alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Adm inistrator Lisa P. Jackson August 3, 2010

Environmental Protection Agency USEPA Headquarters Ariel Rios Building 1200 Penns yl vania Avenue, N. W. Mail Code: 1101A Wa shington, DC 20460 Dear Administrator Jackson:
As provided in the Toxic Substances Control Act (“TSCA”), Petitioners American Bird Conservancy, Association of Avian Veterinarians, Center for Biological Diversity, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, and Project Gu tpile request that the EPA adopt regulations prohibiting the manufacture, processing, and distribution in commerce of lead shot, lead bullets, lead fishing sinkers, and other lead

- containing fishing gear, pursuant to TSCA (15 U.S.C. § 2605(a)(2)(A)(i)). Su ch regulations are needed to protect vulnerable wildlife species from the ongoing threat of lead poisoning, as well as to safeguard human health. TSCA mandates that the EPA must regulate chemical substances where there is a “reasonable basis to conclude” that such substances “present an unreasonable risk of injury to health and or the environment” (15 U.S.C. § 2605(a)). TSCA authorizes the EPA to prohibit “the manufacturing, processing, or distribution in commerce” of a chemical substance for a particular use or uses (15 U.S.C. § 2605(a)(2)(A)(i)). The EPA has already declared that lead is a toxic substance, and has removed nearly all lead containing products from the market. We present in the attached petition nearly 500 peer reviewed scientific articles documenting the toxic effects of lead on wildlife species and conclude that the lead components of bullets, shotgun pellets, fishing weights and lures pose an unreasonable risk of injury to human and wildlife health and to the environment.
Ammunition a nd tackle manufacturers now market a wide variety of non

- lead, non

- toxic bullets, shotgun pellets, and fishing tackle that can replace lead projectiles and weights. The EPA has long held that whenever a toxic substance customarily used in the manufacture o f commercial products can be replaced by a nontoxic substitute, the precautionary principle dictates that articles made of the toxic substance should be removed from the market. All hunting and fishing gear containing lead could economically be replaced wi th non

- toxic alternatives, thus making a strong argument for EPA

- regulatory action.2

The petitioners understand that EPA is specifically prohibited from regulating ammunition or firearms under TSCA, but that toxic components of ammunition can be regulated if non

- toxic alternatives are commercially available. The petitioners have waited until non

- toxic alternatives have become available to submit this petition in an effort to clearly indicate that this petition is not an attempt to regulate ammunition or fi rearms. Sincerely,

Michael Fry, PhD American Bird Conservancy Washington DC.
# C_2012138EN.01002702.xml

| 12.5.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/27

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 1 February 2012 — Bancale and Buccheri v Commission

(Case F-123/10) (1)

(Civil Service - Temporary staff - Internal competitions - Conditions for admission - Professional experience acquired after obtaining the diploma - Diploma - Qualifications obtained before obtaining the diploma - Equivalence)

(2012/C 138/56)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Giovanni Bancale (Waterloo, Belgium) and Roberto Buccheri (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and É. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by B. Eggers and P. Pecho, Agents, and subsequently by B. Eggers, Agent)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decisions of the Selection Boards in Competitions COM/INT/OLAF/09/AD8 and COM/INT/OLAF/09/AD10 not to admit the applicants to the competitions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the application; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application;

| 2. | Orders Mr Bancale and Mr Buccheri to bear all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Bancale and Mr Buccheri to bear all the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 30, 29.1.2011, p. 67.

---
#### Joseph H. Everett, Appellant, v. Charles N. Haskell, Respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs. No opinion.
###### Editorial Note on Part 0

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 0 appear at 73 FR 73 FR 54947, Sept. 24, 2008.

#### § 0.128b Regulations.

All rules of practice and regulations applicable to the management of the affairs of and the adjudication of claims by the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission of the United States are published in 45 CFR chapter V.
Exhibit 23

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Financial Security Assurance Holdings Ltd. on Form S-8 (File No. 33-78784) (1993
Equity Participation Plan), Form S-8 (File No. 33-92648) (Deferred Compensation
Plan), and Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-74165 and 333-92985) (Debt Securities, Common
Stock, Stock Purchase Contracts, Stock Purchase Units and Preferred Stock), of:

1.    Our report dated January 24, 2001, on our audits of the consolidated
      balance sheets of Financial Security Assurance Holdings Ltd. and
      Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the related
      consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income, changes in
      shareholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the
      period ended December 31, 2000 and on our audits of the financial
      statement schedule relating to the consolidated financial statements of
      Financial Security Assurance Holdings Ltd. and Subsidiaries, which report
      is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
      December 31, 2000; and

