlying condition for each impairment type, however respondents who reported a particular impairment were asked the level and frequency of the limitation caused by the impairment. Questions about long-term health conditions were also included.
This method of classifying impairment status is compatible with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) developed by the World Health Organisation (WHO).
The survey also collects information on:
participation in different life areas,
the barriers that people face to participating in these life areas, and
how levels of participation and barriers to participation change over time.
Respondents are asked questions on a broad range of topics including employment, education and training, transport, leisure, social and cultural activities, the accessibility of buildings and use of public services. They are also asked questions about social care, experiences of discrimination and crime and the financial situation of the household.
The LOS asks questions about people's experience of barriers in the following eight life areas:
education and training,
economic life (the household's ability to make ends meet),
leisure activities,
accessibility in the home,
accessibility outside the home, and
social contact.
An adult has a participation restriction if they experience at least one barrier to taking part in at least one of the eight life areas.
Examples of barriers include: discrimination, the attitudes of other people, inaccessible buildings, public transport and information, lack of money, not having anyone to meet or speak to, as well as lack of support, equipment and adjustments.
Further information on the development of the survey, including details on the consultation with a reference group of disabled people and qualitative testing of the survey, can be found in the Wave One Interim Report3.
A survey where respondents are regularly re-interviewed after a set interval (e.g. one year).
Purdon et al (2005) Meeting DWP's long-term information needs on disability: A feasibility study.
The following section of the report contains a brief summary of how respondents are followed up from Wave One to Wave Two, and how they are classified into groups for the purpose of longitudinal analysis.
Each respondent's impairment status at Wave One was used to assign them to one of three different groups which determined how they were followed up at Wave Two:
This group included all adults who reported at least one impairment at Wave One (29%1). These adults, as well as all adult members of their households, were interviewed in person at Wave Two.
Of the 71% of adults who did not report having an impairment at Wave One, a subset was selected to form a 'control' group. The adults in this group were chosen to provide a comparison group that is similar to the adults with at least one impairment on several key characteristics associated with impairment – sex, age, region of residence, and the urban/rural classification of residence. The size of the control group was designed to be half that of the group of adults with at least one impairment, that is for the Wave Two sample there were two adults with impairment for every one person in the control group. All of the adults in the control group, as well as all adult members of their households, were interviewed in person at Wave Two.
All of the remaining adults who did not have an impairment at Wave One and who were not selected for the control group were assigned to the 'onset screening group'. These adults were not interviewed in person at Wave Two, unless they or an adult member of their household had acquired an impairment between Wave One and Wave Two. A brief telephone interview was conducted with the onset-screening group between Wave One and Wave Two in order to establish if anyone in their household had acquired an impairment.
For more information on the composition of the three follow-up groups, see the Wave Two Interim Technical Report2.
Although sub-sampling to identify adults for follow up at Wave Two was carried out at the individual level, interviews were conducted at the household level to simplify fieldwork procedures. Therefore, household members living with a respondent selected for follow up at Wave Two were also given a face to face interview. To utilise all the data collected and to make the control group represent the population of people who are not impaired, the co-residents were included in the control group for analysis purposes. This group is referred to as 'adults without impairment at both waves' in this report, and comprises of all adults who:
were chosen to be in the 'control' group and did not have an impairment at Wave Two,
did not have an impairment at Wave One and Wave Two but were living in the same household as an adult chosen to be in the 'control' group, or
did not have an impairment at Wave One and Wave Two but were living in the same household as an adult who had at least one impairment at Wave One, or in the same household as an adult who was identified as onset-acquired from the screener exercise.
For more information on the development of the use of the 'control' group, see Annex 1 (136.9 Kb Pdf) which provides a summary of the development of the Wave Two weights.
Diagram 1 shows how adults have been classified for the longitudinal analysis. The classification takes into account impairment status at both Wave One and Wave Two. Figure 1 also illustrates how adults who did not report any impairment at either Wave One or Wave Two flow through the survey.
The following four groups are featured in the longitudinal analyses of this report:
adults who had at least one impairment at Wave One and at Wave Two are 'adults with impairment at both waves',
adults who had at least one impairment at Wave One but no impairments at Wave Two are 'offset adults',
adults who did not have any impairment at Wave One but had at least one impairment at Wave Two are 'onset-acquired adults', and
adults who did not have any impairment at Wave One or at Wave Two are 'adults without impairment at both waves'.
The main focus of this report is to explore how adults are restricted in taking part in different areas of their life and the specific barriers they encounter. The data analysed for the report came from respondents who were interviewed in both Wave One and Wave Two of the LOS and focuses on the longitudinal aspect of the data. Chapter 2 explores whether adults1 are restricted in each of the eight LOS life areas. Chapters 3 to 5 describe specific barriers reported for the life areas of work, education and training, and transport for adults of working age, respectively2. Change in adults' experience of participation restriction and barriers between Wave One and Wave Two is considered. Finally, Chapter 6 gives a summary of the general findings of the report.
As identified above, analysis of barriers focuses on three of the eight LOS life areas- work, education and training, and transport. The topics were chosen to focus on the policy priority to understand more about barriers adults experience to work, and topics related to work. Therefore the analysis in Chapters 3 to 5 focuses on adults of working age (aged 16 to 64).
The data have been weighted to provide estimates for the general population (see Annex 1 (136.9 Kb Pdf) which provides a summary of the development of the Wave Two weights).
Throughout the report comparisons are made between the four groups of adults as described in section 1.2 - adults with impairment at both waves, offset adults, onset-acquired adults, and adults without impairment at both waves. The four groups reflect the diversity of impairment status, in that impairment status may be stable, or may change over time. A person may have impairments at both waves or no impairment at both waves, or they may no longer have impairments or they may acquire an impairment at Wave Two.
An adult has a participation restriction in a life area if they experience at least one barrier in that area. For example, in education and training, respondents were asked if they had access to all the learning opportunities that they wanted3. If they answered 'no', they were then asked to specify the barrier(s) experienced. For education and training, these included:
'financial reasons (lack of money/can't afford to)',
'too busy/not enough time',
'lack of information',
'no learning opportunities available', and
'a health condition, illness or impairment'.
For another life area, the barriers reported may be different. For example, 'lack of job opportunities' is a barrier applicable to work, whereas 'difficulty getting to stop or station' is a barrier applicable to the use of public transport such as local buses and long distance trains.
The barriers reported by adults may change over time. For each life area it is possible to see if a particular barrier was:
reported at both waves,
reported at Wave One only,
reported at Wave Two only, or
not reported at either wave.
The analysis of barriers in Chapters 3 to 5 includes working age adults, who experienced a participation restriction to the specific life area being analysed at any point in the survey. For these adults the types of barriers that were reported at both waves or at either wave (groups i, ii, and iii above) will be examined by group.
Analysis of barriers in Chapters 3 to 5 is presented in tables showing the top four barriers that were reported by each group; broken down by whether the specific barriers were reported at both waves or at one wave of the survey4. The analysis has been approached in this way in order to explore the types of barriers that are reported at both waves (i.e. those that are persistent), compared to those that are reported at one wave only (i.e. those that are transient).
The top four barriers form the focus of our analysis given the small number of respondents selecting other barrier types. The full range of barrier types reported in the life areas of work, education and training, and transport, can be seen in the reference tables provided.
The commentary provides descriptive comparisons of the top four barriers, drawing high level conclusions about the relationships between impairment status, participation restriction, and how this changes over time. Direct comparisons are not made of the percentage of adults experiencing specific types of barriers. This approach was taken because of the small sample sizes that result when splitting the dataset into the subsets as described above (i.e. longitudinal analysis group, and barriers experienced across waves of the survey within the three topic areas).
In the life area of work, LOS respondents were also asked to report 'enablers' - measures that helped them at work, or would help them to be able to work. Chapter 3 includes the types of enablers that were reported by employed and economically inactive adults for each of the longitudinal analysis groups. Due to insufficient sample size, it is not possible to analyse adults who were unemployed at both waves5.
Within the LOS questionnaire employed adults were asked to select from a list of enablers, anything that helped them at work. Enablers included 'Modified hours or days or reduced hours', 'modified duties', and 'equipment to help with a health condition or disability'6. From the same list, economically inactive adults were asked if they needed any of the enablers to be able to work.
All adults aged 16 and over are included in the analysis of participation restriction.
Adults aged 16 to 64 are included in the barriers analysis.
LOS questionnaire questions 126 and 127.
The rankings are calculated based on the percentage of adults who reported each particular barrier at both waves, at Wave One only, or at Wave Two only, out of those adults from that particular group who had a participation restriction at either or both waves. For barrier tables 'other reasons' and suppressed values have been excluded from the ranking.
Chapter 2 provides some details on the effect of change in economic activity status on barriers reported.
Question 143 which was administered to employed adults, and question 167 for economically inactive adults in the LOS questionnaire.
The results from the longitudinal analysis of the LOS will be used to inform a new understanding of the dynamic nature of the disabled population and of the barriers faced by people with impairment. As identified in external research, it is important to understand more about the dynamic nature of disability and the barriers people with impairments face1, this will be used to inform policy development in particular on the support people need during onset of impairment.
As well as looking at barriers, wave 3 of the LOS will also collect information on the key enablers to removing barriers. This will inform the development of the approach the Government will take in helping disabled people to fulfil their potential and have the opportunity to play a full role in society.
The LOS Wave Three questionnaire will include questions designed to collect information about onset and offset of impairment. In particular additional questions will be asked to provide understanding of any enablers that may have resulted in the removal of barriers to participation in particular life areas. It is hoped the additional information will also allow further understanding of survey error, in particular the extent of mis-reporting of changes in experience of participation restriction.
Detailed definitions of the terms and categories used in this report are provided in the Glossary at the end of the report.
All estimates presented in the tables and charts have been analysed using longitudinal weights so that they have been adjusted for non-response, differential sampling probabilities of selection at Wave One, and loss to follow-up at Wave Two (more information on weighting can be found in Annex 1 (136.9 Kb Pdf) ).
Percentages reported throughout the document have been calculated using population estimates rounded to integers. When calculating percentages, the values of residual categories such as 'no answer' or 'don't know' have been excluded from the denominator.
The response rate for LOS Wave Two can be calculated at both household and individual level. The LOS Wave Two achieved a household level response rate of 77%. In this case responding households were those in which information was collected in person or by proxy for all adults. The survey achieved an individual response rate of 74%, among adults who were eligible for a face-to-face interview.
For longitudinal surveys, the sample is subject to attrition moving from one wave to the next. For the LOS, a subset of the original sample at Wave One were not contactable, did not respond, or refused further participation at Wave Two. More information on sample attrition and the household and individual response rates can be found in Annex 3 of the Part I report (136.9 Kb Pdf) .
In Chapter 2, unless otherwise stated, changes and differences mentioned in the text have been found to be statistically significant at the 95% confidence level.
The analysis of the types of barriers adults experienced (presented in Chapters 3 to 5) are presented as a qualitative description comparing the top four barriers. Given direct comparisons of the percentage of adults experiencing specific types of barriers are not made, no significance testing has been carried out on the findings reported in these chapters.
LOS is a longitudinal survey that has been designed to follow respondents over time to provide an insight and understanding into the transient nature of impairment. A key component of the survey design is the ability to compare the experience of barriers to participation between people with impairment and those without impairment over time to assess the equality in access in different life areas. The formation, at Wave Two, of a control group from within the respondents who did not have any impairments at Wave One, will allow experiences to be compared between the two groups over time.
As the first longitudinal survey of its kind, the data collected provides a unique and rich source of data for use by analysts. Both to understanding more about the transitions into and out of impairment, as well as different types and severity of impairment experienced by adults in Great Britain.
Survey design. The LOS uses an unclustered sample designed to produce efficient estimates for the sample size and Great Britain. The unclustered sample allows greater precision to be achieved in LOS outputs because it helps to make the sample more representative of all groups in society1.
The size of the Wave One sample was sufficient to accommodate for attrition over time. As a result, at Wave Two, the sample remains of a sufficient size to allow for comparisons and analysis to be conducted among subgroups of the sample.
Potential under or over reporting of impairment. The LOS collects self-reported impairment data which is dependent upon the respondent's perception of the limitations and severity of the impairment at the time of the interview. A self-reporting measure of this kind is prone to both over and under reporting as the perception of the existence and effect of impairment is dependent upon each respondent's own personal opinion on the day they are interviewed.
One consequence of this is that respondent's perception of the impairment may differ over time causing transitions to be recorded that may or may not be real. For example, the LOS definition of impairment is dependent upon the respondent reporting more than 'mild' difficulty. If at Wave One they report 'moderate' difficulty they will be classed as having an impairment according to the LOS definition. However, if at Wave Two we assume that there has been no change in the impairment and the respondent reports 'mild' difficulty, LOS will no longer class them as having an impairment. Using this example, the respondent will be treated as having offset from impairment at Wave Two.
Cross-sectional weights are not available on the LOS Wave Two dataset and therefore estimates of impairment prevalence cannot be calculated. Overall estimates of disability prevalence are available from the Family Resources Survey2.
The LOS is a sample survey and so is subject to weaknesses which also exist for other surveys, including:
Non-sampling error. Estimates from all sample surveys, including those derived from the LOS data, will contain a degree of uncertainty due to non-sampling and sampling error. Non-sampling error generally arises from errors in the collection, measurement and processing of the data3. To minimise non-sampling error the LOS questionnaire was administered using computer assisted interviewing (CAI), which ensured that the questionnaire routing was followed correctly during the interview and inconsistencies and potential collection errors were able to be queried, and where appropriate, corrected during the interview4. Again, to minimise non-sampling error, as a result of errors arising from data collection, all ONS interviewers received both generic interviewer training and specific LOS training prior to working on the LOS. The LOS Wave One Technical Report provides further information about the data collection and processing of the data5.
Sampling error. This relates to the fact that the sample chosen is only one of a large number of samples which could have been chosen. It follows then that any estimate derived from the sample is only one of a large number of estimates which could have been made. For users of survey data, the precision of the estimate is of interest, that is, how much the estimate would vary when different samples are drawn6. In general, the larger the sample size from which the estimate is derived, the more precise, or robust, is the estimate.
Non-response and missing information. The information from a household which co-operates in the survey may be incomplete. This can be due to one of the following reasons: i) a partial refusal (e.g. to income); ii) because information was collected by proxy, therefore certain questions were omitted from the interview; or iii) a particular item was missed because of a lack of understanding or an error.
Survey coverage. The LOS Wave One sample was designed to cover private households in Great Britain. Therefore individuals in care or retirement homes, for example, will not be included. This means that figures relating to the severely disabled and the most elderly individuals may not be representative of the Great Britain population, as many will have moved into homes where they can receive more frequent help.
The survey at Wave Two follows individuals, and their households, and remains a private household survey. This means that any respondents who have moved into institutions (care or retirement homes, prison, etc) between Waves One and Two were not followed at Wave Two and were recorded as not eligible to participate in the survey.
The LOS Wave Two set sample comprised only of households of individuals who had participated at Wave One and did not include any new households. This approach does not allow the sample to be refreshed to include any new population sub-groups that may have entered the country since the sample was drawn for Wave One. However, any adult or child who had entered a LOS household since the Wave One interview are included as new survey entrants at Wave Two.
Survey bias. Although work has been undertaken to try to ensure that the figures that have been collected are valid and that adjustments are made for attrition, survey bias may still remain. This may be partly due to misreporting of certain data items and sampling error, but also may reflect non-response biases not controlled for in the weighting factors. Efforts are continually being made to minimise these problems, for example through greater reliance on documentary evidence at the interview and maintaining response rates.
LOS Wave One Technical Report 2009/11 p.5 Sampling Methodology
Information on non-sampling errors (p.200)
Wave One Technical Report 2009-11 (2.54 Mb Pdf) (p.13)
The precision of the estimate can be gauged by its confidence interval – the range of values within which the population parameter is estimated to lie. The narrower the interval, the more precise is the estimate.
A summary of this report is available in alternative formats such as Large Print, Braille, Audio or Easy Read. The Easy Read version (0.99 Mb Pdf) is available via the ONS website. Large Print and Braille copies are available from the ONS LOS team. The Audio version is available via the DWP website1. Contact the LOS team by email firstname.lastname@example.com or by telephoning +44 (0) 1633 455296.
The LOS Wave Two datasets will be made publicly available in 2014, via the UK Data Archive2.
Helen Tam
Joanna Bulman
Claire Vafidis
Daniel Shiloh
Life Opportunities Survey Team
Buffy Matthews
Kimberly Lloyd
Field Team and Interviewers
Methodology Division
Karl Ashworth
Andy Fallows
Sangeetha Gallagher
Chris Daffin
Colleagues at the Department for Work and Pensions, in particular:
Joanna Littlechild
Riaz Ali
Roger Morgan
Row, column or table percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.
All reported sample sizes are rounded independently to the nearest ten. For this reason, sample sizes for totals may not equal the sum of sample sizes for components.
.. Figure suppressed due to small cell count.
n/a Not applicable.
0 Less than 0.5%, including none.
[] Figures should be used with extra caution because they are based on fewer than 30 reporting individuals.
All tables contain figures based on sample estimates that have been weighted so that they apply to the overall population. This involves the use of a set of adjustment (or grossing) factors that attempt to correct for differential attrition between Wave One and Wave Two. The unweighted sample counts, shown in the tables as 'sample size=100%', therefore can help users to judge the robustness of the information (the larger the sample size the more robust the relevant estimate). Note that the unweighted sample counts have been rounded to the nearest 10. All figures in this report have been rounded independently. Therefore, the sum of component items will not necessarily equal the totals shown.
Households who did not co-operate at both Wave One and Wave Two are omitted from all analyses. Those who omitted whole sections because they were partial refusals or interviewed by proxy are not included in the analyses of that section. The 'no answers' arising from omission of particular items have been excluded from the base numbers shown in the tables and from the bases used when calculating percentages.
Missing answers are excluded from the tables and in some cases this is reflected in the sample bases, i.e. these numbers vary between tables. For this reason, the weighted bases are excluded from tables as they are not recommended as a source for population estimates. Recommended data sources for population estimates for most socio-demographic groups are: ONS mid-year estimates, the Labour Force Survey, or Housing Statistics from the Department for Communities and Local Government.
Details of the policy governing the release of new data are available by visiting www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/assessment/code-of-practice/index.html or from the Media Relations Office email: firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
L'Angolo del Poeta is one of the smaller Bergamo hotels. Milan-Bergamo Airport is 3.8 km (2.4 miles) away.
A smoking area is one of the common areas in L'Angolo del Poeta. Useful services for your stay are a dry cleaning/laundry service, a late check-out option and an express check-in/out service. You are allowed to be accompained by your pet in this hotel. There are 10 rooms to choose from. This accommodation is adjusted for access with a wheelchair. Getting around is simple, as you can choose to use a paid airport shuttle bus, a pick-up service from the train station or a paid area shuttle bus. If you come here by car you can benefit from the availability of paid self service parking at limited hours.
The weather in Bergamo can be uncomfortable, but air conditioning in the rooms make sure you can set the temperature how you like for a good sleep at L'Angolo del Poeta. The state of the bathroom is a factor on which many travelers base their choice for their stay. The bathrooms here come with a shower/bath combination. Booking a room here ensures you can utilise a coffee/tea maker.
Show reviews
|From 14:00 Check-out: Until 12:00
|Free wired Internet, Computer Station, Wired Internet
|Paid Parking (Self-service), Parking Nearby
|Airport shuttle:
|Airport Transportation (surcharge), Train station pickup service, Paid Area Shuttle Service
|Pet policy:
|Pets allowed
|General facilities:
|Extra common areas:
|Note: It is the responsibility of the hotel chain and/or the individual property to ensure the accuracy of the photos displayed. We are not responsible for any inaccuracies in the photos.
Please provide this reference number to our customer service center representative on request, so we can help you better

