DOCSLIB.ORG

United Technologies / Viacom Letter Re

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United Technologies / Viacom Letter Re 233503 April 21,2005 via Federal Express Mr. Brad W. Bradley EPA Project Coordinator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region V, Mailcode SR-6J 77 W. Jackson Boulevard Chicago, IL 60604 W Re: In the Matter of Little Mississinewa Site CERCLA Docket No. V-W-'05-C-812 Dear Mr. Bradley: I. Introduction On or about April 4, 2005, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V ("EPA"), issued an Administrative Order for Remedial Action (Docket No. V-W-'05-C-812) (the "Order" or "Unilateral Order") to Viacom Inc. ("Viacom") and United Technologies Corporation on behalf of Lear Corporation Automotive Systems ("UTC") (collectively, "Respondents"), directing those parties to implement the approved remedial design for the Little Mississinewa Site in Union , City, Indiana (the "Site"). The purposes of this letter are: (1) to advise EPA, pursuant to Section XXIV of the Order, of Respondents' intention to comply with the terms of the Order to the extent such compliance is required under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. §§9601, et seq., and its implementing regulations, namely the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan ("NCP"), 40 C.F.R. Part 300; and (2) to outline several objections and defenses that Respondents have to the Order, as issued. II. General Objections and Reservation of Rights As an initial matter, it should be noted that by setting forth any objections or defenses in this letter, or by submitting this letter at all, Respondents do not waive, and hereby specifically reserve their rights to raise additional or different objections and defenses to the Order at some later time, or to provide additional information and evidence in support of any position that they may respectively or collectively take in Mr. Brad W. Bradley U.S. Environmental Protection Agency April 21,2005 Page 2 the future. Without in any way limiting the generality of the foregoing reservation, Respondents specifically reserve and do not, by providing notice at this time, waive their respective and collective rights to assert any arguments, defenses, objections, positions, or claims that would demonstrate sufficient cause for noncompliance with all or portions of the Order pursuant to Sections 106 and/or 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9606 and/or 9607, or that would support their belief that all or portions of the Order are arbitrary and capricious, not supported by the Administrative Record or otherwise not in accordance with law. Moreover, neither this notice nor any information contained herein shall constitute an admission by Viacom or UTC with respect to the Site for any purpose, including third party claims or future enforcement proceedings, and Viacom and UTC incorporate by reference as if restated herein all prior objections and defenses raised in this matter with respect to the Remedial 'investigation/Feasibility Study ("RI/FS"), Record of Decision ("ROD") and Remedial Design ("RD"), and Respondents reserve all rights, claims, and defenses they may have, have had, or will have in the future regarding the matters addressed under the Order or related to the Site, whether under CERCLA or any other law. Respondents also specifically reserve any affirmative rights and claims they may have to seek reimbursement from EPA pursuant to Section 106(b) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §9606(b), and Respondents' right to file claims against the Superfund under Section 112 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §9612, and to pursue any other claims they may have under CERCLA, the United States Constitution, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Federal Tort Claims Act, or any other law. Finally, by not specifically objecting to each finding or determination in the Order, neither Viacom nor UTC are admitting or conceding such findings or determinations, which Viacom and UTC specifically reserve the right to challenge in any future proceeding. III. Notice of Intent to Comply Subject to the reservations set forth above, and the objections, defenses, and other qualifications identified herein, Respondents hereby provide timely notification to EPA of their intention to comply with the terms of the subject Order to the extent required under CERCLA and the NCP.1 1 Respondents note that nothing in CERCLA requires a "notice of intent" to be submitted upon issuance of an Order, let alone that such notice be "unequivocal" as suggested in Paragraph 83 of the Order. Although Respondents have expressed their intention to comply with all legally applicable provisions of the Order, such compliance is not intended to, and does not waive the substantial defenses, objections, and clarifications Respondents set forth herein. Mr. Brad W. Bradley U.S. Environmental Protection Agency April 21,2005 Page 3 IV. Advance Notice of Project Coordinator Pursuant to Section XV of the Order, Respondents designate as their Project Coordinator: Bradley A. Barquest, R.G. Project Coordinator SECOR International Incorporated 4463 White Bear Parkway, Suite 106 White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Phone: 651-653-9112 Fax: 651-653-1751 E-mail: [email protected] V. Statement of Certain Objections and Defenses A. Introduction No provision of CERCLA requires a Section 106 Order Respondent to outline its "sufficient cause" defenses at the time an Order is issued. Paragraph 85 of the Order permits Respondents to provide comments to the Order, but then attempts to limit the scope of any "sufficient cause" defenses asserted by Respondents to "facts that exist on or prior to the Effective Date of this Order." Paragraph 85. As explained in greater detail in Section II above, by setting forth certain objections to the Order and "sufficient cause" defenses under Sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA herein, Respondents do not waive, and expressly reserve their respective rights to raise additional or different defenses to the Order at some later time, and hereby preserve all defenses and objections to the Order and to liability under CERCLA and other applicable laws, whether or not they are specifically set forth in this document, or whether they did or did not exist upon the Effective Date of this Order. B. EPA's Purported Jurisdictional Basis and Authority Respondents object to EPA's alleged Jurisdictional basis to issue the Order to Respondents. Respondents deny that there is an actual or threatened release of hazardous substances from the Site which may pose an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, welfare, or the environment, or that the actions required by the Order are necessary to protect the public health or welfare or the environment, are in the public interest and are consistent with CERCLA. Respondents reserve their respective rights to challenge EPA's authority to issue the subject Order. Mr Brad \V. Bradle> U.S. Environmental Protection Agenc> April :i. 2005 Pase4 More fundamentally. Seenm Iu6 of CERCLA. 42 U.S.C. $9606 violates the Due Proce— Clause »f the F;:ih Amendment of the United States Constitution, both on its face and as administered b> EPA tits "pattern and practice"). The combination of the absence of pre-enfi-rcement review and massive penalties for non-compliance "imposes a classic and unconstitutional Hobson's choice." GE vs. EPA. 360 F3d 1SS .D.C. Or. 2004..: C. Several Requirements of the Order May be Arbitrary and Capricious. Not Supported by the Administrative Record and Not in Accordance with CERCLA and Other Laws In review :ng the scope of the .-ubiect Order. Respondents note several provisions that may be inconsistent u ith CERCLA and/'or its implementing regulations, or that may not be covered b\ CERCLA at all. thereby rendering all or portions of this Order unenforceable as to Viacom and LTC. The following points highlight Respondents" belief that the Order may. in certain contexts, be arbitrary, capricious, not supported by the Administrative Record and otherwise not in accord with CERCLA or other laws and. therefore, may be unenforceable. By raising the following examples, however. Respondents do not mean to imply that ihis is an exhaustive list of their objections and defenses :n this regard. 1. EPA's Determinations Are Not Accurate Many of EPA" s Determinations, set out in Section IV of the Order, are simply not accurate. To the extent these are EPA's determinations, and not facmal determinations agreed to in a Consent Order or determined by a neutral fact finder. Respondents merely object and note that nothing herein is to be construed as an admission of any fact or law by Respondents. That being said. Respondents specifically object to the statement that the PRPs' Baseline Risk Assessment did not conform to all applicable EPA guidance < Paragraph 20) because that statement is inaccurate and misleading. The same objection is raised with respect to the statements that there is a threat of a future release from either of Respondents' facilities (Paragraph 26L or that the Site poses an imminent and substantial endangerment (Paragraph 2~>. These statements are not true following the extensive work done to cut off all contaminated se'.>. ers and other sources that might continue to release PCBs to the Site and the extensive, multi-million dollar Removal Actions that were previously conducted b\ the Respondents under the direction of EPA and the Indiana Department of En-, ironmental Management. " Or. : errand. :hc District C _r. .-. :.-.e <J£ ;i^ r^er.'.: •• j-ried EP.Y> •• urn man judgment on GE's "pattern - r and practice" claim and alic -A-J j;;c.: .er. -. :ha; :!_:rr. : ;.• : r.'.;>jd. GE :<. 5:ep' .en L Johnson. No. •A--:if? • D C Dist. Ct . Marcr. ; . :•>."? Mr. Brad W. Bradley U.S. Environmental Protection Agency April 21,2005 Page 5 2. EPA's Review of Submissions The provisions of the Order that relate to EPA's review of submissions submitted by Respondents (e.g., Paragraph 32) are objectionable because they do not specify the standards which EPA will apply in reviewing and approving such submissions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Media Ownership Chart
    In 1983, 50 corporations controlled the vast majority of all news media in the U.S. At the time, Ben Bagdikian was called "alarmist" for pointing this out in his book, The Media Monopoly . In his 4th edition, published in 1992, he wrote "in the U.S., fewer than two dozen of these extraordinary creatures own and operate 90% of the mass media" -- controlling almost all of America's newspapers, magazines, TV and radio stations, books, records, movies, videos, wire services and photo agencies. He predicted then that eventually this number would fall to about half a dozen companies. This was greeted with skepticism at the time. When the 6th edition of The Media Monopoly was published in 2000, the number had fallen to six. Since then, there have been more mergers and the scope has expanded to include new media like the Internet market. More than 1 in 4 Internet users in the U.S. now log in with AOL Time-Warner, the world's largest media corporation. In 2004, Bagdikian's revised and expanded book, The New Media Monopoly , shows that only 5 huge corporations -- Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch's News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany, and Viacom (formerly CBS) -- now control most of the media industry in the U.S. General Electric's NBC is a close sixth. Who Controls the Media? Parent General Electric Time Warner The Walt Viacom News Company Disney Co. Corporation $100.5 billion $26.8 billion $18.9 billion 1998 revenues 1998 revenues $23 billion 1998 revenues $13 billion 1998 revenues 1998 revenues Background GE/NBC's ranks No.
