| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 2,386 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Quote:
Well, as far as the $2 2003A L* are concerned, I submitted a FOIA request today to the BEP to find out what happened to them (issued, destroyed, storage, etc.). Got the response to my FOIA request back from the BEP today. Submitted the request electronically on 2/15/2019 and received the written response via UPS on 3/13/2019. So, it took right at a month. The BEP indicated the $2 2003A L* notes were transferred to the FT Worth destruction facility on 4/16/2012 and destroyed.They couldn't immediately locate the destruction records, so instead provided material transfer records indicating the notes had been sent for destruction to the FT Worth destruction facility. Here's the actual response (less the material transfer records themselves. I didn't see the need to scan and post them as well) for anyone who is interested.   Edited by BadDog
03/13/2019 3:36 pm
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4637 Posts |
Quote:
The BEP indicated the $2 2003A L* notes were transferred to the FT Worth destruction facility on 4/16/2019 and destroyed.
Thanks BD, but I'm confused. The date mentioned is a month away and I don't see the need for them to be transferred to FW....they were printed in FW. Unless maybe the FW destruction facility is at a different location than the Western Currency facility. Edited by SteveInTampa
03/13/2019 3:22 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1374 Posts |
Steve, Just a typo mistake on my part on the date in the post. It was April 2012, not this year. They were destroyed 3 months after they printed. I've edited the original post.  The destruction facility is probably just a department within the FT Worth Currency Facility. The material transfer document indicates the transfer was from COPE.EXCHANGE.MUT.NOTES to SD.DESTFTW.WIP.0 with the from organization as WCF and the to organization as WCF. So, it's all within the currency facility, but I would guess just two different departments for accounting purposes. Edited by BadDog
03/13/2019 3:47 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4637 Posts |
Thanks BD.
I'm guessing I'll get a similar reply on my FOIA request on the 2009's.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1339 Posts |
So, I guess this preserves the value of our 2003a stars, that were of course printed in FW for Atlanta. but it makes me wonder why the SF star notes were printed to start with? why not just print more Atlanta stars if there was a need to stockpile replacements? Am I missing something here. this is a great learning thread, thanks to you all for the effort!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Quote:
...why the SF star notes were printed to start with? Yeah, that's probably the question that should be asked, but IMHO it's much tougher to FOIA a policy decision question. Records can usually be found, but finding rationale about why something was done can be tougher. The $2 2003A L* FRNs were printed in Jan 2012. That was over a 5 year break from when the last $2 2003A printing occurred in Sep 2006. The $2 2009 FRNs started being printed the very next month in Feb 2012 with K* notes. My guess is that in response to a Federal Reserve order for more $2 notes that there was an initial decision to print more 2003A notes. As is typically the case, * notes (in this case L*) were printed first. Then, before any regular 2003A notes were printed the decision changed to switch to printing the 2009 series. Once again, the first notes printed were the * notes (2009 K* this time, just one month after the 2003A L* notes were printed). So, the just printed 2003A L* notes were destroyed since there wouldn't be any 2003A misprints to be replaced. Just my guesses of course  Edited by BadDog
03/13/2019 4:44 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4637 Posts |
Quote:
My guess is that in response to a Federal Reserve order for more $2 notes that there was an initial decision to print more 2003A notes. As is typically the case, * notes (in this case L*) were printed first.
Then, before any regular 2003A notes were printed the decision changed to switch to printing the 2009 series. Once again, the first notes printed were the * notes (2009 K* this time, just one month after the 2003A L* notes were printed). I agree with this possible explanation. January 2012 - February 2012 was the changeover from series 2003A to series 2009 $2 notes. Printed and not needed, and eventually destroyed. Everyone looked for them...some are still looking. Thanks BadDog. Edited by SteveInTampa
03/14/2019 04:33 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Interesting discussion, I learned a lot.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4691 Posts |
I wouldn't be surprised if some escape through back door channels. Then the question would be "are they legal to own?".
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Quote:
Then the question would be "are they legal to own?". Without a doubt, the answer IMHO would be illegal to own. The notes were never delivered to the Federal Reserve, never monetized by the Fed and never placed into circulation. If any were to still exist (and the BEP said that none do) then they would still be the property of the US Government. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4637 Posts |
Not knowing if the notes were printed and now being stored, or printed, not need and destroyed always bugged me. My FOIA request arrived today. If I'm reading it correctly, it appears the BEP is stating they mis-reported printing the notes...it never happened. I also received an internal summary of the details in the form of a Lot Transaction Register from the BEP's WCF .   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4691 Posts |
They are probably in Area 51.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4637 Posts |
The website, uspapermoney.info has been updated to reflect both FOIA requests and replies. The 2003A and 2009 $2 charts have been changed. The updates are shown here; http://www.uspapermoney.info/news.html |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Well that FOIA response took awhile  Interesting to see the two different responses. IMHO Mr. Brezillac provided a more informative and friendly response than Ms. Jenkins. Looks like they don't use a template for these responses  The poor $2 note just gets no respect. Printed, unneeded and destroyed and bad record keeping, but at least these anomalies are now put to rest  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
12819 Posts |
Quote:
No fees have been charged for the processing of your request. Well, isn't that nice. |
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 2,386 |
|
Posted 03/13/2019 3:42 pm
