Read the Final Report on the Lewiston, Maine, Mass Shootings (2024)

FINAL REPORTOF THEINDEPENDENT COMMISSIONTO INVESTIGATE THE FACTS OFTHE TRAGEDY IN LEWISTONPresented toGovernor Janet T. MillsAttorney General Aaron M. FreyState of MaineAugust 20, 2024

"When there is someonewho is a danger tothemselves, or to thecommunity, do theuncomfortable task andprotect us."Danielle Jasper, survivorand victimCover photo courtesy of the City of Lewiston: https://www.lewistonmaine.gov/

Table of ContentsLetter from the Chair……………………...Content Advisory...........Dedication............In Memoriam…..........I. INTRODUCTION.............iiiv.............A. Establishment and Work of the Commission........B. Membership........C. Commission's Charge==II.EXECUTIVE SUMMARYIII. GENERAL PROCESSA. Organization and ApproachB. Public Meetings.............C. Private MeetingsD. Website and Email Notification System.......IV.V.DETERMINATION OF CONTENT OF INTERIM REPORT............VI.1.1.1..........2.4.4.6.7.7.8............ 8A. Chronological History Prior to October 25, 2023................81. May2. June........8.103. July and August.114. September........195. October1-25………………………………………………...24B. Robert Card II's Actions on October 25, 2023, and theImmediate Aftermath ................25C. The Emergency Response-October 25-27, 2023..................27D. Victim Services Response-October 25-Present.38WEAPONS RESTRICTION LAWSA. NY SAFE Act..41B. NY Extreme Risk Protection Act (Red Flag Law) 42C. Maine's Protection From Substantial Threats Act (YellowFlag Law).........44

VII.VIII.TIMELINE..DISCUSSION AND OBSERVATIONS...46.58A. Law Enforcement Response Before October 25, 2023...B. Army Reserve Response Before October 25, 2023......C. Medical Response Before October 25, 2023....................58....59..........61IX.X.D. Law Enforcement Response October 25, 2023 and Beyond………………………..61ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND THANKS.…………………………....INTERNET CITATION STATEMENT..63...66XI..67APPENDICES.....A. Executive Order No. 4 FY23/24, Order Establishing the Commissionto Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston with MemberLetter (November 2023)B. Resolves 2023, ch. 129. Subpoena Law. (February 2024)C. 34-B MRS §3861-3862, Maine's Involuntary Commitment Law (bluepaper)D. 4-B MRS § 3682-A - Maine's Yellow Flag Law in effect in 2023E. Chapter 675, PL 2023 - New Changes to Yellow Flag Law effectiveAugust 9, 2024F. 15 MRS §393- Maine's Possession of Firearms by Prohibited PersonsLawG. United States Department of Justice Model Red Flag LawH. NY CPLP 6340- New York SAFE ACT (Red Flag Law) and Model PolicyI. NY MHL 9.40 et seq.-New York Involuntary Commitment LawJ. 25 MRS §2804-C Standard Mandated Policies on Training- MaineCriminal Justice Academy - Yellow Flag Law Section 2-EK. Maine Yellow Flag Law - Written Training Materials and FormsL. Army Reserve Components law- 10 USC § 12301-ReserveComponents and 10 USC § 1090-b - Command Directed EvaluationM. Army Regulation AR 190 - Policy-Storage of GunsN. DOD Instruction 6490.04 - Mental Health Evaluations of Members ofthe Military Services (Command Directed Evaluation)O. Command Directed Behavioral Health Evaluation Process Chart-USArmyP. Military Command Exception to the Health Insurance Portability andAccountability Act (HIPAA) MemoQ. 18 U.S.C. 922(9) -Federal Law-Firearms Prohibition

R. 27 C.F.R.§478.1 and 27 C.F.R. § 478.11 Meaning of Terms- Definitionsand ATF Involuntary Commitment SummaryS. Subpoenas Issued ReportT. Compilation of Reports and Studies ReviewedU. Blast Over Pressure Safety Act, H.R. 8025, 118th Congress, SecondSession, 2024

August 20, 2024The Honorable Janet T. MillsGovernor of MaineState House Station 1Augusta, ME 04333Dear Governor Mills,On behalf of the Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston(Independent Commission), I hereby submit to you a final public report of its findings pursuant toyour Executive Order dated November 9, 2023.We are grateful to you, the Attorney General, and the people of Maine for entrusting us withinvestigating the complete facts and circ*mstances surrounding the unspeakable tragedy inLewiston. And we thank the Maine State Legislature for granting us subpoena power so that wecould complete our work unimpeded.Members of the Independent Commission took their responsibility to the public interest seriously.Individually and collectively, we conducted work thoughtfully and thoroughly with an open mindand a hardened determination to find the truth. We asked questions. We followed leads. Weunearthed information. I extend my gratitude to each member. While none of us wished to be in theposition of serving on a commission investigating a mass shooting, I could not be prouder of theindividual commissioners you chose to complete this solemn task and the final work product weshare with you today.I also wish to thank and acknowledge the following Commission staff members for their hard workand dedication to our state: Executive Director Anne Jordan, investigators Brian MacMaster and JimOsterrieder, and communications consultant Kevin Kelley.Every Mainer was touched by what occurred on October 25, 2023. The acts of violence ended andupended our lives, forever changed our communities, and damaged a sense of safety andtranquility that defines what it means to live in Maine. Our investigation and the information andfindings set out in this final report are meant to bring truth to the victims' families, to those whowere injured, and to the people of our state and nation. We hope this truth will help the healingprocess while simultaneously enabling the public and policymakers to learn from mistakes.Again, thank you for the honor of serving the people of Maine.Sincerely,Darciel E. WasHonorable Daniel E. Wathen ChairmanCC: The Honorable Aaron M. Frey, Attorney General of Mainei.

Content AdvisoryThe Commission and the staff took great care to be deliberate about the words and phrasesused in this report. The purpose of this report is to convey the facts as found by theCommission and to expose the truth. Nevertheless, the descriptions may be upsetting forsome readers due to the explanations of this incident, the age or status of the victims andsurvivors, and the circ*mstances they endured.The Commission carefully considered the FBI's recent recommendations not to name theshooter to avoid glorifying his actions and out of respect for the victims and survivors.1However, after careful deliberation and in light of the widespread and continuing use of theshooter's name by the media, the public, and the witnesses who testified at public hearings,the Commission decided to refer to him by name. This decision was not made to diminishthe nature of his acts; rather, it was made to assist the reader in comprehending the report'scontent and the need to report the facts.For resources, including free and confidential emotional support, please visithttps://988lifeline.org or call or text 988 to reach the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline. If you are aveteran, press 1 for veterans' services. This service is available 24 hours a day, 365 days ayear. Services are also available for teens and young adults by texting (207) 515-8398. Forhelp managing stress and for resiliency resources for anyone in Maine experiencing stressreactions, call (207) 221-8198. This service is available from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., seven days aweek. For deaf and hard of hearing individuals, please contact the Maine Association forthe Deaf at https://deafmaine.org/. Finally, the Maine Resiliency Center, located at 184Main Street in Lewiston, offers trauma-informed resources, counseling, and support foranyone affected by the October 25, 2023, shootings, including family, friends, and lovedones of individuals killed on October 25th, victims and survivors, those present at thescenes, first responders, and medical personnel, and any member of the community. TheCenter may be reached at (207) 515-3930, by email at info@maineresileincycenter.org, orby visiting its website at https://www.maineresiliencycenter.org/.1 The Don't Name Them Campaign, endorsed and supported by the F.B.I., encourages media, law enforcement,and public information officers to shift their focus from the perpetrators of active shooter incidents towardsthe victims, survivors, and heroes who stopped them as well as the communities that come together to help inthe healing process. dontnamethem.org. The Commission lauds these goals but reminds the readers that thecharge contained in the Governor's Executive Order requires it to investigate the facts and response of lawenforcement and the Army before and after the shooting. It must directly name all involved to carry out itscharge.ii.

DedicationThis report is dedicated to the memory of the 18 persons killed on October 25, 2023, atJust-In-Time Recreation and Schemengees Bar and Grille in Lewiston, Maine.The report is also dedicated to the victims and survivors—those who were physically and/or emotionally injured, those who feared for their lives and the lives of their loved ones andfriends, and those who risked their own safety and lives to protect others. They offered aidand comfort, called for help, transported injured persons, and assisted first respondersduring the dreadful aftermath. To the hundreds of survivors in this community, weacknowledge the harm that was inflicted and that your grief and fear linger today. To thehundreds of law enforcement and emergency medical responders who immediatelyresponded to the scenes and rendered aid and protection, we thank you.We honor all of you by remembering your loved ones and relating your stories to the rest ofthe country. We hope our review of the events of the days and months leading up to andafter October 25, 2023, provides some answers to your questions and offers lessonslearned that may help other survivors, victims, and communities in the future. Sadly,despite intensive efforts by law enforcement and the Commission, some questions maynever be answered. The limitations of the human condition and the lack of evidenceprevented the Commission from definitively answering all your questions.The State of Maine and the nation mourned with the Lewiston community on that tragicday. We continue to do so. While we remain heartbroken by your loss, we are driven bythe need to provide an authoritative accounting of the days and months leading up to thatday, the response that transpired on October 25th, and the events and actions thatfollowed.iii.

Peyton Brewer-RossThomas Ryan ConradJoshua SealAaron YoungWilliam YoungIn Loving Memory:Robert VioletteArthur StroutBryan MacFarlaneMaxx HathawayMichael DeslauriersLucille VioletteRonald MorinJoseph WalkerStephen VozzellaJason WalkerTricia AsselinWilliam "Billy' BrackettKeith MacneirLAVE ALWAYS WINSPhoto of Just-In-Time Recreation by Kathleen Walker, survivor and widow of Jason Walker.

I.INTRODUCTIONA. MembershipOn November 9, 2023, by Executive Order No. 4 FY23/24, Governor Janet T. Mills establishedthe Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston.² GovernorMills named the following individuals, who served without compensation, to theCommission:1. The Honorable Daniel E. Wathen, Chair. Chair Wathen is a retired Chief Justiceof the Maine Supreme Judicial Court.2. Dr. Debra Baeder. Dr. Baeder is a forensic psychologist who was the ChiefForensic Psychologist for the State Forensic Service in Maine and the Directorof Clinical Services for the Office of Behavioral Health.3. George T. (Toby) Dilworth, Esq. Attorney Dilworth is a Portland attorney and aformer federal prosecutor.4. The Honorable Ellen A. Gorman. Justice Gorman is a retired Associate Justiceof the Maine Supreme Judicial Court.5. Dr. Anthony Ng. Dr. Ng is a practicing psychiatrist in Bangor and providedservices in the aftermath of the Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting andconsulted on other mass shootings.6. The Honorable Geoffrey Rushlau. Judge Rushlau is a retired District Courtjudge and the former District Attorney for Lincoln, Knox, Waldo, and Sagadahoccounties.7. The Honorable Paula D. Silsby. Attorney Silsby is of counsel to a Portland lawfirm and served as the U.S. Attorney for the District of Maine for nine years.B. Commission's ChargeThe purpose of the Commission was to: "(d)etermine the facts surrounding the tragedy inLewiston on October 25th [2023], including relevant facts and circ*mstances leading up to2 See Appendix A for a copy of the Governor's Executive Order.1.

and the police response to it." The Executive Order further stated that the IndependentCommission "should determine the full scope of its work, and should ask any questionnecessary of any person that is relevant to the charge of gathering the facts regardingRobert Card's mental health history, contact with State, Federal or military authorities,access to firearms, the initial law enforcement response to the Lewiston Shootings and themanhunt that ensued, and any other matters the Independent Commission determines arerelevant to its purpose."In a letter to the Commission members, Governor Mills and Attorney General Aaron M. Freystressed "all that we ask is that you follow the facts, wherever they may lead, and thatyou do so in an independent and objective manner, biased by no one and guided onlyby the pursuit of truth."The Executive Order provided that the Chair would preside at, set the agenda for, andschedule Commission meetings, seek funding from the Attorney General as determinednecessary to hire sufficient staff or consultants on a contract basis to fulfill its mission and,to the extent practical without hindrance and where possible, conduct its work in a manneropen and accessible to the public. The records, proceedings, and deliberations of theCommission were specifically exempted from the provisions of Maine's Freedom of AccessAct, 1 M.R.S. c. 13.It is important to acknowledge that the Commission was not asked to make policyrecommendations regarding access to firearms, suggest amendments to Maine's statutes,or propose operational changes for government agencies. Those responsibilities properlyrest with elected and appointed officials. The Commission's responsibility was to find thefacts so that the public, law enforcement, military leaders, and elected and appointedofficials can make informed decisions and reduce the risk of more such tragedies.II.Executive SummaryAt 6:54 p.m. on October 25, 2023, 40-year-old Army Reservist Robert Card II (Card) enteredthe Just-In-Time Recreation Facility in Lewiston, Maine, armed with a .308 Ruger SFAR4 riflewith a scope and laser. Over 60 patrons and employees, including 20 children, were present.In 45 seconds, Card fired 18 rounds, killing eight people and wounding three others.Additional people suffered injuries while trying to hide or escape. Card then drove about four3 See Appendix A for the joint letter from the Governor and the Attorney General to the members of theCommission.4 Small frame autoloading rifle. Card purchased this firearm legally from the Fine Line Gun Shop in Poland,Maine, on July 6, 2023, nine days before his hospitalization in New York.2.

miles to Schemengees Bar and Grille. He left his car running outside the main entrance andentered the building at 7:07 p.m. In 78 seconds, he fired 36 rounds, killing ten more peopleand wounding ten others. Additional individuals suffered other injuries during the chaos. Intotal, Card killed 18 people and wounded 13 in less than two minutes inside thosebusinesses.Card is solely responsible for his own conduct. He caused the deaths and injuries inflictedthat night. Although he might still have committed a mass shooting even if someone hadmanaged to remove Card's firearms before October 25, 2023, there were severalopportunities that, if taken, might have changed the course of events.The Commission affirms its earlier unanimous finding that in September 2023, theSagadahoc County Sheriff's Office (SCSO) had sufficient probable cause to take Card intoprotective custody under Maine's yellow flag law5 and to initiate a petition to confiscate anyfirearms he possessed or over which he had control.Several law enforcement officials testified that the yellow flag law is cumbersome,inefficient, and unduly restrictive regarding who can initiate a proceeding to limit a person'saccess to firearms. Further, the SCSO is justified in pointing out that the Army Reserve (AR)did not share all the relevant information it had about Card's behavior. Nevertheless, underthe circ*mstances existing and known to the SCSO in September of 2023, the yellow flag lawauthorized the SCSO to start the process of obtaining a court order to remove Card'sfirearms.The Commission further finds that the leaders of Card's (AR) Unit failed to undertakenecessary steps to reduce the threat he posed to the public. His commanding officers werewell aware of his auditory hallucinations, increasingly aggressive behavior, collection ofguns, and ominous comments about his intentions. Despite their knowledge, they ignoredthe strong recommendations of Card's Army mental health providers to stay engaged withhis care and "mak[e] sure that steps are taken to remove weapons" from his home. Theyneglected to share with the SCSO all the information relating to Card's threatening behavior,and actually discounted some of the evidence about the threat posed by Card. Had theypresented a full and complete accounting of the facts, the SCSO might have acted moreassertively in September. While the AR leaders correctly point out that their authority over areservist like Card is not as broad as the authority the military has over their active-duty5 34-B M.R.S. 3862-B (2024) authorizes a law enforcement officer to seek a court order that prohibits anindividual from having or purchasing dangerous weapons, including firearms. The appropriate term for theorder is “threat-based restriction.” However, for ease of reading and understanding, this report refers to it asthe "yellow flag" law. The Legislature has since amended the law in place in October 2023. See LD 2224,enacted into law as P.L. 2023, ch. 675 (signed by the Governor on April 26, 2024), Appendix D. The changeshave not altered the Commission's finding that there was probable cause to take Card into protective custodyand to initiate a yellow flag petition in September 2023.3.

service members, they failed to take advantage of the available opportunities to exercisetheir authority over him.Finally, we find that the challenges faced by law enforcement in responding to the shootingswere unprecedented in Maine: two active shooting sites with dozens killed and injured,multiple reports of other active shooting sites, gathering and preserving evidence for apossible criminal prosecution, and a simultaneous state-wide manhunt. Many lawenforcement officers demonstrated bravery and professionalism in the face of danger. Whilethe first hours were, at times, “utter chaos" as hundreds of law enforcement officers pouredinto Lewiston and were dispatched or self-dispatched to numerous scenes, the actions oflaw enforcement ultimately resulted in the discovery of Card's body within 49 hours withoutfurther loss of life. While the Commission makes some findings about the actions of lawenforcement following the shooting, we anticipate that the Maine State Police (MSP) willconduct a full after-action review with an independent evaluation by an entity with policingexpertise. The MSP has already completed a "Manhunt Operations After Action Review"focused on tactical operations with an independent evaluation by the Pennsylvania StatePolice. Not only would a full after-action review allow for professional recommendationsabout policy, protocol, and other policing improvements, it would likely confirm what thisCommission recognizes as positive and successful examples of the law enforcementresponse.III. General ProcessA. Organization and ApproachThe Commission held its first public meeting on November 20, 2023. At that time, itappointed staff members Anne Jordan, Esq., as the executive director, Brian MacMaster andJames Osterrieder as investigators, and Kevin Kelley as the Commission's media relationsspecialist. The Commission took public commentary. It also voted unanimously to formallyrequest that the Governor and the Attorney General seek subpoena power for theCommission so that all the relevant and necessary documents, evidence, and testimonycould be obtained.Emergency legislation was introduced on January 25, 2024, to grant the Commission thenecessary powers to issue subpoenas.6 After a public hearing before the Legislature'sJudiciary Committee on January 29, 2024, and a work session on January 31st, the billreceived unanimous support from both the House of Representatives and the Senate andwas signed into law by the Governor on February 13, 2024. Because it was emergencylegislation, the law went into effect immediately.6Resolves 2023, chapter 129, granted this subpoena power, See Appendix B.4.

During its investigation, the Commission took voluntary statements from some witnessesand testimony under oath from others. Some, especially victims, submitted writtenstatements. The Commission issued twelve subpoenas to testify and produce documentsand three other subpoenas to produce records.³ Some law enforcement agenciesvoluntarily produced records and provided officers to testify, while others requiredsubpoenas or other formal process. 9 The Commission reviewed over a terabyte of electroniclocal, county, and state law enforcement records and engaged in other investigative tasks.The Commission reviewed thousands of additional pages of reports and records fromvarious institutions and agencies, including the Maine State Police Crime Lab, the Office ofChief Medical Examiner, the Boston University Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE)Center, the Maine State Police Computer Crimes Unit, the Maine Information and AnalysisCenter (MIAC), the New Hampshire and New York State Police, the New York Department ofCriminal Justice Services, the regional communications centers, 10 various District7 Persons who were subpoenaed were placed under oath. A court reporter recorded their testimony andtranscribed it. Each subpoenaed witness was provided a copy of the testimony and allowed to review it, makecorrections, and sign the transcript8 See Appendix S for a detailed report on the subpoenas issued as required by Resolves 2023, ch. 129, section13. One subpoena to testify was withdrawn by the Commission.9 Lewiston, Lisbon, the Maine State Police, the Hudson New Hampshire Police Department, and SagadahocCounty Sheriff's Office all voluntarily produced witnesses and/or records directly to the Commission. Manyother agencies from across the state voluntarily produced reports that were gathered by the Maine State Policeand turned over to the Commission. Other agencies or their employees requested or required a subpoena dueto various state or federal confidentiality or security laws or because the employees were both police officersand members of the AR. The regional dispatch centers produced partially redacted records pursuant to theconfidentiality provisions of 25 M.R.S. §2929. Federal agencies required a formal Touhy request. Some federalagencies, including the FBI, the AR, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Customs andBorder Patrol, and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Maine produced some, but not all, requestedrecords, or produced partially redacted records citing various federal laws or attorney-client, or attorney workproduct privilege. Of note, the AR only produced 115 pages of the 3200 page internal investigation reportrequested via multiple Touhy requests. These requests began in December 2023. The Army completed andsigned the report in March 2024.10 Lewiston-Auburn, Department of Public Safety at Augusta, Sagadahoc County, and Cumberland County.5.

Attorney's offices, the New York Administrative Office of the Courts, 11 the FBI, 12 the Bureauof Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and extensive medical records from KellerArmy Community Hospital and Four Winds Hospital in New York.The Commission also scrutinized records, policies, statutes, and regulations from theUnited States Army and ARs, hundreds of videos and photographs, maps, and hundredsmore pages of text and email messages between various individuals. It reviewed acompilation of videos gathered from multiple businesses in and around the two scenes thatpartially documented the shooter's path of travel that evening. It reviewed after-actionreports from Maine law enforcement and others to gather the necessary information toconduct this investigation. Commission members read dozens of external reports andreviewed numerous websites regarding related topics.B. Public MeetingsTo the extent possible, the Commission conducted its business in public. It held sixteenpublic hearings over the course of nine months. All but five of these meetings wereconducted in a public building and all public hearings were recorded and live-streamed. Thisprocedure allowed members of the public to attend either in person or via live stream and tosee and hear the testimony as it unfolded. 13 One hearing was a combination of live in-persontestimony and live testimony over Zoom. Other hearings were conducted by Zoom livestream because the witnesses were located out of state or out of the country, and the use ofZoom live stream in a webinar format was the most appropriate mechanism to permit livepublic observation of the testimony. 14 Video recordings of each session were posted on the11 New York's "Red Flag Law” has strict confidentiality provisions prohibiting public access to actual courtrecords by any person or agency that is not a party to the case. The New York Administrative Office of theCourts, through the assistance of the New York Division of Criminal Justice Services, did provide theCommission a summary of requested case information without revealing the names of the parties or providingcopies of court records. This provided the details the Commission needed while protecting the privacyinterests of the parties involved.12 For some records, the FBI required the return of the records upon completion of the Commission's work. Inothers, the Commission was allowed to keep the records but was required to and did secure permission toinclude the information in this report. The agreement provided that before any of the records can be releasedto the public, the requestor needs permission specifically granted by the FBI.13 Public hearings were held in the Cross Building at the Capitol Complex in Augusta, the Deering Building inAugusta, the University of Maine in Augusta, and Lewiston City Hall. At each of these locations, the facilities,and highly skilled technology and other staff were provided free of charge.14 The Zoom online seminar format permitted the witnesses and members of the Commission to fullyparticipate and offer testimony or ask questions. Persons who were not testifying or asking questions couldonly observe; they could not speak or interrupt the proceedings, thus avoiding the "Zoom bombing” problemencountered by other governmental boards.6.

Commission's website. 15 Those who testified under subpoena were provided withtranscripts of their testimony in accordance with the provisions of the subpoena law.The Commission endeavored to ensure that members of Maine's Deaf community had fullaccess to all the public proceedings. Certified American Sign Language (ASL) interpreterswere employed, and their interpreting was simultaneously broadcast on a split screen. Priorto each live stream hearing, members of the staff and technical specialists met with theinterpreters and enlisted their suggestions and guidance for room arrangement, interpreterlocation, and camera angles to ensure that the interpreters would be seen clearly andsimultaneously on the screen. For one Zoom hearing, interpreters were not available.Closed captioning was enabled during the live hearing, and a split-screen interpretation wasadded to the recording of the session and posted on the Commission's website.C. Private MeetingsOnce the Commission received a compilation of all victim and survivor contact information,the Commission's Executive Director wrote to each individual and offered an opportunity tospeak to the Commission. 16 This included the options of appearing in public, submittingwritten letters or comments, or meeting with the Commission in private. Some requestedprivate meetings with the Commission, while others asked that their written statementsremain private. Recognizing the need for confidentiality and the protection of privacy andemotional well-being, the requests were granted. Ten individuals testified in private.17 TheCommission also received written statements from three other victims and witnesses whor*quested the statements remain private.D. Website and Email NotificationThe day the Governor announced the creation of the Commission, a public website waslaunched. https://www.maine.gov/icl/. The website provided and continues to providebackground information, regular announcements and updates on public hearing dates. Italso serves as a repository for the recordings of all the Commission public hearings.Included on the website is a system for automated email notifications. This allowed allinterested parties to receive timely notification of upcoming Commission meetings andannouncements. Information concerning the availability of the automated system was15 https://www.maine.gov/icl/16 Over 200 letters were sent out. Three of the letters were returned as undeliverable. Staff then reached out toprivate counsel, victim witness advocates, and/or friends or fellow survivors to offer those individuals theopportunity to provide testimony or letters.17 Four of these individuals subsequently elected to testify in public-Nicole Herling, James Herling, Katie Cardand Cara Lamb.7.

provided to victims and survivors via the victim witness advocates. Notice of its availabilitywas published on the website.IV. DETERMINATION OF THE CONTENTS OF THE INTERIM REPORTEarly in the process, and after conferring with legislative leaders, the Commission agreedthat it was important to divulge the Commission's findings up to that point. Recognizing thatthe Commission's work was not completed but that victims, survivors, public officials, andthe general public were eager to learn of the Commission's work and findings to date, theCommission issued an Interim Report. The Report was provided to the Governor and theAttorney General and then released to the public on March 15, 2024.18 It provided a detaileddescription of the facts that had been found to date and the course of action that remainedto be taken. This report is published on the Commission's website:www.maine.gov/icl/sites/maine.gov.icl/files/2024-03/Commission%20Interim%20Report%203-15-24.pdf.V. FACTS AND FINDINGSA. Chronological History Prior to October 25, 20231. May 2023In early May 2023, Card's then 17-year-old son, Colby Card, spoke to his mother, Cara Lamb(Card's former wife), concerning his father's increasingly erratic behavior, anger, andparanoia. He described his father's insistence that people were talking about him andcalling him gay and a pedophile. When Colby told his father that people were not talkingabout him, Card became very angry and accused Colby of participating in the conversations.This behavior, which started in the late winter of 2023, shortly after Card acquired hearingaids, 19 was out of character for Card and deeply concerned his son. Colby told his motherthat he was so worried about his father's actions, anger, and behaviors that he was no longercomfortable spending time at his father's house. 20 Colby also expressed concerns about his18 It was brought to the attention of the Commission that one of the times included in the Interim Reportconcerning the actions taken by the Sagadahoc County Sheriff's Office on September 15, 2023, was incorrect.This clerical error was corrected and the correct time is reflected in the Timeline contained in Section VII ofthis report. While the Commission acknowledges this mistake, it did not alter or affect its findings.19 Card's AR colleague and good friend, Daryl Reed, also testified to this behavioral change and time frame.20 Before 2023, Colby split his time between his father's and mother's homes. He had a good relationship withhis father, and the two spent time together fishing, boating, jet skiing, motorcycling, and participating in otheroutdoor pursuits. At the time of his meeting with the SRO, Colby was a senior in high school and had his ownvehicle, which allowed him to travel freely back and forth between the two homes.8.

father's access to the 10-15 firearms that were stored at his father's house, in his truck, andat other family properties.After speaking with Colby, Cara decided to seek help and advice. On May 3, 2023, Colby andCara met with the school resource officer (SRO) at Colby's school, Mount Ararat High Schoolin Topsham. They explained their concerns for Card's mental health. When the SRO learnedthat Card resided in Bowdoin, she called the Sagadahoc County Sheriff's Office (SCSO) andasked that a deputy respond.A short while later, SCSO Deputy Sheriff Chad Carleton met with them at the school. He tookdetailed statements. He learned that neither Colby nor Cara wanted Card to know that theywere the ones who made the report. During the interview, Carleton learned of Card's longservice in the AR. 21 Carleton, Cara, and Colby decided that Carleton would reach out toCard's AR unit in Saco and try to get him help through the AR. That same day, Carleton spokewith First Sgt. Kelvin Mote, the senior non-commissioned officer (NCO) in Card's companyat the AR unit, who was also a police officer in Ellsworth, Maine.Mote told Carleton that members of the unit were starting to see behavioral changes in Card,but that he did not know it was as serious as described by Colby. Mote told Carleton that theAR unit had a "battle assembly" coming up and that AR members would sit down with Cardand see if they could get him to "open up.""22 Mote was familiar with the AR PsychologicalHealth Program (PHP), which provides mental health assistance to reservists, their families,and their commanders. During his call with Carleton, Mote did not provide any informationabout the PHP to give to Card's family.The next day, Carleton received a call from Cara Lamb. She said that she had spoken toCard's brother, Ryan Card, and told him about their concerns. She informed Carleton thaton the evening of May 3, 2023, Ryan and his sister, Nicole Herling, had gone to Card's hometo check on him. Card met them at the door with a gun in his hand. Although the meeting21 Card joined the AR in 2003. He enjoyed favorable annual reviews and was praised for his work effort,dedication to the unit, and his willingness to lead. Colby and Cara both believed that Card was more likely tolisten to one of his fellow reservists than to a law enforcement officer. During his years in the AR, Card hadreceived a series of promotions and was a Sergeant First Class at the time of the shootings in Lewiston. Heinitially served as a petroleum supply specialist. In 2013, he became a trainer, working each summer with the1,200 incoming cadets at the West Point Military Academy. He was primarily responsible for teaching thecadets how to properly throw live hand grenades. Over the course of his career, Card was present whenthousands of live grenades were thrown each year.22 Battle assembly is the term used by the AR for the once-a-month reserve duty that the soldiers in the unitmust attend. AR regulations require regular attendance at the battle assembly. See AR-135-91, which sets outattendance requirements for reservists and the consequences, including discharge, for failure to attend thenecessary number of battle assemblies each year.9.

was cordial for the most part, Card accused his siblings of talking about him behind his back.He also told them that he thought people were stalking him or casing his home. Afterreceiving this information, Carleton tried to reach Mote again but was unsuccessful.Carleton then sent the following message to all members of the SCSO patrol division:Use extreme caution if responding to Robert Card's residence. Robert'smental health is in decline, and he is experiencing paranoia and hearingvoices. He has several guns inside the house and is in the Army Reserves. Hisfamily and the Army are working on getting Robert help but his brother Ryanreported Robert answered the door with a gun on 5/3/23 when Ryan went tosee him. Robert allegedly believes people are watching/talking about him.There is no evidence that members of the AR sat down with or even attempted a meetingwith Card during the May battle assembly or, for that matter, the June battle assembly. Thereis also no evidence that any member of the AR reached out to the PHP for assistance on howto address Card's deteriorating mental health.2. June 2023Throughout the month of June, Herling continued to research ways to get help for herbrother. She testified that on June 3, 2023, she called the VA Crisis line. The worker shespoke with advised her not to inform command about her brother's delusions of being calledgay or a pedophile as it could harm his career. Herling also testified that despite extensiveonline searches, she could not find clear information on where to report her concerns; muchof the online information was outdated.Between May and July 15, 2023, when Card reported to active duty at West Point, Herlingattempted to reach someone at the AR unit in Saco to talk about the family's increasingconcerns about Card and his deteriorating mental health. 23 She left five voicemail messageson various phones asking for a callback. No one called her back. She also spent hoursconducting Internet and telephone research trying to find help for Card. She called 988 andother numbers and researched behavioral health programs for members of the AR. There isno evidence that she found the PHP website.23 During this time, Card and his family primarily communicated by text. Nicole Herling explained that Cardalso accused family members of talking about him, but they hoped by continuing the contact they could gethim help and assure him his family loved and supported him. They were concerned that Card was gettingworse.10.

3. July and August 2023On July 6, 2023, Card legally purchased a .308 Ruger SFAR rifle with a scope and laser and a9mm Beretta pistol from Fine Line Gun Shop in Poland, Maine. On that date, Card had neverbeen involuntarily hospitalized and had no felony criminal record, domestic violenceprotection order, or weapon restriction ("yellow flag") order that would have prohibited hispurchase under Maine or federal law. 24 Nothing prohibited him from purchasing thefirearms.In the early summer of 2023, Card received orders requiring him to report to the U.S. MilitaryAcademy at West Point for his annual training responsibilities. He and his unit werescheduled to instruct new cadets on properly throwing grenades and operating otherweapons. On July 15, 2023, Card drove to New York and arrived at his accommodations atCamp Smith, a New York National Guard facility, where he and some members of the unitwere staying. He checked in and joined his fellow soldiers at the pool. He immediatelybegan to tell them that the woman at the front desk was talking about him being a pedophile.He also reported that clerks at a rest-stop restaurant on the way to West Point had beensaying the same things. Members of his unit tried to tell him that was not happening, but hedid not believe them. Many members of his unit found his behavior and statements odd anddisconcerting.Later in the early evening, Card and two other members of the AR unit, Daryl Reed andChristopher Wainwright, drove from the hotel to purchase beer and pizza. During the ride,Card accused the other soldiers of talking about him. When asked what he was talkingabout, Card would not explain the comment any further. When they stopped to purchasebeer, Card angrily left the vehicle and, upon returning after purchasing his beer, Card,without provocation, suddenly and aggressively charged his longtime friend Reed withballed-up fists, wanting to fight. Reed backed away and avoided a physical altercation butfound the behavior very disturbing. Reed was also concerned that Card kept repeating, “I'lltake care of it. It's okay. I'll take care of it.” Upon their return to the hotel, Card grabbed hisbeer and stormed off to his room.Reed and Wainwright took the pizza to a common room and told their fellow soldiers aboutCard's behavior. They were concerned for the safety of the cadets and soldiers if Card wereto react violently during the training. They contacted Master Sergeant Ed Yurek to report theirconcerns. Yurek listened to the account of Card's behavior and, believing that the behaviorwas alcohol-related, suggested they should let him “sleep it off." The other reservistsdisagreed and asked that Yurek meet with Card that night. The soldiers also notified Mote24 See Appendices C, D, and F for the various laws that prohibit certain individuals from possessing firearms.11.

about the situation and asked him to assist. Mote was staying some distance away butarrived as quickly as he could.Yurek and Mote then made repeated attempts to get Card to open his door and speak tothem. He refused to open the door, telling them to leave him alone. Eventually, theysummoned base security, who opened the door with a master key. Yurek and Mote were thenfinally able to observe Card's condition. Mote described him as having a blank, fixedexpression, which he called "a thousand-yard stare.” Mote stated that the expression onCard's face was so disturbing that it made the hairs on the back of his neck stand up.Yurek and Mote scanned the room for weapons and found none. They took the keys to Card'srental car. Because of the beer in Card's room, Yurek still suspected alcohol might be theissue. 25 Yurek and Mote agreed they would evaluate Card the following day to see if hiscondition had improved.Early the next morning, July 16, Yurek and Mote found no change. Card was again locked inhis room. He refused to open the door despite orders to do so and would not communicatewith his superiors. They then asked for assistance from the New York State Police.Three New York troopers responded. When the troopers arrived, various reservists explainedwhat had been happening and Card's troubling behavior. They also mentioned the privateweapons that Card owned. The troopers went to Card's room with Yurek and Mote to assessCard's condition. Card again refused to open the door despite orders to do so. After basesecurity again opened the door with a master key, the troopers entered and attempted to talkto Card. He briefly spoke to them, telling them that members of the unit were "scared of me[because they know ] I am capable.”26 When asked what he meant by that, Card did notanswer.After further discussions and the New York troopers telling the reservists their hands weretied because they did not hear Card make any direct threats, the AR unit's leaders agreedthat a command-directed behavioral health evaluation (CDBHE) was warranted. Cpt.Jeremy Reamer, the company commander who was at home in New Hampshire, verballyauthorized a CDBHE over the telephone. 27 Card was informed of the decision to have himevaluated and acknowledged that because it was an order, he had to comply.25 A search of Card's room the next day confirmed it was not alcohol related: Card had only consumed twobeers.26All this interaction was captured on the NY State Police body worn cameras.27 Reamer was in New Hampshire and was not scheduled to be at West Point until later in the deployment.12.

Three soldiers accompanied Card to Keller Army Community Hospital (Keller) in the nearbycity of West Point. Mote drove while Reed and Sgt. Matthew Noyes, also a Maine lawenforcement officer, sat in the middle seat. Card was intentionally placed in the third-rowseat so that he would not have access to the door. Two cruisers, operated by the troopers,and a third vehicle driven by Wainwright, followed the vehicle transporting Card. Thiscaravan was established to ensure the occupants' safety and to provide an immediate policeresponse if the need arose.Reed and Noyes watched Card throughout the nearly hour-long ride to Keller. 28 Reeddescribed him as quiet, just staring out the window, not saying anything. At one point, Cardstarted to weep quietly. When they attempted to get him to talk, he did not say a word.Upon arrival at Keller, hospital personnel instructed the group to maintain a watch on Card.He was taken to an examination room, and the soldiers who accompanied him to thehospital took turns sitting with him. During the first hour, Card and Reed were having a"normal everyday conversation" when Card blurted out, “There they go again, talking aboutme." When asked who was talking about him, Card pointed to some nurses outside theroom, even though the room was enclosed in glass partitions and the doors were closed.Reed described Card's behavior as paranoid. Wainwright then took over the watch. He laterreported to Reed that Card indicated he wanted to "beat [Reed] up and knock out his teeth,"or words to that effect. Both found this behavior disturbing.An emergency room physician initially examined Card and determined that he was exhibitingpsychosis and paranoia and needed to be further examined. Shortly thereafter, a psychiatricnurse practitioner, Capt. Matthew Dickison, 29 examined Card and completed a Report ofMental Status Evaluation (DA Form 3822). The evaluation report stated that Dickisondiagnosed Card with "Unspecified Psychosis not due to a substance or physiologicalcondition." Based on his evaluation of Card, Dickison determined that Card needed to betransferred to another hospital for a higher level of care. When explaining this to Reamer asCard's company commander, Dickison also gave Reamer a series of recommendations:(1) "ensure that Card attends all follow-up appointments, (2) increase leader/supervisorysupport with intent of keeping [Card] engaged with unit members and other sources ofsupport; (3) encourage Card to temporarily secure personal weapons with MPs, arms rooms,or other trusted sources, and (4) restrict access to or disarm all military weapons and28 Testimony indicated that the normal drive time to Keller was around 15 minutes. However, due to the washoutof a local bridge, the caravan had to take a different, longer route to the hospital.29 Dickison, a master's level psychiatric nurse practitioner with 12 years of experience, was on temporaryassignment at Keller. He was later assigned to a post overseas, promoted to Major and testified via Zoom.13.

ammunition. No range duties." He further informed Reamer that Card was not fit for duty. 30According to Dickison, Reamer appeared to understand the recommendations, expressedno concerns about his ability to carry them out, and left Dickison with the impression thathe would follow them.Dickison informed Card that he needed psychiatric hospitalization, and Card agreed to betransferred.31 Arrangements were made to have Card transported via ambulance to FourWinds Hospital (Four Winds) in Katonah, New York. Dickison informed the members ofCard's unit who were at the hospital, including Reamer, of the plan. Card was taken to FourWinds on July 16, 2023, and, after discussions with staff there, he signed a form indicatingthat he was voluntarily admitting himself to the hospital for treatment. 32 He stayed at FourWinds from July 16 to August 3, 2023.33 Upon admission, he received a psychosocialassessment during which he acknowledged having a “hit list." He also stated that he hadtold a military peer that if he didn't stop talking about him, he'd “be added to my list." Cardwas assessed as having psychosis and thought disorder. The risk factors and high-riskpsychosocial issues requiring immediate intervention in a treatment plan were Card'saccess to firearms and his active thoughts of homicidal ideation, as demonstrated by his hitlist.On July 26, 2023, ten days later, Card underwent a psychodiagnostic evaluation to assist histreatment team in reaching a diagnosis and developing a treatment plan. 34 The psychologistwho conducted the evaluation stated that there were three aspects of Card's personalitythat were likely to cause him difficulty: inconsistent coping skills, poor emotional controls,and narcissism. This was apparently based, in part, on Card's reporting that “he feelsconstantly persecuted, misunderstood, and underappreciated by others." The psychologist30 Card's access to his assigned (military-owned) weapon was restricted on July 20, 2023.31 Dickison testified that because Card agreed to go to Four Winds, there was no need for him to begin theprocess under New York law for an involuntary commitment. See Appendices H and I.32 Under both federal and state laws that prohibit a person involuntarily hospitalized from possessing a firearm,there must be a finding by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of amental illness, is a danger to self or others and that the person must be committed to the hospital for furthertreatment. In this case, no hearing was ever held, and no finding that Card was a danger to himself or otherswas ever made by a court. See Appendices C, D, E, F, I, and Q for the various statutes.33 Reamer extended Card's active-duty orders to include this entire period, thereby enabling him to get paidwhile hospitalized. Reamer could have invoked other AR regulations that would have extended his duty andallowed continued treatment and care, and continued Army authority over him after his discharge. He did notdo so.34 Card's treating psychiatrist voluntarily agreed to provide a statement and to be questioned by theCommission. Due to New York privacy law concerns, the Commission agreed to a private meeting. Thepsychiatrist relied, in part, on this psychodiagnostic testing in formulating Card's treatment plan.14.

also opined that Card's paranoia “is of sufficient magnitude that it may reach delusionalproportions at least part of the time." The doctor further suggested that given all the factorsinvolved, although there might be some limited benefit from the use of psychotropicmedications, Card appeared to be a poor candidate for psychological treatment, and hisprognosis for significant change was guarded.On July 27, 2023, at 5 p.m., Dickison called Reamer. He reviewed the findings on DA 3822and the need for discharge planning for Card. In the notes he made after speaking withReamer, Dickison wrote that he told Reamer that he needed to "include medical regardingdiscussion to start medical board process 35 and service members (sic) medical dispositiongoing forward." He also wrote, "It was also discussed with Commander about making surethat steps are taken to remove weapons from service members home to ensure safety."Dickison noted, “Commander did not have any questions or concerns after ourconversation."Reamer said he had had difficulties retrieving a copy of the DA 3822 form due to email issuesand agreed to come to Keller on July 28, 2023, to pick up a hard copy left for him at the frontdesk. 36 This report provided a diagnosis, findings, and the list of specific recommendationsreferenced above.When Dickison testified before the Commission, he explained, 37 "I was all about making surethe service member did not have access to weapons." Dickison told the Commission thatReamer appeared to understand all his recommendations, was going to ensure that Card'spersonal weapons were removed from his home and see to it that the recommendationswere followed. At no time did Reamer express concerns that he would be unable to followthe recommendations or that he lacked the authority to do so. After this conversation,Dickison had no further contact with Reamer.35 The Medical Board review process occurs when a service member's treating physicians believe the soldierwill not be able to return to duty for medical reasons. It can be part of the discharge and/or retirement processand is initiated by the soldier's treating physician. See Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness)and Army Regulation 635-40 (Disability Evaluation for Retention, Retirement or Separation).36 Reamer needed to return to Keller to complete other paperwork. In the further comments section of the DA3822, it was specifically recommended the "SM( Service Member) Chain of Command stay engaged with theSM care." It was also recommended that measures be taken to safely remove all firearms and weapons fromSM's HOR (home of residence).37 The nurse practitioner previously sent a copy of the DA 3822 form to Capt. Reamer's email. The DA 3822 formis a report of a soldier's mental status evaluation. Capt. Reamer later testified that his email was not workingat the time. Nevertheless, Capt. Reamer was verbally informed of the information on the form, including Card'sdiagnosis and condition and the need to ensure the weapons were removed. A hard copy was left for him topick up at the front desk.15.

Reamer neglected to follow any of the recommendations Dickison gave him. In fact, heignored them. Nor did he complete the Developmental Counseling Form (DA Form 4856)that, among other things, directed Card to make and maintain regular contact with his casemanagement team. Reamer failed to follow up with treatment providers, failed to read emailmessages 38 concerning Card, failed to heed the advice of the providers to ensure the removalof all firearms from Card's home, 39 failed to contact the SCSO or have other members of hisunit who were law enforcement officers in Maine contact the SCSO to arrange for theremoval of the weapons, and failed to follow up with Card to ensure that he was participatingin treatment.Lt. Col. Ryan Vazquez, who assumed the position of Battalion Commander in late June2023, testified that he discussed Mr. Card's diagnosis and hospitalization with Reamer firston July 16, 2023. They discussed his diagnosis, his inpatient hospitalization, and theCommander's Critical Information Report (CCIR).40 Vazquez and Reamer spoke aboutCard's treatment progress a few more times during Card's hospitalization. It does not appearthat Vazquez provided Reamer with any meaningful advice, guidance, or direction aboutCard. Neither Reamer nor Vazquez ordered a Line of Duty Investigation to determine Card'sduty status.Reamer and Vazquez both explained to the Commission that the AR had more limitedauthority over Card while he was in civilian status than they would have had if Card had beena full-time soldier. However, they neglected to use the tools available to them. They failedto initiate a Line of Duty Investigation (LODI) while Card was still at Four Winds. That processwould have extended Card's active-duty orders and allowed him to be held longer. Reamermade no effort to compel Card to appear at either the September or October 2023 battleassemblies. This omission flew in the face of Dickison's recommendation, which Reamerappeared to accept, to “increase leader/supervisory support with intent of keeping [Card]engaged with unit members and other sources of support." At the battle assemblies, Reameror a ranking NCO could have engaged Card about his failure to attend his follow-upappointments and encouraged Card to "temporarily secure personal weapons with MPs,arms rooms, or other trusted sources.""41 Reamer also could have ordered Card to undergoanother command-directed mental health evaluation.38 Card's treatment providers also sent Reamer this report via email on July 27, 2023. Reamer testified that hedid not read this message until after the shootings in Lewiston occurred, some three months after it was sent.He testified that "his computer was down" during those three months.39 Four Winds also urged Reamer to have Card's weapons removed from his home. Reamer ignored Four Wind'srecommendation.40 A CCIR is a Commander's Critical Information Report. In this case, it contained details surrounding theincident that led to Card's transportation to Keller and Card's diagnosis.41 See AR-190-11, Sections 4-5.16.

The AR leadership did not try any of these options. Card was left to continue in his isolation,disengaged from other unit members or other sources of support. Instead of trying to secureCard's weapons through the chain of command, Reamer inexplicably left the task to SeanHodgson, Card's friend, who had no authority over Card 42 and was himself prohibited frompossessing firearms during the summer and fall of 2023.On July 26, 2023, a nurse case manager from the Army Reserve's Psychological Healthprogram (PHP) emailed Card, introduced herself, and offered Card help in securing serviceswhen he got out of Four Winds. The only information provided to her about Card was theCCIR report that had been created as a result of Card's Command Directed BehavioralHealth Evaluation. She was never provided and never had access to any of Card's medicalrecords from either Keller or Four Winds, his psychological assessment results, or the DA3822 Report of Mental Status Evaluation.Card underwent extensive medical and psychiatric testing while at Four Winds. While heinitially resisted group therapy or treatment, he was always compliant with his medicationand, over the course of his treatment, hospital staff saw improvements in his condition. Dr.Klagsbrun, Card's treating psychiatrist, and other staff members participated in weekly callswith Dr. Sanchez and others at Keller and specifically discussed Card's care and situation.While Klagsbrun said the name Reamer was familiar, she could not state with certainty thatReamer was on any of these calls.On July 28, 2023, Four Winds Hospital filed a petition with a New York court, seeking an orderof continued admission for involuntary treatment. This was because Card had filed apetition for release a few days earlier. The hospital's petition was dismissed on August 1,2023, after Card withdrew his petition for release. No court hearing ever occurred.Klagsburn stated that given Card's progress in treatment, his agreement to continue hismedications and participate in therapy and his stabilization at that point in time, she did notfeel that the hospital would be successful in court.Klagsbrun also testified that she considered six factors over the course of Card's treatment,in determining when, and if, he was safe for discharge:1. His aggression risk,2.His homicidal risk,3. His suicidal risk,4.His behavior in the hospital (i.e. was he unsafe to self or others),5. His protective factors vs. risk factors, and6.His medication compliance.42 Card was an E-7, and Hodgson was an E-6.17.

