alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2015

- 5814 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2014

- NM

- 247

- AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then ou t of the changed cell

.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement)

Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance)

Work

- hours

(include

access, testing,

and close

- up) Labor

cost

(@$8 5 / h

our) Parts Cost Total Costs

(labor +

parts) Number of

U.S.

Registered

Products Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### Inspection and

corrective action 11.5 $ 977.50 $ 

### 9 0 $ 1,067.50 

### 642 $ 685,335.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00



### The known numbe r of products in compliance: 

### 0

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 685,335



### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $ 

### 0

On

- Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement) Work

- hours

(include access,

testing, and close

up) Labor cost

(@$85/hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product



### Modification

(Terminating

Action) 21.0 $ 1,785.00 $3,550 $ 5,335.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table

that was assumed or might n ot be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### :

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO

Explanation:

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alas ka. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES * NO



### * Explanation 

### :
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Workers & Retirees 
-  Learn About Benefits 

This page has not been translated. Please go to PBGC.gov's Spanish home page for more information available in Spanish.

Esta página no ha sido traducida. Por favor vaya a la página principal del sitio de español de PBGC para ver información disponible en español.

# Learn About Benefits

If your defined benefit pension plan ends without sufficient money to pay all benefits, PBGC’s insurance program will pay you the benefit provided by your pension plan up to the limits set by law. Learn more about the benefits PBGC guarantees.

## Guaranteed Benefits

Find out more about the pension benefits PBGC pays.

## When and How PBGC Pays Benefits

Learn about benefit options and PBGC's payment schedule. 

## Working Retirement

PBGC has ended its working retirement restriction on when participants are permitted to begin receiving early retirement benefits to which they are entitled under the terms of their pension plans. Retirement-eligible participants in PBGC-trusteed plans can now start to receive their benefit even if they continue working for the sponsor of their plan. If you were working on June 1, 2021, you can choose to start your pension later and receive a back payment covering the month of June 2021 and later months.

## Disability Benefits

Learn about PBGC's guarantees and eligibility requirements.   

## Qualified Domestic Relations Orders and PBGC (QDRO)

See information about divorce orders and other court actions.

## Health Coverage Tax Credit (HCTC)

See information about the IRS Health Coverage Tax Credit for PBGC participants and others.

April 28, 2022

##           MyPBA: My Pension Benefit Access      

With MyPBA, you can create or log in to your MyPBA account and enjoy these benefits:
                                  - View your 1099-R tax form 
                                  - Obtain a letter that verifies your PBGC income
                                  - Update your address, contact and banking information
                                  - Update your federal tax withholding
                                  - Request a benefit estimate 
                                  - Apply for benefits 

### **Workers & Retirees: Benefit Information**

----

**Manage Your Benefits**Find info on applying for retirement benefits, designating a beneficiary, and more.

**Is PBGC Responsible for My Benefits?**See if your pension plan is protected by PBGC: 
                          - PBGC-Trusteed Plans: Failed Plans, PBGC Pays Benefits
                          - PBGC-Insured Plans: Ongoing Plans, PBGC Will Pay Benefits if Plan Fails

**Learn About Your Benefits**Learn more about the benefits PBGC guarantees.

**How Can We Help?**See our frequently asked questions.
§ 115.186 Sexual abuse incident reviews. ( a ) The agency shall conduct a sexual abuse incident review at the conclusion of every investigation of sexual abuse and, where the allegation was not determined to be unfounded, prepare a written report recommending whether the allegation or investigation indicates that a change in policy or practice could better prevent, detect, or respond to sexual abuse. Such review shall ordinarily occur within 30 days of the agency receiving the investigation results from the investigative authority. The agency shall implement the recommendations for improvement, or shall document its reasons for not doing so in a written response. Both the report and response shall be forwarded to the agency PSA Coordinator.
( b ) The agency shall conduct an annual review of all sexual abuse investigations and resulting incident reviews to assess and improve sexual abuse intervention, prevention and response efforts.
120 STAT. 3264 PUBLIC LAW 109–436—DEC. 20, 2006

Public Law 109–436

109th Congress

An Act

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study of maritime sites in

the State of Michigan.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Michigan Lighthouse and Maritime Heritage Act’’.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:

(1) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary

of the Interior.

