alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

74-8 

December 23, 1974 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4006(a)(3) Premium Rates. Initial Rates

4007(a). Payment of Premiums. Due Dates 

OPINION: 

 This is a confirmation of the telephone call on November 22, 1974 by Mr. * * * of our staff regarding the following

questions: (1) Is a plan covered for purposes of premium payments upon the date it receives a favorable IRS

determination, the date it is established or the effective date provided in the plan documents? (2) If the IRS grants its

determination retroactive to the plan's effective date, are premiums due for the interim period and, if so, when are such

premiums due? 

You advise that the subject plan was established after September 1, 1974 with an effective date of September 1, 1974

and that it is awaiting IRS approval. 

A plan is covered for the purpose of premium payments upon the date of establishment or the effective date,

whichever is later. Thus your plan is covered on the date of establishment, which is normally the date on which the plan

documents are executed. 

Premiums are due within 30 days thereafter and should be for the period following such date. 

Steven E. Schanes 

Acting Executive Director
§ 115.116 Accommodating detainees with disabilities and detainees who are limited English proficient. ( a ) The agency shall take appropriate steps to ensure that detainees with disabilities (including, for example, detainees who are deaf or hard of hearing, those who are blind or have low vision, or those who have intellectual, psychiatric, or speech disabilities), have an equal opportunity to participate in or benefit from all aspects of the agency's efforts to prevent, detect, and respond to sexual abuse. Such steps shall include, when necessary to ensure effective communication with detainees who are deaf or hard of hearing, providing access to in-person, telephonic, or video interpretive services that enable effective, accurate, and impartial interpretation, both receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary. In addition, the agency shall ensure that any written materials related to sexual abuse are provided in formats or through methods that ensure effective communication with detainees with disabilities, including detainees who have intellectual disabilities, limited reading skills, or who are blind or have low vision. An agency is not required to take actions that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a service, program, or activity, or in undue financial and administrative burdens, as those terms are used in regulations promulgated under title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 28 CFR 35.164.
( b ) The agency shall take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to all aspects of the agency's efforts to prevent, detect, and respond to sexual abuse to detainees who are limited English proficient, including steps to provide in-person or telephonic interpretive services that enable effective, accurate, and impartial interpretation, both receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary.
( c ) In matters relating to allegations of sexual abuse, the agency shall provide in-person or telephonic interpretation services that enable effective, accurate, and impartial interpretation, by someone other than another detainee, unless the detainee expresses a preference for another detainee to provide interpretation, and the agency determines that such interpretation is appropriate and consistent with DHS policy. The provision of interpreter services by minors, alleged abusers, detainees who witnessed the alleged abuse, and detainees who have a significant relationship with the alleged abuser is not appropriate in matters relating to allegations of sexual abuse is not appropriate in matters relating to allegations of sexual abuse.
# C_2006275EN.01000101.xml

| 11.11.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 275/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.11.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 275/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

10 November 2006

(2006/C 275/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2864 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 151,17 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4576 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,67230 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,0888 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5933 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 87,09 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,2005 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5777 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 28,196 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 260,80 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6962 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,8326 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,5110 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,68 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 36,198 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,8600 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6755 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4531 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,0126 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,9336 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0021 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 201,56 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,2970 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,1169 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3225 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 727,47 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6799 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 64,159 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 34,2400 |
| THB | Thai baht | 47,110 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2864