It was her opinion, that as of the date of his discharge, Card was safe to be released. Hisdischarge plans were discussed by Klagsbrun with Sanchez at Keller on August 1, 2023. Theyalso discussed the need to see that the firearms were removed from Card's home. Klagsbruncalled Sanchez asking him to ensure that the SAFE Act petition had indeed been filed as itwas a very important safety concern.43After 19 days of treatment at Four Winds, Card was discharged, and he returned home toMaine on August 3, 2023.44 Prior to his discharge, Card told the medical professionals thathe would engage in treatment, take his medications, and reach out for help and support fromfamily members and friends.45 Despite these promises, he engaged in no treatment betweenAugust 3 and October 25, 2023, took almost none of his prescribed medication, 46 and didnot answer or return calls or emails from treating professionals. 47 He also failed to make anyappointments with a telemedicine service that was chosen for him. In an entry datedSeptember 21, 2023, Keller records indicated that Card's case with the hospital would beclosed due to his noncompliance. 48On August 5, 2023, two days after his release from the hospital, Card went to CoastalDefense Firearms in Auburn, Maine, to pick up a silencer he had previously ordered. As43 In an earlier conversation, Sanchez told Klagsbrun he thought a SAFE Act petition had been filed but that hehad to verify it.44 His friend and fellow Army Reservist Sgt. Sean Hodgson drove from Maine to New York to pick up Card.Hodgson had text message exchanges with Reamer before he left Maine, during the trip back and upon theirreturn home. Despite Reamer's claims to Army investigators that he did not know about Card's discharge, textmessages produced to the Commission demonstrate otherwise.45 Hospital records indicate that it was initially difficult for medical personnel to reach Card's mother, who wasnamed as the only family point of contact. There was a family meeting via conference call where his dischargeand follow-up were discussed. Testimony taken by the Commission demonstrated that Mrs. Card hadlimitations that would have made her unable to truly supervise or assist Card in his post-release treatment.46 After the Lewiston shootings, the Maine State Police obtained a search warrant for Card's home. They founda prescription for Olanzapine for 60 pills that was filled on August 3, 2023. The instructions were to take onepill in the morning and one at night. They found 53 pills left in the container. A postmortem examination andautopsy found no evidence of this or any other medication in Card's system.47 Card did have one conversation with a nurse from Keller on August 11, 2023. During that conversation, hereported he "was fine” but that he was not taking his medication and would not go for follow-up treatment. Inall, that same nurse left eight voicemail messages for Card between August 7 and September 21, 2023, askinghim to call. None of these calls was returned. It does not appear that this nurse took any steps to alert Reameror Vazquez of Card's refusal to take his medications or participate in treatment.48 The Army Reserve Medical Management Center (AR-MMC) did attempt to continue contact with Card. Itsefforts are described later in this report.18.

mandated by federal law, the gun shop required Card to fill out and sign a form concerninghis eligibility to purchase it. On that form, Card indicated that he had been committed to amental health institution.49 Based on that response, the gun shop refused to complete thetransaction and Card left without the silencer. 50 In subsequent discussions with his fellowArmy Reservists and his brother, he expressed anger about being denied the opportunity topurchase the silencer.On August 9, 2023, Card texted his brother and told him he had "purchased a gun safe" forhimself. This safe was located in his garage after the shooting. There were multiple otherfirearms inside.On August 11, 2023, the PHP nurse case manager again reached out to Card and spoke tohim by phone. She offered assistance to help him secure treatment services. She did notask him about access to firearms, but Card volunteered that his access to firearms waslimited. In responding to questions from the Commission, the nurse case managerdescribed him as being frustrated by that. The nurse stated that Card told her that he hadalready been connected with care and that he did not need any additional resources. Perher employer's standards of care in place at the time, she closed the case because thesoldier declined services. 51 The nurse case manager provided no report or other informationto Card's Commanders to let them know the outcome.4. September 2023The AR unit did not hold a battle assembly in August 2023. One was scheduled forSeptember 16-17, 2023. During the early morning hours of September 13, 2023, Hodgsonwas traveling back from the casino in Oxford, Maine, with Card. Card, who was drivingerratically, suddenly became very angry, pounded the steering wheel, and punched Hodgsonin the face. Hodgson was able to exit the vehicle safely and walk home. Hodgson calledReamer when he got home and reported what happened. Reamer took no action. That samenight, Hodgson also spoke to Reed and reported what happened.5249 Card mistakenly thought that his voluntary admission met the criterion to answer yes to the question, “Haveyou ever been committed to a mental institution?” Only involuntary commitments meet that criterion. SeeAppendix R.50 There is no requirement in federal law for the gun shop owner to report the refusal to sell the silencer, or forthat matter any other firearm, to local, state, or federal law enforcement.51 This policy was changed after October 25, 2023.52 Records recently obtained from First Fleet, the employer of both Card and Hodgson, show that they bothhad the day off on Tuesday, September 12. This corroborates information from other sources that the Casinotrip was on September 12 and the assault and threatening occurred in the early morning hours ofSeptember 13."19.

Then, on Friday September 15, in the early morning hours, Hodgson sent the following textmessage to Reamer and Mote:Change the passcode to the unit gate and be armed if sfc card does arrive.Please. I believe he is messed up in the head. And threaten the unit other andother places. I love to death but do not know how to help him and he refusesto get help or continue help. I'm afraid he's going to f*ck up his life from hearingthings he thinks he heard. When I dropped him off, he was concerned hisweapons were still in the car. I believe they were at the unit. And no onesearched his vehicle on federal property. And yes he still has all his weapons.I'm not there I'm at my own place. I believe he is going to snap and do a massshooting.Mote testified that Hodgson's text again caused “the hairs to go up on the back of my neck."Later that morning, Mote discussed Hodgson's text with Reamer, and they decided to ask theSCSO to conduct a well-being check on Card at his residence in Bowdoin to gauge his mentalhealth and determine if he was a threat to himself or others. Mote, himself a member of theEllsworth Police Department, discussed the plan with his deputy chief, who told him to havean Ellsworth detective request a well-being check by the SCSO. 53Later that day, Mote spoke with Ellsworth police detective Corey Bagley. Bagley opened aninvestigation into Card's threats against Mote and his AR unit. Mote prepared a detailednarrative outlining all that had happened with Card in the previous months. 54 Mote told theCommission he intended that narrative to be “a statement of probable cause" for theSheriff's Office to use to begin securing a yellow flag order. 55 Mote had successfully obtainedsuch an order in another matter the week before and was familiar with the procedure.53 Because Mote had been instrumental in initiating the hospitalization in New York and could be a potentialtarget of Card's anger, his deputy chief believed it was best to have another officer initiate the contact with theSagadahoc County Sheriff's Office.54 This detailed statement from Mote provided more than sufficient information for Skolfield to initiate the yellowflag law petition. It has been long established in Maine that a police officer may establish probable cause throughthe collective knowledge of all law enforcement officers involved in an investigation. See, State v. Bradley, 658 A.2d236 (Me 1995), State v. Baker, 502 A.2d 489 (Me. 1985), State v. Libby, 453 A,2d 481, 485 (Me. 1982). This alsoincludes information from private citizens who have spoken with or interacted with them. See, 34-B MRS §3862(1).55 Before October 25, 2023, no yellow flag petitions had been filed by the Sagadahoc County Sheriff's Office.Statewide, 81 petitions were filed between 2020 and late October 2023. As of July 31, 2024, recordsmaintained by the Office of the Attorney General indicate that since October 25, 2023, 290 petitions have beenfiled statewide. SCSO filed 14 of them.20.

After receiving the information from Mote, Bagley attempted to reach Carleton. When helearned Carleton was not on duty, he asked for a supervisor because the matter "can't wait"and was "time sensitive." At 2:38 p.m., Bagley spoke to Sgt. Aaron Skolfield of the SagadahocCounty Sheriff's Office. Bagley informed him of the contents of Mote's statement and askedSkolfield to perform a welfare check on Card.At 2:46 p.m., Skolfield notified his dispatch center that he would be attempting a welfarecheck. He downplayed the serious nature of Card's mental health decline, 56 stating in thisrecorded telephone call that the matter “was not as pressing as they (the Ellsworth, Maine,Police Department) 57 made it sound" and stated, "He's flagged in-house, known to be armedand dangerous, blah blah blah.""58 When Skolfield arrived at Card's home at 3:09 p.m., noone was home. After looking for but not finding Card at his father's home, Skolfield returnedto Card's home at 3:24 p.m. Again, no one was home. Thirteen minutes later, Skolfieldreceived an email that included Mote's statement.Despite his stated belief that the matter was not as pressing as the members of the AR unitmade it seem, Skolfield broadcast the following “File 6” notice regarding Card to lawenforcement agencies statewide at 5:11 p.m. on September 15th:***CAUTION OFFICER SAFETY-KNOWN TO BE ARMED AND DANGEROUS*** ROBERTHAS BEEN SUFFERING FROM PSYCHOTIC EPISODES &HEARING VOICES. HE IS AFIREARMS INSTRUCTOR AND MADE THREATS TO SHOOT UP THE NATIONAL GUARDARMORY IN SACO. HE WAS COMMITTED OVER THE SUMMER FOR TWO WEEKS DUETO HIS ALTERED MENTAL HEALTH STATE, BUT THEN RELEASED.. .IF LOCATED USEEXTREME CAUTION, CHECK MENTAL HEALTH WELLBEING AND ADVISESAGADAHOC SD VIA SAGADAHOC COMMS 443-9711Other members of the AR unit were also concerned about Card. Yurek, who had beenpresent in New York when Card's behavior led to his command-directed evaluation andhospitalization, was also a lieutenant with the Brunswick Police Department. He reachedout to Sgt. Monica Fahey of the Saco Police Department at 2:17 a.m. on September 16th to56 While Skolfield was aware of the warning Carlton posted in the SCSO internal records system in Mayregarding Card, he did not access or know of Carleton's May 2023 report.57 In that conversation with Skolfield, Bagley specifically suggested that Card was a perfect candidate for ayellow flag law petition. During this same conversation, Skolfield reported to Bagley that he was going onvacation.58 The Sagadahoc County Sheriff's Office provided a transcript of this telephone conversation early in theinvestigation. On May 7, 2024, Skolfield's counsel provided a rebuttal to the Commission's Interim Report, includingan audio recording of this conversation, in which he discussed Card's mental state. The recording demonstratesthat Skolfield's comments were made in a dismissive tone of voice.21.

advise her of the background of the case, the existence of the File 6 notice that Skolfield hadissued the evening before, and of Card's threat to "shoot up the Armory" in Saco. At 7 a.m.a Saco police sergeant and three patrol officers were assigned to position themselves in theimmediate area of the AR facility to respond if Card appeared for the battle assembly onSeptember 16, 2023. Card did not appear. 59 The Saco officers spoke to Reamer later thatmorning. Reamer told them that he had spoken with Card and Card reported that he was notgoing to attend the battle assembly that weekend. He also downplayed the severity of thethreat relayed by Hodgson despite his knowledge of Card's long hospitalization just eightweeks earlier and the fact that other members of the AR unit were deeply worried.At 8:45 a.m. on September 16, 2023, while the Saco officers were awaiting Card's possiblearrival at the Saco AR facility, Skolfield returned to Card's residence. He noticed that Card'svehicle was there and called the Kennebec County Sheriff's Office for a backup unit. A shortwhile later, a Kennebec County deputy arrived, and the two deputies knocked on Card's door.Although they could hear someone moving around inside, no one answered. Skolfieldexpressed concern about “their exposure” at the front of the house so they left theresidence. This attempt by Skolfield and the Kennebec County deputy sheriff to contactCard took approximately 16 minutes from start to finish.Later that morning, Skolfield spoke with Card's father, who said he did not know whereCard's guns were located. Skolfield was unable to reach Card's brother, Ryan Card, that day.At 10:46 a.m. on September 16th, Skolfield called Reamer. Reamer did not tell Skolfield thatthe providers at Keller and Four Winds recommended that Card not have access to weaponsin the military or at home. Reamer did not suggest that Card needed to undergo a riskassessment, and despite acknowledging that “I don't think this is gonna get any better,” heappeared to minimize the risk that Card posed to the community.60 Shortly after thisconversation, Skolfield was called away to a domestic violence call and did not return toCard's residence.On September 17, 2023, Skolfield spoke briefly to Ryan Card and his wife Katie Card. Aroundnoon, Katie told him the guns had not been removed. Two hours later, when Skolfield spoke59 During a phone conversation on September 15th, Card told Reamer he would not be appearing for the battleassembly that weekend and that he was "still mad” about what happened in New York. Reamer did not relaythis information to Mote, Yurek, or other members of the unit who had been involved in getting Card to Keller inJuly.60 During the conversation Reamer gave very basic responses to Skolfield's questions. Skolfield brieflydiscussed the yellow flag process but then said" that um, obviously is a hurdle we have to deal with, but at thesame time, we don't wanna throw a stick of dynamite into a pool of gas either and make things worse". Reamerreplied "yea, yeah, I hear ya."22.

to Ryan and inquired about the status of the guns,61 Ryan responded that he would try tosecure them. Skolfield also asked Ryan to determine whether Card needed a psychiatricevaluation and to report his observations back to Skolfield. Skolfield made no plans withRyan for a follow-up conversation other than to state that if Ryan determined a psychiatricevaluation was needed, Ryan should call the Sheriff's Office, and personnel would "assistthe family in arranging for Card to be evaluated.”"62 Skolfield made no plans to contact Cardor to follow up to see if the firearms had indeed been removed.At that point, Skolfield decided there was no need for him or the SCSO to be involved anyfurther. He considered the matter “resolved,” stating that no person expressly said that heor she "wanted to press charges.""63 Skolfield notified his supervisor, Lt. Brian Quinn, of hisconclusions. Quinn deferred to his “judgment as an experienced officer" and did notundertake any further action or review other than notifying his supervisor, Chief Deputy BrettStrout. Strout did not take any further action and did not assign any other deputy sheriff tothe matter.Skolfield failed to follow up with Ryan Card, did not attempt another well-being check, didnot consult with the District Attorney's Office about the possibility of a yellow flag order, anddid not contact the AR unit or any of its members for further information. He failed to readCarleton's report from May. Skolfield left on vacation on September 18, 2023.In September 2023, the SCSO and other area law enforcement agencies entered into acontract with a mental health specialist who was hired specifically to provide services,advise officers on mental health matters, and function as a liaison between the departmentand citizens. The goal of this contract was to assist officers handling mental health casesand to get citizens in distress the help they needed. The mental health specialist underwenttraining in September and was fully available in October but was never consulted or used inCard's case. Skolfield had received the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) weeklongCrisis Intervention Team training. He did not consult with NAMI, the Maine Office of61 Skolfield apparently did not appreciate the seriousness of the situation. Card's paranoia and delusions wereunchecked, he believed he was being reviled and persecuted, and he had access to multiple guns at twolocations-his home and a gun safe located at the family farm. Skolfield did not inquire as to the number,location, and types of firearms at Card's home or in the family safe. Had he read Deputy Carleton's May report,he would have learned some of this information.62 As the Commission previously stated in the Interim Report, these actions were an abdication of the duty ofthe SCSO.63 It is not up to private citizens to decide whether to "press charges." Prosecutors decide which charges to filebased on their review of the information provided to them by investigating law enforcement officers.23.

Behavioral Health, or Sweetser, which all provide mental health services or information, orany other mental health resources.5. October 1-25, 2023After Skolfield returned from vacation on October 1, 2023, he did not attempt to meet withCard, check back with other members of the Card family, or attempt to call Card. He nevercalled Hodgson or other members of the AR unit who could have provided him with first-hand information about Card and his declining mental health. Neither he nor anyone elsein the Sheriff's Office consulted with the mental health liaison on ways to address the issueor seek assistance in contacting Card. He closed the case on October 1, 2023. Withouttaking any further action, Skolfield canceled the File 6 notice at 8:54 a.m. on October 18,2023, just one week before Card committed Maine's deadliest mass shooting.On October 19, 2023, Card made a delivery to a warehouse in Hudson, New Hampshire.While there, he told two employees that he knew they were talking about him. Card toldthem, "Maybe you will be the ones I snap on.” Neither worker had said anything about himor to him, and nothing further occurred. They reported this information to the Hudson PoliceDepartment in the early morning hours of October 26, 2023, after one of the workersrecognized Card's photograph on the news.On October 23, 2023, Bagley spoke with Mote concerning the open Ellsworth PoliceDepartment case on Card. Mote told him that nothing had been done with Card. He statedthat Card was not helping himself by failing to cooperate with the military and that he wouldbe "forced out with a discharge" in the next few days. 64 Mote stated that he was unaware ofany new threats against him; Bagley closed the case.A post-shooting forensic analysis by the Maine State Police Computer Crime Unit (CCU) ofCard's emails showed that between August 25, 2023, and October 26, 2023, Card receivedover 1200 emails to his personal email address. Of these, he opened fewer than 20. Hereceived and opened five emails from personnel with the Army Reserve MedicalManagement Center (AR-MMC). In each email, AR-MMC personnel indicated they wereattempting to reach him to update his behavioral health profile and provide variousdocuments. In at least two of the emails, the AR-MMC personnel indicated that they hadtried to reach Card by phone. Card did not respond to any of these emails. The last email64 Military records provided to the Commission indicate that initial retirement paperwork was sent to Cardearlier in the summer. There was no pending retirement application, and Reamer failed to file any reports orother documents needed to begin the medical board review process or force a medical discharge. Cardreceived computer-generated notices about his absences from the April, September, and October battleassemblies that could have resulted in discipline or discharge. The third notice, sent by registered mail, wasreturned undelivered on October 25, 2023.24.

that Card opened was from the AR-MMC on October 24, 2023. Reamer was copied on eachof the five AR-MMC emails.65 No documents were provided by the AR or the AR-MMCindicating that Reamer responded to or inquired about the contents of the emails.Another post-shooting forensic analysis was conducted on Card's cell phone. On October22, 2023, at 16 minutes past midnight, Card generated a note stating that he had “hadenough" and was trained to "hurt people." It does not appear that this note was evertransmitted to anyone. The analysis also determined that the last message from Card'sphone occurred at 11:01 a.m. on October 24, 2023, and was sent to an unknown number.Card was looking for the power cord for his griddle. The last instant message/text he receivedbefore the shootings was an automated message on October 24, 2023, at 11:21 a.m., fromhis house cleaning service. The last call to Mr. Card occurred on October 24, 2023. It wasfrom the AR PHP program. When the caller identified herself, Card hung up. Card's phonelast moved at 6:05 p.m. on October 25, 2023. He left it behind at his home before departingfor Just-In-Time Recreation.66B. Robert Card II's Actions on October 25, 2023, and theImmediate AftermathSometime after 6:05 p.m. on October 25, 2023, Card left his home in Bowdoin and traveledapproximately 17 miles to Just-In-Time-Recreation in Lewiston. His precise route andwhether he made any stops along the way are unknown. 67Card entered Just-In-Time Recreation at 6:54:20 p.m. through a set of double glass doors atthe front entrance. More than 60 patrons and employees, including 20 children, werepresent. Card was armed with a .308 Ruger SFAR rifle with a scope and a laser targetingdevice.In 45 seconds,68 he fired 18 rounds, killing eight people and wounding three others.Additional people suffered physical injuries while trying to hide or escape. Among those65 Reamer also failed to follow up with Card about these emails, whether via text, email, instant message, byphone or by arranging for a personal visit by him or others in the unit's command staff. He testified that hisemails were "down" at the time they were originally sent, and that he did not read them until after the shooting.He did not explain why, as Card's commanding officer, he had not read any AR emails between July and October2023.66 Both searches and analyses occurred only after applications for search warrants had been approved.67Security videos secured from businesses immediately surrounding Just-in-Time Recreation show his arrivaland departure.68 These times were determined by analysis of the security camera tapes at Just-in-Time Recreation.25.

killed at Just-In-Time were Tricia Asselin, Thomas Conrad, youth bowling league coachRobert Violette, his wife Lucille Violette, and 14-year-old Aaron Young and his father, WilliamYoung. Two patrons, Jason Walker and Michael Deslauriers II, were killed as they charged atand attempted to disarm Card. Their actions gave other patrons more time to flee or hideand saved many lives. There were numerous other acts of bravery and heroism.Card departed Just-in-Time at 6:55:05 p.m. He got into his white Subaru and headed southon Main Street (US Route 202) toward Schemengees Bar and Grille.At 6:55:31 p.m., a dispatcher received the first 911 call from Just-in-Time. Multiple othercalls followed. Regional communications centers in Lewiston-Auburn, Cumberland County,and Augusta immediately dispatched law enforcement officers to respond to the scene. At6:59 p.m., the first officers from the Lewiston Police Department and an AndroscogginCounty deputy sheriff arrived. Less than 20 seconds later, 69 they entered the building tosearch for Card and render aid to victims.70 Emergency medical services also responded.Meanwhile, Card drove approximately four miles from Just-in-Time Recreation toSchemengees Bar and Grille. He left his car running and entered the building at 7:07:34p.m.71 During the next 78 seconds, he fired 36 rounds, killing ten people and wounding tenothers. Bartender Joseph Walker was killed as he grabbed a knife and tried to stop Card. Hisactions distracted Card and saved lives. Others responded bravely and helped save lives.The other persons killed at Schemengees were Arthur Strout, Joshua Seal, Ronald Morin,Stephen Vozzella, Keith Mcneir, Bryan MacFarlane, Maxx Hathaway, Peyton Brewer-Ross,and William Brackett. Seal, Vozzella, Brackett, and MacFarlane were members of Maine'sDeaf community.While Card was still shooting at people in Schemengees, a patron located the main powerswitch and shut off the power to the building. Because that action rendered the buildingpitch dark, it allowed others to flee or hide. Card left six seconds later.69 The Commission notes that the first responding officers did not hesitate to rush in to try and locate Card andrender aid to the victims and survivors.70 The co-owner of the business, Samantha Juray, quickly locked the doors as soon as Card departed. She alsounlocked the doors for law enforcement and provided them with a description of Card. Another employeeescorted children into a safe area and was shot in the process. Another patron hustled several children,including one who was badly injured, into a storage closet and barricaded the door.71 On his way in, he passed an unidentified individual standing outside next to the door and left him unharmed.26.

The first calls for help to 911 operators from Schemengees Bar and Grille were received at7:08 p.m. Multiple calls followed. The first three officers arrived at 7:13 p.m. They were metby patrons in the parking lot, some screaming that the shooter was still inside while othersshouted that he had left. Like the officers who responded to Just-in-Time Recreation, thefirst responding officers did not hesitate to rush inside, searching for Card and then renderingaid to victims. Realizing that there were many wounded individuals who needed immediateaid, first responders also stepped up to transport them in their cruisers and trucks, ensuringthat they received medical attention as quickly as possible.72Eighteen .308 caliber cartridge casings, four live .308 caliber cartridges, multiple bullets, andbullet fragments, and one 25-round capacity magazine containing twenty-two live .308caliber cartridges were recovered inside Just-In-Time. Thirty-six fired .308 cartridge casings,one empty 25-round capacity magazine, and multiple bullets and bullet fragments wererecovered inside and outside Schemengees.C. The Emergency Response - October 25-27, 2023During the unprecedented manhunt and criminal investigation that followed Card's actions,over 400 law enforcement personnel responded to Lewiston and the surroundingcommunities in search of Card. They came from local, county, state, and federal agenciesfrom across Maine, New England, and beyond. Additionally, 16 tactical teams, multipleaircraft and dive teams, and other specially trained evidence response teams from acrossthe Northeast participated in the search and investigation.Hundreds more emergency communication specialists, emergency medical technicians,police cadets, data analysts, victim witness coordinators, ASL interpreters, and hospitalemployees also responded. The precise number of responders or the number of respondersfrom individual agencies cannot be reliably determined because no centralized list ordatabase was established or maintained. Some came at the specific direction or orders oftheir agencies; others, on their days off or on vacation, simply appeared and went to work. 73The emergency communication centers answered more than 900 calls, and the tiplineentered over 861 calls into its database. Over 580 pieces of evidence were collected,72 A private company provides ambulance services for the City of Lewiston. All its ambulances were tied up atJust-in-Time Recreation. While calls to other communities for ambulance response were made, firstresponders decided not to wait for their arrival and, instead, transported some of the injured persons in cruisersor game warden trucks. One unidentified private citizen was flagged down and took an injured person to thehospital.73 For example, a director of victim witness services from Iowa was on vacation in Maine when the shootingshappened. She canceled her remaining vacation plans and came to Lewiston for three days to assist Maine'svictim witness advocates.27.

cataloged, and stored. An additional 475 non-evidentiary personal effects were gathered bythe Maine State Police and the Maine Office of Chief Medical Examiner, and, with thecoordination of the FBI Victim Services Response team, all the items were cataloged andeventually returned to their owners or the next of kin. A few of the items were destroyed atthe owners' request. Personal vehicles that had been parked at the two scenes werephotographed, processed, and returned to their owners.74All law enforcement command-level officials candidly admitted that in the initial hours afterthe first 911 call, the response and the scenes were utter chaos. The sheer number ofresponding officers, the severity of the injuries at each location, the number of false reportsin quick succession, and the need to quickly and effectively “clear the buildings” to ensurethe shooter was still not inside and to render aid to the injured, created unprecedentedchallenges.1. October 25, 2023Lt. James Theiss of the Lewiston Police Department and Chief Jason Moen of the AuburnPolice Department quickly determined that scene command and control was necessary ateach location until the Maine State Police could assume control. 75 They directed respondingofficers and emergency medical personnel to enter and search, establish perimeters,provide security, render aid, and direct survivors/witnesses to centralized locations so thatofficers could begin gathering necessary identifying information and statements. Theyattempted to coordinate dispatch responses, control the scene, and communicatedirections to officers. Other first-responding officers assisted in these matters.Early in the process at the two crime scenes, survivors were instructed to gather in an areaaway from the buildings but in areas that were well lit and visible to responding officers.76Police officers searched for victims who had fled into adjoining wooded areas or along the74 In one of the unlocked vehicles, investigators observed a firearm and related equipment. The investigatorsneeded to determine ownership and ensure that it was not related to the shootings. This caused a delay in therelease of some of the other vehicles because they needed to process and document the scene. In someinstances, owners did not have their keys because they had been left behind. Keys had to be retrieved,documented and matched to the owners before the cars could be moved.75 Under Maine law, the Attorney General is responsible for investigating and prosecuting all homicides. TheMaine State Police are designated as the investigating agency statewide, except in Portland and Bangor. Inthose cities, the municipal police departments are so designated. Maine State Police troopers had to travel toLewiston to establish the Command Center.76 Some survivors testified that being directed to an area directly under the illuminated business sign madethem feel exposed and vulnerable. On the other hand, other survivors would have felt uncomfortable if theywere told to stay in the shadows.28.

riverbank. An injured Deaf individual was found in the woods along the riverbank andtransported to the hospital. Eventually, survivors were taken to the Lewiston Armory, whereofficers from the Cumberland County Sheriff's Office and agents from the FBI conductedpreliminary interviews and obtained information. The survivors were then transported fromthe Armory to a local school where a “family reunification center" was established.78When it was discovered that some of the victims were members of the Deaf community, anofficer from the Lewiston Police Department who knew American Sign Language wasassigned to the Armory. Certified American Sign Language interpreters were initially turnedaway from the Armory by officers providing security79 and were not permitted entrance intothe hospitals for several hours by security personnel.80Throughout the evening and nighttime hours of October 25, patrol officers saturatedLewiston and surrounding communities and responded to dozens of reported sightings.81Officers went to local businesses that were open, advised them to close, and escortedpatrons to their cars. They provided security at area hospitals and at the scenes of thecrimes. When citizens reported strange noises or suspicious persons or vehicles, theysearched area homes and yards. They patrolled neighborhoods and checked closedbusinesses and schools.Initially, many of the officers responded to the Lewiston Police Department headquarters indowntown Lewiston. When it became clear that there was simply not enough space orparking, officers from outside Lewiston were directed to a staging area at the Colisée in77 An initial call to 911 by a hearing survivor relayed that he was with an injured person who appeared to be Deaf.It is not clear from the records if the presence of Deaf individuals was relayed to responding officers or EMS atthat time. Command staff members were not initially made aware of the presence of Deaf individuals andvictims.78 Notification of the creation of the family reunification center was broadcast, and many family members wentto meet their loved ones. For some families, their loved ones were not there, and no reunification occurred,making the name of the center unfortunate.79 These ASL interpreters self-dispatched to the Armory and the hospitals as soon as they learned throughsocial media that members of the Deaf community had been injured and killed. Because of lockdown andsecurity policies, and because they could not verify that the Incident Command Center had requested them,the interpreters were turned away. There is no uniform statewide identification badge for certified interpreters.80 Coordination among law enforcement, emergency communication specialists, the ASL interpreters, and thehospitals could have prevented this.81 The Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) issued and broadcast a shelter-in-place advisory at 7:55p.m. Eleven minutes later, MSP issued a social media alert on Facebook, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter)advising citizens of the active shooter situation and asking them to stay off the street, shelter in place, andreport any suspicious activity. The City of Lewiston issued a shelter-in-place order at 8:57 p.m.29.

Lewiston to await further directions. Some officers were immediately assigned to specifictasks, but some of those who were not immediately assigned did not comply with therequest to wait for an order; many self-dispatched to scenes. These actions weresometimes helpful 82 but in other situations, created confusion, blocked roads, and resultedin some duplication of efforts. 83At 7:34 p.m., law enforcement obtained the video of Card entering Just-in-Time Recreation.Major Lucas Hare of the MSP established the Incident Command Center (ICC) at 7:42 p.m.at the Lewiston Police Department. 84 The Incident Management Team (IMT) 85 mapped dutiesand responsibilities, assigned responding officers to various patrols and searches, andcoordinated investigative responses with members of the homicide investigation team. Thisincluded assigning personnel to security matters, interviewing witnesses and survivors,coordinating incoming messages, and establishing a tipline for citizens to call in possibleleads.Video surveillance from Schemengees Bar and Grille and other businesses in the areacaptured Card's white Subaru as he fled. The video images of Card from Just-in-TimeRecreation were released to law enforcement at 7:52 p.m. and publicly disseminatedseconds later. The image of his car86 was publicly distributed at 8:06 p.m. At 8:57 p.m., anationwide police bulletin was broadcast describing, but not naming, Card and his vehicle.82 For instance, dozens of officers self-dispatched to the Walmart Distribution Center. Several officers stoppedand confronted an armed private citizen who had decided to respond to the Center to "find the shooter," whileothers quickly organized themselves and conducted a security sweep of facility and determined the call wasfalse.83Col. William Ross, Chief of the Maine State Police, testified that this is a difficult balancing act. He explainedthat, when faced with an active shooter scene, all responding officers are wanted and necessary. Once theemergency response is over, however, self-dispatching officers could interfere with an organized, systematic,and well-executed operation.84 Prior to their arrival at the Lewiston PD, multiple Command team members began coordinating search andinvestigative matters with specialized teams from across Maine and New England. The MSP's participation inthe New England State Police Compact and earlier training and contact with other local, county, and federallaw enforcement agencies allowed the MSP to quickly connect with and request assistance from these otheragencies.85 An Incident Command Center is part of the Incident Command System, comprising nationally recognizedpolicies and procedures for managing large-scale disasters and crime scenes. Every law enforcement officerin Maine receives initial basic training on the incident command system while attending the Maine CriminalJustice Academy Basic Law Enforcement Training Program. The Incident Management Team runs theoperations.86 Shortly after the description of the car was broadcast, multiple officers responded to a crash involving avehicle similar to Card's that had just occurred on an entrance ramp to the Maine Turnpike. This crash turnedout to be unrelated.30.

Between the arrival of the first responding officers to Just-in-Time and Schemengees and thedistribution of the nationwide police bulletin, the Lewiston-Auburn Communication Centerreceived calls of active shooters at three additional scenes. At 7:51 p.m., there was a reportof an active shooter at DaVinci's Restaurant. At 8:11 p.m., there was a report that a manarmed with a gun had entered the massive Walmart Distribution Center87 and a third reportthat a shooter was seen on a nearby street. All these reports later proved to be unfounded,but each required an immediate response by dozens of law enforcement officers.88At 9:20 p.m., members of Card's family called the Lewiston Police Department and identifiedhim as the shooter in the images from the video surveillance at Just-in-Time Recreation.Nicole Herling and Cara Lamb provided positive identification that police immediatelyverified through driver's license and vehicle registration information. With that confirmationin hand, law enforcement broadcast the information to all responding officers, many ofwhom immediately started patrolling Lewiston and other communities looking for Card.Once Card's identity was established, the separate investigative and manhunt operationsteams focused on learning about Card. Members of Card's family went to the LewistonPolice Department and gave detailed statements to investigators that allowed lawenforcement to concentrate its efforts, provide security details to other potential targets,and focus on planning for and obtaining search warrants. This information also allowedinvestigators to seek and obtain cell phone location information, employment information,gun ownership information, and information from members of Card's AR unit. Theirinformation also provided investigators with clues concerning Card's past actions, the typeand number of his firearms, his mental health status and treatment, and possible course oftravel.Twelve minutes after the shooter was identified, the Maine State Police contacted Card'scellular service provider seeking location information for his cell phone. Four minutes later,the provider notified the State Police that the phone was at his residence in Bowdoin. It hadlast moved at 6:05 p.m.Lisbon Police Chief Ryan McGee instructed his officers to concentrate their patrol in Lisbon,a town adjoining Lewiston. At 9:56 p.m., two officers spotted a car, apparently abandonedand not running, at the public Papermill Trail/Miller boat launch in Lisbon. A license plate87 This center is over 800,000 square feet in size.88 Two other individuals called the police and claimed that they were involved in the shootings. Extensiveinvestigation that night and the next day proved that these reports were false and unrelated to the events. Thistied up valuable investigative resources that could have been directed elsewhere.31.

check verified that the vehicle was registered to Card. The Lisbon officers notified the MSPof the car's discovery, and MSP dispatched tactical operators to the boat launch. The Lisbonofficers, who were not equipped with any protective equipment, were instructed to park nearthe vehicle and train their weapons in that direction but not to approach the car untilappropriately equipped officers arrived. A canine patrol officer from the Topsham PoliceDepartment arrived shortly thereafter and assisted in securing the scene.Members of the MSP Tactical Team were immediately dispatched to the boat launch. Beforethe tactical team arrived, its members and Lisbon officers were in radio communicationswith a New Hampshire State Police helicopter and provided information and details thatassisted in the helicopter's night vision search of the area. Another tactical team assumeda position on a bridge nearby. 89 However, dozens of other officers, some in uniform and somenot, also responded to the scene. Many left their vehicles running, and some unidentifiedofficers, who were not in uniform or equipped with appropriate safety gear, entered thewoods surrounding the boat launch, using a paved recreational path that ran parallel to theboat launch.90 MSP witnesses testified that these actions contaminated the scene andfactored into the MSP tactical commander's determination that a canine search would betoo dangerous and most likely futile.91While all this activity was occurring in Lisbon, a press conference was held at Lewiston CityHall. This was recorded and made available on YouTube. 92 Card's name had not yet beenreleased. At 10:14 p.m., the Maine Information and Analysis Center (MIAC) disseminated a"law enforcement sensitive bulletin”⁹³ naming Card as the active shooter suspect. Very89 One member of this team issued a public statement accusing members of a third tactical team of beingintoxicated. The respective law enforcement agencies investigated these allegations. This report did not affectthe Commission's findings or the police response, making any further discussion unnecessary.90 A camera that was on the path was not working that evening. There were no video cameras around the boatlaunch.91 Witnesses from the MSP testified that, due to the length of time that had passed since Card left Schemengeesand the contamination of the scene, it was unlikely that such a search would have been fruitful. In addition,the lack of appropriate safety gear for patrol officers to enter a pitch-dark area in search of a man equippedwith a high-powered rifle and, reportedly, a night vision scope, created unsafe conditions. A New HampshireState Police helicopter equipped with thermal imaging cameras and spotlight had already flown above thearea, and another tactical team with thermal imaging capabilities stood watch on a nearby bridge. Neither hadseen any sign of Card. In addition to finding Card, it was a high priority of the Incident Command Team toprevent the death or injury of any responding law enforcement personnel.92 At this first press briefing, no ASL interpreter was visible on the screen. This was frustrating for members ofMaine's Deaf community as it had been reported over social media that four of their community members hadbeen killed and additional members had been injured.93 All law enforcement officers in Maine are trained and are aware that these types of bulletins are not to bereleased or distributed further.32.

shortly thereafter, the confidential bulletin was leaked to the media. Within minutes, hisname and image were posted and broadcast across social media and by local, state,national, and international news outlets.94After tactical teams secured the scene, they approached Card's car. At 10:37 p.m., theyconfirmed that Card was not inside. They found the Ruger firearm, with fourteen livecartridges in the magazine and one live cartridge in the chamber, and five more magazinescontaining sixty-three live .308 cartridges, inside the car. There was no evidence found in thecar to assist in the search for Card. Police towed the car from the scene. They obtained asearch warrant and analyzed the weaponry. It was later determined that the Ruger recoveredfrom the car was the murder weapon.During the night of October 25, Officers in two Lisbon cruisers decided to perform a sweepof the overflow trailer parking lot at Maine Recycling. Initially, they began inspecting thevarious trailers, including opening the rear doors but soon realized that given their lack ofprotective equipment, insufficient lighting, the height of the trailers 95 and the lack ofappropriate backup, that it was not safe to continue the individual inspections of the trailers.They finished with a visual sweep of the lot. The Lisbon police chief told a state trooper abouttheir abbreviated search and the existence of the overflow lot. Two other individuals- themanager of the Maine Recycling Center and Card's brother - also told police of the existenceof the overflow lot. This information was not relayed to the commander of the manhuntteam. Nearly two days passed before this lot was thoroughly searched and Card's body wasfound.Operational briefings for law enforcement only were held at 11 p.m. on October 25 and againat 2 a.m. the next morning. The briefings provided the latest updates to the law enforcementofficers in attendance, and it was expected that the chiefs or command staff of each agencywould convey the law enforcement-sensitive materials to their officers. Numerousoperational tasks were identified, discussed, and assigned during both briefings. Many ofthe assignments were investigative, involving personal or safety-sensitive matters that werenot for public release.91 According to the Maine State Police, the premature broadcast of this information and the additional leakingof law enforcement sensitive information interfered with the search for Card and potentially put investigators,witnesses, and responding officers in danger.95 The doors to the trailers were approximately four feet off the ground, putting the officers' upper bodies attrailer entrance level. Without protective gear, this positioning made the officers targets for anyone who mighthave been inside.33.

The search for Card continued through the night and into the next morning. Patrols scouredthe area and officers responded to multiple calls.2. October 26, 2023After the 2 a.m. briefing, the ICC was moved to Lewiston High School. This permitted theIMT to establish separate and secure working areas for command staff, the manhunt andinvestigative teams, victim service representatives, Attorney General representatives,chaplains, the tipline staff, operational and food services, and space for law enforcementpartners from local, county, state, and federal agencies. At 2:24 a.m., Card's vehicle wasremoved from the boat launch and secured at the State Police Crime Lab in Augusta pendingthe issuance of a search warrant.At 6:13 a.m., a social media alert was posted announcing an expansion of the shelter-in-place order to include Bowdoin, Lisbon, Lewiston, all of Androscoggin County, and northernSagadahoc County. More than 30 school districts in towns as far south as Wells andOgunquit, as far east as Rockland, and as far north as Augusta, closed. The processing ofthe crime scenes began and continued for two days.Another operational briefing was held at 8 a.m. on October 26. The Major Crimes Unit of theMSP coordinated this law enforcement-only briefing. Goals were outlined for theoperational cycle from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. and some limited tactical plans were reviewed sothat those in attendance would understand the manhunt strategy and plans. Criminalinvestigative information was also shared, along with specific instructions for officers shouldthey apprehend Card. A tipline, dedicated to this incident, was launched to take informationfrom the public. 96 A standard confidential radio frequency was established for all lawenforcement agencies.Maine police cadets and troopers from the New Hampshire State Police took over 800 callson the tipline, sorted and prioritized the information, and relayed pertinent tips to the IMT97for further dissemination to the manhunt and criminal investigative teams.A second press conference was held at 10:30 a.m. ASL interpreters were present. Updatesfrom the Governor and state and federal law enforcement were provided. An affidavit for anarrest warrant charging Card with 18 counts of murder was drafted, reviewed by a District96 The dispatch centers fielded over 900 calls during this incident.97 The Maine State Police have acknowledged that the tipline team should have included experienced localofficers who knew the area and members of the homicide investigation and manhunt teams who could havecoordinated and screened the information received. In their view, a more coordinated dissemination ofinformation between the manhunt and criminal investigative teams would have been helpful.34.

Court judge, and issued at 10:00 a.m. The arrest warrant was entered into a nationwidewanted person database. 98Throughout the day and into the evening of October 26, 2023, investigators drafted, judgesissued, and law enforcement executed search warrants. This included warrants forsearches of Card's home, multiple other locations where it was thought he might be, and hiscar. Investigators also conducted consent searches that did not require a search warrant atthe homes of Card family members, businesses where he had worked, empty buildings orbusinesses, and other locations. Law enforcement officers conducted consensual safetysweeps of the homes of potential witnesses, neighbors, and businesses. They also providedsecurity for and helped transport potential witnesses to safe locations.An investigative briefing for law enforcement was held at 3:35 p.m. MSP shared informationabout the progress and the results of the various searches. Before the briefing was evencompleted, law enforcement-only information was leaked to the press. Because of theleaks, the IMT staff decided to limit the information shared at future briefings.99 Another lawenforcement-only briefing was held at 8:00 p.m. Attendees were specifically instructed thatthe information could only be shared with law enforcement and was not to be distributedfurther.The manhunt for Card continued throughout the day and evening of October 26, 2023. TheICT, along with members of the Maine Warden Service, developed and implemented adetailed grid search plan that was used to extend the ground and water search for Card.Multiple search warrants were also obtained to search Card's residence and otherlocations. Patrol officers responded to hundreds of calls from concerned citizens whothought they had spotted Card or who heard suspicious sounds.Police patrols looking for Card across multiple communities continued throughout the night.The IMT made plans for the next day's operations, including supporting the manhunt,extending the ground search, using dive teams and air support, and adding tactical teamsearches. The tipline continued and relevant information was passed on. Crime sceneprocessing continued as well. Members of the MSP and FBI evidence response teamstraced, cataloged, and collected over 500 pieces of evidence, thousands of photographs andvideos, and extensive GPS mapping of each of the scenes. In addition, these teamsmanaged the recovery, cleaning, and cataloging of 475 items of personal property.98 One victim survivor complained that her loved one's name was published in the charging documents andmade public hours before she received official notification of his death.99 The existence of and contents of a note left at Card's home was leaked. The release of this informationcaused anguish to innocent individuals.35,

3. October 27, 2023The first operational briefing of the day was held at 8 a.m. These operational briefings wereopen to law enforcement and, as had been the practice from the beginning, each agencylead was encouraged to pass the law enforcement sensitive information onto theirrespective officers. Some agency leads remained at the command center throughout thesearch, while others returned to their communities.Lewiston's Chief of Police David St. Pierre and Maine Department of Public SafetyCommissioner Michael Sauschuck conducted a press conference at 10 am. ASLinterpreters were present, and Commissioner Sauschuck requested that any newsorganization that broadcast from the press conference ensure that the interpreters remainfully visible on the screen.Patrols continued throughout the day. Shortly after noon, a search warrant was issued forCard's cell phone, including his voicemail messages, texts, emails, and instant messages.At 2:44 p.m., a separate search warrant for his cell phone records was issued. 100 The MaineState Police Computer Crimes Unit conducted a forensic examination of his phone.To keep all agencies informed about the investigation and the manhunt, Col. Ross, chief ofthe MSP, conducted a virtual operations briefing with police chiefs and sheriffs from acrossthe state at 2:30 p.m.In the late afternoon of October 27, 2023, MSP determined that the trailers in the overflowlot of the Maine Recycling Company in Lisbon had never been adequately searched. Twospecially trained tactical teams began searching and clearing the trailers just after 7 p.m. At7:40 p.m., Card's body was found in the 55th and last trailer to be searched. The officers alsofound a Smith and Wesson .40 caliber handgun with a total of 45 live rounds in threemagazines, a Smith and Wesson MP15 .556 mm rifle, and 242 live cartridges in eightmagazines. 101 Card died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head from the handgun.100 A U.S. Supreme Court ruling requires law enforcement to obtain a search warrant before they can inspect orsearch the content of a person's cell phone. See Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014). Records maintainedby his cell phone provider are separate and require a second separate warrant. MSP was able to obtain initiallocation information within hours of the shootings that informed them that the phone was left behind at Card'shome.101 Card legally purchased both weapons: the Smith and Wesson handgun in July 2012 from Cabela's inScarborough, Maine, and the Smith and Wesson rifle in November 2018 from Rideout's Gunworks in Richmond,Maine.36.

After Card's identity was confirmed, an operations briefing for law enforcement was held at8:30 p.m. At 10:00 p.m., a public press conference with Governor Mills, Chief St. Pierre,Commissioner Sauschuck, and ASL interpreters was held, announcing that Card's body hadbeen found.10102Despite extensive investigation, neither law enforcement nor the Commission has been ableto determine Card's whereabouts between the time he abandoned his vehicle at the Lisbonboat launch and when his body was discovered. Evidence gathered from the trailer yieldedno clues. It is known that Card did not return to his home, the homes of his family members,or the family farm. 103 His exact location and movements after leaving his car have not andlikely will never be determined.Likewise, due to several variables, including the nature of Card's self-inflicted injury and theambient air temperature in the box trailer where he was found, the Office of the Chief MedicalExaminer was unable to determine the precise time of his death.By the end, over 400 sworn law enforcement officers and hundreds more emergencydispatchers, emergency medical responders, victim witness advocates, doctors, nurses,medical technicians, ASL interpreters, prosecutors, judges, court clerks, volunteers, andsupport staff participated in the shooting response. Sixteen tactical teams undertook 29separate tactical team missions. Local, county, state, and federal agents worked thousandsof hours during these 49 hours. Thousands more hours were devoted to investigations,report writing, post-incident after-action analysis, and response to requests for reports andtestimony before the Commission.D. Victim Services Response - October 25-PresentOn October 25, 2023, victim witness advocates (VWAS) 104 from across the state, advocatesfrom the Maine Attorney General's Office, and Victim Witness Advocate Coordinator and102 During this time, another search warrant was issued, this time for the infotainment center on Card's vehicle.Investigators were looking for GPS information that could have provided clues as to his whereabouts and hisroutes of travel before and after the shooting on October 25th. Because Maine's Crime Lab does not have thetechnology to conduct such examinations, it was sent to the New York State Police Crime lab. As of the dateof this report, the results have not been received.103 The Card family cooperated fully with law enforcement investigators and has been of great assistance to theCommission.104 There are 46 VWAS who work in prosecutors' offices across the state. Three VWAs are assigned to theAttorney General's Office for the general homicide caseload. Two other agencies, the Elder Abuse Institute ofMaine and the Portland Police Department, immediately allowed their respective VWAs to respond toLewiston.37.

