alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 108.310 Contents of application. Each Applicant must submit a complete application, including the following: ( a ) *Amounts.* The Applicant must indicate— ( 1 ) The specific amount of Regulatory Capital it proposes to raise (which amount must be at least $5,000,000); and
( 2 ) The specific amount of binding commitments for contributions in cash or in-kind it proposes to raise, and/or an annuity it proposes to purchase, in accordance with the requirements of § 108.2030, as its matching resources for its Operational Assistance grant award (the aggregate of which must be not less than $1,500,000 or 30 percent of the Regulatory Capital it proposes to raise under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, whichever is greater).
( b ) *Comprehensive business plan.* The Applicant must submit a comprehensive business plan covering at least a five-year period, addressing the specific items described in § 108.320, and which demonstrates that the Applicant has the capacity to operate successfully as a NMVC Company.
( c ) *New Markets Tax Credit program.* Applicant must address if and to what extent it intends to conform its activities to the New Markets Tax Credit laws. If Applicant plans to seek a New Markets Tax Credit, Applicant also must state the amount of tax credit allocation it intends to seek.
[66 FR 28609, May 23, 2001, as amended at 67 FR 68502, Nov. 12, 2002]
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 200 (Monday, October 18, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 61434]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23260]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 34549]


Illinois Railnet, Inc.--Acquisition and Operation Exemption--The 
Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company

    Illinois Railnet, Inc. (Illinois), a Class III rail carrier, has 
filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.41 to acquire 
from The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF), and 
operate two lines of railroad: (1) A portion of BNSF's Oregon 
Subdivision between milepost 98.75 at Oregon, IL, and milepost 105.78 
at Mt. Morris, IL, and (2) a portion of BNSF's La Salle Subdivision 
between milepost 25.7 at La Salle, IL, and milepost 43.36 at Zearing, 
IL, a distance of approximately 24.7 miles in Ogle, La Salle, and 
Bureau Counties, IL.
    The transaction is related to STB Finance Docket No. 34559, 
Illinois Railnet, Inc.--Trackage Rights Exemption--The Burlington 
Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company, wherein BNSF will grant 
Illinois: (1) Limited local trackage rights for the purpose of 
servicing customers on BNSF in and around Oregon, and (2) limited 
overhead trackage rights for the purpose of interchanging traffic 
between BNSF and Illinois and accommodating light power moving over 
BNSF's lines between milepost 98.49 near Oregon, and milepost 86.57 
near Flag Center, IL, and between milepost 43.36 near Zearing, and 
milepost 40.73 near Montgomery, IL.
    Illinois certifies that its projected annual revenues as a result 
of this transaction will not result in the creation of a Class I or 
Class II rail carrier, and that its revenues will not exceed $5 
million.
    Illinois indicates that it expected to consummate the transaction 
on October 8, 2004.
    If the notice contains false or misleading information, the 
exemption is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 
U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to 
revoke will not automatically stay the transaction.
    An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB 
Finance Docket No. 34549, must be filed with the Surface Transportation 
Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, one 
copy of each pleading must be served on John D. Heffner, 1920 N Street, 
NW., Suite 800, Washington, DC 20036.
    Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at http://www.stb.dot.gov.

    Decided: October 12, 2004.

    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04-23260 Filed 10-15-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
HomeAbout NRCPlans, Budgets, & Performance

# Becoming a Modern, Risk-Informed Regulator

## NRC's Transformation Journey

The NRC has been on a transformation journeyto be in the best position to continue meetingour important safety and security mission.

## Sustaining Transformational Progress

The NRC is focused on using the foundation built during our transformation to continue to modernize and sustain innovation and progress.

## NRC External StakeholderFeedback Survey on Transformation

As part of our transformation efforts, the NRC wants to engage external stakeholders and seek their views about our transformation journey.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 07, 2023

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

            - Strategic Planning
            - NRC Executive Fleet Vehicle Report
            - Evidence Building and Evaluation
            - Project Aim
            - Artificial Intelligence
            - Becoming a Modern, Risk-Informed Regulator

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                  - The Commission
                  - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                  - Job Openings
                  - Palisades Restart
                  - Environmental Justice 
                  - Pilgrim Water Releases
                  - Monticello Tritium Issue
                  - International Strategy 2021-2025
                  - Tribal Liaison Program
                  - MAP-X
                  - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                  - OIG Hotline
                  - Rulemaking Activity
                  - Commission Documents
                  - Advanced Reactors
                  - Nuclear Security
                  - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 07, 2023
No. 12,652.

#### People ex rel. Colorado Bar Association *v.*Warren.

*(12*P. [2d] 348)

Decided May 31, 1932.

Mr. Clarence L. Ireland, Attorney General, Mr. *100Charles Roach, Deputy, Mr. E. J. Plunkett, Assistant,, Mr. Oliver Dean, Assistant, for petitioner.

No appearance for respondent.

*En Banc.*

Mr. Chiee Justice Adams

delivered the opinion of the court.