2.    Our report dated January 24, 2001, on our audits of the consolidated
      balance sheets of Financial Security Assurance Inc. and Subsidiaries as of
      December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the related consolidated statements of
      operations and comprehensive income, changes in shareholder's equity and
      cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31,
      2000, which report is included in exhibit 99 to this Annual Report on Form
      10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2000.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
New York, New York
March 28, 2001
```

[114th Congress Public Law 3]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 129 STAT. 38]]

Public Law 114-3
114th Congress

                                 An Act

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure that emergency 
 services volunteers are not taken into account as employees under the 
 shared responsibility requirements contained in the Patient Protection 
     and Affordable Care Act. <<NOTE: Feb. 27, 2015 -  [H.R. 33]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS.

    The Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2015 (Public Law 113-164; 
128 Stat. 1867) is amended by striking the date specified in section 
106(3) <<NOTE: 128 Stat. 1868.>>  and inserting ``March 6, 2015''.

    Approved February 27, 2015.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 33:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 161 (2015):
            Jan. 12, considered and passed House.
            Feb. 27, considered and passed Senate, amended. House 
                concurred in Senate amendment.

                                  <all>
```
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 37225

STATE OF IDAHO

,

Plaintiff-Respondent

,

v.

PATRICK DAVID ELLINGER

,

Defendant-Appellant

. )

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

) 2010 Unpublished Opinion No. 657

Filed: October 5, 2010

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial Distric t, State of Idaho, Ada
County. Hon. Darla S. Williamson , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of twenty years, with a minimum
period of confinement of five years , for rape

, affirmed

.

Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Sarah E. Tompkins, Deputy
Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney Gene ral; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney

General, Boise, for respondent.

______________________________________________

Before LANSING, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Patrick David Ellinger pled guilty to rape . I.C. § 18

- 6101 . In exchange for his guilty

plea, an additional charge was dismissed. The district court sentenced Ellinger to a unified term

of twenty years, with a minimum period of confinement of five ye ars

. Ellinger appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court's discretion. Both our standard of review and the

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 1 14, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.

1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho2

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, El linger ’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                                  JUL-1-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                                   12
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          549
<ALLOWANCES>                                             7
<INVENTORY>                                            532
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      1085
<PP&E>                                                 694
<DEPRECIATION>                                         485
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       2,233
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                1,410
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                17
<OTHER-SE>                                              44
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         2,233
<SALES>                                                909
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       909
<CGS>                                                  338
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          777
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      29
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        103
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    103
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                           103
<EPS-BASIC>                                           0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.01



</TABLE>
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72 -70

32 34 36 38 40 42 

### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 06/17 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 17 Jun 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.90 N 76.65 WMeters AGL
AAM-11-271-E April 18, 2011 Exemption No. 10250 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0369

Mr. John Larson Honey B, LLC 5695 SW Airport Place Corvallis, OR 97333

Dear Mr. Larson:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By submission dated April 11, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Honey B, LLC (Honey B) for an exemption from part 120 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow Honey B, which is operating under separate parts of 14 CFR, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one drug testing program.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Honey B.

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135 operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two testing programs into one would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level of safety to that provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—2

 they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703;

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby grant Honey B, LLC an exemption from part 120 to the extent necessary to allow Honey B, which is operating under separate parts of the regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program, subject to the conditions and

limitations described below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. Employees of Honey B are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of the Honey B part 135 operation, not under part 91.

This exemption terminates on April 30, 2013 unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/ Frederick E. Tilton, M.D. Federal Air Surgeon

Enclosure
# C_2013108EN.01001805.xml

| 13.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/18

---

Order of the President of the Court of 21 November 2012 — European Commission v Republic of Cyprus

(Case C-662/11) (1)

1

2013/C 108/41

Language of the case: Greek

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 73, 10.3.2012.

1

---
#### § 3b.4 Government contractors.

Systems of records operated by a contractor, pursuant to a *contract,* on behalf of the Commission, which are designed to accomplish a Commission function, are considered, for the purposes of this part, to be maintained by the Commission. A *contract* covers any contract, written or oral, subject to the Federal Procurement Regulations. The contractual instrument will specify, to the extent consistent with the Commission's authority to require it, that the systems of records be maintained in accordance with the requirements of this part.
§ 706.302 Use of inside information. ( a ) A special Government employee shall not use inside information obtained as a result of his Government employment for private gain for himself or another person either by direct action on his part or by counsel, recommendation, or suggestion to another person, particularly one with whom he has family, business, or financial ties. For the purpose of this section, “inside information” means information obtained under Government authority which has not become part of the body of public information.
( b ) A special Government employee may engage in teaching, lecturing, and writing to the same extent, and subject to the same restrictions, as provided in § 706.303(b) for employees.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

## it,tate5 Court of pi at for tbe 

# ffeberat Circuit

SHAWANDA R. MURRY, 

### Petitioner,
v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 

### Respondent.

2010-3117 Petition for review of the Merits Systems Protection Board in case no. AT1221100381-W-1.