JPY

Japanese yen

151,17

DKK

Danish krone

7,4576

GBP

Pound sterling

0,67230

SEK

Swedish krona

9,0888

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5933

ISK

Iceland króna

87,09

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,2005

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5777

CZK

Czech koruna

28,196

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

260,80

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6962

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,8326

RON

Romanian leu

3,5110

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,68

SKK

Slovak koruna

36,198

TRY

Turkish lira

1,8600

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6755

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4531

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,0126

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,9336

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0021

KRW

South Korean won

1 201,56

ZAR

South African rand

9,2970

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,1169

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3225

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 727,47

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6799

PHP

Philippine peso

64,159

RUB

Russian rouble

34,2400

THB

Thai baht

47,110

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
§ 700.295 Petitions for amendment: Action on appeals. ( a ) *Authority.* Appeals from decisions on initial petitions for amendment shall be decided for the Commission by the Executive Director after consultation with the Commission's legal counsel unless the record challenged by the initial petition is a Civil Service Commission personnel record maintained for the Commission by the Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation Commission. Appeals from decisions on initial petitions requesting amendment of Civil Service Commission records maintained for the Commission by the Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation Commission shall be transmitted by the Executive Director, for decision.
( b ) *Time limit.* ( 1 ) A final determination on any appeal shall be made within thirty (30) days (Saturdays, Sundays and legal public holidays excepted) after receipt of the appeal.
( 2 ) The thirty (30) day period for decision on an appeal may be extended, for good cause shown, by the Commission. If the thirty (30) day period is extended, the individual submitting the appeal shall be notified of the extension and of the date on which a determination on the appeal is expected to be dispatched.
( c ) *Form of decision.* ( 1 ) The final determination on an appeal shall be in writing and shall state the basis for the determination.
( 2 ) If the determination upholds, in whole or part, the initial decision rejecting the petitioned for amendment, the determination shall also advise the individual submitting the appeal: ( i ) Of his or her right to file a concise statement of the reasons for disagreeing with the decision of the agency;
( ii ) Of the procedure established by § 700.297 for the filing of the statement of disagreement;
( iii ) That the statement which is filed will be made available to anyone to whom the record is subsequently disclosed together with, at the discretion of the Commission, a brief statement by the Commission summarizing its reasons for refusing to amend the record;
( iv ) That prior recipients of the challenged record will be provided a copy of any statement of dispute to the extent that an accounting of disclosure was maintained; and
( v ) Of his or her right to seek judicial review of the Commission's refusal to amend the record.
( 3 ) If the determination reverses, in whole or in part, the initial decision rejecting the petitioned for amendment, the system manager responsible for the system containing the challenged record shall be directed to: ( i ) Amend the challenged record accordingly; and
( ii ) If an accounting of disclosure has been made, advise all previous recipients of the record which was amended of the amendment and its substance.
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
undersigned, as chief financial officer of Iron Age Corporation (the
Company), does hereby certify that to the undersigneds knowledge:

|
|
|
|
|
|



|                                                                              
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/Bart R. Huchel                                                             
|                                                                              
|Bart R. Huchel
Chief Financial Officer, Vice President - Finance and
Treasurer

Dated: June 11, 2002
# C_2007038EN.01000101.xml

| 22.2.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4395 — Boeing/C-MAP)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 38/01)

On 16 January 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4395. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4395. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
#### § 48.116 Who may investigate compliance with a lease?

The Head of the School or his or her designee or any Bureau employee may enter the leased facility at any reasonable time, upon reasonable notice, and consistent with any notice requirements under the lease to determine if the lessee is in compliance with the requirements of the lease.
#### The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, *v.*W. R. L. Sales Company, Defendant-Appellant.

(No. 72-358;

Second District

December 18, 1974.

Edward H. Rawles and Donald M. Reno, Jr., both of Reno, O’Bryne & Kepley, of Champaign, for appellant.

James M. Cai;r, State’s Attorney, of Sycamore (James Marshall, Assistant State’s Attorney, of counsel), for the People.

Opinion by

Mr. JUSTICE RECHENMACHER.
§ 585.2 Who may appeal? ( a ) Appeals of notices of violation, proposed civil fine assessments, orders of temporary closure, proposals to remove certificates of self-regulation, and late fee notifications and assessments may only be brought by the tribe or the recipient that is the subject of the action.
( b ) Appeals of the Chair's decision to void or modify a management contract after approval may only be brought by a party to the management contract.
( c ) Appeals of the Chair's decisions to approve or object to the adoption of alternate standards from those required by the Commission's minimum internal control standards and/or technical standards may only be brought by the tribal gaming regulatory authority that approved the alternate standards for the gaming operation(s).
[77 FR 58945, Sept. 25, 2012, as amended at 78 FR 21063, Apr. 9, 2013]
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification Pursuant to**

**18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**as added by**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

In connection with the quarterly report of Pulaski Financial Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Gary W. Douglass, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as added by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 as of and for the period covered by the Report.

 

 
| Date:   May 12, 2011 | /s/   Gary W. Douglass |
|---------------------------|------------------------|
|                      | Name:                  | Gary   W. Douglass |
|                      | Title:                 | President   and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
§ 43.10 Right to challenge. Each educational institution shall give parents of students and eligible students, who are or have been in attendance at the institution, an opportunity to challenge the content of the student's records to: ( a ) Insure that the records are not inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise violating the privacy or other rights of students.
( b ) Provide an opportunity for correcting or deleting any inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise inappropriate data in the record.
( c ) Insert into such records a written comment by the parents or eligible students pertaining to the content of such records.
exh10-1_note.htm


     

    
      

      

    

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    EXHIBIT 10.1

     

    DEMAND PROMISSORY NOTE DATED MAY 30, 2008

    
 

    
      
         


      

      
         


        
          

        

      

      
         


      

    


    DEMAND
PROMISSORY NOTE

     

    $50,000.00                                                                                                                                          Lakewood,
Colorado

                                                                                                                                                                 
May
30, 2008

    


    For value
received, the undersigned, V2K INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Colorado corporation (the
“Borrower”),
hereby promises to pay on demand, to the order of Victor J. Yosha (the “Lender”), at, 7276
Orion Street, Arvada, CO 80007, or at any other place designated at any time by
the holder hereof, in lawful money of the United States of America and in
immediately available funds, the principal sum of FIFTY THOUSAND AND NO/100
DOLLARS ($50,000.00) together with interest on the principal amount hereunder,
computed on the basis of the actual number of days elapsed and a 365-day year,
from the date hereof until this Note is fully paid at the rate of TWELVE PERCENT
(12%) per annum.