subset: commoncrawl


text:
SAP Transportation Management is one of the leading solutions in the world helping:
These and many other industries are currently served by the advanced SAP Transportation Management capabilities. When combined with SAP Extended Warehouse Management solution, advanced analytics and core Logistics Execution capabilities, our consultants can help you get there by delivering complete, multi-modal logistics solutions.
© 2014 SAP Certified Professionals and IT Staffing Services. All rights reserved.


text:
Do you know what it costs for Signal Hill funeral planning or cremation? Get FREE no-obligation funeral planning and pricing information from a local representative.
Signal Hill Funeral Homes
There is currently 1 funeral home listing for the city of Signal Hill, California.
Douglass Family Mortuary Located 10 miles from Signal Hill
Welcome to Douglass Family Mortuary in Lynwood, California. With over 80 years and three generations of funeral service experience, our commitment to service and value is paramount. We are proud of our heritage and value the honored traditions of...
Green Hills Mortuary and Memorial Chapel Located 9 miles from Signal Hill
Green Hills Mortuary is an innovative, full service mortuary located within the serene grounds of Green Hills Memorial Park in Rancho Palos Verdes, California. The grounds sit on the Palos Verdes Peninsula and overlook the beautiful Pacific...
Risher Mortuary Located 15 miles from Signal Hill
Since 1959 the Risher Family has been living and serving families in Montebello and Downey areas with warmth and understanding in their time of need. For two generations we have been committed to providing our friends and neighbors with...
McKenzie Cremation and Burial
2870 Orange Ave Send flowers
Signal Hill, CA 90806
Facts about Signal Hill, CaliforniaSignal Hill is a small city (2.2 mi², 5.8 km²) in Los Angeles County, California Angeles County, California that is an enclave (completely surrounded by the city of Long Beach, California Beach). As of 2005, the city population was 10,951. The city was Municipal corporation on April 22, 1924, roughly three years after oil was discovered on Signal Hill.
Signal Hill Obituaries
It was reported by Des Moines Register on April 30th, 2014 that Gary R Hough died in Iowa. Hough was 60 years old and was born in Signal Hill, CA. Send flowers to share your condolences and honor Gary R's life.
It was reported by Orange County Register on October 25th, 2013 that Kathy Clark-Hansen died in Signal Hill, California. Clark-Hansen was 55 years old. Send flowers to share your condolences and honor Kathy's life.
It was reported by South Bay Daily Breeze on September 9th, 2013 that Chiyoko Hora (Yamada) died in Signal Hill, California. Ms. Hora was 97 years old. Send flowers to share your condolences and honor Chiyoko's life.
It was reported by Long Beach Press-Telegram on July 13th, 2012 that Lou Ingebretsen died in Signal Hill, California. Ingebretsen was 77 years old. Send flowers to share your condolences and honor Lou's life.
It was reported by Long Beach Press-Telegram on April 7th, 2012 that Herbert Pond died in Signal Hill, California. Pond was 91 years old. Send flowers to share your condolences and honor Herbert's life.
Signal Hill Funeral Home News
State trooper remembered as family man
Condolence calls from law enforcement agencies as far away as Florida and California have come in to the patrol, OHP Lt. George Brown said. Numerous area agencies have also offered their honor guards for the funeral ... whether a signal is warranted.
Funeral Homes in Signal Hill CA California - Best Funeral Homes ...
Here are the results for funeral homes in Signal Hill California. You can find some of the best funeral homes businesses serving Signal Hill. We also have some funeral homes reviews ...
SIGNAL HILL CA Funeral Homes
Funeral Homes in SIGNAL HILL CA ... Funeral Home Directory A Comprehensive Directory of Addresses, Phone Numbers, Maps and Area Information for
Funeral Homes in Signal Hill, CA
Compare Funeral Homes in Signal Hill, California to find the lowest cost provider and save money. We can help you find a service provider in Signal Hill that meets your individual ...
Signal Hill Funeral Directors | Funeral Directors in Signal Hill ...
Ambulances & Hearses; Burial Vaults; Caskets; Cemeteries; Cemetery Equipment & Supplies; Craft Dealers & Galleries; Cremation Urns; Crematories; Embalmers; Funeral Directors
Signal Hill Florist, Signal Hill, CA 90755
We are a full service flower shop offering not just locally grown flowers but also flowers shipped overnight from all over the world. We know flowers! ...
Funerals in Signal Hill, CA on Yahoo! Local
Funerals in Signal Hill, CA on Yahoo! Local Get Ratings & Reviews on Funerals with Photos, Maps, Driving Directions and more.
http://local.yahoo.com/results?stx=Funerals&csz=Signal Hill, CA
funerals in Signal Hill, CA on Yahoo! Local
funerals in Signal Hill, CA on Yahoo! Local Get Ratings & Reviews on funerals with Photos, Maps, Driving Directions and more.
http://local.yahoo.com/results?csz=Signal Hill CA&stx=funerals
Send flowers to Mckenzie in Signal Hill California (CA) 2870 ...
We deliver to these funeral homes in SIGNAL HILL. Save $5.00 on fresh flowers to Mckenzie ... See more funeral and sympathy flower selections, save $5.00 with coupon code ' ...
Los Angeles, CA Funerals Personal Services on Citysearch
Citysearch helps you find Funerals Personal Services in Los Angeles, CA, California. Check out our Editors' Picks, user reviews, maps and directions to find the ...


text:
Savage Arms Magazine Follower Assembly 30-06 Length Long Action
Product #: 271627 Savage Arms #: 104804
Product Information
This replacement part is a factory original from Savage Arms. Factory replacement parts are manufactured to the exact same specifications and tolerances and use the same manufacturing materials as the original parts which guarantees excellent fit and reliable operation.
Assembly includes magazine follower and magazine spring.
Assembly includes magazine follower and magazine spring.
Delivery Information
Shipping Weight: 0.030 PoundsXThe total weight of the product, including the product's packaging as it sits on our shelf. Since some products ship directly from the Manufacturer, their weight may be unavailable. Because of variations in the manufacturing process, similar products may have differing weights. Unless the product is designated as "Ships Alone", Shipping Weight does not include the shipping box or packing materials associated with your order.
Ships Alone: NoXProduct ships from MidwayUSA, separate from any other products on your order due to its size. Products that are Shipped Alone incur separate "Per Order" and "Per Pound" shipping charges.
DOT-Regulated: NoXProduct is regulated by the US Department of Transportation (DOT) and cannot be shipped via USPS or air shipping methods. DOT-Regulated products must ship UPS Ground.
Carrier Restrictions: NoXProduct is restricted by shipping carriers and cannot be shipped to certain locations or via certain shipping methods.
HazMat Product: NoXAdditional shipping charge for HazMat products. Carriers charge extra to ship packages with products they consider hazardous, such as reloading powder and primers.
Know someone who may like this? Email this Page to a Friend
Customer Reviews
The statements and opinions expressed within Customer Reviews reflect each author's personal perspective and do not imply endorsement by MidwayUSA, its Employees or any other organization. Customers should in no way infer that MidwayUSA has validated review information as safe, accurate or appropriate.
NOTE: Prices, specifications and availability are subject to change without notice.
We reserve the right to correct typographic, photographic and/or descriptive errors.
We reserve the right to correct typographic, photographic and/or descriptive errors.
Suggested Products
Others Bought
- Hogue EZG Recoil Pad Prefit Savage 110 Post '96 Wood Stock... $27.99 Available
- Savage Arms Ejector Spring Savage 110BA... $1.99 Available
- Marlin Magazine Tube Outside Marlin 60SSK, 60SS, 60SB... $23.49 Available
- AR-Stoner Barrel AR-15 300 AAC Blackout Medium Contour 1 in 8"... $219.99 Available
- Marlin Rear Sight Elevator Marlin 25N, 25NC, 25MN, 25MNC,... $4.99 Available
- Marlin Trigger Guard Marlin 60, 60C, 60W... $21.49 Available
- Marlin Takedown Screw Rear Marlin 60, 60BL, 60C, 60CDU, 60CP,... $3.99 Available
- GrovTec Sling Swivel Stud Pack 7/8" Machine Screw with Nut,... $2.29 Available
- Bradley Skirted Shotgun Bead Front Sight .125" Diameter 6-48... $2.99 Available
- Marlin Magazine Tube Inside Complete Marlin 60, 99C, 990... $31.49 Available
- Leupold Ring Wrench... $16.99 Out of Stock, Backorder OK
- Savage Arms Rear Action Screw 5/32 Hex 10, 110 Series Steel... $1.99 Out of Stock, Backorder OK