106Director of Victim Services Cara Cookson attended the annual Maine Prosecutors'Conference in Bar Harbor, Maine. 105 Shortly after 7:30 p.m., they received word of theshootings in Lewiston. Some made plans to depart the conference immediately and go toLewiston, while others planned for a departure at sunrise. Planning for services, contactwith state and federal partners, and coordination with the homicide prosecutors beganimmediately and continued throughout the night. Knowing the VWAS would beoverwhelmed by the sheer number of victims and survivors, Cookson requested assistancefrom the FBI Victim Services Response Team. The FBI sent a team of approximately 50people with specialized skills, including direct victim services, information technology,victim and survivor data collections, needs assessments and referrals, ASL interpretation,and the cataloging and return of personal effects.During the 49-hour manhunt, VWAs were available, provided services, and answeredhundreds of questions and inquiries from survivors, victims' families, and members of thepublic. They initiated processes to secure emergency funding for victims and survivors andprovided grief support. 107 Each time law enforcement officers made a death notification, theVWAs initiated contact with the families.The VWAs initially had trouble obtaining accurate contact information for witnesses andsurvivors of the shootings who had not required medical attention. In the first two days afterthe shootings, these challenges were compounded by the shelter-in-place orders and thefact that a Family Assistance Center had not yet been established.¹ A Family AssistanceCenter was eventually established at the Lewiston Armory and opened on the morning of108105Each year,the Maine Judicial Branch sets aside three days in October when only emergency court hearingsare held. This allows prosecutors and their staff, judicial officers, and the criminal defense bar to hold separateconferences or meetings where continuing education and frank discussions can be held. Victim witnessadvocates have, for years, joined the prosecutors' conference, where they attend some joint sessions and holdtheir own training sessions to stay up to date on the latest research and programming for their profession.106 Cookson knew that crime victim services were not yet addressed in any state mass violence response planor incident command program. However, prior to October 25th, she had initiated conversations with the Officeof Chief Medical Examiner, MEMA, the U.S. Attorney's Office for Maine, and the FBI Boston division to learnabout the resources available to begin addressing this gap.107 Kelly McGinnis and Kim Ward, victim compensation specialists with the Maine Attorney General's Office,also immediately responded and established a remote office to meet with victims and survivors and processshort-form applications specially designed for mass casualty events. They were assisted by members of thevictim services team from the Maine Department of Corrections.108 A Family Assistance Center is a large physical space where anyone affected by a mass shooting or othercalamitous event can come and receive a wide variety of services under one roof. Law enforcement personnelwere concerned with the safety of opening such a center when Card was still at large.38.

October 28th 109 A separate center for community members who felt the effect of the incidentwas established at the Ramada Inn. Members of the press were not permitted to enter eithersite.Services provided to survivors and victims included assistance with victim compensationapplications, gift cards for immediate financial needs, trauma-informed childcare thatallowed adults to have separate conversations, psychological and spiritual first aid and care,legal services, and educational resources. The FBI and the Harvard, Massachusetts, PoliceDepartment provided two therapy dogs for psychological support. When requested,advocates assisted families in arranging funeral services.The American Red Cross and the Salvation Army set up the site and coordinated servicesand financial assistance and offered three meals each day for all who came to the FamilyAssistance Center. Disability Rights Maine and the Maine Association for the Deaf rapidlybuilt and deployed systems to facilitate communication with members of the Deafcommunity. The New Hampshire Department of Justice deployed three VWAs; victimspecialists from the U.S. Attorney's Office for Maine and New Hampshire also assisted theMaine VWAs with their duties. Many of these individuals continued to provide servicesbeyond the initial days following the shootings. Local VWAs from Androscoggin Countyteamed up with FBI specialists and met with victims and their families at the local hospitalsand at their homes.The Family Assistance Center remained open for six days, serving 200 individuals. It closedon November 2nd and was replaced by a Resiliency Center, which opened in record time onNovember 13, 2023, and remains open. This Center provides long-term continuing supportand programming for survivors, their families, and any other member of the communityaffected by the tragedy.When Card's body was found, VWAs scrambled to notify as many victims and survivors aspossible before the discovery was publicly announced. Unfortunately, this news was onceagain leaked before the official press conference, and many victims and survivors learnedabout it through social media and unconfirmed news reports. Once the IncidentCommand Center was closed, the need for a consistent, secure, and private location where110109 Many survivors expressed dismay over the selection of this location by the FBI, given that they had beentransported to the Armory the night of the shooting, and returning there would be traumatic for them. However,after reviewing multiple sites in the city, the FBI Victim Services team determined it was the only site within thecity boundaries that could provide the space for law enforcement, private meeting space, food services, andhandicap accessibility for such a large operation. Some who needed the services stayed away because theydid not feel psychologically safe at that location.110 This continues today each time law enforcement, the press, or others release information.39.

VWAS could meet locally with families of the deceased developed. Bates College hasprovided the VWAs with an office building equipped with furniture and supplies.As of July 31, 2024, the Victim Compensation Program has received 114111 applications forassistance. The program reimbursed up to $12,000 for each funeral. A separate $5,000,000Maine Mass Violence Care Fund was established and funded by an act of the Legislature toprovide coverage for physical and mental health out-of-pocket expenses that are notcovered by insurance. The funds will be managed by the Office of the State Treasurer witheligibility determined and proceeds distributed by the Maine Crime Victims CompensationBoard within the Office of the Attorney General. An additional application for a non-competitive federal grant has been submitted through the U.S. Department of Justice Anti-Terrorism Emergency Assistance program. The Attorney General's Office anticipatesreceiving these additional federal funds in January 2025. These funds will be used to supportthe Resiliency Center.Donations from across the nation flooded into Lewiston to help the victims and survivors ofthe tragedy. The Lewiston-Auburn Metro Chamber of Commerce, the City of Lewiston, theMaine Community Foundation, and Androscoggin Bank worked together and establishedtwo programs: the #One Lewiston Fund to address immediate unpaid bills and to create alasting memorial in the area; 112 and a separate fund administered by the Maine CommunityFoundation called the Lewiston-Auburn Area Response Fund. The Response Funddistributed larger awards to victims and survivors. 113 The Chamber also manages severalother donor-advised funds that provide financial gifts to victims and survivors. VWAs workedwith businesses and other entities that donated non-financial gifts.11The work of the VWAs continues today and will continue for months to come. To date, thehomicide VWA team has served at least 132 surviving family members and friends of thosewho were killed. The District Attorney's Office team has served at least 89 direct and111 This includes applications for deceased victims, via their families, those with gunshot injuries, those withother physical injuries and those with psychological injuries. The program also serves their family membersas secondary victims which more than doubles the number of individuals seeking or inquiring aboutassistance from the program.112 See https://onelewiston.org/113 This fund received 5,241 contributions from around the world. 100% of the 6.6 million dollars receivedwere distributed to 162 individuals and 29 non-profits in the Lewiston- Auburn area. Seehttps://www.mainecf.org/initiatives-impact/additional-initiatives/lewiston-auburn-area-response-fund/broad-recovery-efforts-and-organizations-fund/.114 These gifts ranged from home heating fuel, Bruins, Patriots, and Gardens Aglow tickets, frozen turkeys,Christmas trees, gift cards for meals or services, and Build-A-Bear gift certificates.40.

secondarily injured victims. 115 Victims who testified before the Commission universallypraised the VWAs for their compassion, support, hard work, and dedication.VI. WEAPONS RESTRICTION LAWSA. New York's SAFE ActThe New York SAFE Act law, found at NY MHL 9.46 et seq., and enacted in 2013, 116 requiresthat any time a mental health professional who is providing treatment services believes thata patient is likely to engage in conduct that would result in serious harm to self or others, theprofessional must report this information as soon as possible to the county's director ofcommunity services. If the director agrees with the determination, the director in turn musttransmit this report to the New York Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS). DCJS willdetermine if the individual has a firearms license and, if so, will notify the appropriate locallicensing official. The individual is required to surrender the license and all firearms. If thefirearms are not surrendered, police are authorized to remove them. The State of New Yorkhas issued both a general guide 117 and a hospital guide 118 for SAFE Act reporting. It has alsoissued a detailed manual to assist mental health professionals in using the establishedIntegrated SAFE Act Reporting System (ISARS). 119 The report is submitted electronicallyusing a one-page form. 120 The Act's reporting standard, i.e., that an individual is likely toengage in conduct that will cause serious harm to self or others, is consistent with thestandard used in New York for an emergency "removal" of a person to a psychiatric hospitalfor an examination, see New York MHL Section 9.45, as well as emergency involuntaryadmissions for observation, care, and treatment. See New York MNH Section 9.39.121115 While the press has repeatedly reported thirteen persons were injured, that number includes only thoseinjured by gunshots that evening. According to records on file with the VWA programs, twenty other individualssuffered other kinds of physical injuries escaping the scenes, and many others have sought VWA services fortheir psychological injuries. Numerous others have chosen to address their needs without involving victimwitness services. The exact number of those physically or emotionally injured is not known.116 See Appendix I.117'https://nics.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/07/mental_health_law_section_9.46_guidance-document_0.pdf118 https://nics.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/07/hospital_guidance.pdf119https://nics.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/07/integrated_safe_act_reporting_system_user_guide.pdf120 https://nysafe.omh.ny.gov/121 In many aspects, New York's involuntary commitment laws track the processes of Maine's involuntarycommitment law. See Appendix E.41.

Dickison, the psychiatric nurse practitioner at Keller, testified that he did not initiate a SAFEAct petition because his research indicated that the law applied only to New York residents.The statute's language does provide that the petition is to be filed in the subject's “county ofresidence." It does not further define "residence," nor does it specifically provide that itapplies only to residents of New York. Training materials obtained from the New York Divisionof Criminal Justice Services (NYDCJS) state that petitions may be filed against non-residents. 122 Eleven such petitions have been filed against non-residents, and ten have beengranted. Dickison was not aware of these NYDCJS training materials.The discharge summary prepared by Four Winds and sent to Keller indicated that Kellerpersonnel completed the SAFE Act report before Card was transferred to Four Winds. Nocopy of such a report exists in the Keller records provided by the United States Army.Dickison testified that he did not file such a petition or see one in Keller's records. Klagsburnasked Sanchez to verify that a SAFE Act petition was filed. According to the New York StatePolice, no such entry in the name of Robert Card II is in the New York SAFE Act registry.B. New York's Extreme Risk Protection Act (Red Flag Law)The statute creating New York's process for obtaining an Extreme Risk Protection Order(ERPO) is found at NY CPLR 6340, et seq. That law, which became effective in 2019 and iscommonly referred to as a red flag law, permits a police officer, district attorney, family orhousehold member, school administrator, physician, registered nurse, licensed clinicalsocial worker, licensed clinical nurse or nurse practitioner, licensed mental health worker, ora licensed clinical marriage or family therapist to file a petition with the court 123 setting forththe facts and circ*mstances justifying the issuance of an order. 124 This process is separatefrom a SAFE Act petition. The court may initially grant an ex parte temporary order afterconsidering seven relevant factors. 125 If the court grants the temporary order, the person isprohibited from purchasing, possessing, or attempting to purchase or possess a firearm,rifle, or shotgun. The temporary order must be served on the person, and the person isrequired to immediately surrender to law enforcement all firearms, rifles, or shotguns in the122 See footnotes 113-117 above.123 The statute also states that the petition shall be "filed in the county where the respondent resides."124 The statute permits medical professionals to disclose otherwise confidential health care and treatmentinformation related to the need for a petition and provides immunity to these professionals for their good faithreporting of the medical information. All filings are confidential and closed to public inspection.125 See Appendix H for a copy of this law. An ex parte order is one given after a petition is filed by just one sidein an action, in other words the person who is subject to the request for a temporary order is not notified aheadof time.42.

person's possession. Law enforcement may search for the weapons in accordance withNew York law or as directed by the court.A second hearing is held within six business days after entry of the temporary order. At thathearing, the party who filed the petition must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, thatthe subject of the order is likely to engage in conduct that would result in serious harm to selfor others. If the court finds that the party filing the petition has met the burden of proof, apermanent order is entered 126 and the subject of the order is prohibited from owning,possessing, or attempting to own or possess any rifle, firearm, or shotgun. Law enforcementis authorized to search for and seize firearms. The order is valid for one year and may berenewed by the court. There is no provision in this law that explicitly provides forenforcement of the order outside of New York. 127Between 2021 and June 2024, eleven out-of-state residents were subject to a temporaryextreme risk protection order in New York. A final extreme risk protection order was grantedin ten of the eleven cases. One was denied in 2022 with the court's notation being "out ofstate address."128In the case of Card, none of the parties who could have filed a petition in New York for suchan order did so. 129 Even if a red flag law petition had been filed in New York, however, it isquestionable whether it could have been enforced in Maine. At that time, Maine's yellow flag126 Between 2021 and June 2024, eleven out-of-state residents were subject to a temporary extreme riskprotection order in New York. A final extreme risk protection order was granted in ten of the eleven cases. Onewas denied in 2022, with the Court's notation being “out-of-state address." Telephone conversations withAdam Dean, New York Division of Criminal Justice Services, June 21 and 28, 2024.127 Some have questioned whether a New York court order could have been registered in Maine and thenenforced under the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, 14 M.R.S. §§ 8001-8008 (2024). This,however, would have required knowledge of the order and access by a nonparty to the court filings andjudgment. Given the strict confidentiality provisions of the New York law, it is highly unlikely that this couldhave occurred. Unlike the federal Violence Against Women Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2265(a), which allows one state toenforce a domestic violence protection order issued in another state, no such provision exists in federal law forred or yellow flag law enforcement outside the state of issuance. In 2023, no such provision existed in Mainelaw. Maine's law has since been amended to permit enforcement of another jurisdiction's weapons prohibitionorders. See Appendix D.128Telephone conversations with Adam Dean, New York Division of Criminal Justice Services, June 21 and28, 2024.129 The database that contains these orders is also confidential and not open to public inspection. It is onlyopen to law enforcement and to federally licensed firearms dealers. NY State Police have queried thedatabase, and no order exists.43,

law made no provision for the enforcement of out-of-state orders. That has since beenchanged.13130C. Maine's Protection from Substantial Threats Act (Yellow Flag Law)The Maine Legislature passed a "protection from substantial threats” law in 2019 that tookeffect on July 1, 2020. 131 Unlike red flag laws in other states, only a law enforcement officeris permitted to file a petition with a court requesting entry of an order that restricts anindividual from possessing or obtaining a firearm, and an officer may do so only after placingthe individual in protective custody. 34-B M.R.S. 3862-A. Once a law enforcement officertakes an individual into protective custody, the officer is required to "deliver the personimmediately for examination by a medical practitioner” and provide the practitioner with the"information that led to the protective custody, including information that gave rise to theprobable cause determination, the person's pertinent criminal history and other knownhistory, and recent or recurring actions and behaviors." Id. After that assessment, which canbe done either in person or by telemedicine, the medical practitioner determines if theindividual presents "a likelihood of foreseeable harm." Id.After the assessment is completed, the medical practitioner must notify the officer in writingof the results. If the medical practitioner finds that the individual presents a likelihood offoreseeable harm, the officer then presents to a judge, justice, or justice of the peace, theresults of the medical assessment, the officer's declaration that the person was taken intoprotective custody, and that the officer has probable cause to believe that the individualpossesses, controls, or may acquire a dangerous weapon. The judge or justice decideswhether to endorse the assessment. If the judicial officer endorses the assessment, sheenters an ex parte order that temporarily prohibits the person from possessing, controlling,acquiring, or attempting to possess, control, or acquire a dangerous weapon. A copy of theorder is served on the person subject to the order, at which time the person is prohibitedfrom possessing, controlling, or acquiring a dangerous weapon. The temporary order isentered into a database of persons prohibited from purchasing firearms. The officer maythen seize and secure any firearms or other dangerous weapons within the possession orcontrol of the now-prohibited person.130 See Appendix D.131 See Appendix C for the law in effect in 2023 and Appendix D for the changes to the law effective on August9, 2024. Maine's law is commonly referred to as a "yellow flag law." It is the only such law in the nation. Afterthe Lewiston tragedy, legislation was passed that allows a law enforcement officer to petition the court for awarrant to take a person into protective custody to begin the evaluation and yellow flag process. It alsospecifically permits the law enforcement officer and the court to consider affidavits and reliable third-partyreports in the process. This eliminates the "we couldn't lay eyes on him" issue. See Appendix D.44.

Within five days after the date the person is notified of the order, the district attorney for theprosecutorial district where the individual resides is required to file a petition for judicialreview of the initial restrictions in the District Court that has jurisdiction over the person'stown of residence. Within 14 days after the notice of prohibition, the court must hold ahearing to determine whether to dissolve or extend the initial restrictions. 132 At that hearing,the prosecuting attorney has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that therestricted person presents a likelihood of foreseeable harm. If the court enters a final order,it is valid for up to one year and may be extended after another hearing. The court is requiredto send a copy of the permanent order to the Maine Department of Public Safety fortransmission to the FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) for entryinto the national database of persons prohibited from owning, possessing, or attempting toown a firearm.No law enforcement officer in Maine filed a yellow flag petition either before or after Card'shospitalization in New York. Skolfield testified that because he was unable to "lay eyes onhim," he could not begin the process. 133 Members of Maine law enforcement who were alsoin the AR unit believed that the SCSO was responsible for filing the petition. However, otherthan the contact previously discussed, none of them contacted their peers at the SCSO toinform them of Card's conduct and hospitalization in New York, his threatening and ominousstatements, or his collection of firearms.134132 This 14-day time restriction has been amended to 30 days. Many prosecutors noted that the initial timeframes were burdensome and often prevented them from securing the necessary paperwork in time.133 Law enforcement officers routinely rely upon the statements of other officers to establish the probablecause in criminal cases. That same practice can and should be used when an officer is considering whetherto take a person into protective custody. Although the person must be physically taken into protective custodyto start the yellow flag process, the Sheriff's Office had probable cause to take Card into protective custody.134 Multiple witnesses testified that they did not make suggestions or recommendations to their peers in otherlaw enforcement agencies because their input would automatically be rejected. They testified that policeofficers in other agencies would resent any advice or suggestions.45.

VII. TIMELINE05/03/202305/03/202305/04/202305/04/2023June 202306/12/2023July 202307/03/202307/06/202307/15/202307/16/202310:37Sagadahoc County Deputy Sheriff Chad Carleton met with Colby Card &Cara Lamb at Mt. Ararat High School to address concerns regarding RobertCard II's (Card) declining mental health. Carleton contacted the ArmyReserve (AR) Center in Saco and later spoke with AR Sgt. Kelvin Mote (anEllsworth, Maine, police officer) and Card's brother, Ryan Card.Ryan Card and Nicole Herling (Card's sister) went to Card's home during theevening; Card met them at the door with a gun.Lamb informed Carleton that Ryan Card and Nicole Herling went to Card'shome the evening before, and Card met them at the door with a gun. Carletonalso followed up with Mote, who said there was an upcoming battle assemblyand that he would contact Card to assess the situation. No such meeting tookplace.Carleton included in his report a caution for other officers to be aware ofCard's paranoid behavior and that he was known to carry a firearm in hishouse and vehicle.Throughout June, Nicole Herling researched ways to get help for her brother.On June 3, 2023, she called the VA Crisis line. The worker advised her notto inform the AR command about her brother's delusions, as it could harmhis career. Despite extensive online searches, she could not find helpfulinformation on where to report her concerns; much of the online informationwas outdated. Between May and July 15, 2023, when Card reported to activeduty at West Point, Herling attempted to reach someone at the AR unit inSaco to discuss the family's increasing concerns about Card. She left fivevoicemail messages at the Saco AR Armory. None of the messages wasreturned. She called 988 and other numbers and researched behavioral healthprograms for members of the AR. There is no evidence that she found thePHP website.Card voluntarily left employment at Maine Recycling. (His employmentthere started on 02-07-2023.)The AR ordered Card to conduct weapons training at West Point. The orderswere originally for 14 duty days beginning 7/15/2023 and later extended to8/3/2023.Card started working as a delivery driver for First Fleet of Auburn.Card purchased the murder weapon, a .308 Ruger rifle, and a 9mm Berettapistol from Fine Line Gun Shop in Poland, Maine.Card arrived at West Point and told members of his unit that people weresaying he was a pedophile. Later that evening, Card and fellow reservistsDaryl Reed and Christopher Wainwright argued. Card clenched his fists atReed, wanting to fight. Card locked himself in his room.Card refused to answer the door, and his commanders ordered him to go toKeller Army Community Hospital in West Point, New York, for a command-directed behavioral health examination. New York State Police alsoresponded. His behavior wasis sufficiently concerning that two AR service47

07/16/202307/26/202307/26/202307/27/2023 17:00members wereare assigned to watch him the entire way while a third drivesand two NYSP cars follow. He was diagnosed with “unspecified psychosisnot due to a substance or physiological condition.” Among other things, theclinician recommended to Card's commander, Capt. Jeremy Reamer that heensure that Card attends all follow-up appointments, increases theleader/supervisory support for Card to keep him engaged with unit membersand other sources of support, and secures Card's personal weapons. “It isalso recommended that measures be taken to safely remove all firearms andweapons from [Card's residence." He further told Reamer that Card was notfit for duty. Card was then transferred to Four Winds Hospital in Katonah,New York, where he signed a voluntary admission acknowledgment form.At the start of his stay at Four Winds, Card was “notably paranoid andguarded with auditory hallucinations.” Upon admission, he received apsychosocial assessment during which he acknowledged having a “hit list.”He also stated that he had told a military peer that if he didn't stop talkingabout him, he'd “be added to my list." Card was assessed as having psychosisand thought disorder. During his stay, he was prescribed Olanzapine,attended group sessions, and by the end of his stay, “showed notableimprovement with no further auditory hallucinations and decreased paranoiddelusions, irritability, and anxiety."Card underwent a psychodiagnostic evaluation to assist his treatment team inreaching a diagnosis and developing a treatment plan. The psychologist whoconducted the evaluation stated that three aspects of Card's personality werelikely to cause him difficulty: inconsistent coping skills, poor emotionalcontrols, and narcissism. This was apparently based partly on Card'sreporting that "he feels constantly persecuted, misunderstood, andunderappreciated by others." The psychologist also opined that Card'sparanoia "is of sufficient magnitude that it may reach delusional proportionsat least part of the time.” The doctor further suggested that given all thefactors involved, Card appeared to be a poor candidate for psychologicaltreatment, and his prognosis for significant change was guarded. However,there might be some limited benefit from the use of psychotropicmedications.A nurse case manager from the Army Reserve's Psychological Healthprogram emailed Card, introduced herself, and offered Card help in securingservices when he got out of Four Winds. The only information provided toher about Card was the report that had been created as a result of Card'scommand-directed behavioral health evaluation, the CCIR. She was neverprovided and never had access to any of Card's medical records from eitherKeller or Four Winds, his psychological assessment results, or the report ofmental status evaluation.A psychiatric nurse practitioner called Reamer. He reviewed the findings andthe need for discharge planning for Card. He told Reamer that Reamerneeded to consider starting a medical board process and determining Card's48

07/28/202308/01/202308/03/202308/05/202308/07/202308/08/202313:5508/11/2023 14:3208/11/202308/15/202308/21/202308/23/202308/29/202308/30/202309/13/202302:04medical disposition going forward. The practitioner also discussed withReamer about taking steps to remove weapons from Card's home. Thepractitioner noted that Reamer "did not have any questions or concerns afterour conversation."After Card announced that he intended to leave the hospital, Four WindsHospital filed a petition for Card's involuntary hospitalization until it couldcomplete a safe discharge plan. Card was assigned counsel under NY law.He filed a request for discharge.After a family meeting with Card's mother and completing a safety plan, FourWinds withdrew its petition for Card's involuntary hospitalization. Cardwithdrew his request for discharge.Card was released from Four Winds. Before his discharge, Card told themedical professionals that he would engage in treatment, take hismedications, and reach out for help and support from family members andfriends. Despite these promises, he engaged in no treatment between August3 and October 25, 2023, took almost none of his prescribed medication, anddid not answer or return calls or emails from treating professionals. He alsofailed to make any appointments with a telemedicine service that was chosenfor him. Sean Hodgson, a close friend and fellow AR reservist, drove him toMaine. Four Winds gave Card a folder containing his discharge records and60 Olanzapine 10 mg tablets. Hodgson remaineds in contact with Reamervia text throughout the trip and informeds Reamer that they arrived safely inMaine. Reamer thanked Hodgson.Card attempted to purchase a silencer previously ordered from CoastalDefense Firearms in Auburn, Maine. He was denied the purchase after heincorrectly checked the box “Yes” on the ATF Form 4473, asking whether hehad "ever been committed to a mental institution?” He had not been"committed" as defined under federal law.A registered nurse (GB) at Keller called Card and left a message to call herback. There was no return call.GB left another message for Card to call her. There was no return call.Four Winds sent Card's discharge summary to Keller, and a Four Windsphysician left a voicemail message for a Keller physician to inform Keller ofthe discharge.GB spoke with Card on the phone, and he told her he was not taking hismedication and he would not go to follow-up treatment.GB called and left a message for Card. No return call.GB called and left a message for Card. No return call.GB called and left a message for Card. No return call.GB called and left a message for Card. No return call.GB called and left a message for Card. No return call.Hodgson called Reamer to report that Card assaulted him after leaving theOxford Casino, that Card had guns, and was going to "shoot up" the Saco ARfacility. Reamer took no action and did not report this conversation to anyoneelse in the AR. Later that day, Hodgson told Reed about the assault.49

09/15/2023 02:3009/15/202309/15/202309/15/2023 14:2809/15/2023 14:38Hodgson sent text messages to Reamer and Mote reporting that Cardassaulted him after leaving the casino, that Card had guns, and was going to"shoot up" the Saco AR facility.Hodgson spoke to Reamer and also Mote to report that Card assaulted himafter leaving the casino, that Card had guns, and was going to "shoot up" theSaco AR facility. Reamer reviewed the situation with Lt. Col. Vazquez andSergeant Major Tlumac. Card's commanders decided to ask local lawenforcement to do a “well-being” check on Card.Reamer spoke with Card by telephone, who told him he would not attend thebattle assembly in Saco the weekend of 9/16/2023 because he had to work.Reamer replied, “Okay, that's fine.” Card expressed lingering anger over theNY hospitalization and said he wanted to punch Reed. Reamer did not tellanyone else in the unit that Card did not plan to attend the battle assemblyuntil he arrived at Saco that morning after Saco PD had stationed officers inthe vicinity.Ellsworth Police Det. Corey Bagley telephoned the Sagadahoc CountySheriff's Office to speak with Carleton about a “time-sensitive” matter.Carleton was not on duty.Sagadahoc County Sgt. Aaron Skolfield conferred with Bagley, who provideda summary of longstanding concerns about Card's mental health, includingthe confrontation between Card and Hodgson the night of 9/13-9/14/2023,Card's threat to "shoot up" the Saco AR facility, and Card's hospitalcommitment for two weeks earlier in the summer. Bagley requested that theSheriff's Office conduct a "welfare check" on Card, who was hearing voicescalling him a pedophile. Bagley said he would email Skolfield a documentprepared by Mote regarding concerns about Card's behavior and the need fora mental health evaluation to determine if Card was dangerous to himself orothers. Mote's report summarized the relevant events for use as the basis fora yellow flag petition and requested that the SCSO conduct a well-beingcheck “to gauge his mental health and determine if he is a threat to himselfand/or others." Hodgson's text to Mote was also attached:Change the passcode to the unit gate and be armed if sfccard does arrive. Please. I believe he is messed up in thehead. And threaten the unit other and other places. I loveto death but do not know how to help him and he refusesto get help or continue help. I'm afraid he's going to f*ckup his life from hearing things he thinks he heard. When Idropped him off, he was concerned his weapons were stillin the car. I believe they were at the unit. And no onesearched his vehicle on federal property. And yes he stillhas all his weapons. I'm not there I'm at my own place. Ibelieve he is going to snap and do a mass shooting.5050

9/15/202314:4609/15/2023 15:0909/15/2023 15:2409/15/2023 15:4709/15/2023 17:1109/15/202309/16/2023 02:1709/16/2023 06:4509/16/2023 07:4609/16/2023 08:4509/16/2023 10:3109/16/2023 10:46Skolfield notified Dispatch he would be attempting a welfare check on Card,although he did not think the matter “as pressing” as previously believed.While aware of an “armed and dangerous” flag in the Sheriff's Office recordssystem, Skolfield was unaware of Carleton's contacts with Card's son and ex-wife on May 3, 2023, because he did not access Carleton's report.Skolfield arrived at Card's residence in Bowdoin. Card was not home nor athis father's house in Bowdoin.Skolfield returned to Card's residence, but Card was still not there.Skolfield received an email message from Bagley that included the documentprepared by Mote.Skolfield issued a statewide "File 6 attempt to locate" teletype broadcastregarding Card:KNOWN***Caution Officer SafetyΤΟ BE ARMED ANDDANGEROUS***ROBERT HAS BEEN SUFFERING FROM PSYCHOTICEPISODES & HEARING VOICES. HE IS A FIREARMS INSTRUCTOR ANDMADE THREATS TO SHOOT UP THE NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY INSACO. HE WAS COMMITTED OVER THE SUMMER FOR TWO WEEKSDUE TO HIS ALTERED MENTAL HEALTH STATE, BUT THENRELEASED. HE ALSO DRIVES ME/MC 82MW BLUE 2020 YAMAHAWR250R. MULTIPLE ADDRESSES HAVE BEEN CHECKED WITHNEGATIVE CONTACT SO FAR. IF LOCATED, USE EXTREME CAUTION,CHECK MENTAL HEALTH WELLBEING AND ADVISE SAGADAHOC SDVIA SAGADAHOC COMMS 443-9711.During the evening, Sagadahoc Sheriff's Deputy Zach Kindelan looked forCard at Card's and Card's parents' residences without success.Brunswick Lt. Ed Yurek (an AR member) telephoned Saco PD and spokewith Sgt. Monica Fahey (recorded). He told her that Card would be at theSaco AR facility at 7 a.m. and advised her of the information in the statewide“File 6” broadcast. Yurek's call was apparently the first time Saco PD officersbecame aware of the threat to the AR facility.Saco PD units were positioned to intercept Card on his way to the ArmyReserve facility. Card did not show.Saco PD officers spoke with Reamer at the Saco AR facility (recorded). Theylearned that Card had notified Reamer the day before that he would not be atthe weekend drill. Reamer told them the AR only desired a "well-beingcheck" on Card and questioned Hodgson's credibility about the potentialdanger Card presented.Skolfield went to Card's residence accompanied by a Kennebec Countydeputy sheriff. Although Card's vehicle was there, no one answered the door.Skolfield believed Card was at home at that time.Skolfield telephoned Saco PD to confirm the PD had received the “File 6”broadcast regarding Card and was advised of Saco PD's actions earlier thatmorning. He also asked Saco PD for the name of a contact for the AR Unit.Skolfield and Reamer spoke by telephone (recorded) regarding Card.Skolfield learned that Card had no access to military weapons. Reamer saidhe had no information regarding the outcome of Card's hospitalization51

09/16/2023 11:0909/17/2023 11:3409/17/2023 14:4209/18/202309/21/2023 12:4010/01/202310/18/2023 08:5410/19/202310/22/2023 00:1610/23/2023 07:47because of HIPAA. He told Skolfield that the family was supposed to secureCard's weapons. Reamer asserted that the military was only requesting awell-being check on Card to “confirm that he is alive and breathing” andasked Skolfield to "document” the check.Skolfield discussed with Lt. Brian Quinn, his supervisor, the attempts tocontact Card and the discussion with Reamer. They decided to leave Cardalone. Skolfield said he would ask Ryan Card to assist in securing Card'sfirearms and would tell the family to contact the Sheriff's Office if there wasany reason to believe Card needed a psychiatric evaluation. Lt. Quinnconcurred.Skolfield attempted to contact Ryan Card without success. At noon, he spokebriefly with Katie Card, who told him the guns had not been secured.Skolfield spoke by telephone with Ryan Card about securing Card's firearmsand having the family contact the Sheriff's Office if there was a need for apsychiatric evaluation of Card. (Not recorded.) No member of Card's familyever told Skolfield that they had successfully removed Card's guns.Skolfield went on vacation, considering the case closed. Skolfield decidedthere was no need for him or the SCSO to be involved further. He consideredthe matter "resolved," stating that no person expressly “wanted to presscharges." Skolfield notified his supervisor, Lt. Brian Quinn, of hisconclusions. Quinn deferred to Skolfield's “judgment as an experiencedofficer" and did not undertake further action or review other than notifyinghis supervisor, Chief Deputy Brett Strout. Strout did not take any furtheraction or assign any other deputy sheriff to the matter.GB called and left a message for Card. She did not receive a return call, soshe closed the case for noncompliance with communications.When Skolfield returneds to work from vacation, he took no further actionon the matter and-did not follow up with Card or his family members.Skolfield canceled the "File 6" broadcast while leaving the “armed anddangerous” flag on Card in the Sheriff's Office records management system.While delivering at a warehouse in Hudson, NH, Card told two workersthere that he knew they were talking about him and stated, "Maybe you willbe the ones I snap on." Neither worker had said anything about Card. (Theworkers did not report this information to the Hudson Police Departmentuntil the early morning of 10/26/2023, several hours after the shootings inLewiston.)A note was generated on Card's cell phone stating that he had had enoughand was trained to hurt people. The entry was discovered post-shooting viaforensic analysis.Bagley spoke with Mote concerning the open Ellsworth Police Departmentcase on Card. Mote told him that nothing had been done with Card. He statedthat Card was not helping himself by failing to cooperate with the militaryand that he would be “forced out with a discharge" in the next few days. Motestated that he was unaware of any new threats against him; Bagley closed theEllsworth case.5252

10/25/2023 18:0510/25/2023 18:54:2018:55:0510/25/202310/25/2023 18:5610/25/2023 18:5910/25/2023 19:00:1310/25/2023 19:07:3410/25/2023 19:0810/25/2023 19:08:4610/25/2023 19:08:5210/25/2023 19:1310/25/2023 19:3410/25/2023 19:4210/25/2023 19:5110/25/2023 19:5210/25/2023 19:5510/25/2023 20:0610/25/2023 20:0610/25/2023 20:0610/25/2023 20:1110/25/2023 20:3310/25/2023 20:5710/25/2023 21:2010/25/2023 21:3210/25/2023 21:33The last time Card's cell phone was mobile, it was at his residence inBowdoin.Card entered the Just-in-Time Recreation Center, where he shot and killedeight people and wounds three others. Others were physically orpsychologically injured.Card departed Just-in-Time Recreation Center.The first 911 calls from Just-in-Time were received.The first Lewiston PD units and an Androscoggin County deputy sheriffarrived at Just-in-Time.Officers entered the Just-in-Time Recreation Center.Card drove into the parking lot of Schemengees Bar & Grille and entered thefacility, where he shot and killed ten people and wounded ten others. Othersare physically or psychologically injured.The first 911 calls were received from Schemengees Bar & Grille.A patron shut off power inside Schemengees Bar & Grill.Card departed Schemengees.The first law enforcement officers arrived at Schemengees.Law enforcement obtained an image of the shooter from Just-in-Time'ssurveillance footage.Maine State Police (MSP) established an initial command post at LewistonPD.MSP received a call of another possible shooter at DaVinci's Restaurant,which was determined to be unfounded.Just-in-Time's image of the suspect was disseminated to law enforcement.Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) issued a shelter-in-placeadvisory.Image of suspect publicly disseminated.Image of suspect's vehicle obtained from Schemengees surveillance footagepublicly distributed.MSP issued a social media alert on Facebook, Instagram, and X (formerlyTwitter) about an active shooter in Lewiston and asked people to shelter inplace, stay off the streets, and report any suspicious activity.Lewiston-Auburn Communications Center received a call about a possibleshooter at Walmart Distribution Center, a report of a shooter seen on a nearbystreet, and a later report that Card's vehicle was involved in an accident onthe on-ramp to I-95; police dispatched to those locations; the reports wereunfounded.The City of Lewiston announced a shelter-in-place order while the manhuntwas underway.A nationwide police bulletin was broadcast describing Card and his vehicle.Nicole Herling and Cara Lamb contacted Lewiston PD and identified Cardfrom the Just-in-Time image.Law enforcement contacts Card's cellular phone service provider for phonedata.Cellphone data indicated that Card's cell phone was at his residence inBowdoin.53

10/25/2023 21:5610/25/2023 22:0010/25/2023 22:0510/25/2023 22:1410/25/2023 22:3710/25/2023 23:0010/25/202323:5710/26/2023 02:0010/26/2023 02:2410/26/2023 03:0010/26/2023 03:0510/26/2023 06:1310/26/2023 08:0010/26/2023 08:5210/26/2023 09:3810/26/2023 10:0010/26/2023 10:3010/26/2023 10:5010/26/2023 15:35Lisbon PD found Card's abandoned vehicle at the Papermill Trail/Miller Parkboat launch in Lisbon.A press conference and briefing were held at Lewiston City Hall.The MSP Tactical Team commander was notified of the discovery of Card'svehicle in Lewiston.The Maine Information & Analysis Center (MIAC) bulletin, identified as"law enforcement sensitive," and naming Card as an active shooter suspectwas disseminated to law enforcement. Very shortly after, it was leaked to themedia.The MSP Tactical Team determined no one was in Card's abandoned vehicle.MSP Major Crimes Unit conducted its first operations briefing at LewistonPD.MSP issued a social media alert on Facebook, Instagram, and X naming Cardas the suspected active shooter, announcing that his vehicle had been locatedand asking people to continue to shelter in place and to report any suspiciousactivity.MSP Major Crimes Unit conducted its second operations briefing at LewistonPD, during which it was announced that the Command Post was moving toLewiston High School and that an incident command model was beingimplemented.Card's vehicle was removed from the boat launch in Lisbon.Command Center relocated from Lewiston PD to Lewiston High SchoolCard's vehicle was secured at the MSP Crime Lab in Augusta.MSP issued a social media alert on Facebook, Instagram, and X announcingan expansion of the shelter-in-place order, including school closings inBowdoin.The incident management team coordinated the MSP operations briefing,which included Col. Bill Ross (Chief of MSP), Lewiston Police Chief DavidSt. Pierre, Lt. Randall Keaten (MSP Major Crimes Unit), Sgt. Greg Roy (MSPTactical Team commander), and Lt. Jodell Wilkinson (MSP IncidentManagement Assistance Team (IMAT) Commander). The team establisheda standard radio frequency for all law enforcement agencies.MSP issued a social media alert on Facebook, Instagram, and X asking thepublic for any information on Card or the Lewiston shootings and providingtelephone numbers to call.Search warrants for Card's vehicle and residence were issued.An arrest warrant was issued for Card, charging knowing and intentionalmurder.Press conference with ASL interpreters at Lewiston City Hall with GovernorMills, Lewiston Police Chief St. Pierre, Maine Public Safety CommissionerSauschuck, MSP Col. Ross, and FBI Special Agent-in-Charge Cohen.MSP searched Card's residence in Bowdoin.The Incident Management Team coordinated an investigative briefing atLewiston High School, during which certain investigative information wasrelayed to law enforcement in attendance, including the discovery of a noteleft by Card at his residence. The information about the note was leaked to54

10/26/2023 15:5010/26/2023 16:5010/27/2023 08:0010/27/2023 10:0010/27/2023 11:0010/27/2023 12:1710/27/2023 14:3010/27/2023 14:4410/27/2023 17:0010/27/2023 19:0810/27/2023 19:3410/27/2023 19:4010/27/2023 20:1010/27/2023 20:3010/27/2023 22:0010/27/2023 23:3410/28/202310/28-10/30/202310/30/202316:14the media immediately after. Because of the leaks by law enforcement, therelease of information at further briefings would be limited.An evidentiary search of Card's residence in Bowdoin began.A Card family property was searched on the Meadow Road in Bowdoin.An operations briefing coordinated by the Incident Management Team washeld at Lewiston High School. Officers were reminded to wear visible lawenforcement markings and respond when assigned to do so rather than “self-dispatch" or "self-deploy," and that information shared in the briefings waslaw enforcement sensitive and not to be further shared.Chief St. Pierre and Commissioner Sauschuck conducted a press conferencewith ASL interpreters at Lewiston City Hall.An investigative briefing coordinated by the Incident Management Team washeld at the Lewiston High School.A search warrant for Card's cellular phone was issued.Col. Ross conducted a virtual operations briefing with police chiefs andsheriffs to update them on the investigation and the manhunt. He announcedthat sensitive information that could compromise the investigation and createsafety issues for those involved in the manhunt had previously been leakedto the media.A search warrant for Card's cellphone records was issued.Chief St. Pierre and Commissioner Sauschuck conducted a press conferenceat Lewiston City Hall.Tactical teams began searches of box trailers in the Maine Recyclingoverflow lot.MSP issued a social media alert announcing the establishment of a FamilyAssistance Center at the Lewiston Armory where victims could get help andsupport.Card's body was found in a box trailer at Maine Recycling in Lisbon. Thecause of death was suicide by gunshot to the head.A search warrant was issued for the infotainment center of Card's vehicle.Col. Ross, Chief St. Pierre, Commissioner Sauschuck, and MSP Major ScottGosselin conducted an operations briefing at the Lewiston High SchoolCommand Post, during which it was announced that Card's body had beenlocated.Governor Mills, Chief St. Pierre, and Commissioner Sauschuck conducted apress conference at Lewiston City Hall to announce the discovery of Card'sbody.MSP issued a social media alert announcing the discovery of Card's body.Shelter-in-place orders lifted.FBI Victim Services Response Team open the family assistance center at theLewiston Armory. A separate site for individuals affected by the shootingswas established at the Ramada Inn on Pleasant Street in Lewiston.MSP issued seven more social media bulletins concerning donations tosupport victims and families, returning victims' personal effects and vehiclesto families, and resources available at the Family Assistance Center.MSP launched a website to share investigative information with the public.55

11/02/202311/13/202311//29/2023The Family Assistance Center was closed.A Community Resilience Center was established in the Peck Building, 184Main Street, Lewiston.The Ramada Inn site for individuals affected by the shootings was closed.56

57

IV. Discussion and ObservationsA. Law Enforcement Response Before October 25, 2023As discussed previously, Robert Card is solely responsible for his actions on July 25, 2023.It is impossible to know whether this tragedy could have been prevented. Even if anyone hadmanaged to remove the firearms from his home in the summer or fall of 2023, he could haveacquired access to other firearms. Nevertheless, the Commission finds that authorities hadseveral opportunities to reduce the risk.First, the Sagadahoc County Sheriff's Office could have sought an involuntary commitmentorder (a “blue paper”). Law enforcement (or family member, social worker, or friend) mayseek a person's involuntary commitment to a hospital qualified to provide mental healthservices if a mental health clinician certifies that the individual is mentally ill and poses alikelihood of serious harm. It does not appear that Skolfield considered obtaining a bluepaper order to get Card treatment from a mental health provider. While the blue paper orderwould not have immediately prohibited Card from possessing a firearm in the future, lawenforcement would have had time to pursue additional steps to reduce the risks.Second, the Sheriff's Office missed an opportunity to pursue a "yellow flag" order againstCard in September of 2023. Based on the information available to the Sheriff's Office fromCard's family members and colleagues in the AR, as well as the historical informationavailable within its own files, the Sheriff's Office had probable cause to believe that Cardwas mentally ill and that due to that illness, he posed a likelihood of serious harm.Indeed, the available information concerning Card's declining mental health and threats ofviolence was greater than the information forming the basis for many "yellow flag" ordersobtained by law enforcement officers in Maine before September of 2023.1 Once theyobtained the "yellow flag" order, the Sheriff's Office could have seized any firearms inCard's possession or over which he had control.Third, the Sheriff's Office missed another opportunity in October 2023. At that time, itsnewly hired mental health liaison, who had been in training in September, was fully available.Had the Sheriff's Office followed up with Card's family in October, the officer and the liaisonwould have learned that there had been no improvement in Card's mental health and thathe still had some or all his weapons. The mental health liaison could have reached out toCard and attempted to secure his cooperation. If Card had failed to cooperate, the Sheriff'sOffice would still have had probable cause to take him into protective custody and begin theyellow flag process. The Sheriff's Office had available a variety of other mental health1 It should be noted that the Commission's investigator monitors all Yellow Flag petitionsand as part of that process reviews each probable cause statement. The Commissiontherefore has a basis for this conclusion.58

resources from which it could have received assistance on approaching Card. They failed toavail themselves of these resources.B. The Army Reserve Response Before October 25, 2023The Army Reserve unit also missed several opportunities that might have reduced the risk ofthis tragedy occurring.First, when contacted by Deputy Sheriff Carleton in May 2023, principal members of the unitfailed to follow through on a plan to “sit down and talk” with Card during the May 2023 oreven the June 2023 battle assemblies.Second, none of the five individuals who received voicemail messages at the AR unit evercalled Nicole Herling back. These calls were placed before the July 2023 New York trainingassignment. Had any of these officials returned her calls, Herling had a wealth ofinformation about her brother she could have shared with them.Third, AR officials failed to follow up with Card after his hospitalization in New York. Theactions taken by various members of the AR unit on July 15 and 16, 2023, were theappropriate first steps in getting Card evaluated and helped. Calling for a command-directed behavioral evaluation, driving Card to the Keller Army Community Hospital with asafety and security plan in place, and then staying with him during his initial emergency roomintake and evaluation were all necessary and appropriate.The failure was due to the inaction of the company leadership and commander, CaptainJeremy Reamer. Reamer failed to follow the July 16, 2023, recommendations of thepsychiatric nurse practitioner, Captain Mathew Dickison, to (1) ensure that Card attendedall follow-up appointments, (2) increase leader/supervisory support with the intent ofkeeping [Card] engaged with unit members and other sources of support; and (3) encourageCard to temporarily secure his personal weapons inthe AR unit's arms room or another safelocation.On July 27, 2023, in a 5 p.m. phone call, Dickison again told Reamer he should ensure (1)that [Card] followed through with his treatment appointments, (2) that his weapons wereremoved from his home, and (3) that a medical review board process be initiated. Reamerled Dickison to believe that he would follow these recommendations, and never expressedconcern that he lacked authority to enforce them. However, Reamer did nothing to followthem.While Card was on active duty and under his command from July 16 through August 3, 2023,Reamer could have endeavored to arrange for Card to voluntarily turn over his weapons.Reamer was in contact with Hodgson on August 3, 2023, as Hodgson drove Card from NewYork to the unit's headquarters in Saco, Maine. Reamer could have arranged for one of his59

unit's officers to meet Card upon his arrival while Card was still on active duty orders andarranged to store Card's guns.Reamer also failed to initiate the medical review board process or contact Keller or FourWinds to learn about Card's diagnosis, discharge plan, and prognosis. The Health InsurancePortability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) specifically provides an exception to the privacyrules that allow a commander to secure information about a soldier's diagnosis andtreatment. See Appendix P for the military command exception.Reamer failed to check with Card after Card's return to Maine on August 3rd, and he failedto order Card to appear for the September or October battle assemblies. Reamer said thatit was "okay" for Card not to attend the battle assembly despite the fact that he later used itin the letter citing his unexcused absences When Card was on active duty, such as duringbattle assemblies, he was subject to Reamer's command authority. Either in September orOctober, a plan could have been put in place to meet Card at the Army Reserve facility gate,evaluate him, and, if appropriate, initiate a second command-directed behavioral healthevaluation.Dickison recommended that Card be encouraged to store his weapons at the AR facility inSaco. The testimony regarding the AR's authority to store Card's personal firearms wasinconsistent. Vazquez testified that the AR strongly discouraged the storage of servicemembers' personal weapons. He referred to a memorandum he said was issued in May 2024- seven months after the shooting - that he claimed makes storage of a service member'spersonal firearms “very challenging” and “very, very difficult” to do. He testified that"without certain permissions, it would have been impossible." Vazquez promised to providethe Commission with a copy of this memo, but, despite repeated requests from theCommission's executive director, the AR still has not produced it.On the other hand, in his Report of Medical Status Evaluation (DA Form 3822, June 2019),Dickison checked the box recommending that Reamer encourage Card "to secure personalweapons with ... unit arms rooms, or other trusted source." That recommendation was oneof several options appearing on the Army's preprinted Evaluation form. Army Regulation190-11, Physical Security of Arms, Ammunitions, and Explosives, specifically allows acommander of a facility to allow the storage of personal weapons in the facility's arms room.It is implausible that the Army's own preprinted form would present an option that isimpermissible for AR commanders to follow.Reamer testified that the AR could have stored Card's firearms, but he did not pursue theoption because he expected Card's family to take them-even though Card's family neverrepresented that they were able to do so. Nevertheless, he conceded that the AR can storeservice members' personal firearms. During his conversation with Dickison at Keller,Reamer led Dickison to believe he would follow through on the recommendation and did not60

express any concerns about his authority to do so. It appears that the AR could havecomplied with Dickison's recommendation.The AR also failed to avail itself of or educate Card or his family concerning the resourcesavailable through the PHP. The PHP is a specific program to assist reservists and theirfamilies in obtaining behavioral health services and to assist Command. When theSagadahoc County Sheriff's Office contacted Mote about Card's family's quest for helpdealing with Card's deteriorating mental health, Mote never informed the Sheriff's Office ofthe PHP. None of the soldiers who received Herling's voicemails availed themselves of theopportunity to provide this information to Card's family or to the Sheriff's Office. At no timedid the Command staff at Card's AR contact the PHP for help in how to manage Card beforehis hospitalization at Keller and Four Winds or after his discharge.It is evident that Reamer had inadequate support in a difficult situation. Vazquez testifiedthat he and Reamer discussed Card's diagnosis, inpatient hospitalization, and the CCIR.However, it does not appear that Vazquez provided Reamer with any meaningful advice,guidance, or direction about Card. Further, neither Reamer nor Vazquez ordered a Line ofDuty Investigation to determine Card's duty status.C. Medical Personnel Response Before October 25, 2023Medical staff at Keller Army Community Hospital failed to file a SAFE Act notice and/orinitiate the New York red flag petition process. Staff apparently misunderstood the laws,believing that they applied only to New York residents. The Four Winds medical director didcall a psychiatrist at Keller, asking him to ensure that a Safe Act petition had been filed.After Card was discharged from Four Winds Hospital, staff at Keller Army CommunityHospital, the Army Reserve Mental Health Program (PHP), and the Army MedicalManagement Center made multiple efforts to contact him. For the most part, Card did notacknowledge or return telephone messages or respond to email messages. He didparticipate in one phone call with a nurse case manager on the PHP staff but declined allservices. The staff failed to reach out by telephone to Reamer or his superiors to followthrough. Per established protocols at the time, the case was closed.Given the severity of Card's symptoms, follow-up with Card's superiors was important bothfor Card's benefit and the safety of the AR and to ensure that Card's "not fit for duty" statuswas re-evaluated. When Reamer failed to respond, his superior officer should have beencontacted.D. The Law Enforcement Response on October 25, 2023On the evening of October 25, 2023, and the days that followed, Maine law enforcementfaced the largest and most complex challenge in its history. The first hours were admittedlychaotic. Once the Incident Command Center (ICC) was established, the tactical,61

operational, and investigative operations improved. No additional civilian lives were lost, thecitizens of Lewiston and surrounding communities were kept safe, and key witnesses wereprotected.Members of the Deaf community and the interpreters who work with them encountereddifficulties with access to information and other communication problems. They haverequested an opportunity to work with law enforcement and other governmental actors toimprove information sharing and communication with Maine's Deaf community. Such aproject could also be helpful for all non-English-speaking members of the Maine population.Communication between teams and among the various agencies responding to the tragedywas not always smooth or effective. Our charge does not include making recommendationsfor operational or policy changes, but we anticipate that the Maine State Police will followthrough with an independent after-action review to address the challenges identified andany other needed changes.Finally, some members of the judiciary and law enforcement expressed frustration with theyellow flag process. Law enforcement officers reported that the process was tooburdensome and took too long, placing outsized burdens, especially on smaller lawenforcement agencies forces. Judges were frustrated by the Judicial Branch's paper-based,court location-specific mental health involuntary commitment records system. Forexample, if a judge is presented with a petition for involuntary commitment and a yellow flagorder in Portland, there is no centralized database available to determine if a similar petitionor order has ever been filed in another court location. Absent separate phone calls to eachof the 37 District Court locations and then a hand search of the paper records at eachlocation, judges are unable to properly analyze all the information they need to make anappropriate decision. Again, it is not within the scope of our charge to makerecommendations for administrative or operational change, but we anticipate that allbranches of government will work together to address these concerns.6262