ON MOTION

ORDER Shawanda R. Murry moves for this court to direct the Department of Justice to provide her certain documentsand also moves for an extension of time to file her informal brief. The Department of Justice (DOJ) responds.DOJ states that it has provided to Murry the documents she requests. Accordingly, I T Is ORDERED THAT:MURRY v. JUSTICE 2 The motion to direct DOJ to provide documents is moot. The motion for an extension of time is granted. Murry's informal brief is due within 45 days from the date of filing of this order. F OR T HE C OURT

JUL 2 7 2010 Date cc: Shawanda R. Murry Jeffrey D. Klingman, Esq. s19 /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk

FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT JUL 2 7 1010

JAN HORBALY CLERK
§ 367.2283 Account 228.3, Accumulated provision for pensions and benefits. ( a ) This account must include provisions made by the service company and amounts contributed by employees for pensions, accident and death benefits, savings, relief, hospital and other provident purposes, where the funds are included in the assets of the service company either in general or in segregated fund accounts.
( b ) Amounts paid by the service company for the purposes for which this liability is established must be charged to this account.
( c ) A separate account must be kept for each kind of provision included in this account.
( d ) If employee pension or benefit plan funds are not included among the assets of the service company but are held by outside trustees, payments into such funds, or accruals therefore, must be included in this account.
### SERVED: AUGUST 8, 2014 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF WILLIAM LEVERANCE DOCKETNO. FAA-2014-0412 (Civil Penalty Action)


### NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2013S0150060) has been assigned to Administrative Law Judge J.E. Sullivan. All future pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served onthe Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other persons onthe attached Service List. 

# C -c··;**~-···-'"!';:~~** nnie A. ChiefA Attachment

- Service List

### SERVICE LIST- BY 

### U.S. MAIL


### Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 ORIGINAL & 

### ONE COPY



### Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC--430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000 1



### William Loren Leverance 3000 ClarconaRoad Apopka, FL 32703 ONE COPY



### Rashawn Rich George, Complainant's Counsel 

### Office ofthe Regional Counsel, AS0-7 Federal Aviation Administration, Southern Region 1701 ColumbiaAvenue College Park, GA 30337 TEL: 404-305-5200 FAX: 404-305-5223 Hon. J.E. Sullivan,Administrative LawJudge 

### Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX: 202-366-7536 DocketNo. FAA-2014-0412 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 IndependenceAvenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

### -2-
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 99.2

                            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  GoAmerica,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the  quarter  ended  March 31,  2003 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),  I, Francis J. Elenio,  Chief
Financial Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section  13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2) The  information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
respects,  the consolidated  financial  condition of the Company as of the dates
presented and consolidated  results of operations of the Company for the periods
presented.

Dated: May 14, 2003

                                                       /s/ Francis J. Elenio
                                                       ---------------------
                                                       Francis J. Elenio
                                                       Chief Financial Officer

This  certification  has been  furnished  solely  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. A signed original of this written statement required
by Section 906 has been  provided  to  GoAmerica,  Inc.  and will be retained by
GoAmerica,  Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.


                                      -21-

<PAGE>
<PAGE>


                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.62

                       EXTENSION OF EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

     THIS EXTENSION AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 8th day of 
September, 1997, by and between HARVEYS CASINO RESORTS, a Nevada corporation, 
hereinafter referred to as "Harveys", and GARY ARMENTROUT, hereinafter 
referred to as "Employee",  as follows:

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

     WHEREAS, Harveys and Employee did, on the 9th day of May, 1995, entered 
into an Employment Agreement (the "Agreement"); and 

     WHEREAS, Harveys and Employee did on the 23rd day of August, 1996, 
extend the term of employment for an additional one (1) year from May 8, 1997 
to and including May 8, 1998; and 

     WHEREAS, Harveys and the Employee desire to extend the term of 
employment;

     NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements 
herein contained and other good and valuable consideration, receipt whereof 
is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree to extend the term of 
employment of an additional one (1) year period, from May 8, 1998 through and 
including May 8, 1999

     Executed the day and year first above written.

                         EMPLOYEE:

                         /s/ Gary D. Armentrout    
                         ---------------------------------------------
                         Gary Armentrout

                         EMPLOYER:
                         HARVEYS CASINO RESORTS, a Nevada corporation

                         By:  /s/ Charles W. Scharer                   
                              -----------------------------------------
                              CHARLES W. SCHARER
                              Chairman/President/CEO
# 2018

# 2017

# 2016

# 2015

# 2014

# 2013

# Parameters