    [Show full text]
  • Ad-Hoc Sub Committee Convened for the First Time on February 23, 2006
    ReviewReview AdvisoryAdvisory CommitteeCommittee Ad-HocAd-Hoc SubSub CommitteeCommittee November 30, 2006 Gold Line Ad-HocAd-Hoc SubSub CommitteeCommittee MembersMembers IntroductionIntroduction • Renee Chavez, Chair • Irvin Lai • Aida Bobadilla • Daisy Ma • Sherri Breskin • Mary Louise Reeves • Nadine Diaz • Rachel Santos • Susan Dickson • Diana Tarango • Rita Govea • Armando Ybarra Rodriguez • Juan Jimenez Gold Line GeneralGeneral OverviewOverview Gold Line Ad-HocAd-Hoc SubSub CommitteeCommittee GeneralGeneral OverviewOverview • The Ad-Hoc Sub Committee convened for the first time on February 23, 2006. Metro provided a presentation to inform the community of the history and current status. A timeline was provided, as was an update on the laboratory effort. • The Project Archeologist made a presentation on the findings to the Ad-Hoc Sub Committee at the March 23rd meeting in Boyle Heights and again at the April 27th meeting in Chinatown. • The Ad-Hoc Sub Committee has held nine monthly meetings in Boyle Heights and in Chinatown. Gold Line Ad-HocAd-Hoc SubSub CommitteeCommittee GeneralGeneral OverviewOverview • Through the Ad-Hoc Sub Committee, Metro will work with the community to receive public feedback on a sensitive and respectful re-interment plan, ceremony and fitting memorial. • The Ad-Hoc Sub Committee, appointed by the Review Advisory Committee will meet monthly until such goals are met. Recommendations will be made through the RAC to Metro. Gold Line ArchaeologicalArchaeological ReportReport UpdateUpdate Gold Line Ad-HocAd-Hoc SubSub CommitteeCommittee ArchaeologicalArchaeological ReportReport UpdateUpdate • The Historic Los Angeles Cemetery Summary Report was distributed to the Ad-Hoc Sub Committee and Ex. RAC members on August 22, 2006 with a CD containing all the appendices.
    [Show full text]
  • Cbs V National Amusements Settlement Transcript
    Cbs V National Amusements Settlement Transcript Noam still computes inscrutably while brinded Jean refrain that Linnette. Seymour still calve succulently while tannic Thaddeus madrigal that salesgirls. Preconditioned Ave wail or corrugate some ado gloriously, however bandy Sid evanish showmanly or decolourized. Howlett stated that this is very purpose of the amusements transcript, how the federal purposes The national amusements said it ever dealt with cbs v national amusements settlement transcript whether particular? Senior role for the flying v national amusements, and its cover made this trek movie theaters operating at cbs filed in discovery has been required to set. See In re CBS Corp. Because there are you for everyone? What violate some overcome the biggest news items from each year of saying past decade? Recent legislation shouldbe interpreted as putting an service to the Cockerham test. Conduct of Attorneys in Civil Cases. So, if the entity giving the directions forgets to touch to board the bread out of dust bag, the person list the sandwich has become just spread garlic butter and jelly all crazy a plastic bag bachelor of bread. Research subjects has waived. Professor danks said, alternative way in discussing the recent merger by the movant established traditional basis that you anticipate the situation to take property where consent. Gmo ingredients are cbs amusements transcript among themselves rely on growth needs because of? The United States Supreme joy and this attitude long ago shiftedthe burden of proving the truth defense to thrill the plaintiff to summit the defamatory statementswere false leaving the statements were thus by a media defendant over going public concern.