IX. Acknowledgment and ThanksThe Commission would like to thank and acknowledge the following individuals andorganizations for their work, dedication, and amiable responses to our many requests forassistance. Their service and skills were instrumental in our operations. Without them, wewould not have been able to conduct our investigation or public hearings.Pine Tree Society- American Sign Language Interpreting: Ashlee Fitch, Joe Toledo, DavidKrueger, Meryl Troop, Marisa Zastrow, Shelly Parks, Cid Pollard, Maurita Marr, MargaretHaberman, Grace Cooney, Kevin Bohlin, Amy Richardson, Tristen Evah Hellewell, AmandaEisenhardt, Stacey Bsullak, and Rebecca Breton for providing interpretating services.Disability Rights Center of Maine: For providing interpreting services at the FamilyAssistance Center.MVP Litigation Services-Court reporting services: Julia Varney, Angella Clukey, PeggyStockford, Melinda Simon, and Veronica Morrill for their professionalism, willingness towork long days, and flexibility with multiple schedule changes.Pro AV Systems: Jeff Souza and Jacob Audet for assistance in video technology matters.Department of Administration and Financial Services-State of Maine: Elaine Clark,Marsha Alexander, Michael Koss, and Michael McPeak for coordinating meeting space andinformation technology services and for providing free office space for Chair Wathen.Department of Health and Human Services-State of Maine, South Portland Office:Andrea Ray and Stephen DeKubber for providing free office space, office supplies, a desktelephone, photocopying and scanning machines. And to the entire Office of FamilyIndependence staff for the kindness and genuine welcome shown to the Executive Director.Department of Transportation -State of Maine: Michael Cole for information technologyand video services.Department of Public Safety-Capitol Police-State of Maine: Chief Matthew Clancy andhis officers for providing security and assistance at public meetings at the Deering building.A special thanks to Officer Alden Weigelt for arranging free psychological first aid providersfor victims and survivors who came to testify.Department of Public Safety- Maine State Police-State of Maine: To the entire commandstaff, including Colonel William Ross, Lieutenant Colonel Brian Scott, Major Lucas Hare,and Major Scott Gosselin, for their offers of help and willingness to provide information andtestimony in an organized and thorough manner. We express a special expression ofgratitude to Lieutenant Thomas Pickering for his work assembling and transmittingthousands of reports, photographs, videos, and electronic information, for gathering63

additional information sought by the Commission, and for his prompt responses to anyinquiry or request from the Commission.Lisbon Police Department: Chief Ryan McGee for arranging and conducting a tour ofrelevant locations in Lewiston and Lisbon for the Commission and its staff.University of Maine Augusta: Dr. Jen Cushman, Noel March, Kera Synder, Greg Keneborus,Peter Starkey, and Richard Burns for coordinating and providing free meeting space andinformation technology services, and for their willingness to work with the Commission toensure that live split-screen Zoom was available for every meeting.City of Lewiston: Mayor Carl Sheline, Brian O'Malley, Dottie Perham-Whittier, Nicole Welch,Heather Hunter, David Gudas, Matt Charest, Moe Pelletier, Craig Starr, David Saucier, BillStorm, Nate Cheevers, Janet Labbe, Martin Mujiba, and Ange Amores for providing andsetting up meeting space, information technology services, and marketing/communicationsservices and for their willingness to assist the Commission with last minute meeting needsso that we could better serve the victims and witnesses who testified.Office of the Attorney General-State of Maine: Attorney General Aaron M. Frey forproviding funding to conduct the investigation, Chief Deputy Attorney General ChristopherTaub, Deputy Attorney General Thomas Knowlton, and Assistant Attorney General JonathanBolton for legal advice and contractual and legal filings on behalf of the Commission;Summer Carter and Paul Knowles for accounting services; Cara Cookson for coordination ofvictim witness services and answering endless emails; Kelly McGillis for providing MaineCrime Victims' Compensation Program information; and to the victim/witness advocatesstatewide who provided and continue to provide vital support to the victims of this tragedy.The Androscoggin County District Attorney's Office: Deputy District Attorney KateBozeman and her staff for providing local victim witness advocate services.Southern Maine Community College: Administrative Assistant Lorri Hall for her skillfulassembly of the initial interim report.Sagadahoc County Sheriff's Department: Sheriff Joel Merry and his staff for providing theCommission with police reports, dispatch records and logs, phone records, and transcriptsof various phone calls.The family members, survivors, victims, business owners, friends, and witnesses:Thank you for your courage and willingness to share your stories, as well as the poignant andloving memories you shared publicly or privately with the Commission. Your presence andparticipation reminded us of the importance of our mission.The Maine Resiliency Center: For assisting victims and survivors with their presentationsto the Commission.64

New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services: Joseph Popcun and Adam Dean fortracking down and providing important background and data information regarding NewYork's red flag law.The evening of October 25, 2023, and its aftermath was an unprecedented event for thecitizens of Maine and one we hope never to experience again. This sad and tragic event hastouched us all, and the memories will remain etched on our hearts forever. The dedication,responsiveness, and willingness of so many people to encounter danger, work long hours,and do whatever it took to bring an end to this tragedy, and the people, businesses, andcommunity partners who immediately volunteered their time, talent, equipment, suppliesand facilities to assist in this endeavor, and who continue to do so as we move forward, isacknowledged with deep gratitude and appreciation. Among those we must acknowledgeare the following:The hundreds of law enforcement officers, emergency medical responders, emergencycommunication specialists, hospital personnel, the FBI Victim Services Rapid ResponseTeam, the Lewiston School Department, Bates College and its student volunteers, BangorSavings Bank, Androscoggin Savings Bank, Community Concepts, the Lewiston AuburnMetropolitan Chamber of Commerce, youth and staff of the Tree Street Youth Center, theMaine Community Foundation, the Harvard Police Department Canine Unit, the FBI CrisisResponse Canine Unit, Build-A Bear Workshops, L.L. Bean, Island Treasure Toys, VermontTeddy Bear Company, U-Haul, Walmart, Amato's, Dunkin Donuts, co*ke Northeast, Big FishPromotions, Hannaford Supermarkets, Broadway Gardens, and all the individuals,businesses and community organizations that immediately responded and offered theirtime, talents, goods, and resources.65

X. Internet Citation and StatementThe internet references cited in this report were valid as of the date of its printing. Given thatURLs and websites constantly change, the Commission cannot vouch for their continuingvalidity after the publication of this report.This report may be freely distributed and used only for noncommercial and educationalpurposes. The photograph by Kathleen Walker contained in this report is her original workand should not be used for any commercial purposes without her express permission.Recommended citation:The Commission to Study the Facts of the Lewiston Tragedy, 2024, Final ReportOf The Independent Commission To Investigate The Facts Of The Tragedy In Lewiston66

XI. APPENDICES

The Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston |Appendix A: Governor's Executive OrderExecutive OrderOFFICE OFTHE GOVERNORNO. 4 FY 23/24DATE November 9, 2023WHEREAS, on October 25, 2023, Robert Card shot and killed 18 people and wounded 13 morein Lewiston, Maine; andWHEREAS, on October 27, 2023, nearly 48 hours after these horrendous acts and a massivemanhunt by law enforcement, the perpetrator of the violence was found deceased of a self-inflictedgunshot wound; andWHEREAS, from what is known thus far, on multiple occasions over the last ten months,concerns about Mr. Card's mental health and his behavior were brought to the attention of hisArmy Reserve Unit, as well as law enforcement agencies in Maine and in New York, raisingcrucial questions about actions taken and what more could have been done to prevent this tragedyfrom occurring; andWHEREAS, the Maine State Police are conducting a criminal investigation of the shooting, butthe gravity of the attack on Maine people - an attack that strikes at the core of who we are and thevalues we hold dear - demands a higher level of scrutiny; andWHEREAS, a cornerstone of the ability to heal is to know the truth - in this case, the facts ofwhat happened on that tragic night, of the months that led up to it, and of the police response to it;andWHEREAS, this - the complete facts and circ*mstances, including any failures and omissions-must be brought to light and known by all because the families of the victims, those who wereinjured and the people of Maine and the nation deserve nothing less.NOW, THEREFORE, I, Janet T. Mills, Governor of the State of Maine, pursuant to authorityconferred by Me. Const. Art. V, Pt. 1, § 1 and § 12, do hereby Order the following.I.A.ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSEThe Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston("Independent Commission") is hereby established;16

The Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston |II.III.B.The purpose of the Independent Commission is to determine the facts surroundingthe tragedy in Lewiston on October 25th, including relevant facts andcirc*mstances leading up to it and the police response to it. The IndependentCommission should determine the full scope of its work, and should ask anyquestion necessary of any person that is relevant to the charge of gathering the factsregarding Robert Card's mental health history, contact with State, Federal, ormilitary authorities, access to firearms, the initial law enforcement response to theLewiston shootings and the manhunt that ensued, and any other matters theIndependent Commission determines are relevant to its purpose.MEMBERSHIP, STAFFING AND SUPPORTThe Independent Commission shall consist of seven members, as follows:A. Chair1. The Honorable Daniel E. WathenB. Members2. Dr. Deborah Baeder3. George T. (Toby) Dilworth, Esq.4. The Honorable Ellen A. Gorman5. The Honorable Geoffrey A. Rushlau6. The Honorable Paula D. Silsby7. Dr. Anthony NgC. Funding and Staffing1. The Office of the Attorney General is hereby requested to provide suchfunding to the Independent Commission as the Chair determines isnecessary to hire sufficient staff or consultants on a contract basis to fulfillthe Independent Commission's charge. The terms of such contracts mustmake clear that those hired will report directly to the IndependentCommission;2. The Chair and the members of the Commission shall serve withoutcompensation.PROCEEDINGS AND RECORDSA.PROCEEDINGS AND RECORDS: The Chair will preside at, set theagenda for, and schedule Independent Commission meetings. The Commissionshall meet as often as it deems necessary to complete its work. Records,proceedings and deliberations of the Independent Commission are not subject toPHONE 1271287-81111PRAYTED ON CLCLORETTY USERS CALL THwww.main pFAX: 12071 287 10417

The Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston |IV.the requirements of 1 M.R.S. c. 13, in accordance with sections 402(2)(F), (3)(J)and § 403(6) of that Chapter. To the extent practical, and to the extent that its fact-finding mission is not hindered, the Independent Commission should conduct itswork in a manner that is open and accessible to the public. The IndependentCommission may conduct its work through subcommittees.B. REPORT: The Independent Commission shall issue a public report of itsfindings. As it conducts its investigation and prepares its report, the Commissionshall balance the need for an appropriately thorough inquiry with the public'sinterest in timely answers.EFFECTIVE DATEThe effective date of this Order is November 9, 2023.JANET T. MILLSPHONE 120726-7811 VistTEYSERS CALLFAX: (2171287-10418

MAINEJanet T. MillsGOVERNORSTATE OF MAINEOFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR1 STATE HOUSE STATIONAUGUSTA, MAINE04333-0001November 8, 2023Members of the Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston:On behalf of the people of Maine, we thank you for accepting this important appointment and itsserious responsibilities.Maine is on what will be a long and difficult road to healing. As we have said, a cornerstone ofour ability to heal as a people and as a state is to know the truth - in this case, the full andunvarnished facts of what happened on October 25th, the months that led up to it, and the lawenforcement response to it.We have selected you for the Independent Commission because each of you brings a wealth ofpersonal and professional legal, behavioral, investigatory, or other experiences that will help bringto light these facts for all to know and understand. Additionally, each of you is highly respectedfor your abilities, your expertise, your impartiality, your integrity, and your fair-mindedness. Thesequalities, and your experiences, will be fundamental to the discharge of the IndependentCommission's duties.We must recognize that, from what we know thus far, on multiple occasions over the last tenmonths, concerns about Robert Card's mental health and his behavior were brought to the attentionof his Army Reserve Unit, as well as law enforcement agencies here in Maine and in New York.This raises crucial questions about actions taken and what more could have been done to preventthis tragedy from occurring.In order to exercise your independence as a Commission, you should determine the full andcomplete scope of your work, and you should ask any question necessary of any person that isrelevant to your charge in gathering the facts. All that we ask is that you follow the facts, whereverthey may lead, and that you do so in an independent and objective manner, biased by no one andguided only by the pursuit of truth.To that end, we should not - and we will not - presume to know the full extent of the staff andresources you may require to discharge your fact-finding responsibilities fully and properly. TheOffice of the Attorney General is providing funding for the Independent Commission. However,if the Independent Commission determines that it needs additional funding or additionalinvestigatory power to discharge its fact-finding responsibilities fully and properly, then ourOffices stand ready to seek any appropriate authorization from the Legislature on your behalf.PRINTS DS REVVEIS PAPERPHONE: (207) 287-3531 (Vora)TTY USERS CALL 711FAX. 1207) 287-1034www.masoe.ox

Lastly, we encourage the Independent Commission to conduct its work in public to the greatestextent possible, insofar as it does not limit or hinder the ability of the Independent Commission touncover the facts, and that the Independent Commission conduct its work with a due sense ofurgency, guided by, above all else, the pursuit of facts and the necessary time that may take.Ultimately, we ask that the Independent Commission prepare a formal report discussing the resultsof the investigation to be released to the public.As we have said, the complete facts and circ*mstances - including any failures or omissions -must be brought to light and known by all. The families of the victims, those who were injured,and the people of Maine and the nation deserve nothing less.Sincerely,eJanet T. MillsGovernorPRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPLEAmnon M. FreyAaron M. FreyAttorney GeneralPHONE: (207) 287-3531 (Voice)TTY USERS CALL 711www.maine.govFAX: (207) 287-1034

Appendix B131st Maine LegislatureResolve, to Ensure That the Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston HasNecessary Authority to Discharge Its Fact-finding MissionL.D. 2192Resolve, to Ensure That the Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts ofthe Tragedy in Lewiston Has Necessary Authority to Discharge Its Fact-findingMissionSTATE OF MAINEIN THE YEAR OF OUR LORDTWO THOUSAND TWENTY-FOURH.P. 1405 - L.D. 2192Resolve, to Ensure That the Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of theTragedy in Lewiston Has Necessary Authority to Discharge Its Fact-finding MissionEmergency preamble. Whereas, acts and resolves of the Legislature do not become effective until90 days after adjournment unless enacted as emergencies; andWhereas, Governor Janet T. Mills, by executive order of November 9, 2023, established theIndependent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston; andWhereas, the independent commission was established for the purpose of conducting a thorough andobjective investigation into the facts and circ*mstances of what happened on that tragic night in Lewiston,the months that led up to it and the police response to it; andWhereas, the families of the victims and all people of the State deserve to know the truth about whathappened; andWhereas, in order to fulfill its fact-finding mission, the independent commission requires the ability toissue subpoenas to compel the testimony of witnesses and the production of documents and have accessto agency records that may not otherwise be subject to disclosure under state law; andWhereas, this legislation needs to take effect before the expiration of the 90-day period in order for theindependent commission to complete its work in a timely fashion; andWhereas, in the judgment of the Legislature, these facts create an emergency within the meaning of theConstitution of Maine and require the following legislation as immediately necessary for the preservation ofthe public peace, health and safety; now, therefore, be itSec. 1. Definitions. Resolved: That, as used in this resolve, the following terms have the followingmeanings.1. "Chair" means the chair of the independent commission.LR3042, item 4 - 131st Maine Legislature, page 1

Appendix B131st Maine LegislatureResolve, to Ensure That the Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston HasNecessary Authority to Discharge Its Fact-finding MissionL.D. 21922. "Independent commission" means the Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of theTragedy in Lewiston, established by executive order of Governor Janet T. Mills on November 9, 2023.Sec. 2. Issuance of subpoenas. Resolved: That, by a majority vote of its members, theindependent commission may issue subpoenas to compel the testimony of witnesses and the production ofdocuments in accordance with this resolve.Sec. 3. Notice to witnesses. Resolved: That a reasonable time before a witness testifies, aprospective witness must be notified of the investigation's subject matter and provided with a copy of thisresolve. The information required by this section must be presented at the time of service of the subpoena.Sec. 4. Oaths. Resolved: That all testimony of subpoenaed witnesses must be under oathadministered by the chair or the chair's designee.Sec. 5. Testimony of witnesses under subpoena. Resolved: That the independentcommission's staff and its members may take testimony of witnesses under subpoena. All testimony ofwitnesses under subpoena must be taken in open session, except upon request of a witness or by a majorityvote of the members of the independent commission, in which case testimony may be taken in executivesession. Testimony may be taken in executive session upon a showing that confidentiality is necessary tofulfill the independent commission's fact-finding mission.Sec. 6. Transcripts of testimony of witnesses under subpoena. Resolved: That theindependent commission shall prepare a transcript of all testimony of witnesses taken under subpoena. Awitness is entitled to obtain a copy of the transcript of the witness's own testimony, except that theindependent commission may delay the release of a transcript until the independent commission determinesthat release will not compromise the integrity of its investigation.Sec. 7. Release of testimony under subpoena. Resolved: That the independent commission,by a majority vote of its members, may release transcripts of witness testimony taken under subpoena,except that a transcript of the testimony may not be released without first affording the witness who gave thetestimony or the witness's counsel an opportunity to object to the proposed release. The chair or the chair'sdesignee shall rule on an objection. The ruling of the chair or the chair's designee may be overruled by amajority vote of the independent commission's members. The transcript of the testimony may be releasedover the objection of a witness upon a showing that the release of the transcript is necessary to theindependent commission's fact-finding mission, outweighs the interests of the witness and is not in violationof any federal or state laws, rules or regulations.Sec. 8. Request for court to compel compliance; legal representation. Resolved: That theindependent commission, by a majority vote of its members, may apply to the Superior Court to compelcompliance with a subpoena and may by lawful process seek to compel compliance in any state, federal ormilitary court or tribunal. The Attorney General, the Attorney General's designee or private counsel approvedby the Attorney General may represent the independent commission in such proceedings.Sec. 9. Compliance with state law and the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure. Resolved: Thatany time the independent commission exercises its authority to issue a subpoena under this resolve, theindependent commission shall comply with state law and the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure.Sec. 10. Availability of counsel to witnesses under subpoena; objections; privileges.Resolved: That a witness appearing before the independent commission under subpoena may havecounsel present to advise the witness at all times. The witness or counsel may, during the time the witnessLR3042, item 4 - 131st Maine Legislature, page 2

Appendix B131st Maine LegislatureResolve, to Ensure That the Independent Commission to Investigate the Facts of the Tragedy in Lewiston HasNecessary Authority to Discharge Its Fact-finding MissionL.D. 2192is giving testimony, object to any action of the independent commission that is detrimental to the witness'sinterests and is entitled to have a ruling by the chair or the chair's designee on the objection. The witnessmust be given the benefit of any privilege that the witness could claim in court as a party to a civil action,except that the chair or the chair's designee may direct compliance with any request for testimony to whichan objection or claim of privilege has been made. The direction of the chair or the chair's designee may beoverruled by a majority vote of the independent commission's members.Sec. 11. Access to state agency records not otherwise subject to disclosure. Resolved:That, notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, the independent commission, by a majority voteof its members, is authorized to request and receive records in the possession of any state agency orinstrumentality that the independent commission determines are necessary to fulfill its fact-finding mission,including confidential records and records not otherwise subject to public disclosure. The members of theindependent commission and its staff are authorized to review records received under this section solely forthe purpose of fulfilling the independent commission's fact-finding mission. During meetings of theindependent commission, the contents of confidential records and records not otherwise subject to publicdisclosure may be reviewed only in executive session.Sec. 12. Cooperation with State Archivist. Resolved: That the independent commission shallcooperate with the State Archivist to ensure that records of the independent commission are maintained incompliance with federal and state laws, rules and regulations.Sec. 13. Report on use of subpoena issuance. Resolved: That the independent commission, incompleting a final report of its work, shall include a detailed account of each subpoena issued.Sec. 14. Establishment of precedent. Resolved: That nothing in this resolve may be used toestablish a precedent authorizing independent commissions to issue subpoenas in the future.Sec. 15. Sunset. Resolved: That the independent commission's authority to issue subpoenas underthis resolve is effective until July 1, 2024. Any subpoena issued by the independent commission before July1, 2024 remains valid after that date.Emergency clause. In view of the emergency cited in the preamble, this legislation takes effect whenapproved.LR3042, item 4 - 131st Maine Legislature, page 3

Appendix CTitle 34-B: BEHAVIORAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL§3861-ASERVICESChapter 3: MENTAL HEALTHSubchapter 4: HOSPITALIZATIONArticle 3: INVOLUNTARY HOSPITALIZATION§3861. Reception of involuntary patients1. Nonstate mental health institution. The chief administrative officer of a nonstate mentalhealth institution may receive for observation, diagnosis, care and treatment in the institution anyperson whose admission is applied for under any of the procedures in this subchapter. Anadmission may be made under the provisions of section 3863 only if the certifying examinationconducted pursuant to section 3863, subsection 2 was completed no more than 2 days before thedate of admission.A. The institution, any person contracting with the institution and any of its employees whenadmitting, treating or discharging a patient under the provisions of sections 3863 and 3864 undera contract with the department, for purposes of civil liability, must be deemed to be a governmentalentity or an employee of a governmental entity under the Maine Tort Claims Act, Title 14, chapter741. [PL 1989, c. 906 (NEW).]B. Patients with a diagnosis of mental illness or psychiatric disorder in nonstate mental healthinstitutions that contract with the department under this subsection are entitled to the same rightsand remedies as patients in state mental health institutes as conferred by the constitution, laws,regulations and rules of this State and of the United States. [PL 1989, c. 906 (NEW).]C. Before contracting with and approving the admission of involuntary patients to a nonstatemental health institution, the department shall require the institution to:(1) Comply with all applicable regulations;(2) Demonstrate the ability of the institution to comply with judicial decrees as those decrees relateto services already being provided by the institution; and(3) Coordinate and integrate care with other community-based services. [PL 1989, c. 906(NEW).]D. Beginning July 31, 1990, the capital, licensing, remodeling, training and recruitment costsassociated with the start-up of beds designated for involuntary patients under this section must bereimbursed, within existing resources, of the Department of Health and Human Services. [PL1989, c. 906 (NEW); PL 1995, c. 560, Pt. K, S82 (AMD); PL 1995, c. 560, Pt. K, §83(AFF); PL 2001, c. 354, $3 (AMD); PL 2003, c. 689, Pt. B, §6 (REV).]E. The chief administrative officer of a nonstate mental health institution shall provide notice tothe department and such additional information as may be requested by the department when a

person who was involuntarily admitted to the institution has died, attempted suicide or sustained aserious injury resulting in significant impairment of physical condition. For the purposes of thisparagraph, "significant impairment" includes serious injuries resulting from burns, lacerations,bone fractures, substantial hematoma and injuries to internal organs whether self-inflicted orinflicted by another person. The notice must be provided within 24 hours of occurrence and mustinclude the name of the person; the name, address and telephone number of that person's legalguardian, conservator or legal representative and parents if that person is a minor; a detaileddescription of the occurrence and any injuries or impairments sustained; the date and time of theoccurrence; the name, street address and telephone number of the facility; and the name and jobtitle of the person providing the notice. [PL 2007, c. 89, §2 (NEW).][PL 2007, c. 89, §2 (AMD).]2. State mental health institute. The chief administrative officer of a state mental healthinstitute:A. May receive for observation, diagnosis, care and treatment in the state mental health instituteany person whose admission is applied for under section 3831 or 3863 if the certifyingexamination conducted pursuant to section 3863, subsection 2 was completed no more than 2 daysbefore the date of admission; and [PL 2007, c. 319, §8 (AMD).]B. May receive for observation, diagnosis, care and treatment in the state mental health instituteany person whose admission is applied for under section 3864 or is ordered by a court. [PL 2007,c. 319, $8 (AMD).]Any business entity contracting with the department for psychiatric physician services or anyperson contracting with a state mental health institute or the department to provide servicespertaining to the admission, treatment or discharge of patients under sections3863 and 3864 within a state mental health institute or any person contracting with a businessentity to provide those services within a state mental health institute is deemed to be agovernmental entity or an employee of a governmental entity for purposes of civil liability underthe Maine Tort Claims Act, Title 14, chapter 741, with respect to the admission, treatment ordischarge of patients within a state mental health institute under sections 3863 and 3864.[PL 2007, c. 319, §8 (AMD).]3. Involuntary treatment. Except for involuntary treatment ordered pursuant to theprovisions of section 3864, subsection 7-A, involuntary treatment of a patient at a designatednonstate mental health institution or a state mental health institute who is an involuntarilycommitted patient under the provisions of this subchapter may be ordered and administered onlyin conformance with the provisions of this subsection. For the purposes of this subsection,involuntary treatment is limited to medication for the treatment of mental illness and laboratorytesting and medication for the monitoring and management of side effects.A. If the patient's primary treating physician proposes a treatment that the physician, in the exerciseof professional judgment, believes is in the best interest of the patient and if the patient lacksclinical capacity to give informed consent to the proposed treatment and the patient is unwilling orunable to comply with the proposed treatment, the patient's primary treating physician shall requestin writing a clinical review of the proposed treatment by a clinical review panel. For a patient at a

state mental health institute, the request must be made to the superintendent of the institute or thedesignee of the superintendent. For a patient at a designated nonstate mental health institution, therequest must be made to the chief administrative officer or the designee of the chief administrativeofficer. The request must include the following information:(1) The name of the patient, the patient's diagnosis and the unit on which the patient ishospitalized;(2) The date that the patient was committed to the institution or institute and the period of the court-ordered commitment;(3) A statement by the primary treating physician that the patient lacks capacity to give informedconsent to the proposed treatment. The statement must include documentation of a 2nd opinionthat the patient lacks that capacity, given by a professional qualified to issue such an opinion whodoes not provide direct care to the patient but who may work for the institute or institution;(4) A description of the proposed course of treatment, including specific medications, routes ofadministration and dose ranges, proposed alternative medications or routes of administration, ifany, and the circ*mstances under which any proposed alternative would be used;(5) A description of how the proposed treatment will benefit the patient and ameliorate identifiedsigns and symptoms of the patient's psychiatric illness;(6) A listing of the known or anticipated risks and side effects of the proposed treatment and howthe prescribing physician will monitor, manage and minimize the risks and side effects;(7) Documentation of consideration of any underlying medical condition of the patient thatcontraindicates the proposed treatment; and(8) Documentation of consideration of any advance health care directive given in accordancewith Title 18-C, section 5-803 and any declaration regarding medical treatment of psychoticdisorders executed in accordance with section 11001. [PL 2017, c. 402, Pt. C, $96 (AMD);PL 2019, c. 417, Pt. B, $14 (AFF).]B. The provisions of this paragraph apply to the appointment, duties and procedures of the clinicalreview panel under paragraph A.(1) Within one business day of receiving a request under paragraph A, the superintendent of a statemental health institute or chief administrative officer of a designated nonstate mental healthinstitution or that person's designee shall appoint a clinical review panel of 2 or more licensedprofessional staff who do not provide direct care to the patient. At least one person must be aprofessional licensed to prescribe medication relevant to the patient's care and treatment. At thetime of appointment of the clinical review panel, the superintendent of a state mental healthinstitute or chief administrative officer of a designated nonstate mental health institution or thatperson's designee shall notify the following persons in writing that the clinical review panel willbe convened:(a) The primary treating physician;(b) The commissioner or the commissioner's designee;(c) The patient's designated representative or attorney, if any;

(d) The State's designated federal protection and advocacy agency; and(e) The patient. Notice to the patient must inform the patient that the clinical review panel will beconvened and of the right to assistance from a lay advisor, at no expense to the patient, and theright to obtain an attorney at the patient's expense. The notice must include contact information forrequesting assistance from a lay advisor, who may be employed by the institute or institution, andaccess to a telephone to contact a lay advisor must be provided to the patient.(2) Within 4 days of receiving a request under paragraph A and no less than 24 hours before themeeting of the clinical review panel, the superintendent of a state mental health institute or chiefadministrative officer of a designated nonstate mental health institution or that person's designeeshall provide notice of the date, time and location of the meeting to the patient's primary treatingphysician, the patient and any lay advisor or attorney.(3) The clinical review panel shall hold the meeting and any additional meetings as necessary,reach a final determination and render a written decision ordering or denying involuntarytreatment.(a) At the meeting, the clinical review panel shall receive information relevant to the determinationof the patient's capacity to give informed consent to treatment and the need for treatment, reviewrelevant portions of the patient's medical records, consult with the physician requesting thetreatment, review with the patient that patient's reasons for refusing treatment, provide the patientand any lay advisor or attorney an opportunity to ask questions of anyone presenting informationto the clinical review panel at the meeting and determine whether the requirements for orderinginvoluntary treatment have been met.(b) All meetings of the clinical review panel must be open to the patient and any lay advisor orattorney, except that any meetings held for the purposes of deliberating, making findings andreaching final conclusions are confidential and not open to the patient and any lay advisor orattorney.(c) The clinical review panel shall conduct its review in a manner that is consistent with thepatient's rights.(d) Involuntary treatment may not be approved and ordered if the patient affirmativelydemonstrates to the clinical review panel that if that patient possessed capacity, the patient wouldhave refused the treatment on religious grounds or on the basis of other previously expressedconvictions or beliefs.(4) The clinical review panel may approve a request for involuntary treatment and order thetreatment if the clinical review panel finds, at a minimum:(a) That the patient lacks the capacity to make an informed decision regarding treatment;(b) That the patient is unable or unwilling to comply with the proposed treatment;(c) That the need for the treatment outweighs the risks and side effects; and(d) That the proposed treatment is the least intrusive appropriate treatment option.

(5) The clinical review panel may make additional findings, including but not limited to findingsthat:(a) Failure to treat the illness is likely to produce lasting or irreparable harm to the patient; or(b) Without the proposed treatment the patient's illness or involuntary commitment may besignificantly extended without addressing the symptoms that cause the patient to pose a likelihoodof serious harm.(6) The clinical review panel shall document its findings and conclusions, including whether thepotential benefits of the proposed treatment outweigh the potential risks. [PL 2011, c. 657, Pt.DD, $1 (AMD).]C. The provisions of this paragraph govern the rights of a patient who is the subject of a clinicalreview panel under paragraph A.(1) The patient is entitled to the assistance of a lay advisor without expense to the patient. Thepatient is entitled to representation by an attorney at the patient's expense.(2) The patient may review any records or documents considered by the clinical review panel.(3) The patient may provide information orally and in writing to the clinical review panel and maypresent witnesses.(4) The patient may ask questions of any person who provides information to the clinical reviewpanel.(5) The patient and any lay advisor or attorney may attend all meetings of the clinical review panelexcept for any private meetings authorized under paragraph B, subparagraph 3, division (b). [PL2007, c. 580, $2 (NEW).]D. If the clinical review panel under paragraph A approves the request for involuntary treatment,the clinical review panel shall enter an order for the treatment in the patient's medical records andimmediately notify the superintendent of a state mental health institute or chief administrativeofficer of a designated nonstate mental health institution. The order takes effect:(1) For a patient at a state mental health institute, one business day from the date of entry of theorder; or(2) For a patient at a designated nonstate mental health institution, one business day from the dateof entry of the order, except that if the patient has requested review of the order by thecommissioner under paragraph F, subparagraph (2), the order takes effect one business day fromthe day on which the commissioner or the commissioner's designee issues a written decision. [PL2011, c. 657, Pt. DD, $2 (AMD).]E. The order for treatment under this subsection remains in effect for 120 days or until the end ofthe period of commitment, whichever is sooner, unless altered by:(1) An agreement to a different course of treatment by the primary treating physician and patient;(2) For a patient at a designated nonstate mental health institution, modification or vacation of theorder by the commissioner or the commissioner's designee; or

(3) An alteration or stay of the order entered by the Superior Court after reviewing the entry of theorder by the clinical review panel on appeal under paragraph F. [PL 2011, c. 657, Pt. DD, $3(AMD).]F. The provisions of this paragraph apply to the review and appeal of an order of the clinical reviewpanel entered under paragraph B.(1) The order of the clinical review panel at a state mental health institute is final agency actionthat may be appealed to the Superior Court in accordance with Rule 80C of the Maine Rules ofCivil Procedure.(2) The order of the clinical review panel at a designated nonstate mental health institution may bereviewed by the commissioner or the commissioner's designee upon receipt of a written requestfrom the patient submitted no later than one business day after the patient receives the order of theclinical review panel. Within 3 business days of receipt of the request for review, the designatednonstate mental health institution shall submit the full clinical review panel record to thecommissioner or the commissioner's designee. Within 3 business days of receipt of the request forreview, the patient and the designated nonstate mental health institution may submit writtenarguments to the commissioner or the commissioner's designee. The commissioner or thecommissioner's designee shall review the full clinical review panel record and any writtenarguments submitted pursuant to this subparagraph for abuse of discretion, error of law or findingsnot supported by substantial evidence in the record. Within 3 business days of the receipt of thefull clinical review panel record and any written arguments, the commissioner or thecommissioner's designee shall issue a decision. The decision of the commissioner or thecommissioner's designee may affirm the order, modify the order or vacate the order. The decisionof the commissioner or the commissioner's designee takes effect one business day after thecommissioner or the commissioner's designee issues a written decision. The decision of thecommissioner or the commissioner's designee is final agency action that may be appealed to theSuperior Court in accordance with Rule 80C of the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure. [PL 2021,c. 165, $1 (AMD).][PL 2021, c. 165, $1 (AMD).]4. Emergency involuntary treatment. Nothing in this section precludes a medicalpractitioner from administering involuntary treatment to a person who is being held or detained bya hospital against the person's will under the provisions of this subchapter, if the followingconditions are met:A. As a result of mental illness, the person poses a serious and immediate risk of harm to thatperson or others; [PL 2015, c. 309, §1 (NEW).]B. The person lacks the decisional capacity either to provide informed consent for treatment or tomake an informed refusal of treatment; [PL 2015, c. 309, §1 (NEW).]C. A person legally authorized to provide consent for treatment on behalf of the person is notreasonably available under the circ*mstances; [PL 2015, c. 309, $1 (NEW).]D. The treatment being administered is a currently recognized standard of treatment for treatingthe person's mental illness and is the least restrictive form of treatment appropriate in thecirc*mstances; [PL 2015, c. 309, $1 (NEW).]

E. For purposes of evaluation for emergency involuntary treatment, the medical practitionerconsiders available history and information from other sources, including, but not limited to,family members, that are considered reliable by the examiner; and [PL 2015, c. 309, $1(NEW).]F. A reasonable person concerned for the welfare of the person would conclude that the benefitsof the treatment outweigh the risks and potential side effects of the treatment and would consentto the treatment under the circ*mstances. [PL 2015, c. 309, $1 (NEW).][PL 2015, c. 309, $1 (NEW).]§3862. Protective custody1. Law enforcement officer's power. If a law enforcement officer has probable cause tobelieve that a person may be mentally ill and that due to that condition the person poses a likelihoodof serious harm as defined in section 3801, subsection 4-A, paragraph A, B or C, or if a lawenforcement officer knows that a person has an advance health care directive authorizing mentalhealth treatment and the officer has probable cause to believe that the person lacks capacity, thelaw enforcement officer:A. May take the person into protective custody; and [PL 1983, c. 459, $7 (NEW).]B. If the law enforcement officer does take the person into protective custody, shall deliver theperson immediately for examination by a medical practitioner as provided in section3862-A or 3863 or, for a person taken into protective custody who has an advance health caredirective authorizing mental health treatment, for examination as provided in Title 18-C, section5-803, subsection 4 to determine the individual's capacity and the existence of conditions specifiedin the advance health care directive for the directive to be effective. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. c,$5 (AMD); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]When formulating probable cause, the law enforcement officer may rely upon informationprovided by a 3rd-party informant if the officer confirms that the informant has reason to believe,based upon the informant's recent personal observations of or conversations with a person, that theperson may be mentally ill and that due to that condition the person poses a likelihood of seriousharm as defined in section 3801, subsection 4-A, paragraph A, B or C.[PL 2021, c. 377, $1 (AMD).]1-A. Law enforcement officer's power.[PL 1995, c. 62, §2 (RP).]2. Certificate not executed. If a certificate relating to the person's likelihood of serious harmis not executed by the examiner under section 3863, and, for a person who has an advance healthcare directive authorizing mental health treatment, if the examiner determines that the conditionsspecified in the advance health care directive for the directive to be effective have not been met or,in the absence of stated conditions, that the person does not lack capacity, the officer shall:A. Release the person from protective custody and, with the person's permission, return the personforthwith to the person's place of residence, if within the territorial jurisdiction of the officer; [PL1999, c. 423, $4 (AMD).]

B. Release the person from protective custody and, with the person's permission, return the personforthwith to the place where the person was taken into protective custody; or [PL 1999, c. 423,$4 (AMD).]C. If the person is also under arrest for a violation of law, retain the person in custody until theperson is released in accordance with the law. [PL 1999, c. 423, §4 (AMD).][PL 1999, c. 423, S4 (AMD).]3. Certificate executed. If the certificate is executed by the examiner under section 3863,the officer shall undertake forthwith to secure the endorsem*nt of a judicial officer under section3863 and may detain the person for a period of time not to exceed 18 hours as may be necessaryto obtain that endorsem*nt.[PL 2009, c. 651, $12 (AMD).]3-A. Advance health care directive effect. If the examiner determines that the conditionsspecified in the advance health care directive for the directive to be effective have been met or, inthe absence of stated conditions, that the person lacks capacity, the person may be treated inaccordance with the terms of the advance health care directive.[PL 1999, c. 423, §4 (NEW).]4. Transportation costs. The costs of transportation under this section must be paid in themanner provided under section 3863. Any person transporting an individual to a hospital underthe circ*mstances described in this section shall use the least restrictive form of transportationavailable that meets the security needs of the situation.[PL 1997, c. 422, §7 (AMD).]SECTION HISTORY

§3863Appendix DTitle 34-B: BEHAVIORAL AND DEVELOPMENTALSERVICESChapter 3: MENTAL HEALTHSubchapter 4: HOSPITALIZATIONArticle 3: INVOLUNTARY HOSPITALIZATION§3862-A. Protection from substantial threats1. Definitions. As used in this section, unless the context otherwise indicates, the followingterms have the following meanings.A. "Dangerous weapon" or "weapon" has the same meaning as in Title 17-A, section 2, subsection9, paragraph C, including a firearm as defined in Title 17-A, section 2, subsection 12-A. [PL2019, c. 411, Pt. A, $1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, S3 (AFF).]B. "Extended restrictions" means the continued threat-based restrictions imposed by the courtpursuant to subsection 6, paragraph D. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c.411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]C. "Initial restrictions" means the immediate and temporary 14-day threat-based restrictionspursuant to subsection 4. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, $1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3(AFF).]D. "Judicial hearing" means a court hearing under subsection 6. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, $1(NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]E. "Law enforcement agency" has the same meaning as in Title 25, section 3701, subsection1. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]F. "Law enforcement officer" means a person vested by law with the power to make arrests forcrimes or serve criminal process, whether that power extends to all crimes or is limited to specificcrimes, and who possesses a current and valid certificate issued pursuant to Title 25, section2803-A. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]G. "Likelihood of foreseeable harm" means a substantial risk in the foreseeable future of seriousphysical harm to the person as manifested by recent behaviors or threats of, or attempts at, suicideor serious self-inflicted harm; or a substantial risk in the foreseeable future of serious physical harmto other persons as manifested by recent homicidal or violent behavior or by recent conduct orstatements placing others in reasonable fear of serious physical harm. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt.A, §1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]H. "Medical practitioner" has the same meaning as in section 3801, subsection 4-B. [PL 2019,c. 411, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]I. "Prohibited person" means a person subject to Title 15, section 393, subsection 1, paragraphE-1 or E-2. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]

J. "Protective custody" means protective custody under section 3862. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt.A, $1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]K. "Restricted person" means a person taken into protective custody by a law enforcement officerwho the officer has probable cause to believe possesses or controls or may acquire a dangerousweapon and who is found by a medical practitioner to present a likelihood of foreseeableharm. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]L. "Threat-based restriction" means a prohibition on a restricted person from purchasing,possessing or controlling or attempting to purchase, possess or control a dangerous weapon duringthe period of the restriction. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D,$3 (AFF).][PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, S3 (AFF).]2. Assessment by a medical practitioner; security; immunity. This subsection applieswhen a law enforcement officer has taken a person into protective custody.A. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, the law enforcement officer shall provideto the medical practitioner the information that led to the protective custody including, but notlimited to, the information that gave rise to the probable cause determination, the person's pertinentcriminal history record information and other known history and recent or recurring actions andbehaviors. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]B. The medical practitioner under paragraph A shall assess whether the person presents alikelihood of foreseeable harm. In assessing the person, a medical practitioner may consult withother medical professionals as the medical practitioner determines advisable. If the medicalpractitioner finds that the person can benefit from treatment and services, the medical practitionershall refer the person to treatment and services. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, $1 (NEW); PL 2019,c. 411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]C. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, an assessment pursuant to this sectionmay be performed at a health care facility but, when available and as appropriate, must beperformed at an alternative location. If the assessment is provided at a health care facility, lawenforcement shall, upon request of the facility and consistent with section 3863, subsection 2-A,absent compelling circ*mstances, assist the facility with the security of the person awaiting theassessment under this section. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, $1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt.D, $3 (AFF).]D. A juvenile, as defined in Title 15, section 3003, subsection 14, who is subject to this sectionmay be accompanied at the assessment by a parent, guardian, grandparent, aunt or uncle or asibling who has attained the age of 18, whose company is requested by the juvenile, who is timelyavailable and whose accompaniment is practicable. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]E. A medical practitioner and any other medical or mental health professional consulted by themedical practitioner are not liable in a civil action brought by any person for any act performed ingood faith in execution of the obligations imposed on medical practitioners by this section,including any decision regarding the affirmative or negative assessment of the likelihood offoreseeable harm. The immunity provided in this paragraph also applies to a principal if the

medical practitioner or professional is acting as an agent or employee of the principal. [PL 2019,c. 411, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).][PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]3. Notification by medical practitioner and judicial endorsem*nt. A medical practitionershall notify in writing the law enforcement officer or law enforcement agency that, based on theassessment under subsection 2, paragraph B, the person is found to present a likelihood offoreseeable harm. If so notified, the law enforcement officer or law enforcement agency shall assoon as practicable seek endorsem*nt by a Superior Court Justice, District Court Judge, judge ofprobate or justice of the peace of the medical practitioner's assessment and law enforcement'sdeclarations that the person was taken into protective custody and that the law enforcement officerhas probable cause that the person possesses, controls or may acquire a dangerous weapon. Thejudge or justice shall promptly transmit to the law enforcement officer or agency the decision toendorse or not endorse. A decision transmitted electronically has the same legal effect and validityas a signed original. An endorsem*nt must authorize law enforcement to execute the authorityin subsection 4. This section may not be construed to prevent law enforcement from accepting avoluntary surrender of dangerous weapons.[PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]4. Initial restrictions; notice by law enforcement. A person whose assessment is endorsedby a judicial officer under subsection 3 becomes, at the time of notice by a law enforcement officerunder paragraph B, a restricted person subject to initial restrictions and subject to the prohibitionsin Title 15, section 393, subsection 1, paragraphs E-1 and E-2 as follows:A. The restricted person, after notice under paragraph B:(1) Is prohibited from possessing, controlling, acquiring or attempting to possess, control oracquire a dangerous weapon pending the outcome of a judicial hearing;(2) Shall immediately and temporarily surrender any weapons possessed, controlled or acquiredby the restricted person to a law enforcement officer who has authority in the jurisdiction in whichthe weapons are located pending the outcome of a judicial hearing; and(3) Has a right to a judicial hearing within 14 days of notice under paragraph B; and [PL 2019,c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]B. A law enforcement officer shall, as soon as practicable, but no later than 24 hours after thejudicial endorsem*nt:(1) Notify the restricted person that the restricted person:(a) Is prohibited from possessing, controlling, acquiring or attempting to possess, control oracquire a dangerous weapon pending the outcome of a judicial hearing;(b) Is required to immediately and temporarily surrender any weapons possessed, controlled oracquired by the restricted person to a law enforcement officer who has authority in the jurisdictionin which the weapons are located pending the outcome of a judicial hearing; and(c) Has a right to a judicial hearing within 14 days of the notice under this paragraph;

(2) Notify the contact person, if any, disclosed by the restricted person to the medical practitionerand the district attorney in the district of the restricted person's residence of the person's restrictedstatus; and(3) Report the person's restricted status to the Department of Public Safety. [PL 2019, c. 411,Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).][PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]5. Temporary surrender to law enforcement. A law enforcement agency may store, ormake arrangements with another law enforcement agency or federally licensed firearms dealer tostore, and care for the weapons surrendered by a restricted person in the manner providedin subsection 7. A restricted person who makes all practical, immediate efforts to comply with asurrender notice under subsection 4 is not subject to arrest or prosecution as a prohibited personunder Title 15, section 393, subsection 1, paragraph E-1 or E-2. If a law enforcement agency hasprobable cause to believe the restricted person possesses or controls but has not surrendered aweapon, law enforcement may, prior to or as part of a judicial hearing, search for and seize such aweapon when authorized by a judicially issued warrant or other circ*mstances approved by law.[PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, $1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]6. Judicial hearing. A judicial hearing under this section is governed by this subsection.A. Within 5 days of the date of the notice given to a restricted person under subsection 4, paragraphB, the district attorney in the district of the restricted person's residence shall file a petition forjudicial review of the initial restrictions by the district court. The district attorney shall provide tothe restricted person written notice of the petition and hearing at least 7 days prior to the hearing.The restricted person has the right to be represented by counsel at the hearing, and the court mayappoint counsel for an indigent party. Upon a showing of good cause, the court may extend thetime to hold the hearing. [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3(AFF).]B. Within 14 days of the notice given under subsection 4, the court shall hold a hearing todetermine whether to dissolve or extend the initial restrictions. In the hearing determining whetherto dissolve or extend the initial restrictions, the district attorney has the burden to prove by clearand convincing evidence that the restricted person presents a likelihood of foreseeable harm. [PL2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]C. In determining whether there are grounds to extend the initial restrictions, the court shallconsider all relevant evidence, including, but not limited to, recent threats or acts of violence bythe restricted person directed toward other persons; recent threats or acts of violence by therestricted person directed toward the restricted person; recent acts of unlawful abuse of animals bythe restricted person; the reckless use or threatening display of a dangerous weapon by therestricted person; a history of the use, attempted use or threatened use of physical force by therestricted person against other persons; a record of prior custodial events or restrictions under thissection; prior involuntary confinement of the restricted person in a hospital for persons withpsychiatric disabilities; prior protection from abuse and protection from harassment orders againstthe restricted person or violations regarding protection from abuse or protection from harassmentby the restricted person; evidence of stalking behavior, severe obsession or sexual violence by therestricted person; the illegal use of controlled substances by the restricted person; and evidence of

alcohol or drug abuse by the restricted person. The court shall also consider whether the restrictedperson is receiving treatment responsive to that person's mental health or substance use needs. [PL2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, S3 (AFF).]D. This paragraph governs court orders.(1) If the court finds after hearing that there is not clear and convincing evidence to continue orextend the initial restrictions, the court shall dissolve the initial restrictions and order the return ofany weapons surrendered or seized. The court shall direct the Department of Public Safety toremove the record of restrictions from the department's pertinent database when developed by thedepartment.(2) If the court finds after hearing that there is clear and convincing evidence to continue or extendthe initial restrictions, the court shall inform the restricted person that the restricted person isprohibited for up to one year from purchasing, possessing or controlling any dangerous weapon orattempting to purchase, possess or control any dangerous weapon. The court shall further orderthe person to immediately surrender dangerous weapons possessed or controlled by that person toa law enforcement officer and notify the Department of Public Safety for entry in the pertinentdatabase when developed by the department.(3) Extended restrictions imposed under this paragraph expire according to the terms of the court'sorder. The court shall schedule a hearing within 45 days prior to the expiration of the order todetermine if the order should be extended. The district attorney has the burden of proving that therestricted person continues to pose a likelihood of foreseeable harm. If, after a hearing, the courtfinds by clear and convincing evidence that the restricted person continues to pose a likelihood offoreseeable harm, the court shall renew the extended restrictions for up to one year. If the courtdoes not so find, the court shall deny the petition and order the return of any weapons surrenderedor seized. Upon motion by the State, the court may for cause shown order that the restricted personbe examined for assessment of whether the restricted person continues to pose a likelihood offoreseeable harm. The fees or expenses for an assessment pursuant to this subparagraph may bepaid from the Extradition and Prosecution Expenses Account established by Title 15, section224-A.(4) A restricted person may file one motion for dissolution during an extended restriction. For thatmotion, the restricted person has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that therestricted person no longer poses a likelihood of foreseeable harm.(5) A court shall electronically update or transmit to the Department of Public Safety, Bureau ofState Police an abstract of the order issued by the court pursuant to this section that includes aprohibition on the possession of a dangerous weapon. The abstract must include the name, date ofbirth and gender of the person who is the subject of the order; the court's order and the expirationdate of that order; and a notation that the person has been notified by the court.The abstract required by this subparagraph is confidential and is not a public record as definedin Title 1, chapter 13; however, the information contained in the abstract or a copy of the abstractmay be provided by the Department of Public Safety to a criminal justice agency for lawenforcement purposes, to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Instant CriminalBackground Check System or to an issuing authority for the purpose of processing concealed

firearm permit applications. The Department of Public Safety shall, when the pertinent database isdeveloped, request that the Federal Bureau of Investigation ensure that, immediately after the orderexpires, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System no longer reflects that expiredorder as a ground for prohibiting the subject of the order from possessing or acquiring a firearm.For the purposes of this subsection, "criminal justice agency" means a federal, state, tribal, district,county or local government agency or any subunit of those entities that performs the administrationof criminal justice under a statute or executive order and that allocates a substantial part of itsannual budget to the administration of criminal justice. Courts and the Department of the AttorneyGeneral are considered criminal justice agencies, as is any equivalent agency at any level ofCanadian government.(6) Nothing in this subsection may be construed to prevent the restricted person, district attorneyand court from accepting a court-ordered disposition to which each agrees. [PL 2019, c. 411,Pt. A, $1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).][PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]7. Weapons storage and return. A law enforcement agency may store, or makearrangements with another law enforcement agency or federally licensed firearms dealer to store,any weapon surrendered to or seized by law enforcement under this section for as long as thethreat-based restrictions are in effect. The duties and liability of a law enforcement agency withrespect to handling and storage of a weapon surrendered or seized are governed by Title 25, section2804-C, subsection 2-C. A weapon surrendered to or seized by a law enforcement agency must bereturned to the restricted person when the threat-based restrictions expire. If a seized or surrenderedweapon remains unclaimed for 6 months after the expiration or dissolution of threat-basedrestrictions, the law enforcement agency may dispose of the weapon consistent with Title 25,section 3503-A.[PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, $1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).]8. Offense. Possession of a dangerous weapon by a restricted person is a Class D crime.[PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]SECTION HISTORYPL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, S1 (NEW). PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. D, $3 (AFF).

