alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 351.27 The Department of Defense. ( a ) Determine appropriate planning bases for Department of Defense (DOD) nuclear facilities and installations (e.g., missile bases, nuclear submarine facilities and weapon storage sites) including distances, time and radiological characteristics.
( b ) Develop, with FEMA, representative scenarios from which DOD nuclear facility commanders and State and local governments may select for use in testing and exercising radiological emergency plans.
( c ) Assist State and local governments, within the constraints of national security and in coordination with FEMA, in the development, review and assessment of those portions of their radiological emergency plans related to DOD nuclear facilities and assist State officials with planning for response to accidents involving DOD controlled radioactive materials in transit.
( d ) Provide representation to and support for the FRPCC and the RACs when appropriate.
**Exhibit 12.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Sigge Haraldsson,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed thisannual report on Form 20-F of Alfa Laval Special Finance AB;

 

2. Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

 

4. The company’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:

 

a) Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluated theeffectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presentedin this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and

 

c) Disclosed in thisreport any change in the company’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the period covered by the annual report that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, thecompany’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The company’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and theaudit committee of the company’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

 

a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

b) Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

Date: April 23, 2004

 
|   | /s/  Sigge  Haraldsson |   |
|--------|----------------------------------|--------|
|   | Sigge Haraldsson                 |
|   | Chief Executive Officer          |

 

1

----
Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs -- Region IV

Walnut Creek Field Office

1450 Maria Lane, Walnut Creek, CA, 94596

Mark Hammond (Telephone: 510/975-0254, E-mail: mfh2@nrc.gov)

CONTACT: Mark Hammond

Feb. 21, 1997

Office: (510) 975-0254

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Home: (415) 674-1024

RIV-9712

Pager: (800) 916-4952

email: mfh2@nrc.gov

NRC, CONSTRUCTION TESTING OFFICIALS

TO DISCUSS APPARENT VIOLATIONS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold a predecisional enforcement conference next week with officials of

Construction Testing & Engineering Inc., of Escondido, CA, to discuss apparent violations of NRC requirements.

The conference will begin at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, Feb. 26, at the NRC Region IV Field Office in Walnut Creek, CA.

The meeting will be open to the public for observation; NRC officials will be available later for questions.

An NRC inspection conducted in December and January determined that CTE had performed work with moisture density

gauges, which contain radioactive materials, on numerous occasions during the first five months of 1996 without filing

proper documentation with the NRC. The violations concern work that CTE conducted on military bases in California and
CTE's failure to provide complete and accurate information to the NRC.

CTE is licensed by the state of California to use the equipment. However, using the equipment on an area of exclusive

federal jurisdiction, such as a military base, requires notification and a nominal fee to the NRC.

The NRC staff considers the violations significant because CTE's failure to inform the NRC of the work denied the

agency the opportunity to ensure that work was conducted by appropriately trained personnel and in accordance with

safety requirements.

The decision to hold a predecisional enforcement conference does not mean that NRC has made a final determination

that a violation did occur or that enforcement action, such as a monetary fine, will be taken. The purpose is to discuss

the apparent violation, its cause and safety significance; to provide CTE an opportunity to challenge or correct portions of

the NRC inspection report; and for the company to outline its corrective actions.

No decision on the apparent violations or any enforcement action will be made at the conference. Those decisions will

be made later by senior NRC officials.

-- 30 --
#### Anna V. Faust, as Administratrix of the Estate of Eileen V. Roop, Deceased, Respondent, v. Central Greyhound Lines, Inc., Appellant.

Present • — ■ Taylor, P. J., MeCurn, Love, Vaughan and Kimball, JJ. [See 274 App. Div. 1029.]
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-96-41 July 23, 1996

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 708/829-9663

Angela Dauginas 708/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

NEW AREA CODE FOR NRC REGION III EFFECTIVE AUGUST 3

Effective August 3, the area code for the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission's (NRC) Region III Office, Lisle, Illinois, will

change to 630.

The switchboard and staff phone numbers will remain the

same:

General switchboard: 630/829-9500

Public Affairs: 630/829-9663 or 9662

Public Affairs facsimile: 630/515-1096

Through November 30, the current 708 area code will still be

operable to accommodate a transition to the 630 area code.

NRC's Region III Office covers eight states in the midwest

with 27 operating nuclear power reactors and about 2,500

licensees using radioactive materials for industrial, medical,

academic, and research purposes. The eight state area includes

Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio and

Wisconsin.