    [Show full text]
  • TEXAS Library JOURNAL
    TexasLibraryJournal VOLUME 88, NUMBER 1 • SPRING 2012 INCLUDES THE BUYERS GUIDE to TLA 2012 Exhibitors TLA MOBILE APP Also in this issue: Conference Overview, D-I-Y Remodeling, and Branding Your Professional Image new from texas Welcome to Utopia Notes from a Small Town By Karen Valby Last Launch Originally published by Spiegel Discovery, Endeavour, Atlantis and Grau and now available in By Dan Winters paperback with a new afterword Powerfully evoking the and reading group guide, this unquenchable American spirit highly acclaimed book takes us of exploration, award-winning into the richly complex life of a photographer Dan Winters small Texas town. chronicles the $15.00 paperback final launches of Discovery, Endeavour, and Atlantis in this stunning photographic tribute to America’s space Displaced Life in the Katrina Diaspora shuttle program. Edited by Lynn Weber and Lori Peek 85 color photos This moving ethnographic ac- $50.00 hardcover count of Hurricane Katrina sur- vivors rebuilding their lives away from the Gulf Coast inaugurates The Katrina Bookshelf, a new series of books that will probe the long-term consequences of Inequity in the Friedrichsburg America’s worst disaster. A Novel The Katrina Bookshelf, Kai Technopolis By Friedrich Armand Strubberg Race, Class, Gender, and the Digital Erikson, Series Editor Translated, annotated, and $24.95 paperback Divide in Austin illustrated by James C. Kearney $55.00 hardcover Edited by Joseph Straubhaar, First published in Jeremiah Germany in 1867, Spence, this fascinating Zeynep autobiographical Tufekci, and novel of German Iranians in Texas Roberta G. immigrants on Migration, Politics, and Ethnic Identity Lentz the antebellum By Mohsen M.
    [Show full text]
  • US V. Entercom Communications Corp. and CBS Corporation
    Case 1:17-cv-02268 Document 1 Filed 11/01/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Suite 4000 Washington, DC 20530, Plaintiff, v. ENTERCOM COMMUNICATIONS CORP. 401 E. City Avenue Suite 809 Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, and CBS CORPORATION 51 W. 52nd Street New York, NY 10019, Defendants. COMPLAINT The United States of America brings this civil action to enjoin the proposed acquisition of CBS Radio, Inc. by Entercom Communications Corporation, and to obtain other equitable relief. The acquisition likely would substantially lessen competition for the sale of radio advertising to advertisers targeting English-language listeners in the Boston, Sacramento, and San Francisco Designated Market Areas (“DMAs”), in violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18. The United States alleges as follows: Case 1:17-cv-02268 Document 1 Filed 11/01/17 Page 2 of 10 I. NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. Pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger dated February 2, 2017, between Entercom, CBS Radio, Inc. and CBS Corporation, Entercom agreed to acquire CBS Radio in a Reverse Morris Trust transaction valued at over $1.6 billion. CBS Radio is a subsidiary of CBS Corporation. 2. Entercom and CBS Radio own and operate broadcast radio stations in various locations throughout the United States, including multiple stations in Boston, Massachusetts, Sacramento, California, and San Francisco, California. Entercom and CBS Radio compete head- to-head for the business of local and national companies that seek to advertise on English- language broadcast radio stations in these three DMAs.