Appendix EAn Act to Strengthen Public Safety by Improving Maine's FirearmLaws and Mental Health SystemSTATE OF MAINEIN THE YEAR OF OUR LORDTWO THOUSAND TWENTY-FOURS.P. 953-L.D. 2224An Act to Strengthen Public Safety by Improving Maine's Firearm Laws andMental Health SystemBe it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:Sec. 1. 15 MRSA §393, sub-§1, TE-1, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. C, §2 andaffected by Pt. D, §3, is amended to read:E-1. Is currently a restricted person under pursuant to Title 34-B, section 3862-A,subsection 24 or Title 34-B, section 3862-A, subsection 6, paragraph D or a similarorder issued by another jurisdiction, except that the prohibition applies to possessionand control, and not ownership. A permit issued pursuant to subsection 2 is not adefense to a violation of this paragraph. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime;Sec. 2. 15 MRSA §394, sub-§1, ¶B-1 is enacted to read:B-1. "Intentionally" has the same meaning as in Title 17-A, section 35, subsection 1.Sec. 3. 15 MRSA §394, sub-§1, B-2 is enacted to read:B-2. "Knowingly" has the same meaning as in Title 17-A, section 35, subsection 2.Sec. 4. 15 MRSA §394, sub-§1, ¶B-3 is enacted to read:B-3. "Recklessly" has the same meaning as in Title 17-A, section 35, subsection 3.Sec. 5. 15 MRSA §394, sub-§2, as enacted by PL 2023, c. 305, §1, is amended toread:

2. Sale or transfer prohibited. A person may not knowingly or intentionally, knowinglyor recklessly sell or transfer a firearm to a person who is prohibited from owning, possessingor having under that person's control a firearm pursuant to section 393 and who does nothave a permit issued under section 393. This subsection does not apply to the sale ortransfer of an antique firearm.Violation of this subsection is a Class D C crime.Sec. 6. 15 MRSA §395 is enacted to read:$395. Background checks of firearms buyers1. Definitions. As used in this section, unless the context otherwise indicates, thefollowing terms have the following meanings.A. "Advertisem*nt" means the presentation of a message regarding a firearm for sale bya seller that is:(1) Broadcast on television or radio;(2) Broadly disseminated over the Internet;(3) Printed in magazines or newspapers; or(4) Displayed on a handbill, poster, sign or placard.B. "Buy" means to acquire ownership for monetary or other consideration.C. "Buyer" means a person who buys from a seller.D. "Family member” means a spouse, domestic partner, parent, stepparent, fosterparent, child, stepchild, foster child or person related by consanguinity within the 2nddegree.E. "Federally licensed firearms dealer" or "dealer" means a person who is licensed or isrequired to be licensed as a dealer under 18 United States Code, Section 923(a)(3).F. "Firearm" has the same meaning as in Title 17-A, section 2, subsection 12-A.G. "Gun show" means any gathering or exhibition at which any firearm is displayed thatis:(1) Open to the public;(2) Not occurring on the permanent premises of a federally licensed firearms dealer;and(3) Conducted principally for the purposes of transactions.H. "Sell" means to transfer ownership for monetary or other consideration.I. "Seller" means a person who sells to a buyer.J. "Transaction" means the transfer of ownership of a firearm from a seller to a buyer.

2. Transactions covered by this section. This section applies only to transactions inwhich:A. A seller sells to a buyer at a gun show; orB. A seller sells to a buyer as a result of an advertisem*nt.3. Transactions not covered by this section. This section does not apply totransactions in which:A. The buyer and seller are family members; orB. The transaction is for a firearm that is:(1) A curio or relic, as defined in 27 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 478.11, asin effect on November 19, 2019, and the sale, transfer or exchange is betweencollectors as defined in 18 United States Code, Section 921(a)(13), as in effect onJune 25, 2022, who each have in their possession a valid collector of curios andrelics license issued by the United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol,Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; or(2) An antique firearm, as defined in 18 United States Code, Section 921(a)(16), asin effect on June 25, 2022.4. Requirement for transactions covered by this section. A seller who is not afederally licensed firearms dealer may not complete a transaction to which this sectionapplies unless the seller facilitates the transaction through a federally licensed firearmsdealer. The dealer shall perform a background check of the putative buyer by using theFederal Bureau of Investigation, National Instant Criminal Background Check System in thesame manner as if the dealer were the seller of the firearm that is the subject of thetransaction. If the background check reveals that the putative buyer is prohibited frompurchasing a firearm, the dealer shall notify the seller of that fact and of the fact that thetransaction may not proceed. The dealer may charge a reasonable fee for serving as thefacilitator.5. Violations. A person who sells a firearm in violation of this section commits a ClassC crime.Sec. 7. 22-A MRSA §203, sub-§2, as enacted by PL 2003, c. 689, Pt. A, §1, isamended to read:2. Additional programs and services for children and families. The departmentshall provide children and families with additional programs and services to assist them inmeeting their needs, including, but not limited to:A. Child welfare services;B. Head Start and child care services;C. Maternal and child health services, including home visiting programs;D. Paternity establishment and child support enforcement services; andE. Residential and long-term care services for children with disabilities:; and

F. Injury and violence prevention programs, including data collection, synthesis andevaluation.Sec. 8. 25 MRSA §2804-C, sub-§2-E, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. C, §4 andaffected by Pt. D, §3, is amended to read:2-E. Receipt of certain dangerous weapons; training; procedure; liability.Beginning in 2020, the Maine Criminal Justice Academy Board of Trustees shall requiretraining as part of its mandated training schedule for municipal, county and state lawenforcement officers regarding the process for protection from substantial threats by arestricted person extreme risk protection orders and the proper handling, storage,safekeeping and return of dangerous weapons received pursuant to an endorsem*nt orcourt order under Title 34-B, section 3862-A or 3873-A. The training must include educationconcerning the prohibitions on the purchase, control or possession of dangerous weapons.A law enforcement officer who receives custody of a dangerous weapon pursuant to Title34-B, section 3862-A or 3873-A shall exercise reasonable care to avoid loss, damage orreduction in value of the weapon and may not permanently mark or fire the weapon unlessthere is reasonable suspicion that the weapon has been used in the commission of a crime.Any liability for damage or reduction in value to such a weapon is governed by Title 14,chapter 741.Sec. 9. 34-B MRSA §3613 is enacted to read:$3613. Crisis receiving centers1. Definition. As used in this section, unless the context otherwise indicates, "crisisreceiving center" means a center that provides immediate and short-term walk-in access toan array of both clinical and nonclinical mental health and substance use disorder crisisstabilization services to all individuals seeking care regardless of severity or insurancecoverage and within bounds of licensing.2. Department to develop plan and serve as coordinator. The department shalldevelop a plan for a network of community-based crisis receiving centers across the State tosupport both clinical and nonclinical mental health and substance use disorder crisisstabilization services. The department shall also coordinate meetings, technical assistanceand training and provide other assistance to help create, maintain and, as necessary,expand the network.3. Guidelines. In carrying out its duties under subsection 2, the department shall:A. Consult with law enforcement agencies, municipalities, public health experts,behavioral health care providers, other states and others as appropriate;B. Assess geographical locations for maximization of community impact;C. Provide technical assistance to persons and entities across the State and providersinterested in joining the network;D. Coordinate regular meetings with crisis receiving centers and provide technicalassistance to crisis receiving centers; andE. Engage in continual process improvement and planning updates.

Sec. 10. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, §1 and affectedby Pt. D, §3, is amended by amending the section headnote to read:§3862-A. Protection from substantial threats Extreme risk protection ordersSec. 11. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§1, ¶C, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A,§1 and affected by Pt. D, §3, is amended to read:C. "Initial restrictions" means the immediate and temporary 14-day 30-day threat-basedrestrictions pursuant to subsection 4.Sec. 12. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§2, ¶B, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A,§1 and affected by Pt. D, §3, is amended to read:B. The medical practitioner under paragraph A this subsection shall assess whether theperson presents a likelihood of foreseeable harm. In assessing the person, a medicalpractitioner may consult with other medical professionals as the medical practitionerdetermines advisable. If the medical practitioner finds that the person can benefit fromtreatment and services, the medical practitioner shall refer the person to treatment andservices. The medical practitioner may rely on information provided by a 3rd party if itreasonably appears that the 3rd party has had recent personal observations of orconversations with the person being assessed.Sec. 13. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§2, TC, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A,§1 and affected by Pt. D, §3, is amended to read:C. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, an assessment pursuant to thissection may be performed at a health care facility but or, when available and asappropriate, must may be performed at an alternative location. The assessment may befacilitated using telehealth technology. If the assessment is provided at a health carefacility, law enforcement shall, upon request of the facility and consistent with section3863, subsection 2-A, absent compelling circ*mstances, assist the facility with thesecurity of the person awaiting the assessment under this section.Sec. 14. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§2, ¶C-1 is enacted to read:C-1. The assessment required by this subsection must be performed while the personbeing assessed remains in protective custody, except that the assessment may beperformed within 24 hours after the person is released from protective custody if:(1) The protective custody stemmed from a law enforcement officer's probablecause to believe the person may be mentally ill and presents a likelihood of seriousharm because the person possesses, controls or may acquire a dangerous weapon;and(2) An examination under section 3863 has occurred.Sec. 15. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§2-A is enacted to read:2-A. Protective custody warrant for purposes of conducting an assessment. If alaw enforcement officer is unable to take a person into protective custody to conduct anassessment under this section, the law enforcement officer may apply for a protective

custody warrant. The officer must submit an affidavit of probable cause for a protectivecustody warrant to a Justice of the Superior Court, a Judge of the District Court or a justiceof the peace.The justice, judge or justice of the peace shall issue a protective custody warrant andpromptly transmit that warrant to the officer for execution upon finding the affidavit under thissubsection is sufficient to establish:A. Probable cause to believe that the person may be mentally ill and due to thatcondition presents a likelihood of serious harm;B. Probable cause to believe that the person possesses, controls or may acquire adangerous weapon; andC. That the officer has made reasonable attempts to take the person into custody withouta warrant.A warrant transmitted by facsimile machine or an electronic warrant transmitted by secureelectronic means has the same legal effect and validity as an original endorsem*nt signedby the justice, judge or justice of the peace. The electronic protective custody warrant orpaper protective custody warrant may be executed by a law enforcement officer authorizedto take the person into protective custody as provided in section 3862, subsection 1,paragraph B.Sec. 16. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§3, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, §1and affected by Pt. D, §3, is amended to read:3. Notification by medical practitioner and judicial endorsem*nt. A medicalpractitioner shall notify in writing the law enforcement officer or law enforcement agency thattook the person into protective custody under section 3862, subsection 1, paragraph B that,based on the assessment under subsection 2, paragraph-B, the person is found to present alikelihood of foreseeable harm. If so notified, the law enforcement officer or law enforcementagency shall as soon as practicable seek endorsem*nt by a Superior Court Justice, DistrictCourt Judge, judge of probate of Justice of the Superior Court, a Judge of the District Courtor a justice of the peace of the medical practitioner's assessment and law enforcement'sdeclarations that the person was taken into protective custody and that the law enforcementofficer has probable cause to believe that the person possesses, controls or may acquire adangerous weapon. The judge justice or justice judge shall promptly transmit to the lawenforcement officer or agency the decision to endorse or not endorse. A decisiontransmitted electronically has the same legal effect and validity as a signed original. Anendorsem*nt must authorize law enforcement to execute the authority in subsection 4. Thissection may not be construed to prevent law enforcement from accepting a voluntarysurrender of dangerous weapons.Sec. 17. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§4, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A, §1and affected by Pt. D, §3, is amended to read:4. Initial restrictions; notice by law enforcement. A person whose assessment isendorsed by a judicial officer under subsection 3 becomes, at the time of notice by a lawenforcement officer under paragraph B, a restricted person subject to initial restrictions and

subject to the prohibitions in Title 15, section 393, subsection 1, paragraphs E-1 and E-2 asfollows:A. The restricted person, after notice under paragraph B:(1) Is prohibited from possessing, controlling, acquiring or attempting to possess,control or acquire a dangerous weapon pending the outcome of a judicial hearing;(2) Shall immediately and temporarily surrender any weapons possessed, controlledor acquired by the restricted person to a law enforcement officer who has authority inthe jurisdiction in which the weapons are located pending the outcome of a judicialhearing; and(3) Has a right to a judicial hearing within 44 30 days of notice under paragraph B;andB. A law enforcement officer shall, as soon as practicable, but no later than 24 hoursafter the judicial endorsem*nt, unless the restricted person is medically incapacitated, inwhich case within 48 hours after the law enforcement officer has been notified that theperson is no longer medically incapacitated:(1) Notify the restricted person that the restricted person:(a) Is prohibited from possessing, controlling, acquiring or attempting to possess,control or acquire a dangerous weapon pending the outcome of a judicialhearing;(b) Is required to immediately and temporarily surrender any weaponspossessed, controlled or acquired by the restricted person to a law enforcementofficer who has authority in the jurisdiction in which the weapons are locatedpending the outcome of a judicial hearing; and(c) Has a right to a judicial hearing within 44 30 days of the notice under thisparagraph;(2) Notify the contact person, if any, disclosed by the restricted person to themedical practitioner and the district attorney in the district of the restricted person'sresidence where the person was taken into protective custody of the person'srestricted status; and(3) Report the person's restricted status to the Department of Public Safety as soonas practicable; and(4) Provide a copy to the court of the notification to the restricted person, includingthe date of notification.Sec. 18. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§6, ¶A, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A,§1 and affected by Pt. D, §3, is amended to read:A. Within 5 14 days of the date of the notice given to a restricted person undersubsection 4, paragraph B, the district attorney the court shall schedule a hearing in thedistrict of the restricted person's residence shall file a petition for judicial review of theinitial restrictions by the district court. The district attorney shall provide where the

person was taken into protective custody and provide notice of the hearing to therestricted person written notice of the petition and hearing and the district attorney atleast 7 days prior to the hearing. The restricted person has the right to be representedby counsel at the hearing, and the court may appoint counsel for an indigent party.Upon a showing of good cause, the court may extend the time to hold the hearing.Sec. 19. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§6, ¶B, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A,§1 and affected by Pt. D, §3, is amended to read:B. Within 44 30 days of the notice given under subsection 4, the court shall hold ahearing to determine whether to dissolve or extend the initial restrictions. Upon ashowing of good cause, the court may extend the time to hold the hearing. In the hearingdetermining whether to dissolve or extend the initial restrictions, the district attorney hasthe burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the restricted person presentsa likelihood of foreseeable harm.Sec. 20. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§6, ¶C, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A,§1 and affected by Pt. D, §3, is amended to read:C. In determining whether there are grounds to extend the initial restrictions, the courtshall consider all relevant evidence, including, but not limited to, recent threats or acts ofviolence by the restricted person directed toward other persons; recent threats or acts ofviolence by the restricted person directed toward the restricted person; recent acts ofunlawful abuse of animals by the restricted person; the reckless use or threateningdisplay of a dangerous weapon by the restricted person; a history of the use, attempteduse or threatened use of physical force by the restricted person against other persons; arecord of prior custodial events or restrictions under this section; prior involuntaryconfinement of the restricted person in a hospital for persons with psychiatric disabilities;prior protection from abuse and protection from harassment orders against the restrictedperson or violations regarding protection from abuse or protection from harassment bythe restricted person; evidence of stalking behavior, severe obsession or sexual violenceby the restricted person; the illegal use of controlled substances by the restricted person;and evidence of alcohol or drug abuse by the restricted person. The court may consideraffidavits and other reliable hearsay in making this determination. The court shall alsoconsider whether the restricted person is receiving treatment responsive to that person'smental health or substance use needs.Sec. 21. 34-B MRSA §3862-A, sub-§6, ¶D, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. A,§1 and affected by Pt. D, §3, is amended by amending subparagraph (5) to read:(5) A court shall electronically update or transmit to the Department of Public Safety,Bureau of State Police an abstract of the order issued by the court pursuant to thissection that includes a prohibition on the possession of a dangerous weapon within72 hours of the order's being issued. The abstract must include the name, date ofbirth and gender of the person who is the subject of the order; the court's order andthe expiration date of that order; and a notation that the person has been notified bythe court.The abstract required by this subparagraph is confidential and is not a public recordas defined in Title 1, chapter 13; however, the information contained in the abstract

or a copy of the abstract may be provided by the Department of Public Safety to acriminal justice agency for law enforcement purposes, to the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation, National Instant Criminal Background Check System or to an issuingauthority for the purpose of processing concealed firearm permit applications. TheDepartment of Public Safety shall, when the pertinent database is developed,request that the Federal Bureau of Investigation ensure that, immediately after theorder expires, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System no longerreflects that expired order as a ground for prohibiting the subject of the order frompossessing or acquiring a firearm. For the purposes of this subsection, "criminaljustice agency" means a federal, state, tribal, district, county or local governmentagency or any subunit of those entities that performs the administration of criminaljustice under a statute or executive order and that allocates a substantial part of itsannual budget to the administration of criminal justice. Courts and the Department ofthe Attorney General are considered criminal justice agencies, as is any equivalentagency at any level of Canadian government.Sec. 22. Appropriations and allocations. The following appropriations andallocations are made.HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OFInjury and Violence Prevention Program Z397Initiative: Provides one-time funding for a new injury and violence prevention program.2024-25GENERAL FUNDAll OtherGENERAL FUND TOTAL2023-24$0 $1,032,000$0$1,032,000Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention 0143Initiative: Establishes one limited-period Health Program Manager position and one limited-period Public Health Education III position through June 12, 2027 and provides funding forrelated All Other costs.FEDERAL EXPENDITURES FUNDPersonal ServicesAll OtherFEDERAL EXPENDITURES FUND TOTAL2023-242024-25$0$206,156$0$17,962$0$224,118FEDERAL BLOCK GRANT FUND2023-242024-25Personal Services$0$105,397All Other$0$9,538FEDERAL BLOCK GRANT FUND TOTAL$0$114,935HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,DEPARTMENT OFDEPARTMENT TOTALS2023-242024-25

GENERAL FUNDFEDERAL EXPENDITURES FUNDFEDERAL BLOCK GRANT FUNDDEPARTMENT TOTAL - ALL FUNDSទទ$0$1,032,000$0$224,118$0$114,935$0 $1,371,053

Appendix FTitle 15: COURT PROCEDURE -- CRIMINALPart 1: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE GENERALLYChapter 15: POSSESSION OF FIREARMS BY PROHIBITED PERSONS§394$393. Possession of firearms prohibited for certain persons1. Possession prohibited. A person may not own, possess or have under that person'scontrol a firearm, unless that person has obtained a permit under this section, if that person:A. [PL 2001, c. 549, $2 (RP).]A-1. Has been convicted of committing or found not criminally responsible by reason of insanityof committing:(1) A crime in this State that is punishable by imprisonment for a term of one year or more;(2) A crime under the laws of the United States that is punishable by imprisonment for a termexceeding one year;(3) A crime under the laws of another jurisdiction that, in accordance with the laws of thatjurisdiction, is punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year. This subparagraph doesnot include a crime under the laws of another jurisdiction that is classified by the laws of thatjurisdiction as a misdemeanor and is punishable by a term of imprisonment of 2 years or less;(4) A crime under the laws of another jurisdiction that, in accordance with the laws of thatjurisdiction, does not come within subparagraph (3) but is elementally substantially similar to acrime in this State that is punishable by a term of imprisonment of one year or more; or(5) A crime under the laws of this State or another jurisdiction in a proceeding in which theprosecuting authority was required to plead and prove that the person committed the crime withthe use of:(a) A firearm against a person; or(b) Any other dangerous weapon.Violation of this paragraph is a Class C crime; [PL 2021, c. 608, Pt. B, §§1-3 (AMD).]B. [PL 2001, c. 549, $2 (RP).]C. Has been adjudicated in this State or under the laws of another jurisdiction to have engaged inconduct as a juvenile that, if committed by an adult, would have been a disqualifying conviction:(1) Under paragraph A-1, subparagraphs (1) to (4) and bodily injury to another person wasthreatened or resulted; or(3) Under paragraph A-1, subparagraph (5).Violation of this paragraph is a Class C crime; [PL 2021, c. 608, Pt. B, $4 (AMD).]

D. Is subject to an order of a court of this State or another jurisdiction that restrains that personfrom harassing, stalking or threatening an intimate partner, as defined in 18 United States Code,Section 921(a), of that person or a child of the intimate partner of that person, or from engaging inother conduct that would place the intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to theintimate partner or the child, except that this paragraph applies only to a court order that was issuedafter a hearing for which that person received actual notice and at which that person had theopportunity to participate and that:(1) Includes a finding that the person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of anintimate partner or a child; or(2) By its terms, explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use or threatened use of physical forceagainst an intimate partner or a child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury.Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime; [PL 2021, c. 608, Pt. B, $5 (AMD).]E. Has been:(1) Committed involuntarily to a hospital pursuant to an order of the District Court under Title34-B, section 3864 because the person was found to present a likelihood of serious harm, asdefined under Title 34-B, section 3801, subsection 4-A, paragraphs A to C;(2) Found not criminally responsible by reason of insanity with respect to a criminal charge; or(3) Found not competent to stand trial with respect to a criminal charge.Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime; [PL 2015, c. 470, $1 (AMD).]E-1. Is currently a restricted person under Title 34-B, section 3862-A, subsection 2 or subsection6, paragraph D except that the prohibition applies to possession and control, and not ownership.Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime; [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. C, S2 (NEW); PL 2019,c. 411, Pt. D, §3 (AFF).]E-2. Has been ordered to participate in a progressive treatment program pursuant to Title 34-B,section 3873-A and, as part of that order, directed not to possess a dangerous weapon pursuantto Title 34-B, section 3873-A, subsection 7-A for the duration of the treatment program, exceptthat the prohibition applies to possession and control, and not ownership. Violation of thisparagraph is a Class D crime; [PL 2019, c. 411, Pt. C, S2 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 411, Pt.D, $3 (AFF).]F. Is a fugitive from justice. For the purposes of this paragraph, "fugitive from justice" has thesame meaning as in section 201, subsection 4. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime; [PL2015, c. 470, $1 (AMD).]G. Is an unlawful user of or is addicted to any controlled substance and as a result is prohibitedfrom possession of a firearm under 18 United States Code, Section 922(g)(3). Notwithstanding theprohibition under 18 United States Code, Section 922(g)(3), the use, possession or transport ofcannabis in accordance with Title 22, chapter 558-C or Title 28-B may not serve as the basis forthe prohibition to own, possess or have under a person's control a firearm in this section. Violationof this paragraph is a Class D crime; [PL 2023, c. 381, §1 (AMD).]

H. Is an alien who is illegally or unlawfully in the United States or who was admitted under anonimmigrant visa and who is prohibited from possession of a firearm under 18 United StatesCode, Section 922(g)(5). Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime; [PL 2015, c. 470, $1(AMD).]I. Has been discharged from the United States Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions.Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime; or [PL 2015, c. 470, $1 (AMD).]J. Has, having been a citizen of the United States, renounced that person's citizenship. Violation ofthis paragraph is a Class D crime. [PL 2015, c. 470, $1 (AMD).]For the purposes of this subsection, a person is deemed to have been convicted upon the acceptanceof a plea of guilty or nolo contendere or a verdict or finding of guilty, or of the equivalent in ajuvenile case, by a court of competent jurisdiction.In the case of a deferred disposition, a person is deemed to have been convicted when the courtimposes the sentence. In the case of a deferred disposition for a person alleged to have committedone or more of the offenses listed in section 1023, subsection 4, paragraph B-1, that person maynot possess a firearm during the deferred disposition period. Violation of this paragraph is a ClassC crime.For the purposes of this subsection, a person is deemed to have been found not criminallyresponsible by reason of insanity upon the acceptance of a plea of not criminally responsible byreason of insanity or a verdict or finding of not criminally responsible by reason of insanity, or ofthe equivalent in a juvenile case, by a court of competent jurisdiction.[PL 2023, c. 381, $1 (AMD).]1-A. Limited prohibition for nonviolent juvenile offenses. A person who has beenadjudicated in this State or under the laws of another jurisdiction to have engaged in conduct as ajuvenile that, if committed by an adult, would have been a disqualifying convictionunder subsection 1, paragraph A-1 or subsection 1-B, paragraph A but is not an adjudicationunder subsection 1, paragraph C or an adjudication under subsection 1-B, paragraph B in whichbodily injury to another person was threatened or resulted may not own or have in that person'spossession or control a firearm for a period of 3 years following completion of any dispositionimposed or until that person reaches 18 years of age, whichever is later. Violation of this subsectionby a person at least 18 years of age is a Class C crime.[PL 2021, c. 608, Pt. B, $6 (AMD).]1-B. Prohibition for domestic violence offenses. A person may not own, possess or haveunder that person's control a firearm if that person:A. Has been convicted of committing or found not criminally responsible by reason of insanity ofcommitting:(1) A Class D crime in this State in violation of Title 17-A, section207-A, 209-A, 210-B, 210-C or 211-A; or(2) A crime under the laws of another jurisdiction that in accordance with the laws of thatjurisdiction is elementally substantially similar to a crime in subparagraph (1).Violation of this paragraph is a Class C crime; or [PL 2021, c. 608, Pt. B, $7 (AMD).]

B. Has been adjudicated in this State or under the laws of another jurisdiction to have engaged inconduct as a juvenile that, if committed by an adult, would have been a disqualifying convictionunder this subsection. Violation of this paragraph is a Class C crime. [PL 2021, c. 608, Pt. B,$8 (AMD).]Except as provided in subsection 1-A, the prohibition created by this subsection for a convictionor adjudication of an offense listed in paragraph A or B expires 5 years from the date the person isfinally discharged from the sentence imposed as a result of the conviction or adjudication if thatperson has no subsequent criminal convictions during that 5-year period. If a person is convictedof a subsequent crime within the 5-year period, the 5-year period starts anew from the date of thesubsequent conviction. In the case of a deferred disposition, the 5-year period begins at the start ofthe deferred disposition period. If, at the conclusion of the deferred disposition period, the courtgrants the State's motion to allow a person to withdraw the plea and the State dismisses the chargethat gave rise to the prohibition with prejudice, the 5-year period terminates.For the purposes of this subsection, a person is deemed to have been convicted or adjudicated uponthe acceptance of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere or a verdict or finding of guilty, or of theequivalent in a juvenile case, by a court of competent jurisdiction.For the purposes of this subsection, a person is deemed to have been found not criminallyresponsible by reason of insanity upon the acceptance of a plea of not criminally responsible byreason of insanity or a verdict or finding of not criminally responsible by reason of insanity, or ofthe equivalent in a juvenile case, by a court of competent jurisdiction.The provisions of this subsection apply only to a person convicted, adjudicated or placed ondeferred disposition on or after October 15, 2015.[PL 2021, c. 608, Pt. B, §§7, 8 (AMD).]2. Application after 5 years. A person subject to the provisions of subsection 1, paragraphA-1, subparagraphs (1) to (4) or paragraph C as a result of a conviction or adjudication may, afterthe expiration of 5 years from the date that the person is finally discharged from the sentencesimposed as a result of the conviction or adjudication, apply to the Office of the Governor for apermit to carry a firearm subject to subsection 4. That person may not be issued a permit to carrya concealed handgun pursuant to Title 25, chapter 252. A permit issued pursuant to this subsectionis valid for 4 years from the date of issue unless sooner revoked for cause by the Governor. Forpurposes of this subsection, "firearm" does not include a firearm defined under 18 United StatesCode, Section 921(a)(3).[PL 2017, c. 475, Pt. A, $21 (RPR).]3. Contents. An application under subsection 2 must be on a form prepared by the Officeof the Governor. The application must include the following: the applicant's full name; all aliases;date and place of birth; place of legal residence; occupation; make, model and serial number of thefirearm sought to be possessed; date, place and nature of conviction; sentence imposed; place ofincarceration; name and address of probation or parole officer; date of discharge or release fromprison or jail or termination of probation, supervised release for sex offenders, parole oradministrative release; the reason for the request; and any other information determined by theGovernor to be of assistance. The application must be accompanied by certified or attested copies

of the indictment, information or complaint, judgment and commitment and discharge that are thesubject of the conviction.[PL 2017, c. 206, $2 (AMD).]4. Notification, objection and decision. Upon receipt of an application, the Office of theGovernor shall determine if the application is in proper form. If the application is proper, theGovernor shall within 30 days notify in writing the sentencing or presiding judge, the AttorneyGeneral, the district attorney for the county where the applicant resides, the district attorney for thecounty where the conviction occurred, the law enforcement agency that investigated the crime, thechief of police and sheriff in the municipality and county where the crime occurred and the chiefof police and sheriff in the municipality where the applicant resides as of the filing of theapplication. The Governor may direct any appropriate investigation to be carried out.A. If, within 30 days of the sending of notice, a person notified objects in writing to the Governorregarding the initial issuance of a permit and provides the reason for the objection, the Governormay not issue a permit. The reason for the objection must be communicated in writing to theGovernor in order for it to be the sole basis for denial. [PL 2017, c. 206, §3 (AMD).]B. If, within 30 days of the sending of notice, a person notified objects in writing, including thereason for the objection, to the Governor regarding a 2nd or subsequent issuance of a permit, theGovernor shall take the objection and its reason into consideration when determining whether toissue a 2nd or subsequent permit to the applicant, but need not deny the issuance of a permit basedon an objection alone. [PL 2017, c. 206, $3 (AMD).]The Governor may deny any application for a permit even if no objection is filed.[PL 2017, c. 206, §3 (AMD).]4-A. Application for relief. Except as otherwise provided, a person subject to the federalprohibition against possession of firearms pursuant to 18 United States Code, Section 922(g)(4) asa result of being adjudicated a mental defective may, after the expiration of 5 years from the dateof final discharge from commitment, apply to the commissioner for relief from the disability.Relief is not available under this subsection for a person found not criminally responsible by reasonof insanity or incompetent to stand trial in a criminal case or a person adjudged by a Probate Courtto lack the capacity to contract or manage the person's own affairs.A. An application under this subsection must be on a form developed by the commissioner. Theapplication must include the applicant's full name; all aliases; date and place of birth; place of legalresidence; occupation; make and model of the firearm sought to be possessed; reason for therequest; date, place and docket number of commitment; name of institution to which applicant wascommitted; names of providers that provided mental health treatment for the applicant; date ofdischarge from commitment; release for all mental health records; and any other informationdetermined by the commissioner to be of assistance. The application must be accompanied bycertified or attested copies of the commitment from which the applicant seeks relief and the reportof an independent psychologist or psychiatrist licensed to practice in this State specificallyaddressing the factors set forth in paragraph E. The commissioner may establish a roster ofpsychologists and psychiatrists qualified and interested in doing these evaluations. The

psychologist or psychiatrist must be available for cross-examination. The psychologist orpsychiatrist listed on the roster is an employee for the purposes of the Maine Tort Claims Act forevaluations under this paragraph. [PL 2007, c. 670, $9 (NEW); PL 2007, c. 670, $24 (AFF).]B. The commissioner has the independent authority to establish the following, to be paid by theapplicant:(1) Application fee; and(2) Fees for evaluations required by paragraph A. [PL 2007, c. 670, $9 (NEW); PL 2007, c.670, $24 (AFF).]C. Upon receipt of a completed application, the commissioner shall notify persons who receivednotice of the commitment pursuant to Title 34-B, section 3864, subsection 3, paragraph A,subparagraph (2) and the district attorney, chief of police and sheriff in the municipality and countywhere the applicant resides of the filing of the application, with a request to provide to thecommissioner any information relevant to the factors in paragraph E. [PL 2007, c. 670, $9(NEW); PL 2007, c. 670, $24 (AFF).]D. Upon receipt of a completed application, the commissioner shall review the application anddetermine whether the person has made a prima facie showing of the elements of paragraph E. Ifthe commissioner determines that the person has made a prima facie showing, the commissionershall schedule a hearing. [PL 2007, c. 670, $9 (NEW); PL 2007, c. 670, $24 (AFF).]E. The burden of proof is on the applicant to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that thecirc*mstances that led to the involuntary commitment to a hospital have changed, that the applicantis not likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety and that granting the application for reliefwill not be contrary to the public interest. [PL 2007, c. 670, §9 (NEW); PL 2007, c. 670, $24(AFF).]F. If the commissioner finds by clear and convincing evidence that the circ*mstances that led tothe involuntary commitment have changed, that the applicant is not likely to act in a mannerdangerous to public safety and that granting the application for relief will not be contrary to thepublic interest, the commissioner may grant relief. [PL 2007, c. 670, $9 (NEW); PL 2007, c.670, $24 (AFF).]G. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and except as indicated in this paragraph, allapplications for relief pursuant to this subsection and documents made a part of the application,refusals and any information of record collected by the commissioner during the process ofdetermining whether an applicant qualifies for relief are confidential and may not be madeavailable for public inspection or copying unless:(1) The applicant waives this confidentiality in writing or on the record of any hearing; or(2) A court of record so orders. Proceedings relating to the grant or denial of relief are not publicproceedings under Title 1, chapter 13.The commissioner shall make a permanent record, in the form of a summary, of the final decisionregarding each application. The summary must include the name of the applicant and indicatewhether the application for relief was granted or denied. The information contained in this

summary is available for public inspection. [PL 2007, c. 670, $9 (NEW); PL 2007, c. 670,$24 (AFF).]H. An applicant may appeal the denial of an application for relief under this subsection within 30days of receipt of the written notice of decision by filing a complaint in the District Court for denovo review in the district where the Department of Public Safety has its principal office. Hearingsare closed unless otherwise agreed to by the applicant. A party aggrieved by a decision of theDistrict Court may not appeal as of right. The time for taking the appeal and the manner and anyconditions for the taking of the appeal are as the Supreme Judicial Court provides by rule. [PL2007, c. 670, §9 (NEW); PL 2007, c. 670, $24 (AFF).][PL 2011, c. 541, S1 (AMD).]5. Appeal. Any person to whom a permit under subsection 2 has been denied may file apetition for review pursuant to Title 5, chapter 375, subchapter 7.[PL 2007, c. 670, $10 (AMD).]6. Filing fee. The commissioner may establish a reasonable filing fee not to exceed $25 todefray costs of processing applications.[PL 1977, c. 225, §2 (NEW).]7. Definitions. As used in this section, unless the context otherwise indicates, the followingterms have the following meanings.A. "Firearm" has the same meaning as in Title 17-A, section 2, subsection 12-A. [PL 2001, c.549, $4 (NEW).]B. "Not criminally responsible by reason of insanity" has the same meaning as used in section103 and any comparable finding under the laws of the United States or any other state. [PL 2005,c. 527, §4 (AMD).]C. [PL 2021, c. 608, Pt. B, §9 (RP).]D. "Use of a dangerous weapon" has the same meaning as in Title 17-A, section 2, subsection 9,paragraph A. [PL 2001, c. 549, §4 (NEW).]E. "Commissioner" means the Commissioner of Public Safety or the commissioner'sdesignee. [PL 2007, c. 670, $11 (NEW).]F. "Another jurisdiction" has the same meaning as in Title 17-A, section 2, subsection 3-B. [PL2021, c. 608, Pt. B, $10 (NEW).][PL 2021, c. 608, Pt. B, §§9, 10 (AMD).]8. Penalty.[PL 2015, c. 470, §4 (RP).]9. Prima facie evidence. Notwithstanding any other law or rule of evidence, a copy of acourt abstract provided by a court to the Department of Public Safety, State Bureau ofIdentification pursuant to Title 34-B, section 3864, subsection 12, if certified by the custodian ofthe records of that bureau, or the custodian's designee, is admissible in a criminal prosecutionbrought pursuant to this section as prima facie evidence that the person identified in the abstracthas been involuntarily committed by the court issuing the abstract and has been provided the notice

required in Title 34-B, section 3864, subsection 5, paragraph A-1 and Title 34-B, section 3864,subsection 13.[PL 2007, c. 670, $13 (NEW).]10. Subpoena power. The commissioner is authorized to issue a subpoena in the name ofthe commissioner in accordance with Title 5, section 9060, except that this authority applies to anystage of an investigation under this section and is not limited to an adjudicatory hearing. If a witnessrefuses to obey a subpoena or to give any evidence relevant to proper inquiry by the commissioner,the Attorney General may petition the Superior Court in the county where the refusal occurred tofind the witness in contempt. The Attorney General shall cause to be served on that witness anorder requiring the witness to appear before the Superior Court to show cause why the witnessshould not be adjudged in contempt. The court shall, in a summary manner, hear the evidence and,if it is such as to warrant the court in doing so, punish that witness in the same manner and to thesame extent as for contempt committed before the Superior Court or with reference to the processof the Superior Court.[PL 2007, c. 670, $14 (NEW).]11. Rules. The commissioner may adopt rules to implement the provisions of subsections2 to 4-A. Rules adopted pursuant to this subsection are routine technical rules as defined by Title5, c

Appendix GUS Department of Justice Model Red Flag LawEXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER MODEL LEGISLATIONSEC. 1. EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDERS(a) DEFINITIONS.-(1) "Petitioner" means:(A) A law enforcement officer or agency, including an attorney for the state;(B) A member of the family of the respondent, which shall be understood to mean aparent, spouse, child, or sibling of the respondent;(C) A member of the household of the respondent;(D) A dating or intimate partner of the respondent;(E) A health care provider [as defined by state law] who has provided health services tothe respondent;(F) An official of a school or school system in which the respondent is enrolled or hasbeen enrolled within the preceding [six months/one year/two years/other appropriatetime period specified by state law]; or(G) [Any other appropriate persons specified by state law.](2) "Respondent" means the person against whom an order under Section 2 or 3 hasbeen sought or granted.(b) TYPES OF ORDERS. - The petitioner may apply for an emergency ex parte orderas provided in Section 2 or an order following a hearing as provided in Section 3.

SEC. 2. EMERGENCY EX PARTE ORDER(a) BASIS FOR ORDER. - The court shall issue an emergency ex parte extreme riskprotection order upon submission of an application by a petitioner, supported byan affidavit or sworn oral statement of the petitioner or other witness, that providesspecific facts establishing probable cause that the respondent's possession orreceipt of a firearm will pose a [significant danger/extreme risk/other appropriatestandard established by state law] of personal injury or death to the respondent oranother person. The court shall take up and decide such an application on the dayit is submitted, or if review and decision of the application on the same day is notfeasible, then as quickly as possible but in no case later than [appropriate timeperiod specified by state law].(b) CONTENT OF ORDER. - An order issued under this section shall -(1) prohibit the respondent from possessing, using, purchasing, manufacturing, orotherwise receiving a firearm;(2) order the respondent to provisionally surrender any firearms in his or her possessionor control, and any license or permit allowing the respondent to possess or acquire afirearm, to any law enforcement officer presenting the order or to a law enforcementagency as directed by the officer or the order; and(3) inform the respondent of the time and place of the hearing under Section 3 todetermine whether he or she will be subject to a continuing prohibition on possessingand acquiring firearms.(c) SEARCH AND SEIZURE. -(1) If the application and its supporting affidavit or statement establish probable causethat the respondent has access to a firearm, on his or her person or in an identifiedplace, the court shall concurrently issue a warrant authorizing a law enforcement agencyto search the person of the respondent and any such place for firearms and to seize anyfirearm therein to which the respondent would have access.(2) The court may subsequently issue additional search warrants of this nature based onprobable cause that the respondent has retained, acquired, or gained access to firearmwhile an order under this section remains in effect.

(3) If the owner of a firearm seized pursuant to this subsection is a person other than therespondent, the owner may secure the return of the firearm as provided in Section3(c)(3)(d) TIME FOR SERVICE AND SEARCHES. - The responsible law enforcement agencyshall serve the order on the respondent, and carry out any search authorized undersubsection (c)(1), [promptly/immediately/within other appropriate time periodspecified by state law] following issuance of the order. If a search is authorizedunder subsection (c)(1), the agency may serve the order on the respondentconcurrently with or after the execution of the search.SEC. 3. ORDER AFTER HEARING(a) ORDER AFTER HEARING. - Upon application for an extreme risk protectionorder, supported by an affidavit or sworn oral statement of the petitioner or otherwitness that provides specific facts giving rise to the concern about the [significantdanger/ extreme risk/other appropriate standard established by state law]described in Section 2, the court may issue an order under this section, which shallbe effective for a period of up to [one year/other appropriate time period specifiedby state law], after a hearing. An order issued under this section shall –(1) prohibit the respondent from possessing, using, purchasing, or otherwise receiving afirearm; and(2) order the respondent to surrender any firearm in his or her possession or control,and any license or permit allowing the respondent to possess or acquire a firearm, toany law enforcement officer presenting the order or to a law enforcement agency asdirected by the officer or the order.(b) BASIS FOR ORDER. - The court shall issue such an order based on [apreponderance of the evidence/other appropriate standard specified by state law]that the respondent's possession or receipt of a firearm will pose a [significantdanger/extreme risk/other appropriate standard specified by state law] of personalinjury or death to the respondent or another person. In determining thesatisfaction of this requirement, the court shall consider all relevant facts andcirc*mstances after reviewing the petitioner's application and conducting thehearing described in Section 2(d). The court may order a psychological evaluationof the respondent, including voluntary or involuntary commitment of therespondent for purposes of such an evaluation, to the extent authorized by otherlaw.