(2) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State of Michigan.

SEC. 3. STUDY.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the State,

the State Historic Preservation Officer, and other appropriate State

and local public agencies and private organizations, shall conduct

a special resource study of resources related to the maritime heritage of the State.

(b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the study is to determine—

(1) suitable and feasible options for the long-term protection

of significant maritime heritage resources in the State; and

(2) the manner in which the public can best learn about

and experience the resources.

(c) REQUIREMENTS.—In conducting the study under subsection

(a), the Secretary shall—

(1) review Federal, State, and local maritime resource

inventories and studies to establish the potential for interpretation and preservation of maritime heritage resources in the

State;

(2) recommend management alternatives that would be

most effective for long-term resource protection and providing

for public enjoyment of maritime heritage resources;

(3) address how to assist regional, State, and local partners

in increasing public awareness of and access to maritime heritage resources;

(4) identify sources of financial and technical assistance

available to communities for the preservation and interpretation of maritime heritage resources; and

(5) identify opportunities for the National Park Service

and the State to coordinate the activities of appropriate units

Michigan

Lighthouse and

Maritime

Heritage Act.

Dec. 20, 2006

[S. 1346]

PUBLIC LAW 109–436—DEC. 20, 2006 120 STAT. 3265

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 1346:

SENATE REPORTS: No. 109–234 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 152 (2006):

Sept. 29, considered and passed Senate.

Dec. 6, considered and passed House.

Æ

of national, State, and local parks and historic sites in furthering the preservation and interpretation of maritime heritage resources.

(d) REPORT.—Not later than 3 years after the date on which

funds are made available to carry out the study under subsection

(a), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and

Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Resources

of the House of Representatives a report that describes—

(1) the results of the study; and

(2) any findings and recommendations of the Secretary.

SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are

necessary to carry out this Act.

Approved December 20, 2006.
#### Colgrove et al. *v.*Service et al.

[No. 12,132.

Filed October 8, 1925.]

From Hamilton Circuit Court; *Fred E. Hines,*Judge.

Action by David W. Service and ' others against Asbury W. Colgrove and another. From a judgment for plaintiffs, the defendants appeal. *Affirmed.*By the court in banc.

*E. C. Gullion,*for appellants.

*Thomas E. Kane*and *Charles H. Cook,*for appellees.

*730McMahan, J.

This is an action by appellees against appellants to set aside two deeds executed by James E. Service conveying certain real estate to appellants. The complaint alleges that Service at the time of the execution of each of these deeds was a person of unsound mind. From a decree in favor of appellees, appellants have appealed and contend that the evidence is not sufficient to sustain the decision of the court.

Witness after witness who had known Service for many years prior to his death, after detailing the facts concerning their observations and conversations with him, testified that he was a person of unsound mind. It is true that a large number of other witnesses after testifying as to their acquaintance and their dealings with him, gave it as their opinion that he was a person of sound mind. Nothing can be gained by entering into a review of the evidence. It is amply sufficient to sustain the decision of the court.

Judgment affirmed.
### **CHAPTER 1601—TRAINING GENERALLY**

#### [No present sections]
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Leah Nivison,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed inrespect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the GS MortgageSecurities Trust 2012-GCJ7 (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is includedin the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except asotherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Master Servicer, CWCapital Asset Management LLC, asSpecial Servicer, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee, Wells FargoBank, National Association, as Certificate Administrator, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Custodian, Situs Holdings, LLC, as Operating Advisor,CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc., as Servicing FunctionParticipant, and National Tax Search, LLC, as Servicing Function Participant.