    [Show full text]
  • OELMA Web.Version 11.08.Pmd
    Fall 2007 Vol. 59, No. 1 1 Contents NCLB & The SKILLS ACT .............................................................................................4 NCLB & The No Child Left Inside Act ........................................................................5 Media Literacy by Frank Baker ................................................................................6 The Marantz Picture Book Collection Moves to Kent State University ...................8 The Story Box Project .............................................................................................10 The Big Read: an urban middle school “Big Read” Project illustrates the power of story .....................................................................................................................13 Bringing science concepts to life with literature ...................................................17 Got Rocks? The U.S. Polar Rock Repository does! Read about a unique educa- tional resource...................................................................................................21 The International Baccalaureate Programme and the School Librarian .............23 Call for Articles ........................................................................................................28 School Librarians Rock! Librarians’ powerful impact on literacy develop- ment....................................................................................................................29 Interactive Whiteboards and Clickers in the Classroom .......................................37
    [Show full text]
  • TOGETHER WE DELIVER CURES for BLOOD CANCER 2014 Report to the Community
    TOGETHER WE DELIVER CURES FOR BLOOD CANCER 2014 Report to the Community — Jade, marrow transplant recipient, with her brother and mom If Laura hadn’t joined the registry—I don’t know— I don’t want to think about what would have happened. We will spend the rest of our lives saying thank you. — Owen’s mom Pictured: Owen, transplant recipient, with his marrow donor, Laura 2014: YEAR AT A GLANCE Helped 6,300 patients receive a marrow transplant Totaling 68,000 marrow WE ARE DEDICATED transplants since 1987 Grew the Be The Match Registry® by TO DELIVERING CURES FOR BLOOD CANCERS. 546,000 new potential donors Every three minutes someone is diagnosed with a blood cancer like leukemia, lymphoma, 45% with or other life-threatening disease. And 70 percent of patients do not have a matched diverse ancestry marrow donor in their family. They depend on us to find a life-saving match. Thanks to you—our growing community of financial supporters, marrow donors, volunteers, Provided $3.5 million health care professionals and researchers—more patients are receiving the life-saving in patient assistance marrow or cord blood transplant they need. for 1,900 families Your support makes it possible for us to continue to: • Grow the world’s largest and most diverse registry of potential donors • Support patients and their families before, during and after transplant Added 20,800 new umbilical • Conduct research and education to expand treatment and improve outcomes cord blood units • Engage the public in our life-saving mission Thank you for your never-ending passion and dedication to saving lives.
    [Show full text]
  • SE17 International.Pdf
    WELCOME TO SHOWEAST! This is the official convention International Schedule of Events for ShowEast 2017. The schedule includes a listing of all events taking place for the duration of the convention at the Loews Miami Beach and the Regal South Beach Stadium 18, the Official Venue Partner of ShowEast 2017. Fully registered delegates will also receive an ACCESS PASS which allows delegates entry into all scheduled events. NOTE: Lost or stolen Access Passes will not be replaced and are non-transferable. IMPORTANT NOTICE Security continues to be a major initiative at all ShowEast screenings and product presentations. In order to maintain and protect the integrity of content presented at the convention, we kindly advise that the use of mobile phones or any other kind of photo or video recording device is strictly prohibited in the Regal South Beach Stadium 18 auditoriums. To further protect product being shown, we will have security personnel at each event utilizing night-vision goggles. Anyone caught using any type of recording device will have their Access Pass confiscated and will be escorted out of the auditorium. Due to increased security measures at screenings, large bags are subject to search upon arrival at the theatre. We urge those attending screenings to leave large bags in their hotel rooms. We appreciate your cooperation and understanding of this matter. We ask that none of the films screened or product featured are reviewed or commented on—regardless of good or bad. Please note, this includes speaking to members of the press, personal and professional blogs, social networking sites like Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, LinkedIn, Twitter, or likewise.
    [Show full text]
  • In Re Viacom Inc Stockholders Litigation
    IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE VIACOM INC. ) CONSOLIDATED STOCKHOLDERS LITIGATION ) C.A. No. 2019-0948-JRS MEMORANDUM OPINION Date Submitted: September 15, 2020 Date Decided: December 29, 2020 Corrected: December 30, 2020 Gregory V. Varallo, Esquire of Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, Delaware; Jeroen van Kwawegen, Esquire, Edward G. Timlin, Esquire, Andrew E. Blumberg, Esquire and Daniel E. Meyer, Esquire of Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, New York, Attorneys for Lead Plaintiff California Public Employees’ Retirement System. Chad Johnson, Esquire, Noam Mandel, Esquire and Desiree Cummings, Esquire of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, New York, New York; Christopher H. Lyons, Esquire of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, Nashville, Tennessee, Attorneys for Additional Plaintiff Park Employees’ and Retirement Board Employees’ Annuity and Benefit Fund of Chicago. Francis A. Bottini, Jr., Esquire and Anne B. Beste, Esquire of Bottini & Bottini, Inc., La Jolla, California, Attorneys for Additional Plaintiff Louis M. Wilen. Matthew E. Fischer, Esquire, Michael A. Pittenger, Esquire, Christopher N. Kelly, Esquire, J. Matthew Belger, Esquire, Jacqueline A. Rogers, Esquire and Callan R. Jackson, Esquire of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, Delaware and Victor L. Hou, Esquire, Rahul Mukhi, Esquire and Mark E. McDonald, Esquire of Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, New York, New York, Attorneys for Defendants National Amusements, Inc., NAI Entertainment Holdings LLC, and Shari E. Redstone. Gregory P. Williams, Esquire, Blake Rohrbacher, Esquire and Kevin M. Regan, Esquire of Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, Delaware and Robert H. Baron, Esquire, Gary A. Bornstein, Esquire and Rory A.