(c) SEARCH AND SEIZURE. -(1) If the evidence presented at the hearing establishes probable cause that therespondent has access to a firearm, on his or her person or in an identified place, thecourt shall concurrently issue a warrant authorizing a law enforcement agency to searchthe person of the respondent and any such place for firearms and to seize any firearmtherein to which the respondent would have access.(2) The court may subsequently issue additional search warrants of this nature based onprobable cause that the respondent has retained, acquired, or gained access to a firearmwhile an order under this section remains in effect.(3) If the owner of a firearm seized pursuant to this subsection is a person other than therespondent, the owner may secure the prompt return of the firearm by providing anaffidavit to the law enforcement agency affirming his or her ownership of the firearmand providing assurance that he or she will safeguard the firearm against access by therespondent. The law enforcement agency shall return the firearm to the owner upon itsconfirmation, including by a check of the National Instant Criminal Background CheckSystem and the applicable state firearm background check system, that the owner is notlegally disqualified from possessing or receiving the firearm.(4) [Any provisions under state law permitting the transfer of seized firearms to a personnot prohibited from possessing them.](d) TIME FOR HEARINGS AND SERVICE. –(1) A hearing under this section shall be held within [appropriate time period specifiedby state law] days of the filing of the application, or within [appropriate time periodspecified by state law] days of the issuance of an emergency ex parte order underSection 2, if such an order is issued. The responsible law enforcement agency shall servenotice of the hearing on the respondent [promptly/immediately/within 72 hours/withinan appropriate time period specified by state law] after the filing of the application orissuance of an emergency ex parte order, but notice may be provided by publication ormailing if the respondent cannot be personally served within the specified period. Therespondent shall be entitled to one continuance of up to [appropriate time periodspecified by state law] days on request, and the court may thereafter grant an additionalcontinuance or continuances for good cause. Any emergency ex parte order underSection 2 shall remain in effect until the hearing is held. The court may temporarilyextend the emergency order at the hearing, pending a decision on a final order.

(2) The responsible law enforcement agency shall serve an order issued under thissection on the respondent, and carry out any search authorized under subsection (c)(1),[promptly/immediately/within an appropriate time period specified by state law]following issuance of the order. If a search is authorized under subsection (c)(1), theagency may serve the order on the respondent concurrently with or after the executionof the search.(e) TERMINATION AND RENEWAL OF ORDERS. –(1) A respondent may file a motion to terminate an order under Section 3 one timeduring the effective period of that order. The respondent shall have the burden ofproving, by the same standard of proof required for issuance of such an order, that heor she does not pose a [significant danger/extreme risk/other appropriate standardspecified by state law] of personal injury or death to himself or herself or another.(2) The petitioner may seek renewals of an order under this section for an additional [sixmonths/one year/other appropriate time period specified by state law] at any timepreceding its expiration. Renewals after the initial order shall be granted subject to thesame standards and requirements as an initial order. The preceding order shall remainin effect until the renewal hearing is held and the court grants or denies a renewedorder.(3) If the respondent fails to appear at, or cannot be personally served in relation to, anyhearing or renewal hearing under this section, the default does not affect the court'sauthority to issue an order or entitle the respondent to challenge the order prior to itsexpiration. The order will lapse after [the period established in Section 3(a)] if no eligiblepetitioner seeks its renewal.SEC. 4. ENTRY INTO BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEMSThe court shall forward any order issued under Section 2 or 3 to an appropriatelaw enforcement agency on the day it is issued. Upon receipt of an order under Section3, the law enforcement agency shall make the order available to the National InstantCriminal Background Check System and any state system used to identify persons whoare prohibited from possessing firearms.SEC. 5. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONSThe following persons shall be subject to [appropriate criminal penalties specifiedby state law]:

(1) FILER OF FALSE OR HARASSING APPLICATION. - Any person filing anapplication under Section 2 or 3 containing information that he or she knows to bematerially false, or for the purpose of harassing the respondent.(2) RESPONDENT NOT COMPLYING WITH ORDER. - Any person who knowinglyviolates an order under Section 2 or 3, including by possessing or acquiring afirearm in violation of the order or failing to surrender a firearm as required by theorder.(3) PROVIDER OF PROHIBITED ACCESS TO RESPONDENT. – Any person whoknowingly provides the subject of an order under Section 2 or 3 access to a firearm,in violation of an assurance the person has provided in an affidavit under Section2(c)(3) or 3(c)(3) that he or she will safeguard the firearm against access by therespondent.

Appendix HNY Extreme Risk Protection Law and Model PolicyNY CPLR 6340 et. seq.SECTION 6340DefinitionsCivil Practice Law & Rules (CVP) CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 63-A§ 6340. Definitions. For the purposes of this article:1. "Extreme risk protection order" means a court-issued order ofprotection prohibiting a person from purchasing, possessing orattempting to purchase or possess a firearm, rifle or shotgun.2. "Petitioner" means: (a) a police officer, as defined in section1.20 of the criminal procedure law, or district attorney withjurisdiction in the county or city where the person against whom theorder is sought resides; (b) a family or household member, as defined insubdivision two of section four hundred fifty-nine-a of the socialservices law, of the person against whom the order is sought; (c) aschool administrator as defined in section eleven hundred twenty-five ofthe education law, or a school administrator's designee, of any schoolin which the person against whom the order is sought is currentlyenrolled or has been enrolled in the six months immediately precedingthe filing of the petition; or (d) a licensed physician, licensedpsychiatrist, licensed psychologist, registered nurse, licensed clinicalsocial worker, certified clinical nurse specialist, certified nursepractitioner, licensed clinical marriage and family therapist,registered professional nurse, licensed master social worker or licensedmental health counselor who has treated the person against whom theorder is sought in the six months immediately preceding the filing ofthe petition. For purposes of this article, a school administrator'sdesignee shall be employed at the same school as the schooladministrator and shall be any of the following who has been designatedin writing to file a petition with respect to the person against whom

the order is sought: a school teacher, school guidance counselor, schoolpsychologist, school social worker, school nurse, or other schoolpersonnel required to hold a teaching or administrative license orcertificate, and full or part-time compensated school employee requiredto hold a temporary coaching license or professional coachingcertificate.3. "Respondent" means the person against whom an extreme riskprotection order is or may be sought under this article.4. "Possess" shall have the same meaning as defined in subdivisioneight of section 10.00 of the penal law.SECTION 6341Application for an extreme risk protection orderCivil Practice Law & Rules (CVP) CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 63-A§ 6341. Application for an extreme risk protection order. Inaccordance with this article, a petitioner may file an application,which shall be sworn, and accompanying supporting documentation, settingforth the facts and circ*mstances justifying the issuance of an extremerisk protection order. Provided, however, that a petitioner who is apolice officer or district attorney shall file such application upon thereceipt of credible information that an individual is likely to engagein conduct that would result in serious harm to himself, herself orothers, as defined in paragraph one or two of subdivision (a) of section9.39 of the mental hygiene law, unless such petitioner determines thatthere is no probable cause for such filing. Such application andsupporting documentation shall be filed in the supreme court in thecounty in which the respondent resides. The chief administrator of thecourts shall adopt forms that may be used for purposes of suchapplications and the court's consideration of such applications. Suchapplication form shall include inquiry as to whether the petitionerknows, or has reason to believe, that the respondent owns, possesses orhas access to a firearm, rifle or shotgun and if so, a request that the

petitioner list or describe such firearms, rifles and shotguns, and therespective locations thereof, with as much specificity as possible.SECTION 6342Issuance of a temporary extreme risk protection orderCivil Practice Law & Rules (CVP) CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 63-A§ 6342. Issuance of a temporary extreme risk protection order. 1. Uponapplication of a petitioner pursuant to this article, the court mayissue a temporary extreme risk protection order, ex parte or otherwise,to prohibit the respondent from purchasing, possessing or attempting topurchase or possess a firearm, rifle or shotgun, upon a finding thatthere is probable cause to believe the respondent is likely to engage inconduct that would result in serious harm to himself, herself or others,as defined in paragraph one or two of subdivision (a) of section 9.39 ofthe mental hygiene law. Such application for a temporary order shall bedetermined in writing on the same day the application is filed.2. In determining whether grounds for a temporary extreme riskprotection order exist, the court shall consider any relevant factorsincluding, but not limited to, the following acts of the respondent:(a) a threat or act of violence or use of physical force directedtoward self, the petitioner, or another person;(b) a violation or alleged violation of an order of protection;(c) any pending charge or conviction for an offense involving the useof a weapon;(d) the reckless use, display or brandishing of a firearm, rifle orshotgun;(e) any history of a violation of an extreme risk protection order;

(f) evidence of recent or ongoing abuse of controlled substances oralcohol; or(g) evidence of recent acquisition of a firearm, rifle, shotgun orother deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, or any ammunition therefor.In considering the factors under this subdivision, the court shallconsider the time that has elapsed since the occurrence of such act oracts and the age of the person at the time of the occurrence of such actor acts.For the purposes of this subdivision, "recent" means within the sixmonths prior to the date the petition was filed.3. The application of the petitioner and supporting documentation, ifany, shall set forth the factual basis for the request and probablecause for issuance of a temporary order. The court may conduct anexamination under oath of the petitioner and any witness the petitionermay produce.4. A temporary extreme risk protection order, if warranted, shallissue in writing, and shall include:(a) a statement of the grounds found for the issuance of the order;(b) the date and time the order expires;(c) the address of the court that issued the order;(d) a statement to the respondent: (i) directing that the respondentmay not purchase, possess or attempt to purchase or possess a firearm,rifle or shotgun while the order is in effect and that any firearm,rifle or shotgun possessed by such respondent shall be promptlysurrendered to any authorized law enforcement official in the samemanner as set forth in subdivision five of section 530.14 of thecriminal procedure law;

(ii) informing the respondent that the court will hold a hearing nosooner than three nor more than six business days after service of thetemporary order, to determine whether a final extreme risk protectionorder will be issued and the date, time and location of such hearing,provided that the respondent shall be entitled to more than six daysupon request in order to prepare for the hearing; and (iii) informingthe respondent the he or she may seek the advice of an attorney and thatan attorney should be consulted promptly; and(e) a form to be completed and executed by the respondent at the timeof service of the temporary extreme risk protection order which elicits.a list of all firearms, rifles and shotguns possessed by the respondentand the particular location of each firearm, rifle or shotgun listed.5. If the application for a temporary extreme risk protection order isnot granted, the court shall notify the petitioner and, unless theapplication is voluntarily withdrawn by the petitioner, nonethelessschedule a hearing on the application for a final extreme riskprotection order. Such hearing shall be scheduled to be held promptly,but in any event no later than ten business days after the date on whichsuch application is served on the respondent, provided, however, thatthe respondent may request, and the court may grant, additional time toallow the respondent to prepare for the hearing. A notice of suchhearing shall be prepared by the court and shall include the date andtime of the hearing, the address of the court, and the subject of thehearing.6. (a) The court shall, in the manner specified in paragraph (b) ofthis subdivision, arrange for prompt service of a copy of the temporaryextreme risk protection order, if any, the application therefor and, ifseparately applied for or if a temporary extreme risk protection orderwas not granted, the application for an extreme risk protection order,any notice of hearing prepared by the court, along with any associatedpapers including the petition and any supporting documentation,provided, that the court may redact the address and contact informationof the petitioner from such application and papers where the court findsthat disclosure of such address or other contact information would pose

an unreasonable risk to the health or safety of the petitioner.(b) The court shall provide copies of such documents to theappropriate law enforcement agency serving the jurisdiction of therespondent's residence with a direction that such documents be promptlyserved, at no cost to the petitioner, on the respondent; provided,however, that the petitioner may voluntarily arrange for service ofcopies of such order and associated papers through a third party, suchas a licensed process server.7. (a) The court shall notify the division of state police, any otherlaw enforcement agency with jurisdiction, all applicable licensingofficers, and the division of criminal justice services of the issuanceof a temporary extreme risk protection order and provide a copy of suchorder no later than the next business day after issuing the order tosuch persons or agencies. The court also shall promptly notify suchpersons and agencies and provide a copy of any order amending orrevoking such protection order or restoring the respondent's ability toown or possess firearms, rifles or shotguns no later than the nextbusiness day after issuing the order to restore such right to therespondent. The court also shall report such demographic data asrequired by the state division of criminal justice services at the timesuch order is transmitted thereto. Any notice or report submittedpursuant to this subdivision shall be in an electronic format, in amanner prescribed by the division of criminal justice services.(b) Upon receiving notice of the issuance of a temporary extreme riskprotection order, the division of criminal justice services shallimmediately report the existence of such order to the federal bureau ofinvestigation to allow the bureau to identify persons prohibited frompurchasing firearms, rifles or shotguns. The division shall alsoimmediately report to the bureau the expiration of any such protectionorder, any court order amending or revoking such protection order orrestoring the respondent's ability to purchase a firearm, rifle orshotgun.8. A law enforcement officer serving a temporary extreme risk

protection order shall request that the respondent immediately surrenderto the officer all firearms, rifles and shotguns in the respondent'spossession and the officer shall conduct any search permitted by law forsuch firearms. The law enforcement officer shall take possession of allfirearms, rifles and shotguns that are surrendered, that are in plainsight, or that are discovered pursuant to a lawful search. As part ofthe order, the court may also direct a police officer to search forfirearms, rifles and shotguns in the respondent's possession in a mannerconsistent with the procedures of article six hundred ninety of thecriminal procedure law.9. Upon issuance of a temporary extreme risk protection order, or uponsetting a hearing for a final extreme risk protection order where atemporary order is denied or not requested, the court shall direct thelaw enforcement agency having jurisdiction to conduct a backgroundinvestigation and report to the court and, subject to any appropriateredactions to protect any person, each party regarding whether therespondent:(a) has any prior criminal conviction for an offense involvingdomestic violence, use of a weapon, or other violence;(b) has any criminal charge or violation currently pending against himor her;(c) is currently on parole or probation;(d) possesses any registered firearms, rifles or shotguns; and(e) has been, or is, subject to any order of protection or hasviolated or allegedly violated any order of protection.

SECTION 6343Issuance of a final extreme risk protection orderCivil Practice Law & Rules (CVP) CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 63-A§ 6343. Issuance of a final extreme risk protection order. 1. Inaccordance with this article, no sooner than three business days norlater than six business days after service of a temporary extreme riskprotection order and, alternatively, no later than ten business daysafter service of an application under this article where no temporaryextreme risk protection order has been issued, the supreme court shallhold a hearing to determine whether to issue a final extreme riskprotection order and, when applicable, whether a firearm, rifle orshotgun surrendered by, or removed from, the respondent should bereturned to the respondent. The respondent shall be entitled to morethan six business days if a temporary extreme risk protection order hasbeen issued and the respondent requests a reasonable period ofadditional time to prepare for the hearing. Where no temporary order hasbeen issued, the respondent may request, and the court may grant,additional time beyond the ten days to allow the respondent to preparefor the hearing.2. At the hearing pursuant to subdivision one of this section, thepetitioner shall have the burden of proving, by clear and convincingevidence, that the respondent is likely to engage in conduct that wouldresult in serious harm to himself, herself or others, as defined inparagraph one or two of subdivision (a) of section 9.39 of the mentalhygiene law. The court may consider the petition and any evidencesubmitted by the petitioner, any evidence submitted by the respondent,any testimony presented, and the report of the relevant law enforcementagency submitted pursuant to subdivision nine of section sixty-threehundred forty-two of this article. The court shall also consider thefactors set forth in subdivision two of section sixty-three hundredforty-two of this article.3. (a) After the hearing pursuant to subdivision one of this section,the court shall issue a written order granting or denying the extremerisk protection order and setting forth the reasons for such

determination. If the extreme risk protection order is granted, thecourt shall direct service of such order in the manner and in accordancewith the protections for the petitioner set forth in subdivision six ofsection sixty-three hundred forty-two of this article.(b) Upon issuance of an extreme risk protection order: (i) anyfirearm, rifle or shotgun removed pursuant to a temporary extreme riskprotection order or such extreme risk protection order shall be retainedby the law enforcement agency having jurisdiction for the duration ofthe order, unless ownership of the firearm, rifle or shotgun is legallytransferred by the respondent to another individual permitted by law toown and possess such firearm, rifle or shotgun; (ii) the supreme courtshall temporarily suspend any existing firearm license possessed by therespondent and order the respondent temporarily ineligible for such alicense; (iii) the respondent shall be prohibited from purchasing orpossessing, or attempting to purchase or possess, a firearm, rifle orshotgun; and (iv) the court shall direct the respondent to surrender anyfirearm, rifle or shotgun in his or her possession in the same manner asset forth in subdivision five of section 530.14 of the criminalprocedure law.(c) An extreme risk protection order issued in accordance with thissection shall extend, as specified by the court, for a period of up toone year from the date of the issuance of such order; provided, however,that if such order was immediately preceded by the issuance of atemporary extreme risk protection order, then the duration of theextreme risk protection order shall be measured from the date ofissuance of such temporary extreme risk protection order.(d) A law enforcement officer serving a final extreme risk protectionorder shall request that the respondent immediately surrender to theofficer all firearms, rifles and shotguns in the respondent's possessionand the officer shall conduct any search permitted by law for suchfirearms. The law enforcement officer shall take possession of allfirearms, rifles and shotguns that are surrendered, that are in plainsight, or that are discovered pursuant to a lawful search. As part ofthe order, the court may also direct a police officer to search for

firearms, rifles and shotguns in a respondent's possession consistentwith the procedures of article six hundred ninety of the criminalprocedure law.4. (a) The court shall notify the division of state police, any otherlaw enforcement agency with jurisdiction, all applicable licensingofficers, and the division of criminal justice services of the issuanceof a final extreme risk protection order and provide a copy of suchorder to such persons and agencies no later than the next business dayafter issuing the order. The court also shall promptly notify suchpersons and agencies and provide a copy of any order amending orrevoking such protection order or restoring the respondent's ability toown or possess firearms, rifles or shotguns no later than the nextbusiness day after issuing the order to restore such right to therespondent. Any notice or report submitted pursuant to this subdivisionshall be in an electronic format, in a manner prescribed by the divisionof criminal justice services.(b) Upon receiving notice of the issuance of a final extreme riskprotection order, the division of criminal justice services shallimmediately report the existence of such order to the federal bureau ofinvestigation to allow the bureau to identify persons prohibited frompurchasing firearms, rifles or shotguns. The division shall alsoimmediately report to the bureau the expiration of such protection orderand any court order amending or revoking such protection order orrestoring the respondent's ability to purchase a firearm, rifle orshotgun.5. (a) If, in accordance with a temporary extreme risk protectionorder, a firearm, rifle or shotgun has been surrendered by or removedfrom the respondent, and the supreme court subsequently finds that thepetitioner has not met the required standard of proof, the court'sfinding shall include a written order, issued to all parties, directingthat any firearm, rifle or shotgun surrendered or removed pursuant tosuch temporary order shall be returned to the respondent, upon a writtenfinding that there is no legal impediment to the respondent's possessionof such firearm, rifle or shotgun.

(b) If any other person demonstrates that he or she is the lawfulowner of any firearm, rifle or shotgun surrendered or removed pursuantto a protection order issued in accordance with this article, andprovided that the court has made a written finding that there is nolegal impediment to the person's possession of a surrendered or removedfirearm, rifle or shotgun, the court shall direct that such firearm,rifle or shotgun be returned to such lawful owner and inform such personof the obligation to safely store such firearm, rifle, or shotgun inaccordance with section 265.45 of the penal law.6. The respondent shall be notified on the record and in writing bythe court that he or she may submit one written request, at any timeduring the effective period of an extreme risk protection order, for ahearing setting aside any portion of such order. The request shall besubmitted in substantially the same form and manner as prescribed by thechief administrator of the courts. Upon such request, the court shallpromptly hold a hearing, in accordance with this article, afterproviding reasonable notice to the petitioner. The respondent shall bearthe burden to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, any change ofcirc*mstances that may justify a change to the order.SECTION 6344Surrender and removal of firearms, rifles and shotgunspursuant to an extreme risk protection orderCivil Practice Law & Rules (CVP) CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 63-A§ 6344. Surrender and removal of firearms, rifles and shotgunspursuant to an extreme risk protection order. 1. When a law enforcementofficer takes any firearm, rifle or shotgun pursuant to a temporaryextreme risk protection order or a final extreme risk protection order,the officer shall give to the person from whom such firearm, rifle orshotgun is taken a receipt or voucher for the property taken, describingthe property in detail. In the absence of a person, the officer shallleave the receipt or voucher in the place where the property was found,mail a copy of the receipt or voucher, retaining proof of mailing, to

the last known address of the respondent and, if different, the owner ofthe firearm, rifle or shotgun, and file a copy of such receipt orvoucher with the court. All firearms, rifles and shotguns in thepossession of a law enforcement official pursuant to this article shallbe subject to the provisions of applicable law, including but notlimited to subdivision six of section 400.05 of the penal law; provided,however, that any such firearm, rifle or shotgun shall be retained andnot disposed of by the law enforcement agency for at least two yearsunless legally transferred by the respondent to an individual permittedby law to own and possess such firearm, rifle or shotgun.2. If the location to be searched during the execution of a temporaryextreme risk protection order or extreme risk protection order isjointly occupied by two or more parties, and a firearm, rifle or shotgunlocated during the execution of such order is owned by a person otherthan the respondent, the court shall, upon a written finding that thereis no legal impediment to the person other than the respondent'spossession of such firearm, rifle or shotgun, order the return of suchfirearm, rifle or shotgun to such lawful owner and inform such person oftheir obligation to safely store their firearm, rifle, or shotgun inaccordance with section 265.45 of the penal law.SECTION 6345Request for renewal of an extreme risk protection orderCivil Practice Law & Rules (CVP) CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 63-A§ 6345. Request for renewal of an extreme risk protection order. 1. Ifa petitioner believes a person subject to an extreme risk protectionorder continues to be likely to engage in conduct that would result inserious harm to himself, herself, or others, as defined in paragraph oneor two of subdivision (a) of section 9.39 of the mental hygiene law,such petitioner may, at any time within sixty days prior to theexpiration of such existing extreme risk protection order, initiate arequest for a renewal of such order, setting forth the facts andcirc*mstances necessitating the request. The chief administrator of the

courts shall adopt forms that may be used for purposes of suchapplications and the court's consideration of such applications. Thecourt may issue a temporary extreme risk protection order in accordancewith section sixty-three hundred forty-two of this article, during theperiod that a request for renewal of an extreme risk protection order isunder consideration pursuant to this section.2. A hearing held pursuant to this section shall be conducted in thesupreme court, in accordance with section sixty-three hundredforty-three of this article, to determine if a request for renewal ofthe order shall be granted. The respondent shall be served with writtennotice of an application for renewal a reasonable time before thehearing, and shall be afforded an opportunity to fully participate inthe hearing. The court shall direct service of such application and theaccompanying papers in the manner and in accordance with the protectionsfor the petitioner set forth in subdivision six of section sixty-threehundred forty-two of this article.SECTION 6346Expiration of an extreme risk protection orderCivil Practice Law & Rules (CVP) CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 63-A§ 6346. Expiration of an extreme risk protection order. 1. Aprotection order issued pursuant to this article, and all records of anyproceedings conducted pursuant to this article, shall be sealed uponexpiration of such order and the clerk of the court wherein suchproceedings were conducted shall immediately notify the commissioner ofthe division of criminal justice services, the heads of all appropriatepolice departments, applicable licensing officers, and all otherappropriate law enforcement agencies that the order has expired and thatthe record of such protection order shall be sealed and not be madeavailable to any person or public or private entity, except that suchrecords shall be made available to:(a) the respondent or the respondent's designated agent;

(b) courts in the unified court system;(c) police forces and departments having responsibility forenforcement of the general criminal laws of the state;(d) any state or local officer or agency with responsibility for theissuance of licenses to possess a firearm, rifle or shotgun, when therespondent has made application for such a license; and(e) any prospective employer of a police officer or peace officer asthose terms are defined in subdivisions thirty-three and thirty-four ofsection 1.20 of the criminal procedure law, in relation to anapplication for employment as a police officer or peace officer;provided, however, that every person who is an applicant for theposition of police officer or peace officer shall be furnished with acopy of all records obtained under this subparagraph and afforded anopportunity to make an explanation thereto.2. Upon expiration of a protection order issued pursuant to thisarticle and upon written application of the respondent who is thesubject of such order, with notice and opportunity to be heard to thepetitioner and every licensing officer responsible for issuance of afirearm license to the subject of the order pursuant to article fourhundred of the penal law, and upon a written finding that there is nolegal impediment to the respondent's possession of a surrenderedfirearm, rifle or shotgun, the court shall order the return of afirearm, rifle or shotgun not otherwise disposed of in accordance withsubdivision one of section sixty-three hundred forty-four of thisarticle. When issuing such order in connection with any firearm subjectto a license requirement under article four hundred of the penal law, ifthe licensing officer informs the court that he or she will seek torevoke the license, the order shall be stayed by the court until theconclusion of any license revocation proceeding.

SECTION 6347Effect of findings and determinations in subsequentproceedingsCivil Practice Law & Rules (CVP) CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 63-A§ 6347. Effect of findings and determinations in subsequentproceedings. Notwithstanding any contrary claim based on common law or aprovision of any other law, no finding or determination made pursuant tothis article shall be interpreted as binding, or having collateralestoppel or similar effect, in any other action or proceeding, or withrespect to any other determination or finding, in any court, forum oradministrative proceeding.SECTION 6348Protections for health care providers applying for an extremerisk protection orderCivil Practice Law & Rules (CVP) CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 63-A§ 6348. Protections for health care providers applying for an extremerisk protection order. 1. (a) Notwithstanding the privileges set forthin article forty-five of this chapter, or any other provision of law tothe contrary, a health care provider authorized under paragraph (d) ofsubdivision two of section sixty-three hundred forty of this article tofile an application for an extreme risk protection order against aperson such health care provider has examined shall, upon filing anyapplication for an extreme risk protection order, be authorized todisclose protected health information, of the person against whom suchorder is sought as are necessary for the full investigation anddisposition of such application for an extreme risk protection orderunder this article. When disclosing protected health information, suchhealth care provider shall make reasonable efforts to limit protectedhealth information to the minimum necessary to accomplish the filing ofthe application.(b) Upon receipt of a petition by any health care provider identified

in paragraph (a) of this subdivision and for good cause shown, the courtmay issue orders as may be necessary to obtain any records or documentsrelating to diagnosis, prognosis or treatment, and clinical records, ofthe patient against whom the order is sought as are necessary for thefull investigation and disposition of an application for an extreme riskprotection order under this article. All such records and other healthinformation provided shall be sealed by the court.2. The decision of any health care provider described in subdivisionone of this section to disclose or not to disclose records or documentsrelating to the diagnosis, prognosis or treatment, and clinical recordsof a patient under paragraphs (a) and (b) of subdivision one of thissection, when made reasonably and in good faith, shall not be the basisfor any civil or criminal liability with respect to such health careprovider.

Appendix INew York Involuntary Commitment LawSECTION 9.40Emergency observation, care and treatment incomprehensive psychiatric emergency programsMental Hygiene (MHY) CHAPTER 27, TITLE B, ARTICLE 9* § 9.40 Emergency observation, care and treatment in comprehensivepsychiatric emergency programs.(a) The director of any comprehensive psychiatric emergency programmay receive and retain therein for a period not to exceed seventy-twohours, any person alleged to have a mental illness for which immediateobservation, care and treatment in such program is appropriate and whichis likely to result in serious harm to the person or others. Thedirector shall cause to be entered upon the program records the name ofthe person or persons, if any, who have brought the person alleged tohave a mental illness to the program and the details of thecirc*mstances leading the person or persons to bring the person allegedto have a mental illness to the program.(a-1) The director shall cause triage and referral services to beprovided by a psychiatric nurse practitioner or physician of the programas soon as such person is received into the comprehensive psychiatricemergency program. After receiving triage and referral services, suchperson shall be appropriately treated and discharged, or referred forfurther crisis intervention services including an examination by aphysician as described in subdivision (b) of this section.(b) The director shall cause examination of such persons notdischarged after the provision of triage and referral services to beinitiated by a staff physician of the program as soon as practicable andin any event within six hours after the person is received into theprogram's emergency room. Such person may be retained for observation,

careand treatment and further examination for up to twenty-four hoursif, at the conclusion of such examination, such physician determinesthat such person may have a mental illness for which immediateobservation, care and treatment in a comprehensive psychiatric emergencyprogram is appropriate, and which is likely to result in serious harm tothe person or others.(c) No person shall be involuntarily retained in accordance with thissection for more than twenty-four hours, unless (i) within that time thedetermination of the examining staff physician has been confirmed afterexamination by another physician who is a member of the psychiatricstaff of the program and (ii) the person is admitted to an extendedobservation bed, as such term is defined in section 31.27 of thischapter. At the time of admission to an extended observation bed, suchperson shall be served with written notice of his status and rights as apatient under this section. Such notice shall contain the patient'sname. The notice shall be provided to the same persons and in the manneras if provided pursuant to subdivision (a) of section 9.39 of thisarticle. Written requests for court hearings on the question of need forimmediate observation, care and treatment shall be made, and courthearings shall be scheduled and held, in the manner provided pursuant tosubdivision (a) of section 9.39 of this article, provided however, if aperson is removed or admitted to a hospital pursuant to subdivision (e)or (f) of this section the director of such hospital shall besubstituted for the director of the comprehensive psychiatric emergencyprogram in all legal proceedings regarding the continued retention ofthe person.(d) If at any time it is determined that the person is no longer inneed of immediate observation, care and treatment in accordance withthis section and is not in need of involuntary care and treatment in ahospital, such person shall be released without regard to the provisionsof section 29.15 of this chapter, unless such person agrees to beadmitted to another appropriate hospital as a voluntary or informalpatient.(e) If at any time within the seventy-two hour period it is determined

that such person continues to require immediate observation, care andtreatment in accordance with this section and such requirement is likelyto continue beyond the seventy-two hour period, such person shall beremoved within a reasonable period of time to an appropriate hospitalauthorized to receive and retain patients pursuant to section 9.39 ofthis article and such person shall be evaluated for admission and, ifappropriate, shall be admitted to such hospital in accordance withsection 9.39 of this article, except that if the person is admitted, thefifteen day retention period of subdivision (b) of section 9.39 of thisarticle shall be calculated from the time such person was initiallyregistered into the emergency room of the comprehensive psychiatricemergency program. Any person removed to a hospital pursuant to thisparagraph shall be removed without regard to the provisions of section29.11 or 29.15 of this chapter and shall not be considered to have beentransferred or discharged to another hospital.(f) Nothing in this section shall preclude the involuntary admissionof a person to an appropriate hospital pursuant to the provisions ofthis article if at any time during the seventy-two hour period it isdetermined that the person is in need of involuntary care and treatmentin a hospital and the person does not agree to be admitted to a hospitalas a voluntary or informal patient. Efforts shall be made to assure thatany arrangements for such involuntary admissions in an appropriatehospital shall be made within a reasonable period of time.(g) If a person is examined and determined to be mentally ill the factthat such person suffers from alcohol or substance abuse shall notpreclude receipt or retention under this section.(h) All time periods referenced in this section shall be calculatedfrom the time such person is initially registered into the emergencyroom of the comprehensive psychiatric emergency program.* NB Repealed July 1, 2027

SECTION 9.43Emergency assessment for immediate observation, care, andtreatment; powers of courtsMental Hygiene (MHY) CHAPTER 27, TITLE B, ARTICLE 9* § 9.43 Emergency assessment for immediate observation, care, andtreatment; powers of courts.(a) Whenever any court of inferior or general jurisdiction is informedby verified statement that a person is apparently mentally ill and isconducting himself or herself in a manner which in a person who is notmentally ill would be deemed disorderly conduct or which is likely toresult in serious harm to himself or herself, such court shall issue awarrant directing that such person be brought before it. If, when saidperson is brought before the court, it appears to the court, on thebasis of evidence presented to it, that such person has or may have amental illness which is likely to result in serious harm to himself orherself or others, the court shall issue a civil order directing his orher removal to any hospital specified in subdivision (a) of section 9.39of this article or any comprehensive psychiatric emergency programspecified in subdivision (a) of section 9.40 of this article, or to anycrisis stabilization center specified in section 36.01 of this chapterwhen the court deems such center is appropriate and where such personvoluntarily agrees; that is willing to receive such person for adetermination by the director of such hospital, program or centerwhether such person should be received therein pursuant to such section.(b) Whenever a person before a court in a criminal action appears tohave a mental illness which is likely to result in serious harm tohimself or herself or others and the court determines either that thecrime has not been committed or that there is not sufficient cause tobelieve that such person is guilty thereof, the court may issue a civilorder as above provided, and in such cases the criminal action shallterminate.* NB Effective until July 1, 2027

* § 9.43 Emergency admissions for immediate observation, care, andtreatment; powers of courts.(a) Whenever any court of inferior or general jurisdiction is informedby verified statement that a person is apparently mentally ill and isconducting himself in a manner which in a person who is not mentally illwould be deemed disorderly conduct or which is likely to result inserious harm to himself or others as defined in section 31.39, suchcourt shall issue a warrant directing that such person be brought beforeit. If, when said person is brought before the court, it appears to thecourt, on the basis of evidence presented to it, that such person has ormay have a mental illness which is likely to result in serious harm tohimself or others, the court shall issue a civil order directing hisremoval to any hospital specified in subdivision (a) of section 31.39willing to receive such person for a determination by the director ofsuch hospital whether such person should be retained therein pursuant tosuch section.(b) Whenever a person before a court in a criminal action appears tohave a mental illness which is likely to result in serious harm tohimself or others and the court determines either that the crime has notbeen committed or that there is not sufficient cause to believe thatsuch person is guilty thereof, the court may issue a civil order asabove provided, and in such cases the criminal action shall terminate.* NB Effective July 1, 2027

Appendix JMaine Criminal Justice Academy Mandatory TrainingNew Officers and Continuing EducationTitle 25: INTERNAL SECURITY AND PUBLIC SAFETYPart 8: MAINE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMYChapter 341: THE MAINE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMY$2804-C. Basic law enforcement training; core curriculum requirements1. Required. As a condition to the continued employment of any person as a full-time lawenforcement officer by a municipality, a county, the State or any other nonfederal employer, thatperson must successfully complete, within the first 12 months of initial full-time employment, thebasic training course at the Maine Criminal Justice Academy approved by the board. If a person'sfailure to comply with this requirement was a result of that person's failure to satisfy any of theadmission standards applicable to the basic training course and that person is subsequentlyemployed as a full-time law enforcement officer within 12 months of termination of the initialemployment by a municipality, a county, the State or any other nonfederal employer, the personmust have satisfied all the admission standards established by the board prior to the time of hire.As a condition of continued employment as a full-time law enforcement officer, the officer mustsatisfactorily maintain the basic certification by completing the recertification requirementsprescribed by the board. The board, under extenuating and emergency circ*mstances in individualcases, may extend the 12-month period for not more than 180 days. The board also, in individualcases, may waive the basic training requirement when the facts indicate that an equivalent coursehas been successfully completed.[PL 2013, c. 147, $29 (AMD).]2. Core curriculum requirements.[PL 1993, c. 744, §6 (RP).]2-A. Probationary employment period. Upon being hired, a law enforcement officer shallcomplete an employment probationary period that lasts for at least one year after graduation fromthe academy or the date the board waives the basic training requirement.[PL 1993, c. 744, §6 (NEW).]2-B. Training regarding people who are homeless. The board shall include in the basiclaw enforcement training program a block of instruction aimed specifically at reducing barriers toreporting crimes against people who are homeless and dealing with the unique challenges posedby cases that involve victims or witnesses who are homeless.[PL 2005, c. 393, $1 (NEW).]2-C. Receipt of firearms; training; procedure; liability. The Maine Criminal JusticeAcademy shall provide training for municipal, county and state law enforcement officers regardingthe proper handling, storage, safekeeping and return of firearms and firearm accessories receivedpursuant to a court order under Title 19-A, section 4108, subsection 3 or Title 19-A, section 4110,

pursuant to a court order under Title 19-A, section 4108, subsection 3 or Title 19-A, section 4110,subsection 4. Such training must include education concerning the prohibitions on the purchase orpossession of a firearm when a protection order has been obtained and communication with partiesto protection orders concerning such prohibitions.In developing materials for training in domestic violence issues, the Maine Criminal JusticeAcademy may consult with a statewide organization involved in advocacy for victims of domesticviolence and with an organization having statewide membership representing the interests offirearms owners.A law enforcement officer who receives custody of a firearm pursuant to Title 19-A, section 4108,subsection 3 or Title 19-A, section 4110, subsection 4 shall exercise reasonable care to avoid loss,damage or reduction in value of the firearm and may not permanently mark the firearm or fire thefirearm unless there is reasonable suspicion that the firearm has been used in the commission of acrime. Any liability for damage or reduction in value to such a firearm is governed by Title 14,chapter 741.[PL 2021, c. 647, Pt. B, $57 (AMD); PL 2021, c. 647, Pt. B, $65 (AFF).]2-D. Training regarding people who have mental illness and the involuntarycommitment process. The board shall include in the basic law enforcement training program ablock of instruction aimed specifically at the clinical, safety and procedural components of theinvoluntary commitment process, including the provision of a uniform checklist that includesreference to Title 34-B, section 1207, subsection 7 for law enforcement officers to use in order toeffectively describe the seriousness of a case to a mental health professional.[PL 2009, c. 451, §6 (NEW).]2-E. Receipt of certain dangerous weapons; training; procedure; liability. Beginning in2020, the Maine Criminal Justice Academy Board of Trustees shall require training as part of itsmandated training schedule for municipal, county and state law enforcement officers regarding theprocess for protection from substantial threats by a restricted person and the proper handling,storage, safekeeping and return of dangerous weapons received pursuant to an endorsem*nt orcourt order under Title 34-B, section 3862-A or 3873-A. The training must include educationconcerning the prohibitions on the purchase, control or possession of dangerous weapons. A lawenforcement officer who receives custody of a dangerous weapon pursuant to Title 34-B, section3862-A or 3873-A shall exercise reasonable care to avoid loss, damage or reduction in value ofthe weapon and may not permanently mark or fire the weapon unless there is reasonable suspicionthat the weapon has been used in the commission of a crime. Any liability for damage or reductionin value to such a weapon is governed by Title 14, chapter 741.5. Application to currently certified law enforcement officers. This section does notapply to any law enforcement officer certified as meeting the law enforcement trainingrequirements or to any full-time law enforcement officer employed by a state agency, includingthe University of Maine System, as of July 1, 1990 or to any person employed as a full-time lawenforcement officer by a municipality on September 23, 1971 or by a county on July 1, 1972.[PL 2013, c. 147, §32 (AMD).]

§2804-E. In-service law enforcement training1. Required. As a condition to the continued employment of a person as a law enforcementofficer with the power to make arrests or the authority to carry a firearm in the course of duty by amunicipality, county, the State or other nonfederal employer, that person must successfullycomplete in-service training as prescribed by the board. Failure to successfully complete in-servicetraining by a law enforcement officer as prescribed by the board constitutes grounds to suspend orrevoke a certificate issued by the board pursuant to section 2803-A.[PL 2013, c. 147, $34 (AMD).]2. Role of board. The board shall establish in-service recertification training requirements,consistent with subsection 1, and coordinate delivery of in-service training. The in-servicerecertification training requirements must include information on new laws and court decisionsand on new enforcement practices demonstrated to reduce crime or increase officer safety. Theboard shall consider and encourage the use of telecommunications technology in the developmentand delivery of in-service training programs. In establishing the recertification trainingrequirements, the board shall cooperate with the state and local departments and agencies to whichthe in-service requirements apply to ensure that the standards are appropriate. In-service trainingmay not be applied to satisfy in-service recertification training requirements unless it is approvedby the board.[PL 2013, c. 147, $34 (AMD).]3. Additional certificates.[PL 2013, c. 147, §34 (RP).]4. Credit for continuing education. The board may grant in-service training credits to beapplied to in-service recertification training requirements for courses completed at accreditedcolleges and universities.[PL 1993, c. 744, S8 (NEW).]5. Provision of in-service training. In-service training programs that meet the requirementsestablished under subsection 2 or other in-service training programs may be provided by theMaine Criminal Justice Academy or the agency employing the law enforcement officer.[PL 2013, c. 147, S34 (NEW).]

Appendix KSTATE OF MAINEOFFICER'S GUIDE TO WEAPONS RESTRICTION ORDERIntroduction34-B M.R.S. § 3862-ASeveral states have adopted “red flag laws.” In general, such laws permit policeor family members to petition a court to order the temporary removal of firearmsfrom persons who present a danger to themselves or others. Maine's version ofthe "red flag law" is unique in that the provision for restricting access to weaponsdepends on whether a qualified medical practitioner initially determines a persontaken into protective custody by law enforcement to present a likelihood offoreseeable harm. Such a determination provides a basis for a WeaponsRestriction Order, which imposes restrictions on possessing, controlling, oracquiring dangerous weapons, and requires a person to surrender such weaponsto law enforcement pending a court hearing. Maine's law took effect on July 1,2020. PL 2019, c. 411.Initial CriteriaThe threshold for invoking the statutory process to obtain a Weapons RestrictionOrder is that the person for whom such an order is sought is in protective custody.Specifically, if a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that a personmay be mentally ill and that, due to that condition, the person poses a likelihood ofserious harm¹, a law enforcement officer may take the person into protective custody.Thus, the process for the issuance of a Weapons Restriction Order begins in thesame way as the process for a "blue paper" with a person first in protective custody.The law enforcement officer must deliver the person for examination by a medical1 Harm to self, or others, or inability to care for self.More specifically, by statute, “likelihood of serious harm" means:A. A substantial risk of physical harm to the person as manifested by recent threats of, or attempts at,suicide or serious self-inflicted harm;B. A substantial risk of physical harm to other persons as manifested by recent homicidal or violentbehavior or by recent conduct placing others in reasonable fear of serious physical harm;C. A reasonable certainty that the person will suffer severe physical or mental harm as manifested byrecent behavior demonstrating an inability to avoid risk or to protect the person adequately fromimpairment or injury; orD. For the purposes of a progressive treatment program, in view of the person's treatment history,current behavior, and inability to make an informed decision, a reasonable likelihood that the person'smental health will deteriorate, and that the person will in the foreseeable future pose a likelihood ofserious harm as defined in A, B, or C above.

2practitioner for purposes of involuntary admission to a psychiatric facility (bluepaper) or for a weapons restriction assessment if law enforcement has probablecause that the person possesses, controls, or may acquire a dangerous weapon.To the extent that protective custody is necessary for the weapons restrictionassessment to proceed, if the blue paper evaluation and weapons restrictionassessment are not co-occurring, the weapons restriction assessment shouldoccur before the blue paper evaluation in that the release of the person fromprotective custody denies an opportunity for the weapons restriction assessment.Assessment of Likelihood of Foreseeable HarmWhen a medical practitioner is informed by law enforcement that there is probablecause to believe that a person in protective custody possesses, controls, or mayacquire a dangerous weapon, the practitioner shall determine whether the personpresents a likelihood of foreseeable harm. In addition to the information that ledto protective custody and the information constituting the probable cause beliefthat the person possesses, controls, or may acquire a dangerous weapon, the lawenforcement officer must also provide to the practitioner any historical information,including prior law enforcement interactions with the person and the person'scriminal history.Judicial Endorsem*nt of Application for Weapons Restriction OrderIf the medical practitioner determines that the person presents a likelihood offoreseeable harm, the practitioner shall endorse the Application for WeaponsRestriction Order whereupon law enforcement must then seek judicialendorsem*nt of the Application (either in person or electronically), whichauthorizes law enforcement to notify the restricted person of the initial WeaponsRestriction Order. 2 A Superior Court Justice, a District Court Judge, a Judge ofProbate, or a Justice of the Peace is authorized to endorse the determination bythe medical practitioner that the person presents a likelihood of foreseeable harmand the law enforcement officer's declarations that the person was taken intoprotective custody and that there is probable cause to believe that the personpossesses, controls, or is likely to acquire a dangerous weapon. There is norequirement that the judicial officer independently assess the probable causedeclarations of law enforcement or the likelihood of foreseeable harm. Onceendorsed, the Notice of Service on Restricted Person may be served on therestricted person.2 The Houlton RCC (800-924-2261) maintains a list of after-hours judicial officers.

3NOTE: Provide the judicial officer with the original and a copy of the applicationand medical assessment; once endorsed, the judicial officer will return the originalto law enforcement and will send the copy to the court.METRO and District Attorney Notification of Issuance of OrderMETRO Notification. The METRO Entering Agency must expeditiously enter theWeapons Restriction Order into the State Database Weapons Restriction OrderFile. (An order not yet served is a "suppressed order;" it becomes an "active order”after service of the order on the restricted person.) This will in turn cause therecord to be entered into the Maine State Bureau of Identification database. Afterthat, the record will be automatically entered into the Federal National InstantCriminal Background Check System (NICS) database. The entry will alsogenerate a unique identifier called an ARI, which will be provided to the METROEntering Agency for inclusion in any subsequent reports. The ARI is like an ATNor a bail ID in that it provides a unique identifier if two or more orders are tied tothe same name and date of birth.DA Notification. The originating law enforcement agency must immediately senda copy of the Weapons Restriction Order and all other relevant reports, forms, orinformation to the District Attorney's Office in the prosecutorial district in which therestricted person resides. The ARI must be included in any documentationsubmitted to the District Attorney's Office.

4Notice to Restricted Person of Weapons Restriction OrderAs soon as practicable, but no later than 24 hours after the judicial endorsem*nt,law enforcement shall notify the subject of the Weapons Restriction Order (1) thatthe person is prohibited from possessing, controlling, acquiring, or attempting toacquire a dangerous weapon pending the outcome of a court hearing; (2) that theperson must immediately and temporarily surrender any weapons possessed,controlled, or acquired by the person to a law enforcement officer who hasauthority in the jurisdiction in which the weapons are located pending the outcomeof the court hearing; and (3) that the person has a right to a court hearing within14 days of notice of the Weapons Restriction Order. A Weapons Restriction Ordermay not be enforced until service of the order on the restricted person. In thisrespect, a Weapons Restriction Order is like a Protection from Abuse Order in thatthere can be no enforcement until the order is served.METRO and District Attorney Notification of Service of OrderMETRO Notification. Regardless of which agency makes service of the order, theMETRO Entering Agency that entered the original information must expeditiouslymodify the appropriate entry in the State Database Weapons Restriction Order Fileto reflect that the order was served. (The status of the order then becomes an"active order" as opposed to a "suppressed order.")DA Notification. The originating law enforcement agency must immediately senda copy of the Weapons Restriction Order that was served on the restricted personto the District Attorney's Office in the prosecutorial district in which the restrictedperson resides.Effect of Service of the Weapons Restriction OrderOnce a judicial official endorses the Application for a Weapons Restriction Orderand a law enforcement officer serves the order, the person to whom the orderapplies is restricted from possessing, controlling, acquiring, or attempting topossess, control, or acquire dangerous weapons. (A "dangerous weapon" meansa firearm or any device designed as a weapon and capable of producing death orserious bodily injury. 17-A M.R.S. § 2(9)(C)). The person must surrender all suchweapons to a law enforcement officer who has authority in the jurisdiction in whichthe weapons are located, pending the outcome of the court hearing. The agencythat took the person into protective custody and initiated the Weapons RestrictionOrder process is expected to coordinate the weapons surrender process. Arestricted person properly served becomes a prohibited person for purposes ofpossession or control of a firearm(s) (not ownership) pursuant to 15 M.R.S. §393(1)(E-1). A violation is a Class D crime. However, a restricted person who

5makes all practical and immediate efforts to comply with the surrender requirementin the order is not subject to arrest or prosecution as a prohibited person forpossessing or controlling weapons before or at the time of surrender. 34-B M.R.S.§ 3862-A(5). If the District Court hearing results in the dissolution of the WeaponsRestriction Order, the originating law enforcement agency is responsible forcoordinating the return of weapons.District Attorney's OfficeThe District Attorney's Office in the prosecutorial district in which the restrictedperson resides is responsible for initiating the court hearing and must file a petitionwithin five (5) days of service of the Weapons Restriction Order. The hearingshould be conducted within 14 days of the service of the order. Accordingly, theDA's Office needs all documentation generated through the point of service of theorder as soon as possible, including the notice of service. One of the mostessential elements to relay to the DA's Office is the ARI number generated by theMETRO entry of the order. Without it, tracking and necessary modifications to theorder as it moves through the court process is not possible. If the DA's Office doesnot petition the court for a hearing, it will notify the originating law enforcementagency. The agency in turn must update the record in the State DatabaseWeapons Restriction Order File.Getting a Hit on a Weapons Restricted PersonThere is a special METRO file populated with the names of persons who are thesubjects of Weapons Restriction Orders. The file is linked to a Driver's LicenseQuery so that the system will return an automatic response, as is the case withwarrants, bail conditions, and protection orders.