    


    The
Borrower hereby agrees to pay all costs of collection, including attorneys’ fees
and legal expenses, in the event this Note is not paid when due, whether or not
legal proceedings are commenced.

    


    Presentment
or other demand for payment, notice of dishonor and protest are expressly
waived.

    


    
      	 
      	
              V2K
      INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Colorado corporation

            
	 
      	
               

              By_______________________________________

               

              Its_______________________________________
#### § 502.8 Electronic or electromechanical facsimile.

*Electronic or electromechanical facsimile* means a game played in an electronic or electromechanical format that replicates a game of chance by incorporating all of the characteristics of the game, except when, for bingo, lotto, and other games similar to bingo, the electronic or electromechanical format broadens participation by allowing multiple players to play with or against each other rather than with or against a machine.

[67 FR 41172, June 17, 2002]
### §640. Deferment of retirement or separation for medical reasons

(a) If the Secretary of the military department concerned determines that the evaluation of the physical condition of an officer and determination of the officer's entitlement to retirement or separation for physical disability require hospitalization or medical observation and that such hospitalization or medical observation cannot be completed with confidence in a manner consistent with the member's well being before the date on which the officer would otherwise be required to retire or be separated under this title, the Secretary may defer the retirement or separation of the officer under this title.

(b) A deferral of retirement or separation under subsection (a) may not extend for more than 30 days after completion of the evaluation requiring hospitalization or medical observation.

(Added Pub. L. 96–513, title I, §105, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2866; amended Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title V, §507, Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1090.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2001—Pub. L. 107–107 amended text generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "The Secretary of the military department concerned may defer the retirement or separation under this title of any officer if the evaluation of the physical condition of the officer and determination of the officer's entitlement to retirement or separation for physical disability require hospitalization or medical observation that cannot be completed before the date on which the officer would otherwise be required to retire or be separated under this title."

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Sept. 15, 1981, but the authority to prescribe regulations under this section effective on Dec. 12, 1980, see section 701 of Pub. L. 96–513, set out as an Effective Date of 1980 Amendment note under section 101 of this title.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.1

                      Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the
               Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section
               1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)


Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United Stated Code), each of the
undersigned officers of InkSure Technologies Inc., a Nevada corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2003 (the
"Form 10-QSB") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information
contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated: May 15, 2003
                                   /s/ Yaron Meerfeld
                                   ------------------------------------------
                                   Yaron Meerfeld, Chief Executive Officer


Dated: May 15, 2003                /s/ Eyal Bigon
                                   ------------------------------------------
                                   Eyal Bigon, Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter
63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of a separate
disclosure document.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

81-39 

1981 PBGC LEXIS 3 

November 30, 1981 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4041(b) Termination by Plan Administrator. Notice of Sufficiency 

OPINION: 

 This is in response to your letter of September 21, 1981 regarding your client, * * * a participant in the * * *

Insurance Company's pension plan, * * * (the "Plan"). You ask whether * * * benefit is payable in a lump sum. 

It has been determined that the Plan has sufficient assets to pay benefits guaranteed by Title IV of the Employee

Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"). The Plan administrator is responsible for payment of benefits to

entitled participants. A plan administrator may pay benefits in excess of $1750 in a single installment if the plan provides

for such distribution and if the plan administrator submits a written statement to the PBGC in which he or she certifies

that-- 

(i) The participant elected, in writing, the alternative form of distribution; 

(ii) The participant was informed, in writing, before he or she made the election, of the estimated amounts of the

annuity and of the alternative form of distribution, with reference to any risks attendant to the alternative form; and 

(iii) The participant was notified, in writing, before he or she made the election, that his or her election [*2] would

not be given effect unless the plan should close out under a Notice of Sufficiency, and that the PBGC does not guarantee

the benefit payable in the alternative form. 

46 Fed. Reg. 9532 (1981) (to be codified in 29 C.F.R. § 2617.4(b)(3)). 

* * * is the case officer assigned to this matter. If you have further questions, he may be reached at the above

address or by telephone at (202) 254-4734. 

Henry Rose 

General Counsel