    [Show full text]
  • TIM FISHER Chief Operating Officer
    TIM FISHER Chief Operating Officer Chief Operating Officer Tim Fisher joined Cedar Fair in December 2017, bringing with him 40 years of experience in the U.S. and international theme park industry, dating back to his first job at Carowinds in Charlotte, North Carolina. As COO, Tim takes a hands-on and detail-oriented approach, ensuring that Cedar Fair’s long-range plan is executed upon with precision, and that the parks and resort properties perform to the company’s budgeted financial targets. Prior to Cedar Fair, Tim served as CEO for three different regions of Village Roadshow Theme Parks in succession, including the North America region from April 2007 to January 2009; the Australia region through March 2017; and the Asia region through November 2017. Under Tim’s leadership as CEO, the theme park group achieved records for attendance, revenues and EBITDA performance. Prior to Village Roadshow, Tim was executive vice president of Paramount Parks and Viacom Recreation USA, where he was responsible for the management, operational and financial performance of all theme parks domestic and international until August 2006. Tim was awarded a B.B.A. in Business/Marketing and an A.A. in Business Administration from American International University. He has served as director on a number of companies, including on the board of the Carlyle Group’s APEX Parks Group, and as an honorary board member for Adventures for Wish Kids (A Kid Again), a non-profit organization that serves families with children that are suffering from a life changing illnesses. Tim and his wife Shandelle sketched out a design concept for a remodeled kitchen in their Charlotte home, then hired a local construction company to bring their concept to life.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES SECURITIES and EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K ☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 OR o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission File Number 001-09553 CBS CORPORATION (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) DELAWARE 04-2949533 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification Number) 51 W. 52nd Street New York, NY 10019 (212) 975-4321 (Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of registrant's principal executive offices) Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Name of Each Exchange on Title of Each Class Which Registered Class A Common Stock, $0.001 par value New York Stock Exchange Class B Common Stock, $0.001 par value New York Stock Exchange 7.625% Senior Debentures due 2016 American Stock Exchange 7.25% Senior Notes due 2051 New York Stock Exchange 6.75% Senior Notes due 2056 New York Stock Exchange Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None (Title of Class) Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer (as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933). Yes ☒ No o Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
    [Show full text]
  • Jazz and Radio in the United States: Mediation, Genre, and Patronage
    Jazz and Radio in the United States: Mediation, Genre, and Patronage Aaron Joseph Johnson Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2014 © 2014 Aaron Joseph Johnson All rights reserved ABSTRACT Jazz and Radio in the United States: Mediation, Genre, and Patronage Aaron Joseph Johnson This dissertation is a study of jazz on American radio. The dissertation's meta-subjects are mediation, classification, and patronage in the presentation of music via distribution channels capable of reaching widespread audiences. The dissertation also addresses questions of race in the representation of jazz on radio. A central claim of the dissertation is that a given direction in jazz radio programming reflects the ideological, aesthetic, and political imperatives of a given broadcasting entity. I further argue that this ideological deployment of jazz can appear as conservative or progressive programming philosophies, and that these tendencies reflect discursive struggles over the identity of jazz. The first chapter, "Jazz on Noncommercial Radio," describes in some detail the current (circa 2013) taxonomy of American jazz radio. The remaining chapters are case studies of different aspects of jazz radio in the United States. Chapter 2, "Jazz is on the Left End of the Dial," presents considerable detail to the way the music is positioned on specific noncommercial stations. Chapter 3, "Duke Ellington and Radio," uses Ellington's multifaceted radio career (1925-1953) as radio bandleader, radio celebrity, and celebrity DJ to examine the medium's shifting relationship with jazz and black American creative ambition.
    [Show full text]