Stanford Student Conduct Charter of 2023

The Stanford Student Conduct Charter of 2023 applies to cases filed May 2, 2023 or after. For cases in progress as of May 1, 2023, please see the Student Judicial Charter of 1997.

Table of Contents

Section I - Introduction, Scope, and Definitions
Section II - Conduct System
 A. Board on Conduct Affairs
 B. Office of Community Standards
 C. OCS Director
 D. Conduct Advisor
 E. Conduct Investigator
 F. Conduct Counselor
 G. Conduct Panelists
 H. Hearing Panels
 I. Appeal Panel
Section III - Levels of Review, Sanctions, and Records
 A. Levels of Review and Sanctions
 B. Alternative Resolution
 C. Mid-Level Review
 D. High-Level Review
Section IV - Conduct Procedures
 A. Receipt of Concern & Determination of Review
 B. Investigation
 C. Hearing Panel
 D. Appeals
Section V - Rights and Responsibilities
 A. Rights of All Parties and Witnesses
 B. Rights of the Responding Student
 C. Rights of the Reporting Party
 D. Cooperation of All Parties
Section VI - Authority and Amendment
 A. Authority
 B. Amendment of Charter

Section I - Introduction, Scope, and Definitions

Stanford University’s dedication to high standards of academic honesty and personal integrity has a long history. At Stanford, students commit to the standards set forth in the Fundamental Standard and Honor Code, and faculty and staff share in the understanding that they play a role in upholding them. These guiding documents, drafted in 1896 and 1921 respectively, continue to serve the University today. When a student is alleged to have violated the Honor Code or Fundamental Standard, students, faculty, and staff share a commitment to adjudicate the alleged violation in the most fair and even-handed manner possible.

This Stanford Student Conduct Charter of 2023 (“Charter”) establishes the system for adjudicating allegations that a Stanford student has violated the Honor Code or Fundamental Standard, including through other applicable law or University policy. The objectives of this system are:

• To affirm the importance of the Honor Code and Fundamental Standard at Stanford.
• To ensure students’ central role in conduct policy and addressing conduct concerns.
• To protect the rights of all individuals involved in the conduct process, while upholding the highest possible standards of honesty and mutual respect.

Jurisdiction

This Charter, and its related policies, apply year-round to all on-campus activities, any work for Stanford academic credit, and to off-campus activity that meets the following criteria:

1. there is a significant nexus to Stanford, such as an alleged victim being a Stanford student, faculty or staff member;
2. the alleged act(s), if true, would create a substantial threat to the safety of the Stanford community; and
3. the Office of Community Standards is able to conduct a thorough investigation, including access to all necessary witnesses and documents.

Provisions of this Charter do not limit the University's ability to bar a student from campus and/or to suspend privileges, if necessary for the safety or health of the student or the Stanford community, or to safeguard the integrity of the institution.

Definitions

The term “student” as used in this Charter refers to individuals enrolled in Stanford degree-granting programs, or studying at Stanford through visiting or exchange programs under agreements with other institutions of higher education.

The term “faculty” as used in this Charter refers to individuals with Academic Council membership or Academic Staff-Teaching status, including professors, fellows, and lecturers.

The term “staff” or “staff member” as used in this Charter refers to other individual(s) employed by the University.

The term “concern” as used in this Charter refers to a formal allegation that a student has violated the Fundamental Standard, Honor Code, or other law or policy appropriate for review under this Charter.

The term “Responding Student” refers to a student about whom a concern has been submitted to the Office of Community Standards.

The term “Reporting Party” refers to an individual who has submitted a concern to the Office of Community Standards.

The terms “Party” or “Parties” refers to the Responding Student and/or Reporting Party, as appropriate.

The term “day” or “days” means business days, excepting winter and spring breaks. Other durations of time refer to calendar spans.

Back to Table of Contents

Section II - Conduct System

This section summarizes the key components of the Conduct System.

A. Board on Conduct Affairs

The Board on Conduct Affairs (“Board”) is a standing committee of students, faculty, and staff that oversees the student conduct system.