Original proceedings in discipline brought by the attorney general upon the relation of the Colorado Bar Association, acting through its committee on grievances, against Allen E. Warren, a licensed attorney at law.. They charge the respondent with grossly dishonorable and unprofessional conduct. Such offenses as alleged in the petition and amended and supplemental petitions, are as follows: (1) That respondent collected money from various persons upon certain merchandise accounts belonging to Union Mortgage and Deposit Company, a corporation, in the aggregate amount of one hundred dollars, without authority to make such collections; that although requested to pay the same to said corporation, respondent failed to do so and appropriated the money to his own use. (2) That by false and fraudulent pretenses, he induced one Dahl in Denver to cash respondent’s cheek in the sum of fifty dollars, drawn on a Pueblo bank where respondent had no account; that the check was returned by the bank unpaid, and though often requested, respondent has failed to pay the said sum. (3) That he bought a suit of clothes in Denver and in payment therefor gave his check in the sum of thirty dollars, drawn on a Pueblo bank, where respondent had no account; that since then he left the state and has not paid the said sum. (4) Since leaving Colorado, respondent committed felonies in the state of Washington, consisting of forgeries of checks on banking institutions in the city of Seattle, of which crimes he has been duly convicted in the superior court of King county in said state, on a *101plea of guilty, and lie is now serving the sentence imposed therefor, consisting of a term at hard labor in the penitentiary of said state.

Respondent was regularly served with process and notice by publication of all of the above charges. He was thereafter personally served with notice thereof as provided by law, but failed to answer the said charges within the time required, or at all, whereupon, upon motion of the attorney general, respondent’s default was entered. The court appointed Will Shafroth, Esq., an attorney, as referee in said cause, who, after hearing and considering the evidence, found the respondent guilty on all of said charges, and so reported to the court. The reports of the referee are approved and he is discharged from further duty in the premises.

The series of crimes committed by respondent show that he is utterly unfit to engage in the practice of law. It is therefore the judgment of the court that his name be and hereby is stricken fr'om the roll of attorneys and that he be and is disbarred from the further practice of law in this state.
Skip to global NPS navigation
Skip to the main content
Skip to the footer section






National Park Service Search Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


War of 1812





Contact Us
  Fighting the Battles
 The fighting in the War of1812 raged from Canada to the American capital, from inland lakes to the Atlantic, from the eastern seaboard to the western frontier. It drew in many different combatants, from professional British soldiers to American militiamen to Native warriors. Outcomes were unpredictable: on land, Americans found their early confidence spoiled by a series of setbacks in Canada and on the frontier, while at sea the modest American fleet acquitted itself surprisingly well against the mighty British navy. For those caught up in the fighting, however, the battles often were devastating and terrifying affairs. Whatever their allegiance, soldiers faced brutal violence, feeble medical treatment, and a relentless kind of warfare that left families shattered and towns destroyed. And, in a final twist, the Americans' most astonishing victory, the lopsided Battle of New Orleans. As American troops defeated their British opponents in January 1815, a peace treaty, negotiated weeks earlier, was already on its way to Washington to be ratified to end the war.
 
 Browse Stories Naval officer is standing in row boat as crew row from one vessel to anotherVoices
Hear about the conflict in the participants’ own words
Map of troop deployment in the Battle of Chippawa. Niagara River on right.Moments
Learn about famous (and not-so-famous) events surrounding the conflict
Sailing ships engaged in battle with damagePerspectives
Discover how different groups regarded the conflict
Painting of Andrew Jackson on a horse with saberNarratives
Leading historians explore the war and its significance
 Last updated: March 5, 2015
 Tools Site Index


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
<PAGE>


                                                                      Exhibit 23



                        Independent Accountants' Consent



The Board of Directors
Alliance Bancorp of New England, Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No.
333-39645 on Form S-8 of Alliance Bancorp of New England, Inc. of our report
dated January 28, 1999, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Alliance
Bancorp of New England, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1998 and 1997,
and the related consolidated income statements, consolidated statements of
changes in shareholders' equity and consolidated statements of cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1998 , which
report is included herein.




                                                 /s/  KPMG LLP




Hartford, Connecticut
March 23, 1999
Exhibit 31.4





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a), AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Samir M. Zabaneh, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Heartland Payment Systems, Inc.;