text:
Why The SEC Is College Football's Dominant Conference
My Conference Can Beat Your Conference: Why the SEC Still Rules College Football, by Paul Finebaum and Gene Wojciechowski (Harper; $27)
Last week, I wrote about a book that detailed the origins of the game of football. The natural corollary to that work? Paul Finebaum's new book about the Southeastern Conference, read »


text:
U.S. Sen. DICK DURBIN, D-Ill., the Springfield resident who is seeking his fourth six-year term in the Senate, would like to reinstate a system that got a bad name — allowing elected officials to use "earmarks" to designate federal transportation projects.
Durbin told reporters in Springfield last week that he has "talked to the Obama administration" about the idea that elected people should have more of a say in seeking projects for their districts and state.
To help pick job-creating projects, he said, "I think members of Congress in both parties as well as senators can make valuable input."
Why did "earmarks" go away?
"It was a tea party reform," Durbin said. "And what they did was take the glue out of a federal transportation bill. That was the glue that held everybody together, Democrats and Republicans, working for a common goal."
He said there were abuses, but they can be policed and eliminated, and there should be "more transparency start to finish."
Durbin's discussion of this came at the Crowne Plaza, when he spoke with reporters following a speech to a Teamsters Local 916 seminar for union members who are professional and technical employees at the Illinois Department of Transportation.
Durbin didn't mention that Democratic President BARACK OBAMA also joined the anti-earmark wave.
"And because the American people deserve to know that special interests aren't larding up legislation with pet projects, both parties in Congress should know this: If a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it," Obama said in his 2011 State of the Union address.
The speech came after the 2010 elections, when Republicans regained control of the U.S. House. Shortly after that election, when House Republicans declared a ban on earmarks, now-Speaker JOHN BOEHNER, R-Ohio, said the ban "shows the American people we are listening and we are dead serious about ending business as usual in Washington."
I asked state Sen. JIM OBERWEIS, R-Sugar Grove, who is the GOP nominee against Durbin for the U.S. Senate in the Nov. 4 election, what he thought of a return to earmarks.
"Career politician Dick Durbin is one of the biggest spenders in Washington," Oberweis said, "so it shouldn't surprise anyone that he wants to bring back earmarks. We'll have plenty of money for important transportation needs once we stop wasting billions of dollars on unnecessary programs and regulations. … There's probably precious little that I agree with our president on, but clearly (earmarks) would be one of those things. … We need to make government smaller and more accountable."
I asked where those cuts should come from, and Oberweis said, "We're working on some of those proposals now."
Page 2 of 3 - In his speech, Durbin said an example of his reason to want to bring back earmarks was when he was at a ceremony earlier this year marking the opening of the Stan Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge between Illinois and Missouri at St. Louis, and realized that the Illinois side, where the river, railroads and highways converge, would be a great place for an intermodal center like the one called CenterPoint at the old Joliet Arsenal site. He said he has discussed the idea with Gov. PAT QUINN.
Asked if earmarks were a mark of clout, Durbin said, "Seniority looks better and better the longer I'm in the Senate, and there are advantages. We didn't end up with the highest share of federal transportation funds in the last transportation bill without some people with seniority and experience stepping up for the state."
There has been some discussion in Republican ranks about bringing back earmarks. In a March 30, 2012, Reuters story, U.S. Rep. LOUIE GOHMERT, R-Tex., was quoted about bringing back earmarks with safeguards.
"I think there's a way that it can be done that we take back the purse strings that the Constitution gives us without just handing sacks of money to the president," Gohmert said in that article.
Meanwhile, Durbin and Oberweis also bickered from afar about the minimum wage. Durbin is in line with Obama, who wants to raise it to more than $10 an hour nationwide. Oberweis recently introduced a proposal in Illinois, where the minimum wage is already $1 higher than the $7.25 federal level, to raise the state level in steps to $10 by 2017, but only for workers 26 and older.
Durbin told reporters that Oberweis-backed change would keep from higher wages younger college students "struggling to pay off … expenses," as well as "single moms" and veterans under 26.
"A multimillionaire like him ought to take a few minutes to get to know folks that are workin' hard, paycheck to paycheck, to survive," Durbin said of Oberweis.
Oberweis said increasing the state's minimum wage for younger workers would make worse the already-high unemployment rates among teens — particularly minority teens.
Oberweis said his son, JOE, now runs Oberweis dairy stores. He said his son has already said that if a proposal in the state Senate to raise the minimum wage to $10.65 by July 1, 2016, were to pass, "We would be closing several marginal stores. And we're not unique. Many other companies would do the same."
Oberweis noted that the Congressional Budget Office has said a federal minimum wage rise to $10.10 would yield loss of about 500,000 jobs.
"And the CBO is certainly not a Republican organization," Oberweis said.
He said Durbin and his "big-government allies" are using the minimum wage as "a distraction" from Democratic "failed economic policies."
Page 3 of 3 - Reverse spin
A touch of inside baseball about this U.S. Senate race: The new spokesman for Oberweis is DAN CURRY of Northbrook, whose experience includes being a press secretary for then-Attorney General JIM RYAN. Curry was also spokesman this year for DOUG TRUAX of Downers Grove, Oberweis' primary opponent.
Shortly before the primary, Oberweis took a trip to Florida to help celebrate his wife's birthday. Curry was the contact person listed on the news release with the headline: "Truax: Oberweis lounging in Florida week of primary shows why he's an awful candidate."
Curry, who is a principal with a public affairs firm called Reverse Spin, said, "Primaries are tough and you play to win. Senator Oberweis won that battle and I'm glad to be able to help him make his case in November — a proven jobs creator versus career politician Dick Durbin."
Said Oberweis: "That's politics, that's the primary, and that's over. Not only that, but Doug (Truax) is going to be involved in our campaign as well. … I think he has a future in the Republican Party and I'm encouraging him to stay involved and come back as a candidate at the time of his choosing."
It was also the week before the election that Curry made some news he could have done without — when a piece of ice fell from a downtown Chicago building and hit him in the head. He was bloodied and taken to a hospital, but luckily, things turned out OK.
"My head appears to be fine, although I will leave that judgment to others," he quipped last week.
Contact Bernard Schoenburg: 788-1540, firstname.lastname@example.com, twitter.com/bschoenburg.


text:
Music Mogul Clive Davis discovered the legendary Whitney Houston at the young age of 20, and helped launch her to fame. So when Whitney tragically died while under the influence at 48, many people blamed her ex-husband, Bobby Brown. Now, Clive reveals what he thinks.
Download the TV Guide app for iPhone, iPad and Android!


text:
Max Haot, CEO and co-founder of Livestream in his New York offices. Livestream
Who are the broadcasters who broadcast the biggest broadcasters in the world? With an estimated $20.7 billion in buying power at this year's National Association of Broadcasters show, it's the New York-based startup, Livestream, that's transmitting the Las Vegas event starting April 6 to April 11. So how does a startup get into this position?
The company's co-founder Max Haot got an early start as an entrepreneur, going back to 1995, way before it was cool to be a teenage tech-geek with a dream.
At age 19 he founded the Internet division of IMG and had 150 people working for him. By 1999 he said the company had invested a "few hundred million" dollars into the division, and within six months he was overseeing 350 people. Now Livestream broadcasts to more than 30 million viewers a month.
"It was like a $10 million a year revenue business within IMG. It wasn't my business, I owned a piece of it but I was really a general manager," Haot told us in an interview about the founding of Livestream, a company that has grown from $133,000 revenue in 2008 to $19 million last year.
The Internet division at IMG ended up selling to Verizon for $20 million before tax, said Haot, from which he made just over $1 million—it was the money he used to found Mogulus, a blogger video company that eventually turned into LiveStream.
But that wasn't always his dream.
"At the beginning of my career," he told Upstart Business Journal, "I wanted to be a TV director. What these guys do when they cut shows and all of that, I wanted to do that for a TV station with millions and millions of viewers."
The epiphany came when Haot realized that bloggers weren't using his product over-and-over again, like he originally imagined, but that event organizers were using it for one-off, large-scale occasions.
Michael earned his BA from Mercer University, along the way excavating a Roman bathhouse with the American School of Archaeology. Plus, he provided security at Oxford University, where he also studied literature and philosophy. He earned his MS from Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism while training for and running in the New York marathon.
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.
Sign up to receive Upstart Business Journal's free daily email newsletter, weekend edition and breaking news alerts.