1. Composition
   1. The Board is composed of six student members appointed by the Undergraduate Senate and Graduate Student Council of the Associated Students of Stanford University, six faculty members appointed by the Senate of the Academic Council, and three University administrators appointed by the Provost. The Board should be drawn from a wide spectrum of the Stanford community and must include both undergraduate and graduate students.
   2. Members of the Board are appointed to one- or two-year terms, with replacement by the appointing entity as needed to fill remaining partial terms. Members may be appointed to multiple terms.
2. Powers
   1. The Board has the exclusive power to adopt or modify Bylaws specifying policies and procedures pertaining to the student conduct process. All such Bylaws must be consistent with this Charter.
   2. Whenever the Board adopts or modifies a Bylaw, it must inform the University community and send the text of the changes to the Undergraduate Senate of the Associated Students of Stanford University, Graduate Student Council of the Associated Students of Stanford University, the Senate of the Academic Council, and the President of the University. Any of these four entities may veto or approve the proposed adoption or modification until the end of the full quarter following Board approval. Unless vetoed, the adoption or modification takes effect on the next day following either approval by all four entities, or the end of the veto period, whichever comes first.
   3. The Board has the exclusive power to propose amendments to this Charter, as provided in Article VI.
   4. The Board may provide interpretative guidance to the Office of Community Standards concerning the Charter, Honor Code, or Fundamental Standard.
3. Procedures
   1. To conduct official business, the Board must have a quorum of at least eight members present, including at least two students, two faculty, and one administrator.
   2. Actions by the Board require approval by a simple majority of members present and voting.
   3. The Board may adopt rules of procedure to govern its own actions through approval by a two-thirds majority of members present and voting.
   4. All members of the Stanford community are invited to suggest modifications to the Charter or Bylaws to the Board.

B. Office of Community Standards

The role of the Office of Community Standards (“OCS”) is to educate and train all members of the Stanford community about their mutual responsibility to uphold the Honor Code and Fundamental Standard, and to fairly administer the formal disciplinary and informal resolution processes for conduct concerns.

Staff members of OCS will:

1. Receive and act upon concerns as Conduct Advisors and Conduct Investigators.
2. Train the Conduct Panelists and Conduct Counselors.
3. Meet with and assist the Board.
4. Undertake and support community outreach and education.
5. Summarize and report about concerns to the University community, including an annual report to the Provost and the Board, without divulging confidential aspects of any concerns. This report will include information about the types of concerns addressed and the levels of review to which they were assigned.
6. Preserve all evidence and testimony obtained during the investigation and/or Panel(s) on a concern for one year following a final decision, or for the duration of a resulting disciplinary record, whichever is longer.
7. Ensure enforcement of sanctions in collaboration with the Registrar, the Dean of Students, and other appropriate University personnel.

C. OCS Director

OCS is led by a Director, who is responsible for ensuring that assignments of Conduct Advisors and Conduct Investigators are timely and appropriate. The Director determines levels of review and, when a Responding Student accepts responsibility for a violation, sanctions. The Director may designate an OCS staff member to make such a determination on their behalf; however, the Director or their designee must not determine level of review or sanctions for any case in which that same individual serves as Conduct Investigator.

D. Conduct Advisor

A Conduct Advisor from OCS serves as the chief coordinator of the conduct process for a concern. This includes explaining the process to all participants and assisting with its administration.

The specific duties of the Conduct Advisor for a concern are to:

1. Inform all Parties and witnesses of their rights and responsibilities under this Charter.
2. Provide the Parties with a list of volunteer Conduct Counselors.
3. Serve as an informational resource on conduct procedures.
4. Provide general assistance to a Hearing Panel or Appeal Panel.
5. Ensure that all Panel proceedings are recorded.
6. Inform a Responding Student found responsible by a Hearing Panel of their right to appeal.

E. Conduct Investigator

A Conduct Investigator from OCS serves as the principal investigator of a concern. This includes gathering evidence and meeting with individuals with knowledge relevant to the concern. The Conduct Investigator follows the concern through the duration of its OCS process.

The specific duties of the Conduct Investigator for a concern are to:

1. Investigate and gather relevant evidence.
2. Refer the concern to another office when appropriate.
3. Determine if there is sufficient evidence of misconduct to file charges.
4. Make evidence available at a Hearing Panel and/or Appeal Panel, if held.

F. Conduct Counselors

Conduct Counselors are qualified and trained individuals who agree, on a voluntary basis, to provide private support to Parties to concerns. A Conduct Counselor must not have any other involvement in a concern in which they provide such assistance.