####
§ 146.200 Agency and legislative liaison. ( a ) The prohibition on the use of appropriated funds, in § 146.100 (a), does not apply in the case of a payment of reasonable compensation made to an officer or employee of a person requesting or receiving a Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement if the payment is for agency and legislative liaison activities not directly related to a covered Federal action.
( b ) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, providing any information specifically requested by an agency or Congress is allowable at any time.
( c ) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, the following agency and legislative liaison activities are allowable at any time only where they are not related to a specific solicitation for any covered Federal action: ( 1 ) Discussing with an agency (including individual demonstrations) the qualities and characteristics of the person's products or services, conditions or terms of sale, and service capabilities; and,
( 2 ) Technical discussions and other activities regarding the application or adaptation of the person's products or services for an agency's use.
( d ) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, the following agencies and legislative liaison activities are allowable only where they are prior to formal solicitation of any covered Federal action: ( 1 ) Providing any information not specifically requested but necessary for an agency to make an informed decision about initiation of a covered Federal action;
( 2 ) Technical discussions regarding the preparation of an unsolicited proposal prior to its official submission; and,
( 3 ) Capability presentations by persons seeking awards from an agency pursuant to the provisions of the Small Business Act, as amended by Public Law 95-507 and other subsequent amendments.
( e ) Only those activities expressly authorized by this section are allowable under this section.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
WASHINGTON, D.C.

SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY

May 4, 2010

The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

Through this letter, I am pleased to provide the Department of the Treasury’s annual report of
compliance with Executive Order 13019 — Supporting Families: Collecting Delinquent Child
Support Obligations. In fiscal year 2009, Treasury continued to collect substantial amounts of
delinquent child support debts through its Treasury Offset Program (TOP).

TOP collects delinquent child support debts by intercepting federal payments, a process known
as “offset.” Treasury has been offsetting federal income tax refunds to collect delinquent child
support debts since the early 1980s. A key objective of the Executive Order, issued on
September 28, 1996, is to collect delinquent child support obligations through the offset of non-
tax federal payments. Treasury and the Department of Health and Human Services work jointly
and with states and territories to further this goal.

In fiscal year 2009, Treasury collected approximately $2.19 billion in delinquent child support
debts through offset. Of this amount, $2.05 billion was collected from tax refund payments,
including $30.1 million from the 2008 economic stimulus payments, and $115.1 million from
offsets of federal non-tax payments, including $109.4 million from the 2009 economic recovery
payments. Since the issuance of Executive Order 13019, more than $22 billion has been
collected through TOP from more than 22.8 million offsets to assist in the collection of past-due
support owed to children and families.

Treasury remains strongly committed to collecting delinquent child support obligations through
the use of offset of both federal tax refunds and non-tax payments. We will continue to support
the important goal of carrying out the provisions of Executive Order 13019.

Sincerely,

cc: The Honorable Kathleen Sebelius
§ 5401.0-6 Policy. ( a ) All sales other than those specified in § 5402.0-6 shall be made only after inviting competitive bids through publication and posting. Sales shall not be held sooner than one week after the last advertisement. Competitive sales shall be offered by the authorized officer when access to the sale area is available to anyone who is qualified to bid. Further, timber or other vegetative resources that would normally be sold by negotiated sale because of lack of legal access may be sold competitively without access if the authorized officer determines that there is competitive interest in such a sale.
( b ) All competitive sales shall be subject to the restrictions relating to the export and substitution from the United States of unprocessed timber.
(Sec. 5, 50 Stat. 875, 61 Stat. 681, as amended, 69 Stat. 367; 43 U.S.C. 1181e, 30 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.*)
[35 FR 9783, June 13, 1970, as amended at 41 FR 12659, Mar. 26, 1976; 49 FR 23839, June 8, 1984; 56 FR 10175, Mar. 11, 1991]
Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-86 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 1 of 1
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 98-210 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Thursday, November 19, 1998)

NOTE TO EDITORS:

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Reactor

Safeguards has scheduled a meeting of its subcommittee on planning and

procedures on December 2 in Rockville, Maryland.

The subcommittee will meet at 2:00 p.m. in Room T-2B1 of the

NRC’s Two White Flint North Building at 11545 Rockville Pike. The

subcommittee will discuss proposed ACRS administrative activities and

the status of a new member’s appointment.

Other aspects of the meeting, including an opportunity for public

comment, will be described in a forthcoming edition of the Federal

Register.

###
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 97-085

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Thursday, May 22, 1997)

NOTE TO EDITORS: ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULE CHANGE

The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards subcommittee

meeting on human factors, scheduled to start at 8;30 a.m., on

Tuesday, June 3, in Rockville, Md., has been changed to start at

12:00 noon.

The meeting, which is open to the public, will be held in

Room 2B3 of the NRC's Two White Flint North building at 11545

Rockville Pike. The Subcommittee on Human Factors will discuss

the draft of the NRC Human Performance Program Plan and related

matters. Some portions of the meeting may be closed to the public

to discuss organizational and personnel matters.

Other aspects of the meeting, including an opportunity for

public comment, are described in a Notice of Meeting published in

the May 9 edition of the Federal Register.