text:
We are all in the middle of a food fight whether we are aware of it or not. What do you think of the video (and accompanying school curriculum)? What questions arise? What parallels can you draw? What … Continue reading
Category Archives: wordful wednesday
We came through the northern entrance near Gardiner, Montana. At this point we had traveled 888 miles (not including the first leg) from our home to the entrance of one of our country's best ideas: Yellowstone National Park. We had about … Continue reading
Glasses have become the bane of my existence and yet I am truly beholden to them. All three of my children wear glasses. If you have seen some of my previous Wordless Wednesday posts that feature those little rascals, you … Continue reading


text:
Logan • Forget the month of August. These are the dog days for Utah State.
A Western Athletic Conference winner-take-all matchup against Louisiana Tech is a mere three weeks away. Even USU veterans such as Matt Austin acknowledge thinking about the Bulldogs.
At the same time, the Aggies have to take care of Texas-San Antonio on Saturday at the Alamodome and Texas State at home next week. Lose one of those two games, and Louisiana Tech won't matter because Utah State won't be playing for anyone's conference title.
It's all a new — and a little unnerving — for the Aggies. The program is on the edge of its best season in more than three decades.
But as far as USU coach Gary Andersen is concerned, his team still is taking "baby steps," and can't afford to look past anybody. Including the Roadrunners — playing just their second season in FBS after being an FCS program. USU is favored by more than three touchdowns.
"It's definitely a program that we can't or won't overlook," Andersen said. "They've won a lot of football games and are a well-coached team. They compete, they are excited to be playing us, and we're going to have to go in there and play well to get a win."
The matchup has a number of different layers. Texas is a prime recruiting territory for USU, and playing in the Alamodome will be a big deal for players like quarterback Chuckie Keeton, who is from Houston.
UTSA is led by former Miami coach Larry Coker, who led the Hurricanes to the 2001 national championship.
Finally — and maybe most importantly — UTSA has established itself in San Antonio. The Roadrunners are 5-2 this season, including wins over South Alabama and New Mexico State, and are averaging nearly 30,000 fans per game at home — accomplishments well beyond what most first- or second-year FBS programs are able to pull off.
"They have one of the top defenses in our conference, so it will definitely be a challenge for us," Keeton said. "At the same time, we have to worry about us and go out and play our type of football. Hopefully, that outshines their defense."
Offensively, UTSA runs the option, which will be a new twist for the Utah State defense. Instead of blitzing, the Aggies will need to stay in their gaps. Instead of preparing to defend against the pass, USU will employ a lot of schemes to stop the run.
"We are going to need discipline," defensive coordinator Dave Aranda said. "They have a style that we aren't used to, and we have to be ready for that."
Utah State at Texas-San Antonio
P At the Alamodome
Kickoff • Noon
Radio • 97.5 FM. Internet • ESPN3
Series history • First meeting between the schools
About Utah State • Nick Diaz won the WAC special teams player of the week award for his performance against New Mexico State. … Utah State has won seven consecutive conference games. … The Aggies are looking to start a season 7-2 for the first time in 30 years. … USU is facing UTSA for the first time.
About UTSA • The Roadrunners will compete in Conference-USA next season. … UTSA is not bowl-eligible this season. … UTSA won its first five games before losing to Rice. … Larry Coker, the former Miami coach, is a two-time national coach of the year.


text:
West Coast Eagle Chris Masten talks about this Sunday's game against Hawthorne. After both teams coming off a loss, he tells us how he thinks they'll go, how they'll cope with Nic Naitanui out injured and gives an exclusive on Josh and Andy from My Kitchen Rules!
© Copyright 2014 dmgRadio Australia


text:
I'm super pumped about this interview with Connie Williams and Sheila Tidwell from ConnieandSheilaTalk.com. They are serial entrepreneurs (9 business and counting) who went from selling promotional products to being seven figure real estate investors.
Their story is not only inspiring, but also very applicable to anyone thinking about starting their own business. They share their story, their passion and the steps they've taken on their path to success.
Here are some highlights from our CHAT:
- How reading Robert Kiyosaki's book Rich Dad Poor Dad lead them on a path of adventure which changed their career paths and lives in general
- The realization and understanding of the difference between being a business owner and being self employed
- The importance of women stepping out of their comfort zone and trying new things – even if it's in a normally male dominated field [learn the Art of Asking]
- The importance of relationship building and how it can win you business and make you money
- How multiple streams of income can save you now and in the future
- How they turned a crisis into cash by thinking outside the box and finding "non-traditional" funding
- The importance of finding a mentor and "investing" in yourself
- How they started their podcast and the importance it has had on their brand
- How the unsolved murder of Connie's brother Carl lead to her writing the book Thinking Consciously Rocks and finding peace in her life
Connie Williams and Sheila Tidwell began their property investment journey in the fall of 2003 after reading Robert Kiyosaki's book, "Rich Dad, Poor Dad". This led them to attend a 3-day property investment conference in Nashville, where they met many REIN (Real Estate Investors of Nashville) members including Ginny & Greg Pitts. They studied with Ginny & Greg for a few months and then created Peace of Earth, LLC (for rehabs) and later Rare Earth Properties (for rentals). Presently they have 48 rental units in their portfolio and are in partnerships that hold an additional 25 units.
Connie and Sheila have purchased properties many different ways including: auctions, foreclosures, homeowners in distress and REOs. They say they are grateful to God for their success and believe everyone can live their life with passion, here's to finding yours. Think big, dream bigger.
Links Mentioned:
Rich Dad, Poor Dad
Connie and Sheila on Facebook
Connie and Sheila on Twitter (but they don't tweet much, lol)
Live Giant,


text:
AM2+/AM3 help - mobo died
Last response: in Motherboards
Related resources
- Could my AM2 socket MOBO support an AM3 CPU? - Forum
- can i run an am3 cpu on an am2+ mobo - Forum
- AM3 cpu can be in a AM2+ and AM2 MoBo?? - Forum
- AM2}+ or AM3 mobo that supports DDR2 ram - Forum
- What is the performance loss on putting an AM3 CPU on a AM2+ Mobo? - Forum
Related resources
- SolvedMotherBoard died, Need help picking a new one under 60 bucks (AM3+) Forum
- Will any AM2+ or AM3 or AM3+ cpu work with my ASRockXLI -eSATA2 mobo Forum
- Am3 processor am2+ mobo Forum
- AM3 CPU in AM2 Mobo Forum
- AM3 on weird AM2 mobo Forum
- AM3 cpu wont work on AM2 mobo Forum
- AM2+ processor in a socket AM3+ mobo - does it work??? Forum
- What is the performance loss on putting an AM3 CPU on a AM2+ Mobo? Forum
- Am2+ compatible with am3 mobo Forum
- Can an AM2 cpu fit in an AM3 mobo? Forum
- AM3 on AM2+ mobo question Forum
- AM2+ or AM3 mobo with nvidia chipset Forum
- AM3 cpu on AM2 mobo Forum
- WTB : AM2+ / AM3 Mobo Forum
- AM3 CPU in AM2+ Mobo = significant bottleneck or no? Forum
- More resources
Read discussions in other Motherboards categories


text:
FAIRBANKS-Here's a look at the rest of the Interior football schedule.
#4 North Pole hosts West Valley at 7 p.m. tomorrow in a non-conference game.
A big Greatland Conference game between #5 Nikiski and Eielson at Buck Nystrom Field on Saturday starts at 1 p.m.. Both teams are 4-0 in conference and there are number a one seed playoff implications at stake in this one.
Also on Saturday Lathrop travels to Homer for their last regular season road game. Kickoff is set for 3 p.m.


text:
Come to Teance Tea Shop on 4th Street in Berkeley at 7:30 Tuesday night to listen and to tell stories that just might open doors to a better understanding of the world and our place in it.
You're invited to join us at Teance Tea House on 4th Street in Berkeley next Tuesday, July 22, 2014, at 7:30 PM for the next gathering of Tea & Dharma.
Yesterday marked the Summer Solstice, the longest day of the year, and the beginning of the astrological sign Cancer. Tuesday night, June 24th, 2014, at 7:30 PM at Teance Tea Shop on 4th Street in Berkeley, we will convene our long-running Tea & Dharma gathering. Tomorrow's topic will be "Stories and Songs Of the Summertime." Please come with a favorite story to share from your own childhood (or adulthood) that involves the summer time.
When did you last have that "endless summer" feeling,with its infinite innocence and infinite possibilities? Did summer mean family vacations? A birthday (for you Leos and Cancerians and Virgos!) Did it mean family trips to the lake or road trips around the country? Did it mean summer jobs or summer schools? Do you have a memory of lazy days and hazy nights on the dock under the stars or perhaps a ritual of passage that marked a sudden awareness of time passing; a time that marked transition from childhood to maturity?
Ollie the Kookaburra wants to laugh with you! Tuesday night, 7:30 PM, at Teance Tea Shop on 4th Street in Berkeley, we will meet for our next session of Tea and Dharma! Our topic will be "Story-telling: Time Travel To Find Our Way Home." Using music, puppets and photos, we will share stories of our ancestors and their journeys through space to the present moment. Please come to share a story and enjoy some of the world's finest teas. I have some new tales from Australia.
Tonight Only! Mandarin Dharma-talk at the Buddhist Lodge in Singapore!
17-19 Kim Yam Road, Singapore, 23929 (67372630) And it's free!
The topic will be: Buddhism and Western Values. (Asian Buddhists are fascinated to contemplate reasons why a Westerner would commit to a Buddhist life-style.)
Come and listen to music, puppets and stories in Mandarin Chinese!
Tonight (Thursday evening, Singapore time) will be the final lecture of my series on "The Practices and Vows of Samantabhadra Bodhisattva" from the Avatamsaka Sutra. The address is The Buddhist Union Dharma Center, 42 Lowland Road, in Singapore, near the Kovan MRT Station. We begin at 7:30. Please come by if you're in town!


