Explorer

For certain assets that were evaluated for impairment the issuer determined adjustment factors that were important inputs used in developing this estimate. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm selected for testing controls that consisted of the issuer's review of this estimate including an assessment of these inputs for reasonableness. The firm did not evaluate the specific review procedures that the control owner performed to assess the reasonableness of these inputs. (AS 2201.42 and .44)

For certain assets that were evaluated for impairment the issuer determined adjustment factors that were important inputs used in developing this estimate. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm's approach for substantively testing the reasonableness of this estimate was to test the issuer's process. The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of the significant assumptions the issuer used to develop this estimate. (AS 2501.16)

For certain assets that were evaluated for impairment the issuer determined adjustment factors that were important inputs used in developing this estimate. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm's approach for substantively testing the reasonableness of this estimate was to test the issuer's process. The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate the relevance of certain data that the issuer used to develop the adjustment factors. (AS 1105.04 and .06)

The firm did not perform procedures to test a significant estimate beyond inquiry including consideration of certain contrary evidence. (AS 2501.07; AS 2810.03)

The firm's approach for substantively testing a significant estimate was to develop an independent expectation of the estimate. The firm did not evaluate the relevance and reliability of data it used to develop its independent estimate. (AS 1105.04 and .06; AS 2501.12)

The firm selected for testing certain controls related to the issuer's reviews of a significant estimate. The firm did not evaluate the review procedures that the control owners performed including the procedures to identify items for follow up and the procedures to determine whether those items were appropriately resolved. (AS 2301.19 and .21)

The firm selected for testing certain controls related to the issuer's reviews of a significant estimate. The firm did not test the design and operating effectiveness of other controls because the firm selected transactions from reports that were not used in the operation of the controls. (AS 2301.19 and .21)

The firm selected for testing a quarterly control over portions of the estimate. The firm tested this control through the second quarter but did not perform any procedures to update the results of its testing from that interim date to the issuer's year end. (AS 2301.29)

The firm identified control deficiencies in its testing of certain controls but did not evaluate the severity of the deficiencies and their effect on its control risk assessment. (AS 2301.34)

The firm obtained and evaluated the service auditor's report for the issuer's system used to process and record transactions related to this estimate. The firm identified and tested certain controls intended to address complementary user entity controls included in the service auditor's report. The firm identified deficiencies in these controls and identified and tested other controls that it believed mitigated these deficiencies. The firm however did not identify that the other controls did not address the same risks as the deficient controls. (AS 2601.14)

The firm's approach for substantively testing the estimate was to review and test management's process. The firm did not sufficiently evaluate the reasonableness of the estimate because the firm did not perform procedures to test certain assumptions used by the issuer to determine the estimate. (AS 2501.09 .10 and .11)

The firm's approach for substantively testing the estimate was to review and test management's process. The firm did not test or in the alternative test any controls over the accuracy and completeness of certain data used to determine the estimate. (AS 1105.10; AS 2501.11)

The firm performed substantive procedures to test certain factors used by the issuer to determine the estimate. The following deficiencies were identified: · The sample sizes the firm used in those procedures were too small to provide sufficient appropriate audit evidence because these procedures were designed based on a level of control reliance that was not supported due to the deficiencies in the firm's control testing discussed above. (AS 2301.16 .18 and .37; AS 2315.19 .23 and .23A)

The firm performed substantive procedures to test certain factors used by the issuer to determine the estimate. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not evaluate differences it identified in its substantive testing of certain data used by the issuer to determine the estimate. (AS 2501.09 .10 and .11)

The firm selected for testing a control that consisted of the issuer's review of certain data. The firm did not evaluate the review procedures that the control owner performed including the procedures to identify items for follow-up and the procedures to determine whether those items were appropriately resolved. (AS 2201.42 and .44).

The firm did not identify and test any controls over certain data that was not subject to this control. (AS 2201.39)