STATE OF MAINEAPPLICATION FOR WEAPONS RESTRICTION ORDER34-B MRS § 3862-AName (First, middle, last):AKAAddressDOB (mm/dd/yyyy):Race:Height:Weight:Scars, marks, tattoosDriver's license #Sex:Hair:_Eyes:_Social Security #_Section 1. Application by Law EnforcementA. Officer [Print name and rank]Officer Contact InformationAgency and ORIAgency Case #B. Onatlaw enforcement took the person named above intoprotective custody pursuant to 34-B MRS § 3862 based on the probable cause outlinedin Appendix 1 of this Application.C. Location where person taken into custody:D. I believe that the person named above possesses, controls or may acquire a dangerousweapon(s) based on the probable cause outlined in Appendix 1 of this Application.E. Description and location of weapon(s), if known:Signature of OfficerDate

Section 2. Assessment by Medical PractitionerA.Medical Practitioner (Print name):License (Select one): MD DO PA NPPractitioner Contact Information:RN, CSPsych, PhD.Physical Address:B.My opinion is that__is a mentally ill person within the meaning of34-B MRS § 3801(5) as a person having a psychiatric or other disease that substantially impairsthat person's mental health or creates a substantial risk of suicide, including persons sufferingeffects from the use of drugs, narcotics, hallucinogens, or alcohol or other intoxicants. Thepatient is exhibiting the following symptoms (attach additional statement as needed):C.My opinion is that because of this illness,D.poses a likelihood offoreseeable harm within the meaning of 34-B MRS § 3862-A(1)(G) as follows (check asapplicable):i)ii)☐ The individual presents a substantial risk in the foreseeable future of seriousphysical harm to self as manifested by recent threats of, or attempts at, suicide orserious self-inflicted harm.☐ The individual presents a substantial risk in the foreseeable future of serious physicalharm to other persons as manifested by recent homicidal or violent behavior or by recentconduct placing others in reasonable fear of serious physical harm.The likelihood of foreseeable harm is based on the following recent behaviors or threats(attach additional statement as needed):E.Location of person at time of assessment☐ Check if telemedicineF.Referral for treatment or servicesInpatientG.Voluntary HospitalizationInvoluntary Hospitalization pursuant to 34-B MRS § 3863OutpatientOther Medical Professionals consulted, if any (Name, License, Contact Info)Signature of Medical PractitionerDate

Section 3. Judicial Endorsem*ntA.B.C.The law enforcement officer identified in Section 1 above has stated thatwas taken into protective custody pursuant to 34-B M.R.S.§ 3862, and that the officer has probable cause to believe thatpossesses, controls, or is likely to acquire a dangerous weapon(s).The medical practitioner identified in Section 2 above has found thatis a mentally ill person within the meaning of 34-B M.R.S.§ 3801(5) and poses a likelihood of foreseeable harm within the meaning of 34-BM.R.S. § 3862-A.Based on the above, and pursuant to 34-B MRS § 3862-A (4), I endorse this applicationand find that_is a restricted person pursuant to 34- BMRS § 3862-A(1)(K). This endorsem*nt authorizes law enforcement to notify therestricted person as soon as possible, but no later than 24 hours from the time of thisendorsem*nt (1) that the person is prohibited from possessing, controlling, acquiringor attempting to acquire a dangerous weapon pending the outcome of a judicialhearing, (2) that the person must immediately and temporarily surrender any weaponspossessed, controlled, or acquired by the person to a law enforcement officer who hasauthority in the jurisdiction in which the weapons are located pending the outcome ofa judicial hearing, and (3) that the person has a right to a judicial hearing within 14days of notice.(Printed Name of Judicial Officer)(Signature)Superior Court Justice/District Court Judge/Judge of Probate/Justice of the Peace(Date and Time)METRO Entering Agency must enter information in METRO upon judicial endorsem*nt.Transmit Application with signed judicial endorsem*nt to the District Attorney's Office withjurisdiction over the restricted person's place of residence.METRO Entry made on_at_by_(Date)(Time)Transmitted to DA's Office onat_by_(Date)(Time)

STATE OF MAINEAPPLICATION FOR WEAPONS RESTRICTION ORDER34-B MRS § 3862-AAPPENDIX 1OFFICER'S STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CAUSEBased on the probable cause outlined below, I tookatin(Time)(Municipality)into protective custody onpursuant to 34-B MRS § 3862, and I believe that(Date)possesses, controls, or may acquire a dangerous weapon(s).[Include the information that gave rise to the probable cause determination for protective custody andthe belief that the person possesses, controls, or may acquire a dangerous weapon(s), as well as adescription of recent or recurring actions and behaviors. Attach the person's pertinent criminal historyrecord information (convictions and non-convictions), as well as all available pertinent investigativerecord information. Also, include a description and location of dangerous weapons, if known.]Signature of OfficerDate

TO:STATE OF MAINEWEAPONS RESTRICTION ORDER34-B MRS § 3862-ANOTICE OF SERVICE ON RESTRICTED PERSON1. Law enforcement took you into protective custody.2. A qualified medical practitioner found that you currently present a likelihood of foreseeable harm, and ajudicial official endorsed that determination.3. You may not possess, control, or acquire or attempt to possess, control, or acquire a firearm or other dangerousweapon until a court dissolves the restriction. You must surrender to law enforcement any firearms or otherdangerous weapons currently in your possession or control. If you immediately comply with the surrenderorder, you are not subject to arrest or prosecution as a person prohibited from possessing or controllingdangerous weapons.4. If you do not comply with the surrender order or if you possess, control, or acquire or attempt to possess,control, or acquire a dangerous weapon during the period of restriction, you are subject to arrest andprosecution as a person prohibited from possessing or controlling dangerous weapons.5. You have a right to a court hearing within 14 days of this notice during which you may engage legal counsel,which a court may appoint if you are indigent.6. Any firearms or other dangerous weapons you surrendered to law enforcement will be returned to you if thecourt dissolves the restrictions.(Printed Name of Officer Making Service) (Signature of Officer Making Service)(Date & Time of Service)(Printed Name of Restricted Person)(Signature of Restricted Person)METRO Entering Agency must enter information in METRO upon service of order.Transmit Service of Order to the District Attorney's Office with jurisdictionover the restricted person's place of residence.METRO Entry made onat_by_(Date)(Time)Transmitted to DA's Office onat_by_(Date)(Time)

Appendix LArmy laws- Reserve ComponentsCommand Directed Mental Health Evaluations10 U.S. Code § 12301 - Reservecomponents generally(a)In time of war or of national emergency declared by Congress, or when otherwiseauthorized by law, an authority designated by the Secretary concerned may,without the consent of the persons affected, order any unit, and any member notassigned to a unit organized to serve as a unit, of a reserve component under thejurisdiction of that Secretary to active duty for the duration of the war oremergency and for six months thereafter. However a member on an inactive statuslist or in a retired status may not be ordered to active duty under this subsectionunless the Secretary concerned, with the approval of the Secretary of Defense inthe case of the Secretary of a military department, determines that there are notenough qualified Reserves in an active status or in the inactive National Guard inthe required category who are readily available.(b)At any time, an authority designated by the Secretary concerned may, without theconsent of the persons affected, order any unit, and any member not assigned to aunit organized to serve as a unit, in an active status in a reserve component underthe jurisdiction of that Secretary to active duty for not more than 15 days a year.However, units and members of the Army National Guard of the United States orthe Air National Guard of the United States may not be ordered to active dutyunder this subsection without the consent of the governor of the State (or, in thecase of the District of Columbia National Guard, the commanding general of theDistrict of Columbia National Guard).(c)So far as practicable, during any expansion of the active armed forces that requiresthat units and members of the reserve components be ordered to active duty asprovided in subsection (a), members of units organized and trained to serve as

units who are ordered to that duty without their consent shall be so ordered withtheir units. However, members of those units may be reassigned after being soordered to active duty.(d)At any time, an authority designated by the Secretary concerned may order amember of a reserve component under his jurisdiction to active duty, or retain himon active duty, with the consent of that member. However, a member of the ArmyNational Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United Statesmay not be ordered to active duty under this subsection without the consent of thegovernor or other appropriate authority of the State concerned.(e)The period of time allowed between the date when a Reserve ordered to activeduty as provided in subsection (a) is alerted for that duty and the date when theReserve is required to enter upon that duty shall be determined by the Secretaryconcerned based upon military requirements at that time.(f)The consent of a Governor described in subsections (b) and (d) may not be withheld(in whole or in part) with regard to active duty outside the United States, itsterritories, and its possessions, because of any objection to the location, purpose,type, or schedule of such active duty.(g)(1)A member of a reserve component may be ordered to active duty without hisconsent if the Secretary concerned determines that the member is in a captivestatus. A member ordered to active duty under this section may not be retained onactive duty, without his consent, for more than 30 days after his captive status isterminated.(2)The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to carry out this section. Suchregulations shall apply uniformly among the armed forces under the jurisdiction ofthe Secretary. A determination for the purposes of this subsection that a member isin a captive status shall be made pursuant to such regulations.(3)In this section, the term "captive status" means the status of a member of thearmed forces who is in a missing status (as defined in section 551(2) of title 37)which occurs as the result of a hostile action and is related to the member's militarystatus.(h)

(1)When authorized by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a militarydepartment may, with the consent of the member, order a member of a reservecomponent to active duty-(A)to receive authorized medical care;(B)to be medically evaluated for disability or other purposes; or(C)to complete a required Department of Defense health care study, which mayinclude an associated medical evaluation of the member.(2)A member ordered to active duty under this subsection may, with the member'sconsent, be retained on active duty, if the Secretary concerned considers itappropriate, for medical treatment for a condition associated with the study orevaluation, if that treatment of the member is otherwise authorized by law.(3)A member of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air NationalGuard of the United States may be ordered to active duty under this subsectiononly with the consent of the Governor or other appropriate authority of the Stateconcerned.10 U.S. Code § 1090b - Commandingofficer and supervisor referrals ofmembers for mental healthevaluations(a)REGULATIONS.-The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe and maintain regulations relating tocommanding officer and supervisor referrals of members of the armed forcesfor mental health evaluations. The regulations shall incorporate the requirementsset forth in subsections (b), (c), and (d) and such other matters as the Secretaryconsiders appropriate.

(b)REDUCTION OF PERCEIVED STIGMA. -The regulations required by subsection (a)shall, to the greatest extent possible-(1)seek to eliminate perceived stigma associated with seeking and receiving mentalhealth services, promoting the use of mental health services on a basis comparableto the use of other medical and health services; and(2)clarify the appropriate action to be taken by commanders or supervisory personnelwho, in good faith, believe that a subordinate may require a mental healthevaluation.(c)PROCEDURES FOR INPATIENT EVALUATIONS.-The regulations required by subsection(a) shall provide that, when a commander or supervisor determines that it isnecessary to refer a member of the armed forces for a mental health evaluation oris required to make such a referral pursuant to the process described in subsection(e)(1)(A)-(1)the health evaluation shall only be conducted in the most appropriate clinicalsetting, in accordance with the least restrictive alternative principle; and(2)only a psychiatrist, or, in cases in which a psychiatrist is not available,another mental health professional or a physician, may admit the memberpursuant to the referral for a mental health evaluation to be conducted on aninpatient basis.(d)PROHIBITION ON USE OF REFERRALS FOR MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATIONS TO RETALIATEAGAINST WHISTLEBLOWERS.-The regulations required by subsection (a) shall provide that no person may refer amember of the armed forces for a mental health evaluation as a reprisal for makingor preparing a lawful communication of the type described in section 1034(c)(2) ofthis title, and applicable regulations. For purposes of this subsection, suchcommunication shall also include a communication to any appropriate authority inthe chain of command of the member.(e)SELF-INITIATED REFERRAL PROCESS. —(1) The regulations required by subsection (a) shall, with respect to a member ofthe armed forces-(A)provide for a self-initiated process that enables the member to trigger a referral fora mental health evaluation by requesting such a referral from a commandingofficer or supervisor who is in a grade above E-5;

(B)ensure the function of the process described in subparagraph (A) by-(i)requiring the commanding officer or supervisor of the member to refer themember to a mental health provider for a mental health evaluation as soon aspracticable following the request of the member (including by providing to themental health provider the name and contact information of the member andproviding to the member the date, time, and place of the scheduled mental healthevaluation); and(ii)ensure the member may request a referral pursuant to subparagraph (A) on anybasis (including on the basis of a concern relating to fitness for duty, occupationalrequirements, safety issues, significant changes in performance, or behavioralchanges that may be attributable to possible changes in mental status); and(C)ensure that the process described in subparagraph (A)-(i)reduces stigma in accordance with subsection (b), including by treating referralsfor mental health evaluations made pursuant to such process in a manner similarto referrals for other medical services, to the maximum extent practicable; and(ii)protects the confidentiality of the member to the maximum extent practicable, inaccordance with requirements for the confidentiality of health information underthe Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-191) and applicable privacy laws.(2)In making a referral for an evaluation of a member of the armed forces triggeredby a request made pursuant to the process described in paragraph (1)(A), if themember has made such a request on the basis of a concern that the member is apotential or imminent danger to self or others, the commanding officer orsupervisor of the member shall observe the following principles:(A)With respect to safety, if the commander or supervisor determines the member isexhibiting dangerous behavior, the first priority of the commander or supervisorshall be to ensure that precautions are taken to protect the safety of the member,and others, prior to the arrival of the member at the location of the evaluation.(B)With respect to communication, prior to such arrival, the commander orsupervisor shall communicate to the provider to which the member is beingreferred (in a manner and to an extent consistent with paragraph (1)(C)(ii)),information on the circ*mstances and observations that led to-(i)

the member requesting the referral; and(ii)the commander or supervisor making such referral based on the request.(f)ANNUAL TRAINING REQUIREMENT.-On an annual basis, each Secretary concerned shall provide to the members of theArmed Forces under the jurisdiction of such Secretary a training on how torecognize personnel who may require mental health evaluations on the basis of theindividual being an imminent danger to self or others, as demonstrated by thebehavior or apparent mental state of the individual.(g)DEFINITIONS.-In this section:(1)The term "mental health professional" means a psychiatrist or clinical psychologist,a person with a doctorate in clinical social work, or a psychiatric clinical nursespecialist.(2)The term "mental health evaluation" means a psychiatric examination or evaluation,a psychological examination or evaluation, an examination for psychiatric orpsychological fitness for duty, or any other means of assessing the state of mentalhealth of a member of the armed forces.(3)The term "least restrictive alternative principle" means a principle under which amember of the armed forces committed for hospitalization and treatment shall beplaced in the most appropriate and therapeutic available setting-(A)that is no more restrictive than is conducive to the most effective form oftreatment; and(B)in which treatment is available and the risks of physical injury or property damageposed by such placement are warranted by the proposed plan of treatment.(Added Pub. L. 112-81, div. A, title VII, § 711(a)(1), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1475,§ 1090a; renumbered § 1090b and amended Pub. L. 117-81, div. A, title VII,§§ 701(c)(1)(A), 704, Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 1778, 1780.)

Appendix MArmy Regulation AR-190 Paragraphs 4-5 (17 January 2019)Applicable portions of this regulation were, by agreement, provided by the USArmy, other non-related portions of this regulation were not provided.(2) Unit Commanders will-(a) Account for and inventory privately owned firearms and ammunitionsecured in unit arms.(b) Ensure that a DA Form 3749 has been issued for each privately ownedfirearm secured in the arms room. Privately owned firearms will beinventoried in conjunction with and at the frequency of the inventory ofmilitary weapons.(c) Establish limits on the quantity and type of privately owned ammunitionstored in the arms room, based upon availability of space and safetyconsiderations.(3) Personnel keeping or storing privately owned firearms and ammunition(including authorized war trophy firearms) on an installation will-(a) Comply with federal, state, and local laws and regulations on ownership,possession, registration, off-post transport, and use.(b) Store both firearms and ammunition in the unit arms room or otherlocations authorized by the installation commander.(c) Follow local security and safety regulations. Safeguard the unit issuedDA Form for turn-in to the unit armorer, when the firearm is withdrawn fromthe arms room.(d) Withdraw privately owned firearms and ammunition from the unit armsroom only upon approval of the unite commander or representative.

Appendix NPARTMENT▾UNITEDOFSTATESDEFENSEOF AMERICADepartment of DefenseINSTRUCTIONNUMBER 6490.04March 4, 2013Incorporating Change 1, Effective April 22, 2020SUBJECT: Mental Health Evaluations of Members of the Military ServicesReferences: See Enclosure 1USD(P&R)1. PURPOSE. In accordance with the authority in DoD Directive 5124.02 (Reference (a)), thisinstruction:a. Reissues DoD Instruction 6490.4 (Reference (b)), establishing policy, assigningresponsibilities, and prescribing procedures for the referral, evaluation, treatment, and medicaland command management of Service members who may require assessment for mental healthissues, psychiatric hospitalization, and risk of imminent or potential danger to self or others.b. Incorporates and cancels DoD Directive 6490.1 (Reference (c)).c. Implements section 1090a of Title 10, United States Code (Reference (d)) and section711(b) of Public Law 112-81, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012(Reference (e)).2. APPLICABILITY. This instruction:a. Applies to the OSD, the Military Departments (including the Coast Guard at all times,including when it is a Service in the Department of Homeland Security by agreement with thatDepartment), the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff, theCombatant Commands, the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense, theDefense Agencies, the DoD Field Activities, and all other organizational entities within the DoD.b. Does not apply to:(1) Voluntary self-referrals.(2) Required periodic pre- and post-deployment mental health assessments for Servicemembers deployed in connection with a contingency operation in accordance with DoDInstruction 6490.03 (Reference (f)).

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013(3) Responsibility and competency inquiries conducted in accordance with the guidelinesestablished in the Rule for Courts Martial 706 of the Manual for Courts-Martial (Reference (g)).(4) Interviews conducted in accordance with guidelines established for the FamilyAdvocacy Program in DoD Instruction 6400.01 (Reference (h)).(5) Interviews conducted in accordance with guidelines established for drug or alcoholabuse rehabilitation programs in DoD Instruction 1010.04 (Reference (i)).(6) Clinical referrals requested by other healthcare providers as a matter of clinicaljudgment and when the Service member consents to the evaluation.(7) Evaluations under authorized law enforcement or corrections system procedures.(8) Evaluations for special duties or occupational classifications and other evaluationsexpressly required by applicable DoD issuance or Service regulation that are not subject tocommanders' discretion.3. POLICY. It is DoD policy that:a. It is the responsibility of the DoD to ensure that policy and procedures are implemented ina manner that removes the stigma associated with Service members seeking and receiving mentalhealth services. The use of mental health services is considered, whenever possible, to becomparable to the use of other medical and health services. This extends to policy directed atensuring fitness for duty, returning injured or ill Service members to full duty status afterappropriate treatment, and managing medical conditions that may endanger the Service member,others, or mission accomplishment.b. Commanders and supervisors who in good faith believe a subordinate Service membermay require a mental health evaluation are authorized to direct an evaluation under thisinstruction or take other actions consistent with the procedures in Enclosure 3. In thesecirc*mstances, a command directed mental health evaluation (MHE) has the same status as anyother military order.c. Referral for a command directed evaluation (CDE) of a Service member to a mentalhealthcare provider (MHP) for a non-emergency MHE may be initiated only by a commander orsupervisor as defined in the Glossary. Such evaluations may be for a variety of concerns,including fitness for duty, occupational requirements, safety issues, significant changes inperformance, or behavior changes that may be attributable to possible mental status changes.d. A commander or supervisor will refer a Service member for an emergency MHE as soonas is practicable whenever:(1) A Service member, by actions or words, such as actual, attempted, or threatenedviolence, intends or is likely to cause serious injury to him or herself or others.Change 1, 04/22/20202

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013(2) When the facts and circ*mstances indicate that the Service member's intent to causesuch injury is likely.(3) When the commanding officer believes that the Service member may be sufferingfrom a severe mental disorder.e. No one may refer a Service member for an MHE as a reprisal for making or preparing alawful communication of the type described in section 1034 of Reference (d) and in DoDDirective 7050.06 (Reference (j)).f. A Service member may initiate a voluntary self-referral for mental health care. When self-initiated, the MHP will follow the policy and procedures of DoD Instruction 6490.08 (Reference(k)) with regard to both the presumption of non-notification, required notifications, and theextent of disclosure.g. Training must be provided annually to all Service members by the Military Departmentsregarding the recognition of personnel who may require MHE for imminent dangerousness,based on the individual's behavior or apparent mental state.h. Mental health assessments of Service members deployed in connection with acontingency operation will be conducted, for purposes other than CDEs, in accordance with theauthority and procedures in Reference (f).4. RESPONSIBILITIES. See Enclosure 2.5. PROCEDURES. See Enclosure 3.6. RELEASABILITY. Cleared for public release. This instruction is available on theDirectives Division Website at http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives.7. SUMMARY OF CHANGE 1. The change to this issuance updates references and removesexpiration language in accordance with current Chief Management Officer of the Department ofDefense direction.Change 1, 04/22/20203

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 20138. EFFECTIVE DATE. This instruction is effective March 4, 2013.Enclosures1. References2. Responsibilities3. ProceduresGlossaryChange 1, 04/22/2020xuriantJessica L Wright,Acting Under Secretary of Defense forPersonnel and Readiness

TABLE OF CONTENTSDoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013ENCLOSURE 1: REFERENCES.ENCLOSURE 2: RESPONSIBILITIES.ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS (ASD(HA))..SECRETARIES OF THE MILITARY DEPARTMENTS...ENCLOSURE 3: PROCEDURES ..TRAINING FOR COMMANDERS, SUPERVISORS, AND SERVICE MEMBERSREFERRAL OF SERVICE MEMBERS FOR COMMANDER OR SUPERVISORDIRECTED MHE...COMMAND PROMOTION OF CARE SEEKING FOR THE MAINTENANCE OFTOTAL WELL-BEING.HOSPITALIZATION FOR PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION AND TREATMENTFITNESS AND SUITABILITY FOR SERVICE...DUTY TO TAKE PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT OTHERS FROM HARM.MEDICAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT CASE REVIEW ..COMPLAINTS OF REPRISAL FOR PROTECTED COMMUNICATIONGLOSSARYPART I: ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMSPART II: DEFINITIONS...Change 1, 04/22/20205CONTENTS.7.7.7.9.9.10.10.12.13..13.14.15.15.15

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013ENCLOSURE 1REFERENCES(a) DoD Directive 5124.02, “Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness(USD(P&R))," June 23, 2008(b) DoD Instruction 6490.4, "Requirements for Mental Health Evaluations of Members of theArmed Forces," August 28, 1997 (hereby cancelled)(c) DoD Directive 6490.1, “Mental Health Evaluations of Members of the Armed Forces,”October 1, 1997 (hereby cancelled)(d) Sections 1034 and 1090a of Title 10, United States Code(e) Section 711(b) of Public Law 112-81, "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year2012," December 31, 2011(f)DoD Instruction 6490.03, “Deployment Health," June 19, 2019(g) Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, current version(h) DoD Instruction 6400.01, "Family Advocacy Program (FAP)," May 1, 2019(i) DoD Instruction 1010.04, "Problematic Substance Use by DoD Personnel," February 20,2014(j)DoD Directive 7050.06, “Military Whistleblower Protection," April 17, 2015(k) DoD Instruction 6490.08, “Command Notification Requirements to Dispel Stigma inProviding Mental Health Care to Service Members,” August 17, 2011(1)National Center for State Courts, "Guidelines for Involuntary Civil Commitment,” 1986(m) DoD Instruction 1332.18, “Disability Evaluation System (DES),” August 5, 2014(n) DoD Instruction 1332.14, “Enlisted Administrative Separations," January 27, 2014, asamendedChange 1, 04/22/20206ENCLOSURE 1

ENCLOSURE 2RESPONSIBILITIESDoDI 6490.04, March 4, 20131. ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS (ASD(HA)). Underthe authority, direction, and control of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel andReadiness, the ASD(HA) monitors compliance with this instruction and develop additionalguidance as required.2. SECRETARIES OF THE MILITARY DEPARTMENTS. The Secretaries of the MilitaryDepartments:a. Require departmental monitoring of compliance with this instruction.b. Develop policy that ensures active duty Service member involuntary psychiatrichospitalization procedures at DoD inpatient facilities are modeled after guidance prepared byprofessional civilian mental health organizations that serve as credible sources of nationallyrecognized best practices and standards of care for emergency evaluation, hospitalization, andtreatment for adults (e.g., guidance written by the American Psychiatric Association regardingemergency evaluation of adults).c. Monitor the ability of commanders and supervisors, medical treatment facility personnel,emergency care providers, and MHPs to meet the requirements of this instruction to follow:(1) Military Department involuntary emergency admission procedures.(2) The State's civil commitment procedures, if the commitment occurs at a civilianfacility, for the State in which the psychiatric emergency admission occurs, in accordance withNational Center for State Courts, “Guidelines for Involuntary Civil Commitment” (Reference(1)).(3) Military involuntary admission procedures, if the commitment occurs at an MTF.d. Ensure that commanders and supervisors are proficient in fulfilling their responsibilities,as set forth by Military Department's policies and procedures, to:(1) Initiate and follow procedures for both emergency and non-emergency CDEs andfacilitating other MHE referrals.(2) Execute emergency management and precautions in the referral and care of apotentially dangerous Service member.(3) Provide the Service member with the resources, opportunity, and encouragement toseek non-directed mental health, social service, or other types of assistance, consistent with thepromotion of well-being and maintenance of the Service member's health and readiness.Change 1, 04/22/20207ENCLOSURE 2

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013e. Ensure that MHPs follow Military Department procedures, policy, and clinical guidancefor completing clinical risk assessment evaluations and related documentation.f. Ensure periodic training is provided to all commanders, supervisors, and Service membersregarding the recognition of personnel who may require MHE for dangerousness to self, others,or mission, based on the individual's behavior or apparent mental state. The training must meetthe requirements in Enclosure 3 of this instruction.g. Ensure medical quality management case review is completed for all cases that,subsequent to a CDE or other MHE, result in suicide, homicide, serious injury, or violence.h Develop and implement effective procedures, consistent with Reference (j), to enforce theprohibition on using CDEs to retaliate against whistleblowers and the other provisions in thatdirective concerning protected communications.Change 1, 04/22/2020008ENCLOSURE 2

ENCLOSURE 3PROCEDURESDoDI 6490.04, March 4, 20131. TRAINING FOR COMMANDERS, SUPERVISORS, AND SERVICE MEMBERSa. Periodic training provided to all commanders, supervisors, and Service members mustprovide instruction on how to recognize Service members who may require mental healthevaluation for dangerousness to self, others, or mission based on the Service member's behavioror apparent mental state.b. Such training must include:(1) The recognition of potentially dangerous behavior.(2) Appropriate use of security or civilian police authorities.(3) Management of emergencies pending the arrival of security or civilian police.(4) Administrative management of such cases.c. Training must be specific to the needs, rank, and level of responsibility and assignment ofcommanders, supervisors, and Service members.2. REFERRAL OF SERVICE MEMBER FOR COMMANDER OR SUPERVISORDIRECTED MHEa. The responsibility for determining whether or not referral for MHE should be made restswith the Service member's commander or supervisor at the time of the referral.(1) A senior enlisted Service member may be designated by the commander orsupervisor for ordering an emergency CDE for enlisted Service members.(2) In cases involving a commissioned officer, a commissioned officer of rank senior tothe officer to be referred may be designated.b. When a commander or supervisor, in good faith, believes that a Service member mayrequire a non-emergency MHE, he or she will:(1) Advise the Service member that there is no stigma associated with obtaining mentalhealth services.(2) Refer the Service member to an MHP, providing both name and contact information.Change 1, 04/22/20209ENCLOSURE 3

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013(3) Tell the Service member the date, time, and place of the scheduled MHE.c. When a commander or supervisor refers a Service member for an emergency MHE owingto concern about potential or imminent danger to self or others, the following principles shouldbe observed:(1) Safety. When a Service member is exhibiting dangerous behavior, the first priorityof the commander or supervisor is to ensure that precautions are taken to protect the safety of theService member and others, pending arrangements for and transportation of the Service memberto the location of the emergency evaluation.Communication. The commander or supervisor will report to the MHPcirc*mstances and observations regarding the Service member that led to the emergency referraleither prior to or while the Service member is en route to emergency evaluation.3. COMMAND PROMOTION OF CARE SEEKING FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF TOTALWELL-BEINGa. Commanders or supervisors may make informal, non-mandatory recommendations forService members under their authority to seek care from an MHP when circ*mstances do notrequire a CDE based on safety or mission concerns. Under such circ*mstances, the commanderor supervisor will inform the Service member that he or she is providing a recommendation forvoluntary self-referral and not ordering the care.b. Commanders and supervisors will demonstrate leadership and direct involvement indevelopment of a culture of total well-being of Service members by providing consistent andongoing messaging and support for the benefits and value of seeking mental health care andvoluntarily-sought substance abuse education.c. Commanders and supervisors may educate Service members with respect to additionaloptions for assistance, including confidential counseling from family support, MilitaryOneSource resources, consultation from chaplains, and options for obtaining assistance withfinancial, legal, childcare, housing, or educational issues.d. Commanders and supervisors will not substitute alternative approaches to CDE whenthere is significant concern regarding a Service member's safety or performance of duty orconcern for the safety of others.4. HOSPITALIZATION FOR PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION AND TREATMENTa. Pursuant to a referral, only a psychiatrist, or, when a psychiatrist is not available, aphysician or another MHP with admitting privileges may admit a Service member for aninpatient MHE.Change 1, 04/22/202010ENCLOSURE 3

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013b. The evaluation will be conducted in the most appropriate clinical setting, in accordancewith the least restrictive alternative principle.c. Voluntary inpatient admission is appropriate when a psychiatrist, or, when a psychiatrist isnot available, a physician or another MHP with admitting privileges, determines that admissionis clinically indicated and the Service member has the capacity to provide and does provideinformed consent regarding treatment and admission.d. An involuntary inpatient admission to an MTF is appropriate only when a psychiatrist, or,when a psychiatrist is not available, a physician or another MHP with admitting privileges,makes an evaluation that the Service member has, or likely has, a severe mental disorder or posesimminent or potential danger to self or others. Guidelines include:(1) Level of Care. Placement in a less restrictive level of care would result in inadequatemedical care.(2) Admission Criteria. Admission is consistent with applicable clinical practiceguidelines.(3) Re-evaluation Following Admission. The Service member will be re-evaluated,under the purview of the admitting facility, within 72 hours of admission by an independentprivileged psychiatrist or other medical officer if a psychiatrist is not available.(a) The independent medical reviewer will notify the Service member of the purposeand nature of the review and of the member's right to have legal representation during the reviewby a judge advocate or by an attorney of the member's choosing at the member's own expense ifreasonably available within the required time period for the review.(b) The independent medical reviewer will determine and document in the inpatientmedical record whether, based on clear and convincing evidence, continued involuntaryhospitalization is clinically appropriate. If so, the reviewer will document the clinical conditionsrequiring continued involuntary hospitalization and the circ*mstances required for dischargefrom the hospital, and schedule another review within 5 business days.(c) The independent medical reviewer will notify the Service member of the resultsof each review.(4) Medical Record Documentation. Documentation of the evaluation encounter,findings, and disposition must be consistent with applicable standards of care and willadditionally:(a) Document information pertaining to the inpatient admission in the Servicemember's MTF electronic health record including at a minimum communication of theassessment of risk for dangerousness, treatment plan, medications, progress of treatment,discharge assessment, and recommendations to commanders or supervisors regarding continuedChange 1, 04/22/202011ENCLOSURE 3

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013fitness for duty and actions the MHP recommends be taken to assist with the continued treatmentplan.(b) Upon discharge, MHPs will provide, consistent with Reference (k),memorandums or copies of consultation reports to the commander or supervisor with sufficientclinical information and recommendations to allow the commander or supervisor to understandthe Service member's condition and make reasoned decisions about the Service member's safety,duties, and medical care requirements.(5) Additional Patient Rights. The Service member has the right to contact a relative,friend, chaplain, attorney, any office of Inspector General (IG), and anyone else the memberchooses, as soon as the Service member's condition permits, after admission to the hospital.e. When a physician who is not an MHP admits a Service member pursuant to the referralfor an MHE to be conducted on an inpatient basis, the physician will:(1) Make reasonable attempts to consult with an MHP with admitting privileges prior toand during the admission (e.g., by telecommunications).(2) Arrange for transfer to an MHP with admitting privileges as soon as practicable.f. In the case of referral for an involuntary inpatient admission to a civilian facility,guidelines in Reference (1) will be considered and the process established under the law of theState where the facility is located will be followed. If in a foreign country, the applicable laws ofthe host nation will be followed.5. FITNESS AND SUITABILITY FOR SERVICEa. MHPs will report to commanders or supervisors who make CDEs, but in doing so willmake the minimum necessary disclosure and, when applicable, will advise how the commanderor supervisor can assist the Service member's treatment. Additional information may bedisclosed consistent with Enclosure 2 of Reference (k) as justified by other circ*mstancesdescribed there.b. The providers will advise the commander or supervisor of any duty limitations orrecommendations for monitoring or additional evaluation, recommendations for treatment,referral of the Service member to a Medical Evaluation Board for processing through theDisability Evaluation System in accordance with DoD Instruction 1332.18 (Reference (m)), oradministrative separation of the Service member for personality disorder or unsuitability forcontinued military service under DoD Instruction 1332.14 (Reference (n)). Any referral forconsideration of potential separation from Military Service will be in accordance with MilitaryDepartment procedures.Change 1, 04/22/202012ENCLOSURE 3

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 20136. DUTY TO TAKE PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT OTHERS FROM HARMa. In any case in which a Service member has communicated to a privileged healthcareprovider an explicit threat to kill or seriously injure a clearly identified or reasonably identifiableperson, or to destroy property under circ*mstances likely to lead to serious bodily injury ordeath, and the Service member has the apparent intent and ability to carry out the threat, theresponsible healthcare provider will make a good faith effort to take precautions against thethreatened injury. Such precautions include, but are not limited to:(1) Notifications. Privileged healthcare providers will notify:(a) The Service member's commander or supervisor that the Service member isimminently or potentially dangerous.occur.(b) Military or civilian law enforcement authorities where the threatened injury may(c) Law enforcement of specifically named or identified potential victim(s).(d) The Service member's commander or supervisor and any identifiable individualswho had been harmed or threatened harm by the Service member immediately beforehospitalization about the Service member's pending discharge from inpatient status.(2) Recommendations and Referrals. The MHP will recommend as appropriate:(a) Appropriate precautions to the Service member's commander or supervisor.(b) Referral of the Service member's case to the Service's physical evaluation board.(c) Admission of the Service member to an inpatient psychiatric or medical unit forevaluation and treatment.supervisor.(d) Administrative separation of the Service member to the commander orb. The provider will inform the Service member and document in the medical record thatprecautions have been taken.7. MEDICAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT CASE REVIEWa. Every MHE or treatment case in which a Service member ultimately commits an actresulting in suicide, homicide, serious injury, or significant violence will be systematicallyreviewed. The findings will be used to inform patient care processes, risk management, andtechnical competence of staff members.Change 1, 04/22/202013ENCLOSURE 3

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013b. Reviews will focus upon the assessment, treatment, and clinical progress of the Servicemember, as well as the administrative recommendations and follow-through. Quality reviewswill be documented in the risk management record and, if appropriate, the credentials record.c. The disposition and outcomes of Service members identified as being at increased risk ofdanger to self or others will be included in on-going quality management activities. This willinclude review of a Service member's treatment over time, level of resolution, and ability toreturn to full duty.8. COMPLAINTS OF REPRISAL FOR PROTECTED COMMUNICATION. Any Servicemember who believes a CDE is a reprisal for the Service member having made a protectedcommunication may file a complaint with the DoD IG Hotline or a Military Department IG inaccordance with Reference (j).Change 1, 04/22/202014ENCLOSURE 3

GLOSSARYDoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013ASD(HA)CDEIGPART I ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMSAssistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairscommand directed evaluationInspector GeneralMHEMHPmental health evaluationmental healthcare providerPART II. DEFINITIONSThese terms and their definitions are for the purpose of this instruction.CDE. An MHE ordered by a commander or supervisor.commander. Any commissioned officer who exercises command authority over a Servicemember. The term includes a military member designated in accordance with this instruction tocarry out any activity of a commander under this instruction.emergency. Any situation in which a Service member is found or determined to be a risk forharm to self or others.good faith. A sincere belief without improper purpose.least restrictive alternative principle. A principle under which a Service member committed forhospitalization and treatment will be placed in the most appropriate and therapeutic settingavailable:That is no more restrictive than is conducive to the most effective form of treatment; andIn which treatment is available and the risks of physical injury or property damage posed bysuch placement are warranted by the proposed plan of treatment.MHE. A psychiatric examination or evaluation, a psychological examination or evaluation, anexamination for psychiatric or psychological fitness for duty, or any other means of assessing themental health of a Service member.Change 1, 04/22/202015GLOSSARY

DoDI 6490.04, March 4, 2013MHP. A psychiatrist or clinical psychologist, a person with a doctorate in clinical social work,or a psychiatric nurse practitioner. In cases of outpatient MHEs only, licensed clinical socialworkers who possess a master's degree in clinical social work will also be considered MHPs.privileged healthcare provider. A MHP or other healthcare provider whose credentials forpractice have been verified and have been granted permission to practice within the scope anddefined limits of their current licensure, relevant education and clinical training.supervisor. A commissioned officer within or out of a Service member's official chain ofcommand, or civilian employee in a grade level comparable to a commissioned officer, who:Exercises supervisory authority over the Service member owing to the Service member'scurrent or temporary duty assignment or other circ*mstances of the Service member's dutyassignment; andIs authorized due to the impracticality of involving an actual commanding officer in themember's chain of command to direct an MHE.voluntary self-referral. The process of seeking information about or obtaining an appointment foran MHE or treatment initiated by a Service member without being ordered or directed by acommander or supervisor.Change 1, 04/22/202016GLOSSARY

U.S.ARMYCommand Directed Behavioral Health Evaluation (CDBHE) ProcessCommander maintainsnon-stigmatizing Unit BH education programUNITED STATESARMYEmergent Evaluation ProcessSigns of BH ConditionChange in behaviorUnusual behaviorCDRsuspects a BHNoSustain UnitBH educationIntense sadnessReport of BH concernsconditioneffortsIndicators of RiskThreatening statementsStatements re: self-harmConcentration problemsDistracting behaviorIndicators of EmergencyThreatening behaviorThreatens self-harmDisoriented/disorganizedCDR concerned about risk toSoldierYesRiskNoto safety or unitmissionYesConditions NOT considered a CDBHE:. Voluntary self-referralNoIs this anemergency?Yes. Deployment Health or Periodic Health Assessment. Family Advocacy Program or ASAP AssessmentClinical referrals by health care providers. Law enforcement/corrections evaluations. Competency inquiryInformalrecommendationthat SM seek BHsupportConsultPsychologicalHealth Program forassistancewww.usar.army.milEvaluations required by regulation not subject to CDR's discretion/php/DODI 6490.04, "Mental Health Evaluations of Members of the Military Services," 4MAR13MEDCOM 17-031 CDBHE, 31MAY07MEDCOM 19-010, DOA Form 3822, Mental Status ExamMarch 2021Ensure SafetyContain Situation (Escort SM)Use Community First RespondersUse Local ResourcesClosest ERIf on base may use MTFCommunicate with ProviderReason for referral/situationEnsure release of info to unitAssume provider will be civilianEnsure Duty Status forAccountabilityIf during BA, payment coveredIf not BA, insurance, out of pocketDocumentation/NotificationInitiate SIR/CCIRInitiate 2173, MMSO, LOD if duty relatedTRICARE one-off if neededFollow UpFollow through on treatmentrecommendationsAfter resolution of acute episodeschedule non-emergent CDBHE foradmin documentation/actionsReady Now! Shaping Tomorrow...Non-Emergent CDBHE ProcessNotify SMIntent to refer for CDBHENormalize (no stigma)Use MTFContact nearest MTF BHCommunicate reason for CDBHEObtain appointment time, loc.Direct SM to CDBHEProvide appointment informationCommunicate directly with SMNo waiting time or counselingEnsure Duty Status forAccountability & Pay. Place on orders for movementand for evaluation time. Escort if required by MTF or if thereis perceived riskDocumentationMTF completes DA 3822Risk/dangerousnessTreatment plan incl. medsFitness for dutyFollow UpEngage PHP for assistance on accessto care. Any administrative actions related tofitness for duty

Appendix PTHE MILITARY COMMAND EXCEPTION TOTHE HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY ANDACCOUNTABILITY ACT12/29/22, 2:40 PM*q) 10StaffJudgeOfficeAdvocateFortBlissThe Military Command Exceptionto the Health InsurancePortability and Accountability ActBy Capt. Kayli Ragsdale, Fort Bliss Legal Assistance OfficeThe Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act is a federal law that requiresnational standards to protect sensitive patient health information from being disclosedwithout the patient's consent or knowledge. HIPAA permits protected health informationof service members to be disclosed under special circ*mstances. Under the MilitaryCommand Exception, a healthcare provider may disclose the PHI of service membersfor authorized activities to appropriate military command authorities. An appropriatemilitary command authority includes commanders who exercise authority over theservice member, or another person designated by a commander. The exception doesnot require healthcare providers to disclose PHI to commanders. It only permits thedisclosure. If the disclosure is made, then only the minimum amount of informationnecessary should be provided. Furthermore, the exception does not permit acommander's direct access to a service member's electronic medical record, unlessotherwise authorized by the service member or the HIPAA Privacy Rule.

Authorized activities for which PHI may be disclosed to a commander include but arenot limited to fitness for duty determinations, fitness to perform a particular assignment,or the service member's ability to carry out any other activity essential for the militarymission. Once PHI has been disclosed to military command authorities, it is no longersubject to HIPAA. However, it remains protected under the Privacy Act of 1974.To dispel stigma around service members seeking mental health care or voluntarysubstance misuse education, Department of Defense Instruction 6490.08 was issued tobalance patient confidentiality rights with the commander's need to make informedoperational and risk management decisions. DoD healthcare providers are notpermitted to notify a service member's commander when the member obtains theseservices unless certain conditions are met. However, if one of the below conditions orcirc*mstances apply, the healthcare provider is required to notify the commander:Harm to self. The provider believes there is a serious risk of self-harm by theservice member either as a result of the condition itself or medical treatment of thecondition.Harm to others. The provider believes there is a serious risk of harm to otherseither as a result of the condition itself or medical treatment of the condition. Thisincludes any disclosure concerning child abuse or domestic violence.Harm to mission. The provider believes there is a serious risk of harm to aspecific military operational mission. Such serious risk may include disorders thatsignificantly impact impulsivity, insight, reliability, and judgment.Special personnel. The service member is in the Personnel Reliability Programor is in a position that has been pre-identified by Service regulation or the commandas having mission responsibilities of such potential sensitivity or urgency that normalnotification standards would significantly risk mission accomplishment.Inpatient care. The service member is admitted or discharged from anyinpatient mental health or substance abuse treatment facility, as these areconsidered critical points in treatment and support nationally recognized patientsafety standards.Acute medical conditions interfering with duty. The service member isexperiencing an acute mental health condition or is engaged in an acute medicaltreatment regimen that impairs the service member's ability to perform assignedduties.Substance misuse treatment program. The service member has entered into,or is being discharged from, a formal outpatient or inpatient treatment program forthe treatment of substance abuse or dependence.

Command-directed mental health evaluation. The mental health services areobtained as a result of a command-directed mental health evaluation.Other special circ*mstances. The notification is based on other specialcirc*mstances in which proper execution of the military mission outweighs theinterests served by avoiding notification, as determined on a case-by-case basis bya health care provider.In making a disclosure pursuant to the circ*mstances described above, healthcareproviders shall provide the minimum amount of information to satisfy the purpose of thedisclosure. In general, this shall consist of: (1) the diagnosis; a description of thetreatment prescribed or planned; impact on duty or mission; recommended dutyrestrictions; the prognosis; any applicable duty limitations; and implications for thesafety of self or others; and (2) ways the command can support or assist the servicemember's treatment.Commanders must protect the privacy of information provided pursuant to the PrivacyAct. Information provided shall be restricted to personnel with a specific need to know;that is, access to the information must be necessary for the conduct of official duties.Such personnel shall also be accountable for protecting the information. Commandersmust also reduce stigma through positive regard for those who seek mental healthassistance to restore and maintain their mission readiness, just as they would viewsomeone seeking treatment for any other medical issue.If you have more questions about this topic, please schedule an appointment to speakwith an attorney at the Fort Bliss Legal Assistance Office by either calling (915) 568-7141 during office hours or emailingUSARMY.BLISS.HQDA-OTJAG.MESG.BLISS-LEGAL-ASSISTANCE-OFFICE@MAIL.MIL anytime.

Appendix Q18 U.S. Code § 922(9) - Unlawful acts(a)It shall be unlawful-(9)for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licenseddealer, or licensed collector, who does not reside in any State to receive anyfirearms unless such receipt is for lawful sporting purposes.(b)It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licenseddealer, or licensed collector to sell or deliver................(2)any firearm to any person in any State where the purchase or possession by suchperson of such firearm would be in violation of any State law or any publishedordinance applicable at the place of sale, delivery or other disposition, unless thelicensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the purchase or possessionwould not be in violation of such State law or such published ordinance..............(d)It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm orammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that suchperson, including as a juvenile-(1)is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishableby imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;(2)is a fugitive from justice;(3)is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));(4)has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mentalinstitution at 16 years of age or older;.....

Appendix R27 CFR § 478.11 - Meaning of terms.When used in this part and in forms prescribed under this part, where nototherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof,terms shall have the meanings ascribed in this subpart. Words in the plural formshall include the singular, and vice versa, and words importing the masculinegender shall include the feminine. The terms "includes" and "including" do notexclude other things not enumerated which are in the same general class or areotherwise within the scope thereof.Act. 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44.Committed to a mental institution. A formal commitment of a person to a mentalinstitution by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority. The term includes acommitment to a mental institution involuntarily. The term includes commitment formental defectiveness or mental illness. It also includes commitments for other reasons,such as for drug use. The term does not include a person in a mental institution forobservation or a voluntary admission to a mental institution.Mental institution. Includes mental health facilities, mental hospitals, sanitariums,psychiatric facilities, and other facilities that provide diagnoses by licensed professionals ofmental retardation or mental illness, including a psychiatric ward in a general hospital.