text:
1. The possibility that LNG might play an important role in meeting U.S. energy needs has arisen only recently. As recently as 36 months ago, for example, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) indicated that LNG imports were "not expected to become a major source of U.S. [energy] supply." Annual Energy Outlook 2002 at page 82.
EIA's most recent forecast, however, Annual Energy Outlook 2005, assumes a compound annual growth rate for imports of LNG, beginning in 2008, of 12.2% per year -- more than 5 X the expected growth rate for imported oil. See AEO 2005, Supplemental Table 104.
2. Unlike the global oil industry or the North American natural gas industry, the global LNG market still is at a comparatively early stage in its development. The current size of the global market, for example, is less than 1/5th of the size of the North American market for natural gas. It is designed predominantly to serve just three countries: Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Collectively, these countries account for more than 2/3rd's of the current world market.
Further, the output of most existing LNG projects and all but a small share of the output from the limited number of projects that currently are under construction in various parts of the world already is committed to other purchasers on a long-term basis.
Virtually all of the incremental LNG supplies EIA assumes will be available to the U.S. market in future years, therefore – even as soon as 2008 -- must be obtained from projects that have not yet been built and shipped using specialized tankers that have yet been constructed.
In addition, even though the lead time for building new LNG projects generally is estimated to be at least 4 to 5 years, even meeting EIA's projected deliveries for 2008 will require obtaining substantial production from projects that have not yet even broken ground -- or in some instances, even signed binding commercial agreements or begun to seek financing.
Further, even though the U.S. has become critically dependent upon meeting the import levels assumed in EIA's estimates in order to be able to satisfy the basic energy needs of the U.S. economy, EIA has not identified the specific projects on which its estimates are based – even during the 2008 through 2010 time frame.
Nor has it identified major milestones that must be met for these increased import levels to be achieved.
It also is not attempting to report publicly on a current basis on the status of pending projects.
Instead, as it so often does, it has merely published a set of estimates of total imports and said, in effect "trust us" -- at least until next year, when its estimates presumably might once again be radically revised.
3. Longer term, there still is a great deal of uncertainty regarding how many new LNG projects actually will be constructed during the next decade. Despite the intense interest in LNG, few if any new projects actually started construction anywhere in the world in 2004.
Further, neither EIA nor any other federal or state Agency appears to have ever undertaken any rigorous assessment of how many new projects actually are likely to be built over the next 20 years. No assessment appears to have been made, for example, of whether the host companies are likely to develop a significant percentage of their reserves within a relatively compressed time frame (which many estimates implicitly assume) or instead potentially decide to phase the development of the finite reserves each country controls over a period of several decades (as prudence would appear to dictate) -- in which case it is possible that only a limited number of projects will be initiated in the next few years beyond those already under way and the price of LNG could prove to be significantly higher than EIA assumes.
Instead, EIA appears to have simply accepted at face value broad-brush assertions regarding the potential amount of new LNG production that conceivably might be developed on a world-wide scale in a relatively short period of time assuming that both the host companies and the super-major international oil companies attempt to build new supply projects on an extremely aggressive schedule, without considering whether it is necessarily in their economic best interests to do so (which it almost certainly is not).
(Note, in this regard, that the government of Qatar, one of three countries – along with Iran and Russia – generally considered to have the greatest potential to develop new capacity -- recently announced a moratorium of unspecified length on new projects, at a time when a high percentage of the output from projects already under way in Qatar is committed to other countries. At close to the same time it announced its moratorium, it also abruptly cut by almost 40 % ExxonMobil's expected share of the 2nd train at Qatargas II, which ExxonMobil has been including in its development plans for almost 4 years. This share was awarded instead to the French firm, Total. Neither ExxonMobil nor Total have yet made any public commitment to ship any portion of the output of Qatargas II to the U.S. market, even though it is one of the last projects expected to be built in Qatar which is not subject to the moratorium.)
4. Further, even if a significant number of new projects are successfully completed over the next several years, competition for the output from these projects is likely to be intense.
Like the U.S., much of the world is currently planning to turn increasingly to the use of natural gas for space heating, rather than heating oil and planning to rely on gas-fired generation to meet nearly all of its incremental demand for electricity.
As a result, world-wide demand for natural gas is expected to grow at a rapid rate.
Also like the U.S., however, most major natural-gas consuming countries are not currently expected to be self-sufficient in future years (including countries, such as Great Britain, that currently are meeting all of their own needs).
As a result, the U.S. is likely to face stiff competition for the limited new supplies of LNG that become available on the world market from China, India, the United Kingdom, Spain, France, South Korea, Japan, Mexico and many other countries, further limiting the potential new supplies that are likely to become available to the U.S. market.
5. Despite the overall strength of the U.S. economy, the U.S. could be at a significant disadvantage in competing for these supplies.
We are running the largest trade deficit in U.S. history – and the largest trade deficit of any country in the world. In part as a direct result, the value of the dollar is expected to continue to decline sharply over the next several years.
Further, because of our location, for every current producer other than Trinidad, the amount of time a tanker must travel in order to complete a delivery to the U.S. and therefore the cost of shipping LNG to the U.S. market is significantly greater than for any other potential customer except Mexico. With tankers potentially costing up to $ 250 million each, this is a significant disincentive to sell into the U.S. market.
It also means that, by definition, a U.S. manufacturer using LNG will be at a competitive disadvantage to almost every other manufacturer worldwide, since (due to the shipping cost differential) the cost of LNG delivered to the U.S. market inevitably will be higher than in any other market in the world.
6. In addition, neither EIA nor industry representatives appear to have given adequate consideration to the potential consequences of the supply disruptions that are virtually certain to occur periodically if the U.S. shifts to a strategy in which it will be relying upon supplies from a few large LNG mega-projects potentially located thousands of miles from the U.S. rather than tens of thousands of discrete natural gas wells, even the largest of which accounts for only a tiny fraction of 1 % of total U.S. supply.
In a global LNG market, with supplies being shipped half across the world and the stability of the host government not always a given, periodic interruptions in supply in all likelihood are inevitable.
As the International Energy Agency (IEA) has observed with respect to the global oil market, supply disruptions can arise due to any of a variety of causes, including "accidents, unplanned or unannounced maintenance, technical problems, labor strikes, political unrest, guerilla activity, wars and weather-related supply losses." See IEA Monthly Oil Report for February, 2005 at page 12.
Every one of these factors is potentially just as applicable to a large LNG mega-supply project located half way around the world as it is to the international oil market.
Further, at least some of the expected sources of supply (particularly Nigeria, but also Venezuela and to some degree Statoil in Norway) have been among the most prone to political or labor-related strikes (or in the case of Nigeria, political unrest) of any producers in the world.
If we rely heavily on LNG imports from West Africa or the Middle East, therefore, and the government in a host country is overthrown, a strike temporarily shuts down production or, in the case of a Middle East producer, shipments through the Strait of Hormuz are temporarily blocked, there may be a very real risk that we'll not be able to keep homes warm in the middle of the winter or that the lights will go out in the summer.
Even if shortages never occur, however, from a pricing standpoint, the potential consequences of a supply disruption in the LNG market, even for a short period, could also be severe – even if it involves only a single major LNG project supplying the U.S. market.
This is in part due to differences in the feasibility and cost of storing oil and the cost and feasibility of storing natural gas, the resulting differences in the amount of oil and natural gas that are maintained in storage, and the increased risk of severe price spikes this creates in the U.S. market for natural gas.
Oil, as a liquid, can be stored relatively inexpensively. In part as a result, industry and government have developed huge reserves. Total U.S. reserves of crude oil, for example, including both commercial reserves and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve maintained by the U.S. government, are sufficient to offset a total cut-off of oil from the Middle East for over 12 months.
At least to a significant degree, this reduces the severity of the price shocks that occur when temporary supply disruptions occur -- such as the strikes and guerilla-war related supply interruptions that have occurred frequently in recent years in Nigeria.
By contrast, the cost of storing natural gas is far greater – either as a gas or as LNG.
As a result, just barely enough storage capacity exists in the U.S. to meet expected peak period needs during the winter.
While the natural gas industry in the U.S. is seldom described in this way, because of the high costs associated with natural gas storage (both to build storage facilities and to keep them stocked) the natural gas market in the U.S. is designed to operate with essentially zero spare capacity over the course of any given annual 12-month cycle.
Natural gas is injected into storage during a 7-month injection season. At the end of the injection season (in late October), if the industry has met its targets, a large amount of natural gas will temporarily be contained in underground storage facilities (viz., approximately 3,250 to 3,350 BCf).
This creates the near-universal impression (even within the industry) that the natural gas market always maintains a substantial reserve.
In fact, however, if supply and demand are more or less balanced for the year as a whole and weather over the course of the year matches historical norms, all or virtually all of the natural gas injected into storage during the storage Refill Season is likely to be needed to meet winter needs.
While there still may be a few hundred BCf of natural gas left in storage at the end of the winter heating season, as we saw three winters ago when the amount of natural gas in storage was reduced to 730 BCf, much of that amount is needed simply to maintain operating pressure in the pipelines.
Further, at least some amount always must be held back to guard against the possibility of one more wave of "cold weather."
As a practical matter, therefore, there ordinarily isn't any meaningful amount available as a reserve to protect against a significant interruption of supply.
In the natural gas industry, therefore, there is no natural gas "Strategic Reserve" comparable to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve." Nor is there a "natural gas stockpile" comparable to a coal stockpile.
Instead, largely because it would be prohibitively expensive to construct the required storage facilities and fill them with natural gas held in reserve strictly to protect against disruptions in supply or other emergency use, the industry effectively operates with near-zero reserves over the course of any given 12-month cycle.
As a result, in the natural gas market, even minor swings in expected supply or demand routinely cause significant swings in the market price of natural gas.
We saw vividly last fall, for example, the impact on the market price of natural gas of the temporary loss of approximately 2.2 BCf per day of production from the Gulf of Mexico due to Hurricane Ivan. At its peak, the cash market price for natural gas jumped by as much as 60 % and the price for natural gas futures traded on NYMEX sky-rocketed to as high as $ 10.00 per MMBTU.
No other event affecting the natural gas market in the U.S. has ever caused a temporary loss of supply even close to the magnitude of the loss of production caused by Hurricane Ivan; instead, from a domestic supply standpoint, the temporary loss of production that resulted from Hurricane Ivan was a classic "1 in a 100 year" event.
By contrast, however, the production temporarily lost due to the storm – i.e., at its peak, 2.2 BCf per day -- is the same scale size as each one of the largest LNG supply projects targeting the U.S. market.
The temporary loss of supply from a single LNG project, therefore, potentially could have an impact on the U.S. market similar to the extreme strikes that resulted from Hurricane Ivan.
No one has yet proposed that we create a Strategic Reserve for natural gas – presumably in part because the cost to construct and maintain a storage facility of the requisite size would be many times greater than the cost for constructing a storage facility of comparable size for oil.
Further, if the cost of constructing such a facility and maintaining a reserve adequate to protect against potential temporary interruptions of supplies of LNG were included as a "tax" on the cost of importing LNG, it might make it prohibitively expense to import LNG into the U.S. market.
Absent a reserve or some other form of reliable back-up supply, however, an interruption of deliveries from any one of these projects, for any reason, or the unavailability of one or more U.S. re-gasification facilities for an extended period could expose the U.S. natural gas market to price shocks just as severe as we experienced last fall after Hurricane Ivan struck the Gulf.
In a market which already exceeds 60 BCf a day, even if such an interruption only lasted 2 or 3 months, it could easily add $ 10 billion or more to the costs incurred by U.S. consumers of natural gas each time such a disruption is supplies occurs.
It is not entirely clear, therefore, whether a massive increase in U.S. dependence upon imports of LNG should even be allowed without determining before new import permits are granted who will bear the costs when such supply interruptions occur – as almost certainly periodically will be the case.
7. Finally, a heavily LNG-dependent strategy raises far-reaching issues regarding the potential increased exposure of the U.S. natural gas and electricity markets to frequent and extreme price shocks that might result from increased dependence upon LNG even in instances in which no supply disruption has occurred.
At least to date, these issues do not appear to have been adequately addressed – or, for that matter, even considered – by regulators at either the federal or state level.
This omission in some respects surprising, since the potential problem that arises closely parallels an issue that has become the central focus of much of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC's) efforts to regulate the wholesale power markets – viz., the potential ability of a so called "pivotal supplier" in the market for electric generation to raise prices at will.
In electricity markets, a pivotal supplier is any supplier whose market share exceeds the amount of excess capacity available to serve a particular market.
