alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AMENDMENT NO





Exhibit
(10)(o)(6)


 


AMENDMENT NO. 5


TO


ALLTEL CORPORATION 401(k)
PLAN


(January 1, 2001
Restatement)


 


WHEREAS, ALLTEL Corporation (the “Company”) maintains
the ALLTEL Corporation 401(k) Plan, as amended and restated effective January
1, 2001, and as subsequently amended (the “Plan”); and


 


WHEREAS, the Company desires further to amend the Plan
in conformity to the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the Company and
the Communication Workers of America Locals 3371 and 3372 effective October 4,
2003 and the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the Company and the
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 463 ratified February 6,
2004;


 


NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Company hereby
amends the Plan, effective as set forth herein, in the respects hereinafter set
forth:


 


1.     Effective as of February 7, 2004, Section 13.11(b)(3) of the
Plan is amended by deleting subsection (i) and substituting the following:


 


(i)            in the case of a KY
CBA Employee covered by the collective bargaining agreement with IBEW Local
463:


 


(A)          for Contribution Periods
ending prior to January 1, 2005, 66 cents for each $1 of the KY CBA Employee’s
Salary Deferral Matched Contributions for the Contribution Period, and


 


(B)           for Contribution
Periods ending after December 31, 2004, KY CBA Employee’s Salary Deferral
Matched Contributions shall receive no Employer Matching Contributions and the
Applicable Matching Amount shall be zero (0);


 


2.     Effective as of January 1, 2004, Section 13.11(b)(3) of the
Plan is amended by deleting subsection (ii) and substituting the
following:


 


(ii)           in the case of a KY CBA
Employee covered by the collective bargaining agreement with the CWA:


 


(A)          for Contribution Periods
ending prior to January 1, 2004, 75 cents for each $ 1 of the KY CBA Employee’s
Salary Deferral Matched Contributions for the Contribution Period; and


 


(B)           for Contribution
Periods ending after December 31, 2003, KY CBA Employee’s Salary Deferral
Matched Contributions shall receive no Employer Matching Contributions and the


 

















 


Applicable Matching Amount shall be zero (0).


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company, by its duly
authorized officer, has caused this Amendment No. 5 to ALLTEL Corporation
401(k) Plan (January 1, 2001 Restatement) to be executed on this 7th day of
February, 2004.


 


	
   

  	
  ALLTEL CORPORATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/

  	
  Scott T. Ford

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
  President & CEO
Russia Imposes New Border Fees

----
USING RUSSIAN PROMISSORY NOTES

----

**December 1997/January 1998**
by Padraic J. Sweeney
One of the most common forms of commercial credit in Russia is the promissory note, or"veksel."  Russian companies of all sizes, Russian banks, and many local and regionalgovernments use promissory notes in lieu of cash in an economy where commercial credit is stillhard to obtain.  While promissory notes do carry significant risk, knowledge and common sensecan serve U.S. companies well when they encounter this ubiquitous financial instrument*(editor's note: "veksel" is the Russian word for "promissory note": the two terms are usedinterchangeably in the Russian banking sector and in this article).*
Originally a means of addressing the chronic payments problems faced by many Russian private-and public-sector organizations, promissory notes are issued by banks, enterprises, andgovernment entities.  Russian companies "are highly illiquid and use veksels as a form of non-cashpayment," observes Michael Workman of Renaissance Capital, a leading Russian investmentbank.  The secondary market for "veksels" has become one of the most dynamic securitiesmarkets in Russia, since  yields on commonly traded promissory notes often  far exceed those ofother types of domestic debt securities. "The yields [reaching as high as 60 to 70 percent in rubleterms per annum] are reflective of the liquidity of the companies...and their transparency," saysWorkman.
**As Commercial Credit**
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2007

To increase the amount allowed as a child tax credit and to repeal the 

sunset imposed on the modifications to the child tax credit made by 

the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2003

Mr. DAVIS of Alabama introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To increase the amount allowed as a child tax credit and 

to repeal the sunset imposed on the modifications to 

the child tax credit made by the Economic Growth and 

Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, and for other 

purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. ACCELERATION OF CHILD TAX CREDIT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (a) of section 24 of the 

5 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to child tax cred6 it) is amended to read as follows: 
2

•HR 2007 IH 

1 ‘‘(a) ALLOWANCE OF CREDIT.—There shall be al2 lowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this chapter 

3 for the taxable year with respect to each qualifying child 

4 of the taxpayer an amount equal to $1,500.’’. 

5 (b) REPEAL OF SUNSET.—Title IX of the Economic 

6 Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (relat7 ing to sunset of provisions of such Act) shall not apply 

8 to the amendments made by section 201 of such Act. 