 

 

 

Dated: March 23, 2018

 

 

/s/ Leah Nivison

 

 

Chief ExecutiveOfficer

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
-  Home 
-  Technical Resources 
-  Pipeline Technical Resources 
-  Class Location Special Permits 

# In This Section

                      -  Pipeline Technical Resources 
                      -  Class Location Special Permits 
                      -  Class Location Special Permits Documents 

## Related Links

                  -                                          Class Location Special Permits Meeting, March 21, 2006                   

## Related Documents

                  -                                          FAQs: Class Location Special Permits                   

## Contact Us

Office of Pipeline Safety
U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration1200 New Jersey Avenue, SEWashington, DC20590United States

**Email:**phmsa.pipelinesafety@dot.gov**Phone:**202-366-4595****Fax:**202-366-4566****Business Hours:**9:00am-5:00pm ET, M-F

If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.

# Class Location Special Permits

Welcome. This site is administered by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), and provides information concerning applications for special permits to operate certain gas transmission pipelines at pressures based on previous class location designation, under circumstances when class location has changed due to development or changes in land use near the pipeline.

The Federal pipeline safety regulations in 49 CFR § 192.611(a) require natural gas pipeline operators to confirm or revise the maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of a pipeline segment after a change in class location. Provided the operator submits an acceptable application for a special permit, and provided certain conditions are met, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) may consider waiving compliance from 49 CFR § 192.611(a) for specific natural gas transmission pipeline segments. If granted, the special permit allows the operator to continue to operate each special permit segment at its current maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP). This website provides guidance and resources to operators that are considering an application for such a special permit.
# C_2006281EN.01003502.xml

| 18.11.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 281/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.11.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 281/35

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 6 September 2006 — Bayer CropScience and Others v Commission

(Case T-34/05) (1)

1

(Plant protection products - Active substance endosulfan - Reexamination of authorisation for placing products on the market - Action for failure to act - No need to adjudicate)

(2006/C 281/61)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Bayer CropScience AG (Monheim, Germany), Makhteshim-Agan Holding BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands), Alfa Georgika Efodia AEVE (Athens, Greece) and Aragonesas Agro, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Doherty, Agent)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the applicants: European Crop Protection Association (ECPA) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: D. Waelbroeck, U. Zinsmeister and N. Rampal, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the applicants

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: J. Rodríguez Cárcamo, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant

Re:

Action for failure to act seeking a declaration that the Commission unlawfully failed to review the data submitted by the applicants in the course of the procedure for review of the authorisation to place the active substance endosulfan on the market, laid down by Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (OJ 1991 L 230, p. 1).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no need to adjudicate on the present application. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on the present application.

| 2. | The Commission and the applicants shall bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Commission and the applicants shall bear their own costs.

| 3. | With regard to costs incurred in connection with the application for interim measures, the Commission and the applicants shall to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

With regard to costs incurred in connection with the application for interim measures, the Commission and the applicants shall to bear their own costs.

| 4. | The Kingdom of Spain and the European Crop Protection Association shall bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Kingdom of Spain and the European Crop Protection Association shall bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 93, 16.4.2005.

1

---
# C_2006317EN.01000501.xml

| 23.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 317/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 317/5

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.4475 — Schneider Electric/APC)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 317/04)

| 1. | On 12 December 2006, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Schneider Electric SA (Schneider, France) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking American Power Conversion (APC, USA) by way of purchase of shares. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 12 December 2006, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Schneider Electric SA (Schneider, France) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking American Power Conversion (APC, USA) by way of purchase of shares.

1

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






  — | for Schneider: electrical distribution, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

for Schneider: electrical distribution,

| — | for APC: power solutions, |
| --- | --- |

—

for APC: power solutions,

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (fax No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.4475 — Schneider Electric/APC, to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| J-70 |
| B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (fax No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.4475 — Schneider Electric/APC, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

J-70

B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
EXHIBIT
32.1
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 27, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Sally J. Smith, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
  (1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
  (2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date:
November 3, 2009


By:
                        /s/
      Sally J. SmithSally
      J. Smith
                          Chief
      Executive Officer
#### John J. Murtaugh, Respondent, v. Murdoch M. Campbell, Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No op.inion. (Ingraham, J., dissenting.)