Because of the long lead time required to add new electric generating capacity, at least in theory, in a de-regulated market, during some hours of the year, a pivotal supplier can raise the market clearing price for electricity in the wholesale market to whatever level it chooses simply by withholding from the market sufficient capacity so that there are not enough other sources of supply available for the local service provider to be able to serve total electricity demand in its service territory without purchasing some or all of the pivotal supplier's remaining output at whatever price the pivotal supplier chooses to demand.
Since the California crisis in 2000, the FERC has devoted a great deal of time and effort to addressing this potential problem – not just as it potentially applied to the 2000 crisis in California, but as a major issue potentially affecting wholesale power markets nationwide.
One of the primary allegations made in connection with the California crisis is that during the height of the crisis, "pivotal generators" in California with "market power" decided to deliberately withhold from the market a portion of the capacity that was available to serve the California market in order to artificially raise the spot market price of electricity. (This allegation has been vigorously disputed by the generators who are alleged to have engaged in this conduct.)
Petitioners in proceedings relating to the California crisis have alleged that deliberate withholding of capacity by pivotal suppliers led to billions of dollars in increased costs for electricity in California alone in a period of just a few months.
Whether or not the specific allegations that have been made in connection with the California crisis are factually true, electricity markets are thought to be particularly vulnerable to this form of price manipulation, since often only a limited number of generators are in a position to serve a particular geographic market – not just in California but in many other parts of the U.S.
While many of the claims relating to the California crisis have been settled, in the electricity context, the FERC has taken the problem of the pivotal supplier very seriously, recognizing that the only solution might be to re-impose price restrictions on pivot suppliers during any portion of any year in which a pivotal supplier might have the ability to exercise market power.
The domestic natural gas industry as it is currently structured, however, generally has been thought to be immune from the problem of the pivotal supplier.
This is largely because there are literally hundreds of producers, no one of whom has more than a small share of total production. In addition, there are a large number of individual wells (currently, over 320,000 in the U.S. and another 40,000 + in Canada), with more than 22,000 new wells added this year in the U.S. alone.
While the largest U.S. natural gas producer (currently BP Amoco) in theory might be able to withhold sufficient production to increase the market clearing price of natural gas slightly for a brief period, in all likelihood it could do so it could only do so by cutting its own production drastically.
As a result, even if a very large producer chose to pursue such a strategy, its own profits almost certainly would decrease (since its market share would be cut significantly) and it would not be likely to profit from pursuing such a strategy.
Further, since the lead time for drilling new on-shore wells in the U.S. is relatively short (i.e., less than a year), the general expectation has been that, even if a large producer chose to engage in such conduct, other producers would quickly move in to fill the gap by increasing the number of new wells that they drilled – increasing their market share and potentially causing the larger company's market share to permanently decline.
As a practical matter, therefore, most economists have concluded that it is difficult to conceive of a circumstance in which a domestic producer of natural gas in the U.S. market as currently structured would have any incentive to attempt to cut-back on its production in order to increase prices in the U.S. market.
Indeed, it is precisely for this reason that de-regulation of wellhead prices originally was thought to be appropriate in the U.S. market and why many believe it has been such a success.
If the U.S. moves to a heavily LNG-dependent strategy, however, as it applies to the natural gas industry, the problem of the "pivotal supplier" would be likely to change radically. Further, this change will occur even assuming – as the author of this paper does – that no LNG supplier ever deliberately withholds a single molecule of supplies from the U.S. market for the specific purpose of raising prices in the U.S. market.
The problem in a nutshell is this:
If EIA's estimates prove to be accurate, beginning as soon as 2008, the total amount of LNG imported into the U.S. -- which already has increased by 419 BCf over the past over the past two years -- will begin to increase at an even more rapid rate.
By 2010, for example, EIA projects that LNG imports will increase from 2004 levels of 649.1 BCf per year (i.e., an average of just over 1.75 BCf/day) to 2.50 TCf per year (or almost 7 BCf/day).
By 2015, this figure is expected to increase to an astounding 4.33 TCf (i.e., almost 12 BCf/day) – at which point it would account for over 15 % of total U.S. supplies of natural gas (more than 5 X the current market share of 2.9 %):
By 2025, this figure would increase to 6.37 TCf (i.e., just under 17.5 BCf/day) – which equates to 21.7 % of expected total U.S. natural gas consumption in that year.
Unlike current North American production, however, this 17.5 BCf/day is not expected to be obtained from hundreds of different suppliers, each of whom is expected to have a relatively small market share.
Instead, it is expected to be obtained from a small number of huge "mega-projects," much of the output will be controlled by a small number of large suppliers. Further:
This combination of circumstances -- none of which assumes any wrongful conduct by any of these companies – potentially poses a unique set of risks to the U.S. market, which to date appear to have been entirely ignored in the public debate regarding LNG.
These risks arise precisely because these companies are legally obligated to – and presumably should and will – act in a manner that serves the best interests of their shareholders, as long as it conforms to applicable laws.
As a result, they presumably will generally sell the output under their control wherever it can fetch the highest price; indeed, in a free market system, that's precisely what we want them to do in order for the market as a whole to function as efficiently as possible (i.e., in this instance, the new "global" market for LNG).
A significant portion of this output could well be sold under long-term contracts. To the extent this occurs, if the contracts are binding and enforceable and lock the supplier into delivering the LNG into the U.S. market on a long-term basis, at least a portion of the output from these projects presumably will be certain to reach the U.S. market (i.e., it will not be subject to being withheld by the supplier, at least without penalties for breach of contract, even though the supplier might otherwise arguably satisfy the conditions necessary to qualify as a "pivotal supplier" with the potential ability to exercise "market power" by withholding needed supplies from the U.S. market).
It is quite possible, however, that even those contracts which lock-in delivery into the U.S. market will not set a fixed priced for the sale. If so, the purchaser may still be vulnerable to steep price increases, if other LNG supplies under the control of the same LNG supplier or any other LNG supplier serving the U.S. market are diverted to another market.
More importantly, however, at least the way the LNG industry currently appears to be evolving, there appears to be a substantial likelihood that that the delivery point for a significant portion of the output from many of the major projects will be left flexible.
Specifically, for a significant portion of the output of each major project, the LNG supplier who signs the initial contract with the producing country (e.g., Royal Dutch Shell, Tractabel, BP, ExxonMobil, etc.), will have discretion as to the market or markets to which that supply will be delivered.
At various points in time, some of that discretion subsequently might be negotiated away by contract, as a result of suppliers making binding contractual commitments of varying durations (e.g., one month, 1 year, 10 years) to specific customers in specific markets.
But some of it may not (i.e., control over the delivery point may be retained for short-term sales).
Further, at least under current law, neither the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission nor any state Public Utility Commission will necessarily have any direct jurisdiction over how shipments of LNG are allocated between countries or priced.
Nor, given the international nature of the LNG business, is it clear that there is any basis by which either FERC or any state PUC even could be given such authority -- unless suppliers voluntarily agree to be regulated by the U.S. government or some not-yet-created international Agency.
To the extent suppliers remain free to re-allocate LNG to different markets on a short-term basis, however – as they presumably will remain free to do – this could greatly magnify the risk of severe price spikes in the natural gas market in the U.S. – price spikes that could quickly spill over into electricity markets as well.
As a result, the $ 125 billion + U.S. natural gas market and the $ 300 billion + electricity market (two of the largest segments of our economy), could become exposed to severe new price risks that have never previously existed in the U.S. market.
This is because, unlike a domestic producer (whose only alternatives are to sell into the U.S. market or not sell its gas at all), to the extent an LNG supplier reserves a portion of its output for short term sales it will not necessarily be required to sell this output into the U.S. market at all.
Instead, if it can fetch a higher price, it presumably can – and will – sell its LNG to a purchaser in China, or India, or Japan or Great Britain or Spain or the Netherlands or anywhere else in the world where it believes it can obtain a higher price than it can obtain in the U.S.
Unlike a domestic producer, therefore, it is not faced with a "Hobson's choice," where if it withholds production from the U.S. market, its profits and revenues potentially will suffer since it has no other way to make a sale.
Instead, in order to maximize its profits, it has every incentive to divert cargoes that might ordinarily have been delivered to the U.S. to any market anywhere in the world in which it can obtain a higher price – and presumably will do just that.
The potential impact that this is likely to have on the volatility of natural gas prices in the U.S. market should not be underestimated.
In a tight U.S. market, there already was evidence this past summer that the ability of Japanese buyers to outbid the U.S. for a small number of LNG cargoes originally expected to be delivered into the U.S. market but ultimately diverted to Japan (including at least one cargo from Trinidad reportedly shipped halfway around the world to satisfy demand this summer in the Japanese market) was sufficient to significantly affect the price of natural gas futures traded on NYMEX – possibly by as much as 50 cents per MMBTU.
Further, even though LNG still accounts for less than 3 % of U.S. supplies, in a recent research report, Goldman Sachs suggests that the need to compete with other countries for spot market cargoes of LNG could become one of the dominant factors driving natural gas prices in the U.S. this coming winter. This in turn potentially could become a powerful factor driving natural gas prices in the U.S. market towards parity with oil at a time when oil prices may be reaching a new all-time high.
If the U.S. continues to pursue a heavily LNG-dependent strategy, in another 5 to 7 years, up to several BCf per day of expected U.S. natural gas supply may be vulnerable to being diverted at any time to any of a number of other major markets around the world.
The sudden shut of nuclear units in Japan, for example, or the rupture of a major natural gas pipeline in Europe, and the subsequent diversion of LNG originally expected to be delivered to the U.S. to those markets, might suddenly reduce the natural gas supply available to the U.S. market not just by a few cargoes but by 3, 4 or even 5 BCf a day – at least unless U.S. purchasers were willing to engage in a bidding war in which they outbid every other purchaser in the world for limited available supplies of LNG.
This in turn could result in unprecedented increases in the spot market price of natural gas in the U.S. – increases that would apply not just to purchasers of LNG, but to every purchaser of natural gas in the U.S. market from any source who is obligated to pay the spot market price for natural gas at the time the event occurs.
The economic consequences of a major diversion of LNG supplies away from the U.S. market, therefore, could be truly staggering – i.e., potentially several times greater than the impact of the loss of production caused by Hurricane Ivan last fall. Indeed, just the potential for such a loss of supply could add significantly to the price volatility of natural gas in the U.S. market.
If a major shift in supply to other markets were to occur during the hottest period of the summer, for example, or during the heart of the winter heating season, and last for an extended time period, increases in the total costs incurred by purchasers of natural gas on the order of $ 5 to 10 billion in the natural gas market alone are not by any means out of the question.
If the shift occurred in the summer, and the impact then rippled through the electricity market, the total cost to U.S. energy users easily could be 2 to 3 times this amount.
Further, even if U.S. purchasers ultimately outbid other competitors for the available supplies and the cargoes originally expected to be delivered to the U.S. market remained here, the need to potentially outbid other competitors all over the world, in natural gas markets that like the U.S. market essentially are operating with zero reserves, could create just as severe an increase in the spot market price of natural gas. It is also possible that, in some years, disruptive events of this nature could occur several times in one year.
There are, of course, solutions that potentially could be crafted to avoid some of these problems.
At least in theory, for example, if suppliers were so inclined, they could make binding commitments to deliver whatever portion of their output they plan to deliver into the U.S. market on a firm basis 100 % of the time whenever their facilities are operating and never divert these shipments to other markets.
If commitments of this nature were made, then from a functional standpoint, at least in some respects, LNG would become more similar to a domestic source of supply (although there still would be a greater risk of supply interruptions of the type discussed in item # 6 above).
Given the obvious risks involved with a heavily LNG-dependent strategy, however, absent such a commitment, the vulnerability of the U.S. market to severe price spikes is likely to be unprecedented.
In all likelihood therefore, if we continue along our current path, it will only be a matter of time until we begin experiencing a new generation of crises in the natural gas markets in the U.S., in which U.S. prices suddenly spike to unprecedented levels not because of events here but because of events in other markets beyond our control (e.g., most recently, just in the last few weeks, poor hydro availability in Spain – which apparently was made up for almost entirely by increased imports of LNG into Spain, a significant portion of which apparently consisted of cargoes diverted from the U.S. market).
Further, given the close link between natural gas prices and the wholesale price of electricity, particularly in the summer months, it may be inevitable that these crises will spill over into Regional electricity markets as well, with consequences that may ripple through much of the U.S. economy.
These losses in turn could wipe out in a heartbeat any benefits that might have been obtained by a decision to massively increase imports of LNG.
Please note: This is Part 2 in a 3 Part series. Part 3 will be published tomorrow, May 19th.
One very obvious exception is France, where people couldn't care less about the volatility of the cost of LNG, at least for electrical generation. Isn't it about time thinking people in the US finally force energy industry captives like the EIA to face up to the realities, and start promoting development of an infrastructure where nuclear reactors replace imported fossil fuels?
Get your event listing in front of more than 100,000 industry professionals by posting on EnergyCentral's Event Center.