G. Conduct Panelists

Conduct Panelists are individuals who are qualified and receive training to serve on Hearing Panels and the Appeal Panel. Panelists include undergraduate and graduate students appointed by the Undergraduate Senate and the Graduate Student Council of the Associated Students of Stanford University, faculty appointed by the Senate of the Academic Council, and staff appointed by the Provost. There should be at least 30 trained Panelists, including at least 15 students and at least 8 faculty.

H. Hearing Panels

Hearing Panels review contested charges in a concern, and are composed of Conduct Panelists. They determine whether the Responding Student is responsible for the alleged violation, and determine sanctions for a Responding Student found responsible. A Hearing Panel is chaired by a student Panelist, and may act only when all member Panelists are present. Panelists are selected by OCS without involvement of the Conduct Investigator for a concern. A Hearing Panel for a concern alleging a violation of the Honor Code must include a faculty member. A Hearing Panel for a concern in which the Responding Student is an undergraduate student must include an undergraduate student, and for a concern in which the Responding Student is a graduate student must include a graduate student.

I. Appeal Panel

The Appeal Panel hears appeals of Hearing Panel decisions. It has five Conduct Panelist members, of whom three are students and two are faculty or staff, appointed by OCS for the duration of the academic year, with replacement as needed. Appeal Panelists are selected based on prior Hearing Panel service and experience. Appeal Panelists do not serve on Hearing Panels for the duration of their service on the Appeal Panel. The Appeal Panel is chaired by a student Panelist, and may act only when all Panelists are present.

Back to Table of Contents

Section III - Levels of Review, Sanctions, and Records

This section describes the levels of review used in the Conduct System, the sanctions that may be imposed through it, and the nature and duration of disciplinary records made and retained about concerns.

A. Levels of Review and Sanctions

1. The levels of review are Alternative Resolution, Mid-Level Review and High-Level Review. Level of review for a concern is determined based on the nature of the concern and the individual's disciplinary history.
   1. The “nature of the concern” takes into account the apparent severity and pattern of the alleged activity and its impact on other community members.
   2. The Board may specify in the Bylaws the level of review for particular allegations, and factors to be considered in determining the appropriate level of review.
2. Sanctions are based on the nature and seriousness of the offense, aggravating or extenuating circumstances, prior violations, precedent, and level of review. The Board may formulate a Student Conduct Penalty Code Bylaw providing available sanctions and additional guidelines for the imposition of sanctions. Sanctions are subject to the following limitations:
   1. Alternative Resolution must not include probation or suspension.
   2. Probation or any suspension through Mid-Level Review must last at most one quarter.
   3. Expulsion is only available through High-Level Review.
3. If a Responding Student accepts responsibility for an alleged violation, the Director of OCS may impose a sanction consistent with the Student Conduct Penalty Code. If the violation is an Honor Code violation, the instructor(s) for the affected course(s) may make an appropriate grade adjustment.
4. The Dean of Students reviews each sanction for general conformance with precedent and the Student Conduct Penalty Code, and within one week of its imposition may request its reconsideration. If the Dean has a conflict of interest in a case, they must instead provide an independent designee to conduct such review.
5. If a sanction includes expulsion from the University, the concern must be reviewed by the Provost, who may either approve the expulsion or impose lesser sanctions. This review occurs subsequent to any appeal under this Charter.
6. No record of any violation or alleged violation will be placed on a Responding Student’s transcript.
7. The Board may reduce limits for retention of disciplinary records through a Bylaw.

B. Alternative Resolution

1. Alternative Resolution is considered educational and restorative in nature, but the Responding Student must accept responsibility for the alleged violation and accept and abide by the sanctions imposed. Alternative Resolution is neither considered disciplinary nor recorded in a student’s formal disciplinary record.
2. A concern about a student who was responsible for a previous concern is eligible for Alternative Resolution only if:
   1. each Reporting Party specifically requests Alternative Resolution; and
   2. extenuating circumstances exist meriting its use.
3. Alternative Resolution includes a Restorative Meeting conducted by OCS. This is an opportunity for the Responding Student to reflect on the nature of the violation, the circumstances and the decisions that led to it, resources available to the student, and ways to prevent future violations of conduct policy. With the approval of the Responding Student, the Reporting Party may choose to join in the Restorative Meeting.
4. OCS will keep an internal record of acceptance of responsibility by a Responding Student through Alternative Resolution until the Responding Student receives their final degree in progress at the time of sanctioning. This is not part of a student’s disciplinary record.