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








Date: April 21, 2016


/s/Samir M. ZabanehSamir M. ZabanehChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
§ 128.309 What are the ways a Participant may exit the Veteran Small Business Certification Program? ( a ) *Voluntary withdrawal.* A Participant may voluntarily withdraw from the Veteran Small Business Certification Program at any time. Once a concern notifies SBA that it seeks to voluntarily withdraw from the program, SBA will decertify the concern and remove its designation as a certified VOSB or SDVOSB in the certification database. The concern may reapply for SDVOSB or VOSB certification ninety (90) calendar days after the date of decertification. At reapplication, the concern must demonstrate that it meets all eligibility requirements.
( b ) *Decertification by SBA.* SBA may decertify a Participant and remove its designation as a VOSB or SDVOSB in the certification database in accordance with § 128.310. The concern may reapply for certification ninety (90) calendar days after the date of decertification. At reapplication, the concern must demonstrate that it meets all eligibility requirements.
( c ) *Decertification pursuant to a protest.* Any certified VOSB or SDVOSB that is found to be ineligible through a VOSB or SDVOSB status protest decision will be immediately removed from the certification database. The concern may reapply for certification ninety (90) calendar days after the date of decertification. At reapplication, the concern must demonstrate that it meets all eligibility requirements.
( d ) *Decertification due to suspension or debarment.* SBA may decertify a Participant immediately upon notice that the Participant or any of its owners has an active exclusion in SAM, pursuant to § 128.201.
```

[110th Congress Public Law 224]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ224.110]

[[Page 122 STAT. 737]]

Public Law 110-224
110th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
160 East Washington Street in Chagrin Falls, Ohio, as the ``Sgt. Michael 
         M. Kashkoush Post Office <<NOTE: May 7, 2008 -  [H.R. 
                           5400]>> Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SGT. MICHAEL M. KASHKOUSH POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 160 East Washington Street in Chagrin Falls, Ohio, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Sgt. Michael M. Kashkoush Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sgt. 
Michael M. Kashkoush Post Office Building''.

    Approved May 7, 2008.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 5400 (S. 2626):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 154 (2008):
            Mar. 5, considered and passed House.
            Apr. 22, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
#### A. Woehrlin, Appellant, *v.*C. Schaffer, Respondent.

April 21, 1885.

Abatement — Death Pending Appeal — In an action for personal injuries, wherein the judgment is for the defendant, the death of the plaintiff pending his appeal, abates the action.

Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Adams, J.

*Appeal dismissed.*

McGaman & Leahey, for the appellant.

B. Schnurmacher, for the respondent.

Rombauer, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

We are precluded from examining the merits of this appeal, by the fact that the action is one for injuries to the person of the plaintiff, and that during the pendency of the appeal the plaintiff appellant died.

It is conceded that the action does not survive. — Rev. Stat., sect. 97. A brief however is filed by counsel claiming to represent appellant, asking us to review the action of the lower court notwithstanding, because the appeal is taken solely for the purpose of determining whether the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed, reversed, or modified.

In Lewis, *Adm'r, v. St. Louis & S. M. R. R. Co.*(59 *443Mo. 495), which case we presume counsel had in view in making this point, a judgment was recovered in the trial court in the lifetime of the party inj ured. From the judgment thus rendered an appeal was prosecuted by defendant, and plaintiff.’s administrator substituted in the appellate court. It was held that by the recovery of a judgment in the life time of the intestate, the claim for personal injuries was merged in the judgment, and became a. debt with which the personal representative was chargeable, and that therefore the personal representative was-properly substituted. The facts here are wholly different. The judgment of the trial court was for defendant, and the- - claim at the date of the death of the party injured was a simple claim and no more. With his death that claim necessarily died, and no one can represent him in this court in regard thereto. The administrator, if any such there be, has no interest in the controversy. No substitution has been made in this court,- and in fact no substitution can be made.

It results from the foregoing that the only disposition -we can make herein is to dismiss the appeal. It is so ordered.

All the judges concur.
§ 312.8 Investment rates. ( a ) *Minimum investment rate.* There is no minimum investment rate for a project.
( b ) *Maximum investment rate.* The maximum investment rate for a project shall not exceed 50 percent.
### §5366. Supervision

The Secretary may by regulations require that operations at a bonded wine cellar or taxpaid wine bottling house be supervised by an internal revenue officer where necessary for the protection of the revenue or for the proper enforcement of this subchapter.

(Added Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §201, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1381; amended Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1834.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 5366, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 666, consisted of provisions similar to those comprising this section, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859.

#### Amendments

1976—Pub. L. 94–455 struck out "or his delegate" after "Secretary".
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS
OF OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                      34,351,922
<SECURITIES>                                 3,834,646
<RECEIVABLES>                                   66,974
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            38,741,119
<PP&E>                                       2,878,466
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,272,242
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              41,000,300
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,757,198
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       129,703
<OTHER-SE>                                  36,287,665
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                41,000,300
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,663,893
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            14,233,502
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (8,884,066)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (8,884,066)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (8,884,066)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.71)
        

</TABLE>
§ 1.2 Definitions. ( a ) Rule or regulation have the same meaning as those terms are defined in the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551(4)).
( b ) *Rulemaking* means the FEMA process for considering and formulating the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule.
( c ) *Administrator* means the Administrator, FEMA, or an official to whom the Administrator has expressly delegated authority to issue rules.
( d ) *FEMA* means Federal Emergency Management Agency.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MAY 2, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JAN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 FEB-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAY-02-1998
<CASH>                                               2,080
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          678
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                         66,730
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    71,267
<PP&E>                                              55,764
<DEPRECIATION>                                      23,501
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     103,530
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               18,474
<BONDS>                                              6,892
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                          75,108
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       103,530
<SALES>                                             65,694
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    65,694
<CGS>                                               45,020
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       45,020
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     174
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      5,191
<INCOME-TAX>                                         2,076
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  3,115
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         3,115  
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          .24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .23 
        


</TABLE>