27 C.F.R. 478.1-DefinitionsAdjudicated as a mental defective.1. A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority thata person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness,incompetency, condition, or disease:1. Is a danger to himself or to others; or2. Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.Committed to a mental institution.A formal commitment of a person to a mental institution by a court, board,commission, or other lawful authority. The term includes a commitment toa mental institution involuntarily. The term includes commitment for mentaldefectiveness or mental illness. It also includes commitments for other reasons,such as for drug use. The term does not include a person in a mentalinstitution for observation or a voluntary admission to a mental institution.Mental institution.Includes mental health facilities, mental hospitals, sanitariums, psychiatric facilities,and other facilities that provide diagnoses by licensed professionals of mentalretardation or mental illness, including a psychiatric ward in a general hospital.

FEDERAL FIREARMS PROHIBITION UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4)PERSONS ADJUDICATED AS A MENTAL DEFECTIVE OR COMMITTED TO A MENTAL INSTITUTIONAny person who has been "adjudicated as a mental defective” or “committed to a mental institution" is prohibited underFederal law from shipping, transporting, receiving, or possessing any firearm or ammunition. Violation of this Federaloffense is punishable by a fine of $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to ten years. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(4) and924(a)(2). The terms enumerated below are located in 27 C.F.R. § 478.11.A person is "adjudicated as a mental defective" if a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority has madea determination that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, mental illness, incompetency, condition,or disease:❖ Is a danger to himself or to others;❖ Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs;❖Is found insane by a court in a criminal case; or❖ Is found incompetent to stand trial, or not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility, pursuant to articles50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 850a, 876b.A person is "committed to a mental institution" if that person has been formally committed to a mental institutionby a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority.The term includes a commitment:❖To a mental institution involuntarily;❖ For mental defectiveness or mental illness; or❖ For other reasons, such as for drug use.The term does not include a person in a mental institution for observationOfHOL TOBCHOvoluntary admission.The term “lawful authority” means an entity having legal authority to make adjudications or commitments.WwwgratThe term "mental institution" includes mental health facilities, mental hospitals, sanitariums, psychiatric facilities,and other facilities that provide diagnoses by licensed professionals of mental retardation or mental illness, includinga psychiatric ward in a general hospital.AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSESA person is not prohibited under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) if:The person received relief from Federal firearms disabilities under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) by:❖ The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives under 18 U.S.C. § 925(c); orA proper Federal or State authority under a relief from disabilities program that meets the requirements of theNICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, Public Law 110-180.The mental health adjudication or commitment was imposed by a Federal department or agency, and the:❖ Adjudication or commitment was set aside or expunged;❖Person was fully released from mandatory treatment, supervision, or monitoring;❖ Person was found to no longer suffer from the disabling mental health condition;❖ Person has otherwise been found to be rehabilitated; or❖ Adjudication or commitment was based solely on a medical finding without opportunity for hearingby the Federal department or agency with proper jurisdiction.For further information about section 922(g)(4) or other firearms prohibitions, please contact your localfield office of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) by calling (800) 800-3855.ATF Information 3310.4Revised May 2009

Appendix SSubpoenas Issued by the CommissionThis Appendix is included in this report pursuant to the provisions of Resolves 2023, ch. 129,Section 13, which requires the Commission to include in its final report a detailed accountof each subpoena the Commission issued.Resolves (2023), ch. 129 was passed unanimously by the Legislature and signed into law onFebruary 13, 2024. Because it was emergency legislation, the law went into immediateeffect.Following passage, the members of the Commission voted unanimously to issue subpoenasto the following individuals and entities:For Records and Documents1. Maine State Police - In addition to police reports from various local, county, state,and federal police agencies, the Maine State Police had in its possession medicaland Army records that the Commission sought but that the State Police could notrelease without a duly authorized subpoena due to various federal and stateconfidentiality laws. The subpoena was issued on Friday, February 16, 2024, andserved on Tuesday, February 20, 2024. It should be noted that February 19, 2024,was a holiday. The State Police promptly provided the Commission with copies ofall the records requested.2. Four Winds Hospital - Katonah, NY. A subpoena for medical records was served onhospital counsel on April 11, 2024. Due to NY law and concerns expressed byhospital counsel of potential administrative penalties under federal HIPAAregulations, it was agreed that all parties would file a motion in Superior Court toenforce the subpoena with all parties consenting to the Court order. The Maine Officeof the Attorney General, through Chief Deputy Attorney General Christopher C. Taub,filed the motion on April 12, 2024. It was presented to the Court that same afternoonand the motion was promptly granted without objection. The Court ordered FourWinds Hospital to provide the records within seven days. Four Winds Hospitalprovided the records in a very timely manner.For both records requests, the Commission voted unanimously to request a subpoena forthe production of records be served on the respective party.For Testimony and RecordsMany members of Robert Card's Army Reserve Unit, 3rd Training Battalion, 304th Regiment,Saco, Maine, had relevant testimony and records related to this investigation. Due to various

federal privacy, national security, and HIPAA laws, the U.S. Army would not allow individualsoldiers to testify in their capacity as reservists without a subpoena. Federal law andregulations also required that the Army issue Authorization to Testify letters for each witness.Counsel from the U.S. Army JAG Office, Civil Division, worked with the Commission to issuetestimonial authorization letters and assisted in confirming the availability of each Armywitness. For each of the following witnesses, the Commission voted unanimously to issuesubpoenas for their testimony and to produce relevant records. All but two of the witnesseslisted below consented to acceptance of service of their respective subpoenas by mail. Twoof the witnesses requested personal service, which occurred at their civilian workplaces,due to requirements of their civilian employers. Subpoenas were issued to the followingindividuals:1. Sean Hodgson2. Jeremy Reamer3. Kelvin Mote4. Samuel Tlumac5. Jordan Jandreau6. Matthew Noyes7. Edward Yurek8. Daryl Reed9. Ryan Vazquez10. Matthew Dickison11. Mark Ochoa12. Patricia Moloney-civilian Army contract employeeThe testimony of all the above individuals, except for Ryan Vazquez, Mark Ochoa, PatriciaMoloney, and Matthew Dickison, was taken under oath at a live in-person hearing. Thesehearings were live-streamed, had simultaneous ASL Interpreters, and the recordings werelater posted on the Commission's website. Due to scheduling issues and long-distancetravel concerns, it was agreed by all parties to take the testimony of Ryan Vasquez, MatthewDickison, Patricia Moloney, and Mark Ochoa by Zoom. The hearings were recorded, hadsimultaneous ASL interpretation and/or closed captioning followed by ASL interpretationadded to the recording where simultaneous ASL interpretation was not available, and therespective videos were then posted to the Commission's website.Transcripts of each of the above Army witnesses' testimony were prepared and sent to themfor review and signature. As of the date of this report, Kelvin Mote, an Army reservist and anofficer of the Ellsworth Police Department; Samuel Tlumac, a Maine state trooper, and anArmy reservist; Jeremy Reamer, an officer with the Nashua, New Hampshire, PoliceDepartment and commander of the Saco, Maine, AR unit; and Lt. Col. Ryan Vazquez signedand returned their transcripts. None of the other individuals who were subpoenaed signed

or returned their transcripts despite multiple requests. Two people's transcripts werereceived as this report went to print and were forwarded to counsel for review and signature.Dickinson had been transferred to an overseas post and testified via Zoom.A formal Touhy request for the testimony of Patricia Moloney, a civilian contracted employeewith the US Army, was provided to the Army in early June 2024. The Army JAG office reportedit was required to go through its contracting office to contact Ms. Moloney's employer. OnJune 25, 2024, via an email from the Army JAG Office, it was reported that her employer wouldnot permit her to testify, citing federal OMB laws. Thus, a subpoena to compel her testimonywas electronically served on Ms. Moloney's legal representative on June 26, 2024. Hertestimony was scheduled for July 11, 2024. Ms. Moloney failed to appear. Shortly thereafter,new legal counsel contacted the Commission, and her testimony was taken under oath onJuly 18, 2024. It was not helpful or informative.When it was discovered that the information thought to rest with Patricia Moloney actuallybelonged to civilian PHP contractor Cari Sanford, it was arranged through counsel to haveher appear and testify. This was necessary due to the delay in securing Ms. Moloney'stestimony (over six weeks) and the expiration of the subpoena authority.One other subpoena was issued to a local law enforcement officer. After furtherinvestigation, the Commission voted unanimously to withdraw the subpoena, and the officerand the department's counsel were informed that testimony was no longer needed. Thewitness fee check was returned to the Commission.Four Winds Hospital agreed to extend the authority of the subpoena previously issued toprovide for Dr. Sara Klagsbrun's testimony. The testimony was taken on August 1, 2024, andconducted in a private meeting due to HIPAA concerns. Four Winds stated on the record thatvoluntary participation in the process did not constitute a waiver of any future jurisdictionaldefenses should lawsuits be filed.

Appendix TStudies, Websites and Reports reviewed1. Report of the Task Force on Accessibility to Appropriate Communication Methods forDeaf and Hard-of-hearing Patients, State of Maine 131st Legislature, First Regular andFirst Special Session, Office of Policy and Legal Analysis, January 2024. Task ForceReport on Interpretation Deficiencies in the Medical Setting Jan. 2024.pdf,2. Preventing Suicide in the US Military, Recommendations from the Suicide Preventionand Response Independent Review Committee, (2022) Army Suicide prevention andIntervention Report 2022.pdf3. Guidance for Emergency Responses to People with Behavioral Health or OtherDisabilities, (May 2023), U.S. Department of Justice and Department of Health andHuman Services.https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-05/Sec.%2014%28a%29%20-%20DO%20and%20HHS%20Guidance%20on%20Emergency%20Responses%20t0%20Individuals%20with%20Behavioral%20Health%20or%20Other%20DisabilitiesFINAL.pdf4. Critical Incident Review: Active Shooter at Robb Elementary School. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Justice. 2024, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.(2024).https://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter/content.ashx/cops-r1141-pub.pdf5. National Incident Management System Training Program, U.S. Department ofHomeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Summer 2020,https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/nims/implementation-training6. National Incident Management System Basic Guidance for Public Information Officers,(December 2020) https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/nims/implementation-training7. How to Conduct an After Action Review, National Police Foundation, Washington, D.C.,Office of Community Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice (2020).https://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter/Home.aspx?item=cops-w08788. Community Driven Crisis Response: A Workbook For Coordinators, Council of StateGovernments, Justice Center (January 2023),

https://csgjusticecenter.org/publications/community-driven-crisis-response-a-workbook-for-coordinators/9. Office of Justice- Mass Violence Resources, National Criminal Justice AssociationLearning Lunch, Washington, D.C. (April 2024)10. National Mass Violence Victimization Resource Center: Multiple resource articlesaddressing victims, community, law enforcement and recovery needs and planning,suggested reading lists and information and resources addressing the impact of themedia response on victims and communities. These resources include QR Codes foraccessing various materials. https://nmvvrc.org/11. Reporting a Traumatic Community Event-Resources For Media Workers, and DartCenter Style Guide for Trauma-Informed Journalism, (2021), Dart Center for Journalismand Trauma, Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism,https://dartcenter.org/resources12. The Crime and Justice Research Alliance-Extensive listing of various crime and justicetopics, research experts: https://crimeandjusticeresearchalliance.org/explore-research/13. Incidents of Mass Violence Resources, SAMHSA https://www.samhsa.gov/find-help/disaster-distress-helpline/disaster-types/incidents-mass-violence14. National Child Traumatic Stress Net Work-Mass Violence Resourceshttps://www.nctsn.org/what-is-child-trauma/trauma-types/terrorism-and-violence/mass-violence15. Victims First- A national victim centered network that provides best practices,advocacy and tracks donations and groups to ensure the funds go to the victims.Https://www.victimsfirst.org16. Boston One Fund: Lessons for Leaders: https://hdl.handle.net/2144/894317. The 14th Biennial Report of the Maine Domestic Abuse Homicide Review Panel: ThePower of Collaboration: From Intervention to Prevention 14th DAHRP Report Final word1.23.24-accessible.pdf (maine.gov)

18. U.S Troops Still Train on Weapons With Known Risk of Brain Injury, N.Y. Times,November 26, 2023, updated November 28, 2023,https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/26/us/military-brain-injrocket-launcher.html19. Gun Violence in the US 2013, The Gun Violence Archive is an evidence based, non-profit non-political organization that has maintained a verified comprehensive database of gun violence in the United States since 2013.https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls20. Public Mass Shootings Research: Special Report, National Institute of Justice, USDepartment of Justice, December 2023. https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/nij-special-report-public-mass-shootings-research.21. Statement of the National Shattering Silence Coalition-Maine Chapter, Maine's PTPProgram. This statement was presented to the Commission on June 13, 2024.22. Traumatic Brain Injury Center Of Excellence: 2023 Annual Report, US Defense HealthAgency, https://www.health.mil/Reference-Center/Reports/2024/03/29/2023-TBICOE-Annual-Report.23. Military Health System Mental Health Hub, https://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Mental-Health24. Reserve Health Readiness Program, Military Health System,https://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Health-Readiness/Reserve-Health-Readiness-Program and https://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Health-Readiness/Reserve-Health-Readiness-Program/Army-Reserve.25. FEMA Emergency Management Quick Reference Guide,www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_eoc-quick-reference-guide.pdf26. The Four C's of Emergency Management,https://emilms.fema.gov/is_0289/groups/51.html#:~:text-Aligned%20with%20the%20founding%20principles.coordination%2C%20collaboration%2C%20and%20cooperation.27. Disaster Management Roles and Responsibilities- FEMA Training,https://training.fema.gov/emiweb/downloads/is208sdmunit1.pdf28. Firearm Violence: A Public Health Crisis in America, The U.S. Surgeon General'sAdvisory 2024, www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/priorities/firear-violence/index.html

29. Active Shooter Incidents in the United States, 2023, Federal Bureau of Investigation,U.S, Department of Justice, Washington D.C. and the Advanced Law Enforcement RapidResponse Training (ALERRT) Center at Texas State University,repository/2023-active-shooter-report-062124.pdf/viewwww.fbi.gov/file-30. How Blast Waves Can Injure the Brain, New York Times Video,https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000009504123/how-blast-waves-can-injure-the-brain.html?smid-url-share31. Patterns of Brain Damage is Pervasive in Navy SEALS Who Died by Suicide, New YorkTimes, June 30, 2024, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/30/us/navy-seals-brain-damage-suicide.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare32. Risk Assessment and Tools for Identifying Patients at High Risk for Violence and Self-Harm in the ED, November 2015, American College of Emergency Room Physicians,www.acep.org/site assets/sites/acep/media/public-health/risk-assessment-violence selfharm.pdf

Appendix UProposed Legislation -Blast Over Safety Act118TH CONGRESS2D SESSIONH. R. 8025To amend title 10, United States Code, to clarify roles and responsibilities within the Department ofDefense relating to subconcussive and concussive brain injuries and to improve brain healthinitiatives of the Department of Defense, and for other purposes.IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESAPRIL 16, 2024Mr. KHANNA (for himself, Ms. STEFANIK, Ms. HOULAHAN, Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia, Ms. LEE of Nevada,Mr. WALTZ, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, Mr. MOULTON, Ms. PINGREE, Mr. GOLDEN of Maine, andMr. PANETTA) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed ServicesA BILLTo amend title 10, United States Code, to clarify roles and responsibilities within the Department ofDefense relating to subconcussive and concussive brain injuries and to improve brain healthinitiatives of the Department of Defense, and for other purposes.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America inCongress assembled,SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.This Act may be cited as the "Blast Overpressure Safety Act".SEC. 2. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR COMPONENTS OF THE OFFICE OF THESECRETARY OF DEFENSE RELATING TO BRAIN INJURIES FROM CONCUSSIVEAND SUBCONCUSSIVE BLASTS.(a) FINDINGS AND SENSE OF CONGRESS.―

(1) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following:(A) Research conducted by the Department of Defense underscores that concussive andsubconcussive brain injuries can arise not only from combat scenarios but also from routinetraining exercises.(B) Even when adhering to established safety guidelines, the act of firing or being exposedto the firing of heavy weapons, grenades, and breaching during training sessions can potentiallylead to cognitive impairments, particularly affecting aspects such as delayed verbal memory,visual-spatial memory, and executive function.(C) Traumatic brain injuries have become the signature wound of members of the ArmedForces from the Global War on Terrorism generation.(D) Special Warfare Operator 1st Class Ryan Larkin and Sergeant First Class MichaelFroede both suffered traumatic brain injuries during their rigorous training and multiple combatdeployments and were tragically lost to suicide as a result of their wounds. Their stories highlightthe critical issues surrounding traumatic brain injury within the military and the subsequent riskof suicide among affected individuals.(E) This Act honors the sacrifices of Special Warfare Operator 1st Class Ryan Larkin andSergeant First Class Michael Froede, as well as the thousands of affected members of the ArmedForces by expediting the efforts of the Department of Defense to mitigate, identify, and treattraumatic brain injuries within the Armed Forces.(2) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that―(A) Congress commends the Department of Defense for its efforts to implement measuresconsistent with modern science to limit the occurrence of concussive and subconcussive braininjuries among members of the Armed Forces and facilitate the rehabilitation of those recoveringfrom service-related traumatic brain injuries; and(B) the Secretary of Defense should sustain those efforts while also enhancing overallknowledge and protection against brain injuries.(b) ESTABLISHMment Of RoleS.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish the roles andresponsibilities of components of the Office of the Secretary of Defense for the mitigation,identification, and treatment of concussive and subconcussive brain injuries and the monitoringand documentation of blast overpressure exposure as follows:(1) The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness shall be responsible for,not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act―(A) establishing a baseline neurocognitive assessment to be conducted during the accessionprocess of members of the Armed Forces before the beginning of training;

(B) establishing annual neurocognitive assessments to monitor the cognitive function ofsuch members to be conducted-(i) at least every three years as part of the periodic health assessment of such members;(ii) as part of the post-deployment health assessment of such members; and(iii) prior to separation from service in the Armed Forces;(C) ensuring all neurocognitive assessments of such members, including those requiredunder subparagraphs (A) and (B), are maintained in the electronic medical record of suchmember;(D) establishing a process for annual review of blast overpressure exposure and traumaticbrain injury logs specified in paragraph (2)(A) for each member of the Armed Forces during theperiodic health assessment of such member for cumulative exposure in order to refer memberswith recurrent and prolonged exposure to specialty care; and(E) establishing standards for recurrent and prolonged exposure.(2) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness shall be responsible for, not later thanone year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the following:(A) Establishing and maintaining blast overpressure exposure logs and traumatic braininjury logs for every member of the Armed Forces.(B) Integrating those logs into the Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record (as defined insection 1171(b) of title 38, United States Code) for such member.(C) Including in those logs at least the following:(i) The number of previous exposures to blast overpressure, including the number ofexposures per unit of time, date, blast overpressure in pounds per square inch, and number oftimes the member of the Armed Forces fires, uses, or is exposed to weapons that cause blastoverpressure.(ii) Any residual physical, mental, or emotional effects resulting from such exposure.(iii) The source of the exposure, activity when the exposure occurred, whether it occurredduring training or deployment, and any other relevant context of such exposure.(iv) The treatment that the member sought and received in connection with such exposure.(v) The number of concussive and subconcussive brain injuries, including traumatic braininjuries, sustained.

(vi) The severity of concussive and subconcussive brain injuries, including traumatic braininjuries, sustained.(vii) Other head trauma, regardless of whether it requires the treatment of a medicalprovider.(3) The Inspector General of the Department of Defense shall be responsible for―(A) not later than two years after the date of the enactment of this Act, submitting toCongress a report (in unclassified form, but with a classified annex as necessary) evaluating theestablishment and maintenance of the logs required under paragraph (2), including thecumulative exposure annotated in the blast overpressure exposure logs and traumatic brain injurylogs, as well as the compliance of the Department of Defense with Department policies toaddress the brain health of members of the Armed Forces;(B) not later than 10 days after submitting the report under subparagraph (A), makingavailable to the public the unclassified portion of the report; and(C) beginning on the date that is three years after the date of the enactment of this Act-(i) evaluating the continued fulfillment by the Department of the requirements underparagraph (2), including the cumulative exposure annotated in the blast overpressure exposurelogs and traumatic brain injury logs, as well as the compliance of the Department withDepartment policies to address the brain health of members of the Armed Forces;(ii) not later than December 31 of each year, submitting to Congress a report (in unclassifiedform, but with a classified annex as necessary) containing the results of such evaluation; and(iii) not later than 10 days after submitting each report under clause (ii), making available tothe public the unclassified portion of such report.(4) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment shall be responsiblefor, not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the following:(A) Establishing the minimization of exposure to blast overpressure as a performanceparameter when drafting requirements for new weapons systems that produce blast overpressurefor the Department of Defense.(B) Establishing a requirement that any entity under contractual agreement with theDepartment as part of the defense weapons acquisition process shall provide to the Departmentblast overpressure measurements and safety data for any weapons system that produce blastoverpressure and exceed the department set maximum exposure limit procured from such entity.(C) Establishing a requirement that any test plan for a weapons system incorporate testingfor blast overpressure measurements and safety data.

(D) Not later than December 31 of each year, publishing on a publicly available website,including govinfo.gov or successor website, a report that includes―(i) blast overpressure measurements and safety data for weapons systems of theDepartment, including how those systems have been tested and in what environments; and(ii) plans to improve protection for exposure by members of the Armed Forces to in-useweapons systems with unsafe levels of blast overpressure and exposure.(c) COORDINATION.-The officials specified in paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4) ofsubsection (b) shall coordinate and align their plans and activities to implement such subsectionamong themselves and with the Secretaries of the military departments.(d) BRIEFINGS AND REPORTS.-(1) IMPLEMENTATION BRIEFING.—Not later than 180 days after the date of theenactment of this Act, and every 180 days thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall provide tothe congressional defense committees a briefing on the plans, associated timelines, and activitiesconducted to implement subsection (a).(2) REPORT ON CONCUSSIVE AND SUBCONCUSSIVE BRAIN INJURIES.—(A) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defensecommittees a report on-(i) concussive and subconcussive brain injuries caused during military operations, includingcombat operations, among members of the Armed Forces, including information on-(I) the Armed Force of the member;(II) the name of the operation;(III) the location within the area of responsibility;(IV) the number of concussive and subconcussive brain injuries caused;(V) the severity of concussive and subconcussive brain injuries caused;(VI) the treatment received for a concussive or subconcussive brain injury;(VII) whether a member of the Armed Forces was medically retired from service due to aconcussive or subconcussive brain injury;(VIII) whether a member of the Armed Forces died by suicide after sustaining a concussiveor subconcussive brain injury; and

(IX) the source of the injury, including the activity conducted when the injury occurred; and(ii) concussive and subconcussive brain injuries caused during training events amongmembers of the Armed Forces, including information on—(I) the Armed Force of the member;(II) the type of training;(III) the location of the training;(IV) the number of concussive and subconcussive brain injuries caused;(V) the severity of concussive and subconcussive brain injuries caused;(VI) the treatment received for a concussive or subconcussive brain injury;(VII) whether a member of the Armed Forces was medically retired from service due to aconcussive or subconcussive brain injury;(VIII) whether a member of the Armed Forces died by suicide after sustaining a concussiveor subconcussive brain injury; and(IX) the source of the injury, including the activity conducted when the injury occurred.(B) FORM. Each report submitted under subparagraph (A) shall be submitted inunclassified form, but may include a classified annex.(C) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—Not later than 10 days after submitting a report undersubparagraph (A), the Secretary of Defense shall make the unclassified portion of the reportavailable to the public, including by publishing the report on the govinfo.gov website, orsuccessor website.(3) REPORT ON DISCHARGES RELATED TO CONCUSSIVE ANDSUBCONCUSSIVE BRAIN INJURIES.-(A) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,and annually thereafter, the officials specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (b) and theSecretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on membersof the Armed Forces who were discharged administratively or punitively and had a concussive orsubconcussive brain injury, including a traumatic brain injury, including information on-(i) whether the injury or injuries occurred during combat operations or training and theassociated combat operations or training incident;(ii) the severity of the injury or injuries;

(iii) if any such injury was combat related, the name of the operation;(iv) the treatment sought and received for the injury or injuries;(v) the number of discharge upgrade requests in connection with such an injury or injuriesthat have been made; and(vi) the number of such discharge upgrade requests that have been approved.(B) FORM. Each report submitted under subparagraph (A) shall be submitted inunclassified form, but may include a classified annex.(C) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.-Not later than 10 days after submitting a report undersubparagraph (A), the Secretary of Defense shall make the unclassified portion of the reportavailable to the public, including by publishing the report on the govinfo.gov website, orsuccessor website.(4) REPORT ON MEDICAL PROVIDERS TRAINED IN CONCUSSIVE ANDSUBCONCUSSIVE BRAIN INJURIES.--(A) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defensecommittees a report on medical providers within the Defense Health Agency who are trained intraumatic brain injury or concussive and subconcussive brain injuries as a sub-specialty ofneurology, including information on―(i) the number of such providers, disaggregated by location;(ii) the billets of such personnel;(iii) the number of medical personnel currently participating in training or a fellowshiprelating to traumatic brain injury or concussive and subconcussive brain injuries; and(iv) the strategy of the Department of Defense to increase the number of medical providerstrained in traumatic brain injury or concussive and subconcussive brain injuries as a sub-specialty of neurology.(B) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—Not later than 10 days after submitting a report undersubparagraph (A), the Secretary of Defense shall make the report available to the public,including by publishing the report on the govinfo.gov website, or successor website.(5) REPORT ON EFFORTS TO COORDINATE WITH ALLIES AND PARTNERS.—(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defensecommittees a report on the efforts of the Department of Defense to share and coordinate on blast

injury and subconcussive and concussive brain injury research efforts with allies and partners ofthe United States, which shall include information on-(i) the activities coordinated with such allies and partners to better prevent, mitigate, andtreat injuries from blast exposure; and(ii) recommendations to improve future collaboration with such allies and partners,including administrative and data structures.(B) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—Not later than 10 days after submitting a report undersubparagraph (A), the Secretary of Defense shall make the report available to the public,including by publishing the report on the govinfo.gov website, or successor website.(e) DEFINITIONS.-In this section:(1) CONGRESSIONAL DEFENSE COMMITTEES.-The term “congressional defensecommittees" has the meaning given that term in section 101(a)(16) of title 10, United StatesCode.(2) CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT.—The term “contractual agreement” includes acontract, grant, cooperative agreement, and any other similar transaction or relationship.(3) NEUROCOGNITIVE ASSESSMENT.-The term "neurocognitive assessment” meansa standardized cognitive and behavioral evaluation using validated and normed testing performedin a formal environment that uses specifically designated tasks to measure cognitive functionknown to be linked to a particular brain structure or pathway, which may include a measurementof intellectual functioning, attention, new learning or memory, intelligence, processing speed,and executive functioning.(4) TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY.-The term "traumatic brain injury” means atraumatically induced structural injury or physiological disruption of brain function as a result ofan external force that is indicated by new onset or worsening of at least one of the followingclinical signs immediately following the event:(A) Alteration in mental status, including confusion, disorientation, or slowed thinking.(B) Loss of memory for events immediately before or after the injury.(C) Any period of loss of or decreased level of consciousness, observed or self-reported.SEC. 3. IMPROVEMENTS TO BRAIN HEALTH INITIATIVES OF DEPARTMENT OFDEFENSE.(a) BRAIN HEALTH INITIATIVES.―

(1) IN GENERAL.-Part II of subtitle A of title 10, United States Code, is amended byinserting after chapter 55 the following new chapter:"CHAPTER 55A-BRAIN HEALTH INITIATIVES"§ 1110n. Definition of traumatic brain injury“In this chapter, the term 'traumatic brain injury' means a traumatically induced structural injuryor physiological disruption of brain function as a result of an external force that is indicated bynew onset or worsening of at least one of the following clinical signs immediately following theevent:"(1) Alteration in mental status, including confusion, disorientation, or slowed thinking."(2) Loss of memory for events immediately before or after the injury."(3) Any period of loss of or decreased level of consciousness, observed or self-reported."§ 1110n-1. Warfighter Brain Health Initiative"(a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretariesconcerned, shall establish a comprehensive initiative for brain health to be known as the'Warfighter Brain Health Initiative' (in this section referred to as the ‘Initiative') for the purposeof unifying efforts and programs across the Department of Defense to improve the cognitiveperformance and brain health of members of the armed forces."(b) OBJECTIVES.-The objectives of the Initiative shall be the following:"(1) To enhance, maintain, and restore the cognitive performance of members of the armedforces through education, training, prevention, protection, monitoring, detection, diagnosis,treatment, and rehabilitation, including through the following activities:"(A) The establishment of a program to monitor cognitive brain health across theDepartment of Defense, with the goal of detecting any need for cognitive enhancement orrestoration resulting from potential brain exposures of members of armed forces, to mitigatepossible evolution of injury or disease progression."(B) The identification and dissemination of thresholds for blast exposure and blastoverpressure safety and associated emerging scientific evidence that—"(i) cover brain injury, lung injury, and impulse noise;“(ii) measure impact over 24-hour, 72-hour to 96-hour, monthly, annual, and lifetimeperiods;

“(iii) ensure that the thresholds are low enough that they are not associated with cognitivedeficits after firing;"(iv) include thresholds that account for the firing of multiple types of heavy weaponry anduse of grenades in one period of time;and"(v) include minimum safe distances and levels of exposure for observers and instructors;"(vi) include limits for shoulder-fired heavy weapons."(C) The modification of high-risk training and operational activities to mitigate thenegative effects of repetitive blast exposure."(D) The identification of individuals who perform high-risk training or occupationalactivities for purposes of increased monitoring of the brain health of such individuals.“(E) The development and operational fielding of non-invasive, portable, point-of-caremedical devices, to inform the diagnosis and treatment of traumatic brain injury."(F) The establishment of a standardized monitoring program that documents and analyzesblast exposures that may affect the brain health of members of the armed forces."(G) The consideration of the findings and recommendations of the report of the NationalAcademies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine published in 2022 and entitled ‘TraumaticBrain Injury: A Roadmap for Accelerating Progress' (relating to the acceleration of progress intraumatic brain injury research and care), or any successor report, in relation to the activities ofthe Department relating to brain health."(H) The establishment of policies to encourage members of the armed forces to seeksupport for brain health when needed, prevent retaliation against such members who seek care,and address other barriers to seeking help for brain health, including due to the impact of blastexposure, blast overpressure, traumatic brain injury, and other health matters."(I) The modification of existing weapons systems to reduce blast exposure of theindividual using the weapon and those within the minimum safe distance.“(2) To harmonize and prioritize the efforts of the Department of Defense into a singleapproach to brain health."(c) THRESHOLDS FOR BLAST EXPOSURE AND OVERPRESSURE SAFETY.—"(1) DEADLINE.—"(A) IN GENERAL.-Not later than two years after the date of the enactment of the BlastOverpressure Safety Act, the Secretary of Defense shall identify and disseminate the thresholds

for blast exposure and blast overpressure safety and associated emerging scientific evidencerequired under subsection (b)(1)(B).“(B) UPDATE.—Not less frequently than every five years, the Secretary of Defense shallupdate the thresholds for blast exposure and blast overpressure safety and associated emergingscientific evidence required under subsection (b)(1)(B).“(2) CENTRAL REPOSITORY.—Not later than two years after the date of the enactmentof the Blast Overpressure Safety Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a central repositoryof blast-related characteristics, such as pressure profiles and common blast loads associated withspecific systems and the environments in which they are used, that is available to members of thearmed forces and the public and includes the information described in subsection (b)(1)(B)."(3) WAIVERS.-“(A) PROTOCOLS.-Not later than two years after the date of the enactment of the BlastOverpressure Safety Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish and implement protocols torequire waivers in cases in which members of the armed forces must exceed the safety thresholdsdescribed in subsection (b)(1)(B), which shall include a justification for exceeding those safetythresholds."(B) TRACKING SYSTEM.—“(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than two years after the date of the enactment of the BlastOverpressure Safety Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a Department of Defense-widetracking system for waivers described in subparagraph (A), which shall include data contributedby each of the Secretaries concerned."(ii) REPORT.-“(I) IN GENERAL.—Not less frequently than once each year by December 31 of that yearfollowing the establishment of the tracking system required under clause (i), the Secretary ofDefense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House ofRepresentatives a report on waivers described in subparagraph (A) that includes―"(aa) the number of waivers issued, disaggregated by armed force;"(bb) the justifications provided for each waiver;"(cc) a description of actions taken by the Secretary concerned to track the health effects onmembers of the armed forces of exceeding safety thresholds described in subsection (b)(1)(B),document those effects in medical records, and provide care to those members; and"(dd) a description of the medical care received by those members in response to exceedingthese safety thresholds.

"(II) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.-The Secretary of Defense shall make the informationcontained in each report submitted under subclause (I) available to the public, including on thegovinfo.gov website, or successor website, not later than 10 days after the report is submittedunder such subclause."(d) FORMAL TRAINING REQUIREMENT.-“(1) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that training described inparagraph (2) is required for members of the armed forces before training, deployment, orentering other environments determined to be high-risk by the Secretary concerned.“(2) TRAINING DESCRIBED.—Training described in this paragraph is training on thefollowing:"(A) Thresholds for blast exposure and blast overpressure safety and associated emergingscientific evidence required under subsection (b)(1)(B).“(B) Symptoms of exposure to blasts or blast overpressure."(C) Symptoms of traumatic brain injury.“(e) STRATEGIES FOR MITIGATION AND PREVENTION OF Blast ExposURE ANDOVERPRESSURE Risk For High-Risk IndividUALS.-In carrying out the Initiative, notlater than one year after the date of the enactment of the Blast Overpressure Safety Act, theSecretary of Defense shall establish strategies for mitigating and preventing blast exposure andblast overpressure risk for individuals most at risk for exposure to high-risk training or high-riskoccupational activities, which shall include-"(1) a timeline and process for implementing those strategies;“(2) a determination of the frequency with which those strategies will be updated, at a rateof not less frequently than every five years; and“(3) an assessment of how information regarding those strategies will be disseminated tosuch individuals, including after those strategies are updated.“(f) ANNUAL BUdget JustificaATION DOCUMENTS.—In the budget justificationmaterials submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the Department of Defense for eachfiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31), theSecretary of Defense shall include a budget justification display that includes all activities of theDepartment relating to the Initiative."(g) ANNUAL REPORTS.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than March 31, 2025, and not less frequently than annuallythereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of theSenate and the House of Representatives a report that includes the following:"(A) A description of the activities taken under the Initiative and resources expended underthe Initiative during the prior fiscal year."(B) The number of members of the armed forces impacted by blast overpressure and blastexposure in the prior fiscal year, including―"(i) the number of members who reported adverse health effects from blast overpressure orblast exposure;"(ii) the number of members exposed to blast overpressure or blast exposure;"(iii) the number of members who received treatment for injuries related to blastoverpressure or blast exposure, including at facilities of the Department of Defense and atfacilities in the private sector;"(iv) regarding treatment for blast exposure, blast overpressure, or subconcussive orconcussive brain injuries at the National Intrepid Center of Excellence, an Intrepid Spirit Center,or an appropriate military medical treatment facility—"(I) the number of members on the waitlist for such treatment;"(II) the average period of time those members are on that waitlist; and"(III) the average number of days between when an appointment is requested and the actualappointment date; and"(v) the type of care that members receive from facilities of the Department of Defense andthe type of care that members receive from facilities in the private sector."(C) A summary of the progress made during the prior fiscal year with respect to theobjectives of the Initiative under subsection (b)."(D) A description of the steps the Secretary is taking to ensure that activities under theInitiative are being implemented across the Department of Defense and the military departments."(2) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.-The Secretary of Defense shall make the informationcontained in each report submitted under paragraph (1) available to the public, including on thegovinfo.gov website, or successor website, not later than 10 days after the report is submittedunder such paragraph.".(b) CONFORMING AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.—

(1) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.-The table of sections at the beginning of title 10, UnitedStates Code, is amended by inserting before the item relating to chapter 56 the following newitems:"CHAPTER 55A-BRAIN HEALTH INITIATIVES"Sec."1110n. Definition of traumatic brain injury."1110n-1. Warfighter Brain Health Initiative.".(2) CONFORMING REPEAL.-Section 735 of the James M. Inhofe National DefenseAuthorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263; 10 U.S.C. 1071 note) is repealed.(c) INITIAL BRIEFING AND REPORT ON NATIONAL INTREPID CENTER OFEXCELLENCE.(1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 150 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, theSecretary of Defense shall provide to the congressional defense committees a briefing andsubmit to the congressional defense committees a report on the parameters of the program ofrecord established under section 1110n-3 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection(a).(2) CONGRESSIONAL DEFENSE COMMITTEES DEFINED. In this subsection, theterm "congressional defense committees" has the meaning given that term in section 101(a)(16)of title 10, United States Code.SEC. 4. PILOT PROGRAM RELATING TO MONITORING OF BLAST COVERAGE.(a) AUTHORITY.-The Secretary concerned may conduct, as part of the initiativeestablished under section 1110n-1 of title 10, United States Code, as added by section 3, a pilotprogram under which the Secretary concerned shall monitor blast overpressure exposure throughthe use of commercially available, off-the-shelf, remote measurements, and document andevaluate data collected as a result of such monitoring.(b) LOCATIONS.-Monitoring activities under a pilot program conducted pursuant tosubsection (a) shall be carried out in each training environment that the Secretary concerneddetermines poses a risk for blast overpressure exposure.(c) DOCUMENTATION AND SHARING OF DATA. If the Secretary concerned conductsa pilot program pursuant to subsection (a), the Secretary concerned shall-(1) ensure that any data collected pursuant to such pilot program that is related to the healtheffects of the blast overpressure exposure of a member of the armed forces who participated inthe pilot program is documented and maintained by the Secretary of Defense in an electronichealth record for the member; and

(2) to the extent practicable, and in accordance with applicable provisions of law relating todata privacy, make data collected pursuant to such pilot program available to other academic andmedical researchers for the purpose of informing future research and treatment options.(d) DEFINITION OF SECRETARY CONCERNED.-In this section, the term "Secretaryconcerned" has the meaning given such term in section 101 of title 10, United States Code.SEC. 5. SPECIAL OPERATIONS BRAIN HEALTH AND TRAUMA PROGRAM.(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 55A of title 10, United States Code, as added by section 3, isamended by adding at the end the following new section:“§ 1110n–2. Special operations brain health and trauma program"(a) IN GENERAL.-The Commander of the United States Special Operations Command(in this section referred to as the 'Commander'), in coordination with the Secretary of Defense,shall conduct an intensive, comprehensive brain health and trauma program (in this sectionreferred to as the ‘Program') to provide coordinated, integrated, multi-disciplinary specialistevaluations, treatment initiation, and aftercare coordination in a highly condensed model forspecial operations forces.“(b) Evidence-BASED TREATMENT.—In carrying out the Program, the Commandershall provide evidence-based physical, mental, and behavioral health care and counseling fortraumatic brain injury, blast overpressure, blast exposure, and psychological or neurologicalconditions that are common among members of the special operations forces."(c) POPULATION SERVED.—In carrying out the Program, the Commander shall providethe health care and counseling specified in subsection (b) to members of the special operationsforces and family members of such members.“(d) Evaluation, Testing, And TreatmenT.—The Program shall include thefollowing:"(1) Evaluations by health care providers in the areas of brain injury medicine,neuropsychology, clinical psychology, psychiatry, neuroendocrinology, sports medicine,musculoskeletal medicine, vestibular physical therapy, neuroimaging, and hormonal evaluation."(2) Metabolic testing, cardiovascular testing, and cerebrovascular testing.“(3) Treatment relating to headaches, sleep interventions and medication, injection-basedtherapies for musculoskeletal pain, cognitive rehab, vestibular physical therapy, and exerciseprogramming.“(e) COORDINATION.—In carrying out the Program, the Commander shall coordinate withprivate sector non-profit healthcare organizations that have the capacity and infrastructure toprovide the care and services required under the Program.

"(f) MEDICAL RECORDS.—In carrying out the Program, the Commander shall coordinatewith the Director of the Defense Health Agency and the Secretaries of the military departmentsto ensure that the treatment received through the Program is documented in the medical recordsof members of the armed forces.".(b) CLERICAL. The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 55A of such title, asamended by section 3, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:"1110n-2. Special operations brain health and trauma program.".(c) REPORT And Briefing ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL OPERATIONSTRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY PROGRAM.―(1) REPORT ON PROGRAM.-(A) IN GENERAL.-Not later than December 31, 2025, the Commander of the UnitedStates Special Operations Command, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, shall submitto the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of theHouse of Representatives a report on the special operations brain health and trauma programrequired under section 1110n-2 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a),which shall include―(i) the benefits of the program to members of the Armed Forces and their families;(ii) the number of members assisted by such program;(iii) the type of treatment received under such program;(iv) the rate of members of the Armed Forces returning to duty after receiving treatmentunder such program;(v) how the Commander is coordinating with the Director of the Defense Health Agencyand the Secretaries of the military departments to update records of members of the ArmedForces with treatment received under such program; and(vi) whether and how the program should be expanded to include other vulnerablepopulations within the Armed Forces;(B) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.-The Secretary of Defense shall make the informationcontained in the report submitted under subparagraph (A) available to the public, including onthe govinfo.gov website, or successor website, not later than 10 days after the report is submittedunder such subparagraph.(2) COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT AND BRIEFING.—Not later than 180 daysafter the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall

brief the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services ofthe House of Representatives on the implementation of section 1110n-2 of title 10, United StatesCode, as added by subsection (a), with a report to follow at a mutually agreed upon date.SEC. 6. NATIONAL INTREPID CENTER OF EXCELLENCE.(a) IN GENERAL.-Chapter 55A of title 10, United States Code, as added by section 3 andamended by section 5, is further amended by adding at the end the following new section:"§ 1110n-3. National Intrepid Center of Excellence"(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of the BlastOverpressure Safety Act, the Secretary of Defense shall establish the National Intrepid Center ofExcellence (in this section referred to as the 'Center') as a program of record subject to milestonereviews and compliance with the requirements under this section."(b) DUTIES. The duties of the Center are as follows:"(1) To provide interdisciplinary care to prevent, diagnose, treat, and rehabilitate membersof the armed forces with traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, symptoms fromblast overpressure or blast exposure, and other mental health conditions."(2) Support and conduct research and education on traumatic brain injury, post-traumaticstress disorder, blast overpressure or blast exposure, and other mental health conditions."(c) CHILDCARE.—Childcare services shall be made available for individuals seeking helpthrough the National Intrepid Center of Excellence."(d) ANNUAL REPORT.--“(1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of the BlastOverpressure Safety Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to theCommittees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report thatshall include, for the year covered by the report-"(A) the number of individuals to whom the Center has provided services;"(B) the number of individuals who return to active duty in the armed forces after receivingservices from the Center, and the stage in their career at which they seek treatment at the Center;"(C) the number of individuals whose families are able to participate in programs providedby the Center; and"(D) the number of individuals on a waitlist for treatment at the Center and the averageperiod those individuals are on the waitlist.

"(2) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.-The Secretary of Defense shall make the informationcontained in each report submitted under paragraph (1) available to the public, including on thegovinfo.gov website, or successor website, not later than 10 days after the report is submittedunder such paragraph.".(b) CLERICAL. The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 55A of such title, asamended by sections 3 and 5, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:"1110n-3. National Intrepid Center of Excellence.".SEC. 7. MANDATORY TRAINING ON HEALTH EFFECTS OF CERTAIN BRAINTRAUMA.(a) IN GENERAL.-Chapter 55A of title 10, United States Code, as added by section 3 andamended by sections 5 and 6, is further amended by adding at the end the following new section:"§ 1110n-4. Mandatory training on health effects of certain brain trauma"Not less frequently than once every two years, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to eachmedical provider and training manager of the Department of Defense mandatory training withrespect to the potential health effects of blast overpressure, blast exposure, and traumatic braininjury.".(b) CLERICAL. The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 55A of such title, asamended by sections 3, 5, and 6, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:"1110n-4. Mandatory training on health effects of certain brain trauma.".SEC. 8. ANNUAL BRIEFING ON INDIVIDUAL LONGITUDINAL EXPOSURE RECORD.(a) IN GENERAL.-Chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at theend the following new section:"§ 1110c. Annual briefing on Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record"(a) IN GENERAL.-Not less frequently than annually, the Secretary of Defense, inconsultation with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall provide the appropriate committees ofCongress a briefing on-"(1) the quality of the databases of the Department of Defense that provide the informationpresented in the Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record; and"(2) the usefulness of the Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record in supporting membersof the armed forces and veterans in receiving health care and benefits from the Department ofDefense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

"(b) ELEMENTS. Each briefing required by subsection (a) shall include, for the periodcovered by the report, the following:"(1) An identification of potential exposures to occupational or environmental hazards,including blast overpressure and blast exposure, captured by the current systems of theDepartment of Defense for environmental, occupational, and health monitoring, andrecommendations for how to improve those systems."(2) An analysis of the quality and accuracy of the location data used by the Department ofDefense in determining potential exposures to occupational or environmental hazards bymembers of the armed forces and veterans, including blast overpressure and blast exposure, andrecommendations for how to improve the quality of such data if necessary."(c) DEFINITIONS.-In this section:"(1) APPROPRIATE COMMITTEES OF CONGRESS.-The term appropriatecommittees of Congress' means-"(A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of theSenate; and"(B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of theHouse of Representatives."(2) INDIVIDUAL LONGITUDINAL EXPOSURE RECORD.-The term 'IndividualLongitudinal Exposure Record' has the meaning given such term in section 1171(b) of title 38.".(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.-The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 55 oftitle 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1110b thefollowing new item:"1110c. Annual briefing on Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record.".(c) CONFORMING REPEAL.-Section 802 of the Sergeant First Class Heath RobinsonHonoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 (Public Law 117-168; 10U.S.C. 1071 note) is repealed.SEC. 9. REVIEW OF BLAST-RELATED BRAIN INJURY RESEARCH AND OTHEREFFORTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.(a) REVIEW.-(1) IN GENERAL.-The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a reviewof the research and other efforts of the Department of Defense on traumatic brain injury,including injuries related to blast overpressure or blast exposure.

(2) MATTERS TO BE INCLUDED.—The review required by paragraph (1) shall includethe following:(A) A description of the research conducted by the Department of Defense on traumaticbrain injury, the entities involved in that research, and efforts to coordinate that researchinternally and externally.(B) A description of any improvements identified by that research related to the prevention,diagnosis, and treatment of blast-related brain injuries and an assessment of the implementationof those improvements.(C) An evaluation of the efforts of the Department to protect members of the Armed Forcesfrom retaliation for seeking care for the prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of traumatic braininjury, blast overpressure, or blast exposure, including any gaps in or barriers to those efforts.(D) An evaluation of the list maintained by the Department of the military occupationalspecialties most at-risk for blast overpressure and blast exposure and whether additional at-riskoccupational specialties should be included.(E) Any other finding the Comptroller General considers relevant.(b) BRIEFING And Report.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment ofthis Act, the Comptroller General shall brief the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate andthe Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives on the review required undersubsection (a), with a report to follow on a mutually agreed upon date.(c) DEFINITION OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY.-In this section, the term “traumaticbrain injury" means a traumatically induced structural injury or physiological disruption of brainfunction as a result of an external force that is indicated by new onset or worsening of at leastone of the following clinical signs immediately following the event:(1) Alteration in mental status, including confusion, disorientation, or slowed thinking.(2) Loss of memory for events immediately before or after the injury.(3) Any period of loss of or decreased level of consciousness, observed or self-reported.SEC. 10. IMPLEMENTATION OF INSPECTOR GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS TOMANAGE TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY CARE.(a) IMPLEMENTATION.―Not later than December 31, 2025, the Secretary of Defenseshall implement the recommendations contained in the report of the Inspector General of theDepartment of Defense entitled, “Evaluation of the DoD's Management of Traumatic BrainInjury" (DODIG-2023-059).

(b) BRIEFING. Not later than April 1, 2025, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to theCommittee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the Houseof Representatives a briefing on the progress of the Secretary in carrying out the implementationrequired under subsection (a).