C. Mid-Level Review

1. Mid-Level Review is investigatory, and used for concerns ineligible or inappropriate for Alternative Resolution, or when a Responding Student declines Alternative Resolution. The investigation may result in charges.
2. Contested charges under Mid-Level Review are heard by a Hearing Panel of three members, two of whom are students and one of whom is faculty or staff. Determinations by the Hearing Panel require agreement of two of three Panelists.
3. The standard of proof in Mid-Level Review for bringing charges, and for a Hearing Panel to find responsibility for a violation, is clear and convincing evidence.
4. Responsibility through Mid-Level Review becomes a part of the Responding Student’s disciplinary record until receipt of their final degree in progress at the time of sanctioning.

D. High-Level Review

1. High-Level Review is also investigatory, and used for concerns for which more substantial sanctions could be appropriate. The investigation may result in charges.
2. Contested charges under High-Level Review are heard by a Hearing Panel of five members, three of whom are students and two of whom are faculty and/or staff. Determinations by the Hearing Panel require agreement of four of five Panelists.
3. The standard of proof in High-Level Review for bringing charges, and for a Hearing Panel to find responsibility for a violation, is beyond a reasonable doubt.
4. Responsibility through High-Level Review becomes a part of the Responding Student’s disciplinary record indefinitely.

Back to Table of Contents

Section IV - Conduct Procedures

Conduct procedures begin when a Stanford community member files a concern with OCS. An Honor Code concern must be filed within two calendar months of its discovery. The steps below are taken after a concern has been filed.

A. Receipt of Concern & Determination of Review

1. Within five days of receiving a concern, the Director of OCS or their designee determines the appropriate level of review. If the allegations in the concern could not constitute a violation, OCS notifies the Reporting Party of this determination and does not proceed further with the process.
2. If the allegations in the concern could constitute a violation, OCS notifies the Responding Student of the concern and its level of review. This notice must include this Charter and information about meeting with the Conduct Advisor assigned to the concern to explain the conduct process.
3. The Responding Student may accept responsibility for the alleged violation or contest it. If they do not engage with the process within 15 days, they will be presumed to contest the allegation and the process will move forward. If such a presumption is made, the Responding Student may later reject it by choosing to accept responsibility.
4. If the Responding Student contests the allegation, they may submit a statement explaining their position regarding the concern to the Conduct Advisor. The Conduct Advisor provides this statement to the Reporting Party, who may choose to withdraw the concern. If they do not withdraw the concern, a Conduct Investigator is assigned to proceed with investigation.

B. Investigation

1. The Responding Student meets with the Conduct Investigator assigned to the concern.
2. The Conduct Investigator gathers relevant evidence, including meeting with all relevant individuals with knowledge of the concern.
3. During the investigation, the Investigator may request that the Director or their designee assign a higher level of review for the concern, if appropriate. If they change the level of review, the Conduct Advisor notifies the Parties of this change.
4. An individual contacted for an investigation who does not respond within 10 days may be presumed non-responsive, and the Investigator may continue with the investigation.
5. After conducting a thorough investigation, the Conduct Investigator may either:
   1. refer the concern to another appropriate office;
   2. file formal charges against the Responding Student; or
   3. take no further action, only if the charging standard is not met, the allegations could not constitute a violation, and/or the matter is not within the jurisdiction of this Charter.
6. The Conduct Investigator files charges only if they conclude that a fair-minded panelist could find the Responding Student responsible for the alleged violation(s) by the applicable standard of proof.
   1. If filing a charge, the Conduct Investigator must do so within six months of the alleged misconduct or when it should reasonably have been discovered, unless the alleged misconduct involves a hate crime or physical assault, in which case a charge must be filed within 24 months of that time.
   2. Charges will not be filed against a student while on leave from the University; however, time on leave will not be counted against these time limits.
   3. If compelling new evidence becomes available after these time limits elapse, charges may be filed within the applicable time limit from the availability of that evidence.
7. The Conduct Investigator notifies the Parties of their charging determination.
8. If the Conduct Investigator files charges, the Responding Student may either accept responsibility for the alleged violation or contest the charges.
9. If the Responding Student contests the charges, the concern proceeds to a Hearing Panel.