text:
Ladyboy / Tomboy Toilet / Restroom Sign, Bangkok, Thailand
This great custom product in gold from our department Men and T-Shirt category can be printed just for you in the size and style you like. The design Ladyboy / Tomboy Toilet / Restroom Sign (Headless) was created by sickbuffalo and uploaded to Spreadshirt for you to have printed on a T-Shirt. Next to a host of other great customized designs, you can find this Ladyboy / Tomboy Toilet / Restroom Sign (Headless) design in Spreadshirt's Provocative category. If you are interested in topics like Bangkok or Humor, then you'll love Ladyboy / Tomboy Toilet / Restroom Sign (Headless) designs by sickbuffalo. Spreadshirt also offers a huge selection of custom t-shirts, hoodies and accessories for the category Provocative as well as top Ladyboy clothing. sickbuffalo's designs have already impressed many of our customers, so we are sure that we've got right stuff for you! Spreadshirt is your destination for great designs of all kinds – whether it's Bangkok, Humor or Ladyboy. We are sure that you will find something nice in our shop, there are many amazing custom Provocative t-shirts, hoodies, or accessories for you to find!Tags: Design ID: 11614666
sunglasses_mustache3 Other Designed by surreal197
love to train Designed by skill11
Wicked strong Designed by 3087565
The Official Save the Ta-tas® Logo Other Designed by SAVETHETATAS
A mustache with a gift ribbon Other Designed by namo
Two owls Other Designed by SumuLee
Sloth Love Hug iPhone 4/4S Case Designed by carlhuber
segelschiff_o_3c Bags Designed by Judith-M83
Lightweight and slim-fitting, this t-shirt is perfect for that tailored look. Throw it on under a sweater or sweatshirt, or wear it by itself with a pair of jeans or khakis.
still to fill