#
#### Richard A. Challenger et al. v. Household Finance Corporation.

Present-—Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.
#### In the Matter of the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Esther Robitscher, as Executrix, etc., of Frederick Robitscher, Deceased, Appellant. Louisa Fribourg, Respondent.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-109 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 1 of 1
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus CASTRO-GUZMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-41431.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 23, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, David Hill Peck, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Sokolow, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

*249Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Jesus Castro-Guzman appeals his guilty-plea conviction for being found in the United States after previously having been deported. Castro-Guzman argues that there was error under *United, States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), because he was sentenced under the mandatory Sentencing Guidelines. Castro-Guzman’s sentence was enhanced based only on his pri- or convictions, and, thus, Castro-Guzman’s sentence was not affected by a Sixth Amendment violation. *See Booker,*125 S.Ct. at 750, 769. Nevertheless, the district court erred by imposing a sentence pursuant to a mandatory application of the Sentencing Guidelines. *Id.*at 768; *see also United States v. Valenzuela-Quevedo,*407 F.3d 728, 733 (5th Cir.), *cert, denied,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 267, 163 L.Ed.2d 240 (2005). However, Castro-Guzman cannot establish that this error affected his substantial rights because he cannot show that the outcome would have been different absent the error. *See United States v. Mares,*402 F.3d 511, 521 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 43, 163 L.Ed.2d 76 (2005). The record does not establish that the sentencing court would have imposed a different sentence had it been proceeding under an advisory guideline scheme.

Castro-Guzman also challenges the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)’s penalty provisions in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Castro-Guzman’s challenge is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Castro-Guzman contends that *Almendarez-Torres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi*we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *Almendarez-Torres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Castro-Guzman properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### Louis Arnheim, Respondent, v. George W. Linch, as Receiver, etc., Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
Exhibit 31.2

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

|I, Richard P. Barber,
  certify that:
|-------------------------------------
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     

|Date: November 15, 2004 | By: | /s/
  Richard P. Barber                     
|----------------------- | --- | --------------------------------------------
|                        |     |                                             
|                        |     | Richard
  P. Barber                         
|                        |     | Chief
  Financial Officer                   
|                        |     | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
|                        |     |                                             

---

---
IES Report

Confidential Business Information
afbi-ex1013_223.htm



Exhibit 10.13

AFFINITY BANCSHARES, INC.

2018 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN

 

RESTRICTED STOCK AWARD AGREEMENT


ADDENDUM

 

NOTICE REGARDING YOUR RESTRICTED STOCK AWARDS

 

Name:[___________]

 

This notice is provided to you as a recipient of a Restricted Stock Award (“Restricted Stock Award”) under the Affinity Bancshares, Inc. 2018 Equity Incentive Plan (formerly known as the “Community First Bancshares, Inc. 2018 Equity Incentive Plan”) (the “Plan”).   

 

In connection with the completion of second step conversion of Community First Bancshares, Inc. and related stock offering, effective January 20, 2021, (collectively, the “Second-Step Conversion”), the number of unvested Restricted Stock Awards you have has changed.  

 

As a result of the Second-Step Conversion, the number of shares that you are entitled to receive upon your vesting date(s) has been converted using the Second-Step Conversion exchange ratio of 0.90685864 (“Exchange Ratio”) by multiplying the number of shares of unvested Restricted Stock by the Exchange Ratio and rounding down to the nearest whole number.  Accordingly, the new total number of shares of unvested Restricted Stock that you hold are shown below (please note that no fractional shares will be issued).  

 



 
You should keep this Addendum to your Restricted Stock Award Agreement. The original vesting schedule and other terms of your Restricted Stock Awards shall remain the same as set forth in your Restricted Stock Award Agreement and the Plan.  

 

If you have any questions regarding this notice or your Restricted Stock, please contact Tessa Nolan, Chief Financial Officer at (770) 385-3559 or tessanolan@newtonfederal.com.

 

 

{Clients/1622/00377293.DOC/ }
ARTHUR BRITT,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-2827

_____________________________/

Opinion filed October 7, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Angela Cox, Judge.

Diana L. Johnson of Johnson and Lufrano, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Virginia Chester Harris, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Based on the State’s proper concession of error, we reverse and remand for 

resentencing on Counts I and II in accordance with Williams v. State, 186 So. 3d 
2

989 (Fla. 2016), which held that consecutive mandatory minimum terms under the 

10-20-Life statute are permissible but not mandatory where, as here, the defendant 

shot at multiple victims. In all other respects, we affirm.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

ROBERTS, C.J., WETHERELL, and BILBREY, JJ., CONCUR.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Annual report**
 
2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005
 
SuDoc:ID 1.27:B 73/
Item Number:0900-I-18 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000637774
 
November 1, 2017