C. Hearing Panel

1. OCS will identify Panelists for and initiate scheduling of a Hearing Panel within 15 days of a Responding Student’s decision to contest charges.
2. Panelists may not have an actual or reasonably perceived bias or conflict of interest, and OCS has the authority to remove such a Panelist. If a Panelist discovers that they have a bias or conflict of interest, they must withdraw and be replaced. OCS will provide the Parties with the names of the Panel members for identification of bias or conflicts of interest. The Conduct Advisor determines whether the bias or conflict of interest is reasonably based, and if so replaces the Panelist.
3. The Conduct Advisor attends the Hearing Panel to record the proceedings and answer procedural questions. A Party need not appear in person before the Panel and may instead provide a written statement, unless that Party is called as a witness. The Hearing Panel has discretion whether to hear each witness’s testimony.
4. The Conduct Investigator provides the relevant evidence that supports or refutes the charges, including a list of witnesses who may be called.
5. The Responding Student may answer the charges, call witnesses, and/or cross-examine witnesses. The Reporting Party may answer questions, call witnesses, and/or cross-examine witnesses. The Panel may question the Parties and witnesses.
6. Presentation of evidence, including testimony and questioning of Parties and witnesses, will be conducted in a courteous manner without intimidation or harassment.
   1. Only relevant evidence will be permitted.
   2. Evidence provided by a witness unwilling or unable to be cross-examined will be disregarded unless otherwise provided by the Bylaws.
7. Following the presentation of evidence and cross-examination, the Hearing Panel meets in closed session to rule on the charges. The Panel may either:
   1. Find the Responding Student responsible for the alleged violation; or
   2. Find that a violation was not proven by the applicable standard of proof; or
   3. Find that the allegations could not constitute a violation; grounds for such a finding include that charges were filed after the applicable time limit, or that the matter is outside the jurisdiction of the Charter.
8. If the Panel finds the Responding Student responsible for a violation, the Parties and Conduct Investigator may provide additional information relevant to sanctions. The Hearing Panel then determines sanctions consistent with the Student Conduct Penalty Code. If the violation is an Honor Code violation, the instructor(s) for the affected course(s) may make an appropriate grade adjustment.
   1. The Dean of Students reviews the imposed sanction for general conformance with precedent and the Student Conduct Penalty Code, and within one week may request its reconsideration.
9. Unless the Dean of Students requests reconsideration of sanctions, the Conduct Advisor notifies the Parties of the outcome, including the Panel’s findings and, if applicable, the sanctions imposed. The Conduct Advisor will be available to explain any sanctions to the Responding Student.

D. Appeals

1. A Responding Student found responsible may appeal the decision of the Hearing Panel. An appeal must be filed within 20 days following notice of the Hearing Panel outcome. The Responding Student may, within this deadline, request that the Director provide additional time for filing an appeal if there are extenuating circumstances.
2. The bases for appeal are:
   1. Compelling new evidence;
   2. Bias or conflict of interest on the part of a member of a Hearing Panel;
   3. Significant error on the part of the Conduct Investigator or the Conduct Advisor;
   4. Other significant procedural error, including inappropriately high level of review; or
   5. Violation of any rights of the Responding Student enumerated in this Charter.
3. OCS will endeavor to schedule an Appeal Panel within 20 days of a Responding Student filing an appeal.
4. Panelists may not have an actual or reasonably perceived bias or conflict of interest, and OCS has the authority to remove such a Panelist. If a Panelist discovers that they have a conflict of interest of bias, they must withdraw and be replaced. OCS will provide the Parties with the names of the Panelists for identification of bias or conflicts of interest. The Conduct Advisor determines whether the bias or conflict of interest is reasonably based, and if so replaces the Panelist. A Panelist who has served on a Hearing Panel for a concern must not serve on the Appeal Panel for that concern.
5. The Appeal Panel may do any of the following by majority vote:
   1. deny the appeal;
   2. reduce the sanctions;
   3. dismiss the original charges;
   4. return the case to the original Hearing Panel; or
   5. convene a new Hearing Panel to rehear the charges.
   If the Appeal Panel fails to reach a majority on any of the above actions, the result of the original Hearing Panel stands.
6. The Conduct Advisor informs the Parties of the outcome of the Appeal Panel.