9 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

10 subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

11 December 31, 2002.

Æ
EVALUATING RUSSIAN BANKS

----

**December 1997/January 1998**
by Philip H. de Leon
The emergence of a commercial banking system in Russia over the last eight years has spawnedhundreds of new Russian banks.  Some of these banks are becoming pillars of the country'sbanking system.  Many others are rapidly disappearing, as increased competition and regulationdrive them out of business.  In a still unsettled banking climate, it can be difficult to evaluate abank's financial health when selecting a financial service provider.  While there is no fool-proofmethod for evaluating any Russian bank, a number of private- and public-sector entities canprovide an American firm with important clues to a bank's well-being.  Some of these entities aredescribed below.
**Central Bank of Russia**
H. R. 1668

One Hundred Eighth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the seventh day of January, two thousand and three

An Act

To designate the United States courthouse located at 101 North Fifth Street in

Muskogee, Oklahoma, as the ‘‘Ed Edmondson United States Courthouse’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The United States courthouse located at 101 North Fifth Street

in Muskogee, Oklahoma, shall be known and designated as the

‘‘Ed Edmondson United States Courthouse’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the United States courthouse

referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the

‘‘Ed Edmondson United States Courthouse’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
<Page>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2


               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 Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Genaissance Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Ben Kaplan, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
that:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
    of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                                       /s/ BEN KAPLAN
                                                       -----------------------
                                                       Ben Kaplan
Date: February 11, 2004                                Chief Financial Officer


    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Genaissance Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by
Genaissance Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 831.1301 Purpose.

This subpart prescribes procedures to be followed by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) , which are consistent with the Federal Claims Collection Standards (FCCS) (Chapter II of title 4, Code of Federal Regulations), in the collection of debts owed to the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### National Park Service 

Notice is hereby given in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 92-463, that a meeting of the Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail Advisory Council will be held Wednesday, December 8, 2004 at 9 a.m. until 3:30 p.m., at the Alabama Department of Transportation, 1409 Coliseum Boulevard in Montgomery Alabama. 

The Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail Advisory Council was established pursuant to Pub. L. 100-192 establishing the Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail. This Council was established to advise the National Park Service on such issues as preservation of trail routes and features, public use, standards for posting and maintaining trail markers, and administrative matters.

The matters to be discussed include: 

(A) Review of last meeting Minutes 

(B) Subcommittee Review & Nominations 

(C) 40th Anniversary Update 

The meeting will be open to the public. However, facilities and space for accommodating members of the public are limited and persons will be accommodated on first come, first serve basis. Anyone may file a written statement with Catherine F. Light, Trail Superintendent concerning the matters to be discussed. 

Person wishing further information concerning this meeting may contact Catherine F. Light, Trail Superintendent, Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail, at 334.727.6390 (phone), 334.727.4597 (fax) or mail 1212 Old Montgomery Road, Tuskegee Institute, Alabama 36088.

      ( print page 64321)    
Dated: October 6, 2004. 

Catherine F. Light, 

Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail Superintendent. 

[FR Doc. 04-24609 Filed 11-3-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
#### Hub Towel Supply Corp., Respondent, v. Massachusetts Bonding and Insurance Company, Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements, with leave to the defendant to answer within ten days after service of the order, with notice of entry thereof, on payment of said costs. No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Cohn, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
#### Jacob M. Whitman, Respondent, v. Nancy M. Whitman et al., Appellants.

The modification by the court of the judgment of separation which had been granted in favor of the wife prior to her procurement of the Revada decree of divorce, which modification eliminated from the judgment the requirement that the plaintiff in the instant action pay for the support of the wife, cannot support the claim that the court thereby made a binding adjudication that the Revada divorce and the ensuing remarriage were valid, even though the court might have granted such modification under the belief that the stated foreign decree and the remarriage were valid. Section 1172-c of the Civil Practice Act makes it mandatory for the court to eliminate provisions for support of a wife in a judgment of divorce in her favor or in a judgment annulling a marriage or declaring its nullity. That section has no application to a judgment of separation. Provisions for support in a judgment of separation may be annulled pursuant to section 1170 of the Civil Practice Act, but this section does not require the court to make any finding as to the validity of a foreign decree of divorce or of a remarriage by one of the parties. Rolan, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ., concur.
### §59z. Declaration of nonnavigability of bodies of water in Ridgefield, New Jersey

The three bodies of water located at block 4004, lots 1 and 2, and block 4003, lot 1, in the Borough of Ridgefield, County of Bergen, New Jersey, which have their mouths at the Hackensack River at 40 degrees 49 minutes 58 seconds north latitude and 74 degrees 01 minute 46 seconds west longitude, 40 degrees 49 minutes 46 seconds north latitude and 74 degrees 01 minute 55 seconds west longitude, and 40 degrees 49 minutes 35 seconds north latitude and 74 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds west longitude, respectively, and the body of water located at block 4006, lot 1, in the Borough of Ridgefield, County of Bergen, New Jersey, which has its mouth at the Hackensack River at 40 degrees 49 minutes 15 seconds north latitude and 74 degrees 01 minute 52 seconds west longitude, are declared to be nonnavigable waterways of the United States within the meaning of the General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 525 et seq.) and section 401 of this title.

(Pub. L. 100–676, §54, Nov. 17, 1988, 102 Stat. 4046.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The General Bridge Act of 1946, referred to in text, is title V of act Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 753, 60 Stat. 847, which is classified generally to subchapter III (§525 et seq.) of chapter 11 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 525 of this title and Tables.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Natural Resources Conservation Service

# AGENCY:

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture, Maine State Office.