text:
PLAYFUL LITTLE AUDREY #116 1957-1976 | Volume 1 | Harvey Lbwill72 | $9.00
BATMAN: THE KILLING JOKE #1 March 1988 | Volume 1 | DC Phantom--X | $1,000.00
GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY #23 2008-2010 | Volume 2 | Marvel JamesP1217 | $5.00
Members can view pricing and buy, sell, and trade their books.
Join today, it's free!
(Paid Advertisement)
You are about to enter information about this issue.
Your username will be recorded with this. You can add multiple people.
Current Writers Associated With This Title
Pending Associated With This Title
Don't let this happen to you. Try our new Comic Book Shop Locator service today!
CPG Comic Book Store Locator
Our partners help make CPG possible.We couldn't do it without them!


text: Take your Geo Storm to the next level in looks and performance with these add-ons and components. Let us outfit your Storm with eye-catching, stunning design with our set of exterior accessories. Custom manufactured items are made for hassle-free installation and to boost your power and design. We offer a plentiful selection of uniquely-designed Storm accessories for the most sweet presence and amazing performance. You can rest assured that Auto Accessories Garage has got your Geo Storm covered.


text:
POSTED: 9:55 AM Oct 24 2011 UPDATED: 11:11 AM May 06 2014
Text Size:
Saying "It's time to burn the beret and bury the blue dress," Monica Lewinsky is writing for the first time about her affair in the 1990s with President Bill Clinton. Take a look at some of history's steamiest political sex scandals.
The views expressed are not those of this site, this station or its affiliated companies. By posting your comments you agree to accept our terms of use, which are located at the bottom of this page.