Back to Table of Contents

Section V - Rights and Responsibilities

This section enumerates the rights guaranteed by the Charter to Parties and witnesses for a concern, and the responsibilities of community members in the conduct system.

A. Rights of All Parties and Witnesses

All Parties and witnesses have the following rights:

1. To be informed, in writing, of their rights under this Charter and, when notified in regard to a concern, to receive such notice in writing.
2. To refuse to offer any statement that would implicate themselves in a violation.
3. To have a person of their choice accompany them throughout the conduct process. This individual may assist them during conduct procedures. The Bylaws may establish further policies and guidelines specifying the nature of the adviser’s role.
4. To be protected from retaliation and intimidation.
5. To receive appropriate disability-related accommodations from the Diversity and Access Office through a process defined in the Bylaws.

B. Rights of the Responding Student

A Responding Student has the following additional rights:

1. To be presumed not responsible for an alleged violation until accepting responsibility or being found responsible.
2. To be assured that their identity and the circumstances of the concern will be kept confidential, except as specified in the Bylaws or required by law.
3. To be provided a list of Conduct Counselors who may be consulted for advice and guidance throughout the conduct process.
4. To have access to all evidence considered by OCS when making a charging decision and, when applicable, determining responsibility and/or sanctions.
5. To be allowed at least thirty (30) days to prepare for a Hearing Panel.
6. To appear before a Hearing Panel reviewing charges against them. The Hearing Panel shall be scheduled and arranged to allow a reasonable opportunity to participate.
7. To call relevant witnesses on their behalf at a Hearing Panel, and to cross-examine witnesses.
8. To be sent a written statement of a Hearing Panel decision regarding their concern.
9. To be given, upon request, an audio recording of their Hearing Panel, excluding Panel deliberations, for the purpose of filing an appeal.
10. To have all charges related to one concern heard in a single proceeding. If a Hearing Panel finds a student responsible for a single act that violates both specific policies and the Fundamental Standard, a Hearing Panel must not issue compounded sanctions.
11. To not have a concern pursued against them for which a conduct process has already been concluded.

C. Rights of the Reporting Party

A Reporting Party has the following additional rights:

1. To withdraw the concern at any time. Once withdrawn, a concern should not be resubmitted without a compelling reason for doing so.
2. To be provided a list of Conduct Counselors who may be consulted for advice and guidance throughout the conduct process.
3. To be given access to additional evidence that will be presented at a Hearing Panel regarding the concern, if one is held.
4. To appear at any Hearing Panel regarding the concern.
5. To submit a written statement for consideration by a Conduct Investigator and/or Hearing Panel. This does not preempt the right of the Responding Student to cross-examine a Reporting Party whose testimony is considered during a Hearing Panel.
6. To be sent a confidential written statement of the disposition of the concern.

D. Cooperation of All Parties

Parties are expected to cooperate fully with investigation of a concern and with the conduct review process. Similarly, in keeping with the principles set forth in the Honor Code and Fundamental Standard, individuals with information pertaining to a concern are expected to cooperate with its investigation; to appear, if requested, at a Hearing Panel; and to provide truthful testimony when appearing. All individuals are expected to maintain the confidentiality of a concern, and to refrain from disclosing the identities of the individuals involved outside the conduct process, except as specified in the Bylaws.

Back to Table of Contents

Section VI - Authority and Amendment

A. Authority

Although nothing in this Charter limits or contravenes the authority of the President of Stanford University to promulgate and enforce regulations governing student conduct, the Board, except in extraordinary circumstances, shall have primary responsibility for conduct procedures.

This Charter replaces the Student Judicial Charter of 1997 and all procedures described therein. Upon its passage, the members of the Board on Judicial Affairs become the initial members of the Board on Conduct Affairs, with the same terms of service. Bylaws in effect at that time, including the Student Conduct Penalty Code, may be retained at the discretion of the Board.

B. Amendment of Charter

The provisions of this Charter are subject to amendment. Amendments are enacted by a simple majority of Board members present and voting, upon approval by the Undergraduate Senate and Graduate Student Council of the Associated Students of Stanford University, the Senate of the Academic Council, and the President of the University. An amendment changing the membership of the Board shall instead go into effect following the next regular selection of its members. Proposed amendments are void upon rejection, or if not approved within one year of submission.

Back to Table of Contents