parity) has been attained, then the Beecher decree has outlived its usefulness as to that community’s firefighting force. D. Reworking the Algorithm. From this analysis, it is evident that the district court erred in constructing the first Beecher variable. In order to determine whether that error affected the Candidates’ substantial rights, see Fed. R.Civ.P. 61, we rework the algorithm using the proper variables. If that algorithm does not yield ratios that show parity (or, at least, rough parity) between the percentage of minorities in the entry-level rank of the BFD and the percentage of minorities in the City of Boston as a whole, then the entry of summary judgment in the City’s favor must stand. See Houlton Citizens’ Coalition v. Town of Houlton, 175 F.3d 178, 184 (1st Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). On this issue, the parties urging that parity
holding that in reviewing a district courts decision on a motion for summary judgment de novo the decision can be affirmed on any ground that finds support in the record including an alternate ground holding that the trial court may not grant summary judgment on a ground not raised in the motion holding that judgment may be affirmed on any ground supported by record holding that judgment may be affirmed on any ground supported by the record holding that a grant of summary judgment may be affirmed on any independent ground revealed by the record