# ACTION:

                        Notice of availability of proposed changes in the NRCS National Handbook of Conservation Practices, Section IV of the Maine State NRCS Field Office Technical Guide (FOTG) located at                         *http://www.me.nrcs.usda.gov*                         under “Draft Standards for Comments” for review and comment.                    

# SUMMARY:

It is the intention of NRCS to issue revised conservation practice standards in its National Handbook of Conservation Practices. These revised standards are the following:

314 Brush Management; 329 Residue Management, Ridge-Till; 340 Cover Crop; 342 Critical Area Planting; 344 Residue Management, Seasonal; 386 Field Border; 511 Forage Harvest Management; 512 Pasture and Hay Planting; 528 Animal Trails and Walkways; 590 Nutrient Management; 557 Row Arrangement.

# DATES:

Comments will be received for a 30-day period commencing with this date of publication.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Inquire in writing to Christopher R. Jones, State Resource Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 967 Illinois Avenue, Suite #3, Bangor, Maine 04401.

A copy of these standards are available from the above individual.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 343 of the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act of 1966 states that revisions made after enactment of the law to NRCS State Technical Guides used to carry out highly erodible land and wetland provisions of the law shall be made available for public review and comment. For the next 30 days the NRCS will receive comments relative to the proposed changes. Following that period a determination will be made by the NRCS regarding disposition of those comments and a final determination of change will be made.

Dated: November 4, 2004.

Christopher R. Jones,

State Resource Conservationist.

[FR Doc. 04-25246 Filed 11-12-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-16-P
### §110105. Governing body

(a) Board of Directors.—The board of directors and the responsibilities of the board are as provided in the articles of incorporation.

(b) Officers.—The officers and the election of officers are as provided in the articles of incorporation.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1367.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 110105(a) | 36:2706. | Aug. 21, 1984, Pub. L. 98–391, §§6, 7, 98 Stat. 1359. |
| 110105(b) | 36:2707. | |

Section
### §1710E. Traumatic brain injury: use of non-Department facilities for rehabilitation

(a) Cooperative Agreements.—The Secretary, in implementing and carrying out a plan developed under section 1710C of this title, may provide hospital care and medical services, including rehabilitative services (as defined in section 1710C of this title), through cooperative agreements with appropriate public or private entities that have established long-term neurobehavioral rehabilitation and recovery programs.

(b) Covered Individuals.—The care and services provided under subsection (a) shall be made available to an individual—

(1) who is described in section 1710C(a) of this title; and

(2)(A) to whom the Secretary is unable to provide such treatment or services at the frequency or for the duration prescribed in such plan; or

(B) for whom the Secretary determines that it is optimal with respect to the recovery and rehabilitation for such individual.

(c) Authorities of State Protection and Advocacy Systems.—Nothing in subtitle C of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000 shall be construed as preventing a State protection and advocacy system (as defined in section 1710C(g) of this title) from exercising the authorities described in such subtitle with respect to individuals provided rehabilitative treatment or services under section 1710C of this title in a non-Department facility.

(d) Standards.—The Secretary may not provide treatment or services as described in subsection (a) at a non-Department facility under such subsection unless such facility maintains standards for the provision of such treatment or services established by an independent, peer-reviewed organization that accredits specialized rehabilitation programs for adults with traumatic brain injury.

(Added Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XVII, §1703(a), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 489; amended Pub. L. 111–163, title V, §509, May 5, 2010, 124 Stat. 1162; Pub. L. 112–154, title I, §107(c), Aug. 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 1173.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000, referred to in subsec. (c), is Pub. L. 106–402, Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1677. Subtitle C of the Act probably means subtitle C of title I of the Act, which is classified generally to part C (§15041 et seq.) of subchapter I of chapter 144 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 15001 of Title 42 and Tables.

#### Amendments

2012—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 112–154, §107(c), inserted ", including rehabilitative services (as defined in section 1710C of this title)," after "medical services".

2010—Subsecs. (b) to (d). Pub. L. 111–163 added subsecs. (b) and (d) and redesignated former subsec. (b) as (c).
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-22-00488-CR

Troy Allen Dennis, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY

NO. CR2018-048, THE HONORABLE STEPHANIE BASCON, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Troy Allen Dennis was convicted by a jury of aggravated sexual assault 

of a child younger than six years of age and sentenced to life imprisonment. See Tex. Penal 

Code § 22.021(a)(1)(B)(i), (f)(1).

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by 

a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the 

requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record 

demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); 

Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 

488 U.S. 75, 81–82 (1988). Appellant’s counsel has certified to this Court that she sent copies of 

the motion and brief to appellant, advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record

and file a pro se response, and provided a motion to assist appellant in obtaining the record. See 
2

Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 

744. Appellant filed a pro se response on July 27, 2023.

We have conducted an independent review of the record—including the record of 

the trial and sentencing proceedings below, appellate counsel’s brief, and appellant’s pro se 

response—and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 

766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel 

that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review, and the appeal is frivolous. 

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. The trial court’s judgment of 

conviction is affirmed.

__________________________________________

Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Theofanis

Affirmed

Filed: August 25, 2023

Do Not Publish