alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
March 23 , 2015

Mr. Dean Penewit

Peneworx LLC

5108 Elton Court

Virginia Beach, VA 23464

Dear Mr. Penewit :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It

explains why we cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can n o t Process Your Request

We entered your J anuary 9 , 2015 exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

-

0053 ) , but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request

any further, y ou must send us all of the following:

• The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would

benefit the public as a whole.

• The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption

would pr ovide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

• Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

W hat You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further , you must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9521

.

Sincerely,

/s/

Jake Troutman

Program Analyst , Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________ 

Case No. 5D23-2667

LT Case No. 2013-CF-6749-A 

_____________________________ 

GEORGE P. CARTER, 

Appellant, 

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Appellee. 

_____________________________ 

3.800 appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. 

London M. Kite, Judge. 

George P. Carter, Madison, pro se. 

No Appearance for Appellee. 

January 23, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. 

EDWARDS, C.J., EISNAUGLE, and MACIVER, JJ., concur. 
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
#### Louis E. Rich v. Samuel I. Hyman.

Motion for stay granted on condition that the appeal from the order for the examination of the proposed defendant to enable plaintiff to frame a complaint be ready for argument on December 1, 1916. Order to be settled on notice. Present — Clarke, P. J., Scott, Smith, Page and Davis, JJ.
§ 971.601 Environmental requirements. Before issuing a permit for the commercial recovery of deep seabed hard mineral resources, the Administrator must find that: ( a ) The issuance of a permit cannot reasonably be expected to result in a significant adverse environmental effect, or, if there is insufficient information to make that determination, that no irreparable harm will result during a period when monitoring of commerical recovery is undertaken to gather sufficient information in order to determine the potential for or occurrence of any significant adverse environmental effect. In examining this issue, NOAA will give consideration to the following Ocean Discharge Criteria of the Clean Water Act (40 CFR part 125, subpart M), as they may pertain to discharges and other environmental perturbations related to the commercial recovery operations: ( 1 ) The quantities, composition and potential for bioaccumulation or persistence of the pollutants to be discharged;
( 2 ) The potential transport of such pollutants by biological, physical or chemical processes;
( 3 ) The composition and vulnerability of the biological communities which may be exposed to such pollutants including the presence of unique species or communities of species, the presence of species identified as endangered or threatened pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, or the presence of those species critical to the structure or function of the ecosystem such as those important for the food chain;
( 4 ) The importance of the receiving water area to the surrounding biological community, including the presence of spawning sites, nursery/forage areas, migratory pathways, or areas necessary for other functions or critical stages in the life cycle of an organism;
( 5 ) The existence of special aquatic sites including but not limited to marine sanctuaries and refuges, parks, national and historic monuments, national seashores, wilderness areas and coral reefs;
( 6 ) The potential impacts on human health through direct and indirect pathways;
( 7 ) Existing or potential recreational and commercial fishing, including finfishing and shellfishing;
( 8 ) Any applicable requirements of an approved Coastal Zone Management plan;
( 9 ) Such other factors relating to the effects of the discharge as may be appropriate;
( 10 ) Marine water quality criteria developed pursuant to section 304(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act; and
( b ) The applicant has an approved monitoring plan (§ 971.603) and the resources and other capabilities to implement it.
§ 990.61 Administrative record. ( a ) *Closing the administrative record for restoration planning.* Within a reasonable time after the trustees have completed restoration planning, as provided in §§ 990.55 and 990.56 of this part, they must close the administrative record. Trustees may not add documents to the administrative record once it is closed, except where such documents: ( 1 ) Are offered by interested parties that did not receive actual or constructive notice of the Draft Restoration Plan and the opportunity to comment on the plan;
( 2 ) Do not duplicate information already contained in the administrative record; and
( 3 ) Raise significant issues regarding the Final Restoration Plan.
( b ) *Opening an administrative record for restoration implementation.* Trustees may open an administrative record for implementation of restoration, as provided in § 990.45 of this part. The costs associated with the administrative record are part of the costs of restoration. Ordinarily, the administrative record for implementation of restoration should document, at a minimum, all Restoration Implementation Phase decisions, actions, and expenditures, including any modifications made to the Final Restoration Plan.
NEW NRC SENIOR RESIDENT INSPECTOR ASSIGNED TO

PEACH BOTTOM NUCLEAR PLANT

Samuel L. Hansell has been assigned as the new Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission Senior Resident Inspector at the Peach Bottom Nuclear Power Plant in 

Delta, Pa. He joins NRC Resident Inspector Adam Ziedonis at the two-unit site, 

operated by Exelon Nuclear. 

NRC Region I Administrator Bill Dean said, "Sam Hansell has the 

experience and commitment to safety to carry out the NRC mission of protecting 

people and the environment by ensuring safe operation at Peach Bottom.”

Hansell first joined the NRC in April 1990 as a licensed operator examiner in Region I. 

Most recently, he was the chief of the operations branch in the Region I Office. He has also served 

as a senior resident inspector at the Limerick nuclear plant in Sanatoga, Pa., and the Susquehanna 

Steam Electric Station in Berwick, Pa. Prior to joining the agency, Hansell worked for Public 

Service Electric and Gas as a reactor operator and senior reactor operator at Hope Creek Nuclear 

Plant in Hancock’s Bridge, N.J.

Hansell is a graduate of Thomas Edison State College in Trenton, N.J., where he earned a 

bachelor’s degree in nuclear engineering technology.

Each U.S. commercial nuclear plant has at least two NRC resident inspectors. They serve

as the agency's eyes and ears at the facility, conducting inspections, monitoring major work

projects, and interacting with plant workers and the public.

The Peach Bottom resident inspectors can be reached at 717-456-7614.

###

News releases are available through a free listserv subscription or by clicking on the EMAIL UPDATES link on the 

NRC homepage (www.nrc.gov). E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's 

website. For the latest news, follow the NRC on www.twitter.com/NRCgov.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region I 

475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406

E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov 

Site: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov

No. I-11-039

Contact: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330

 Neil Sheehan (610) 337-5331

October 12, 2011

Email: opa1.resource@nrc.gov
#### In the Matter of Harborne Realty Corp., Appellant. Samuel Gottlieb et al., Respondents.

*Per Curiam.*

In this proceeding the landlord, who is the appellant, sought to secure an increase in rent from respondents, who are tenants of stores in the landlord’s premises. The building involved is fourteen stories high and contains six stores and seventy apartments. In' the absence of other proof the formula set forth in the statute as to commercial property fixing a net annual return of 6% on the fair value of the property plus 2% on the principal of the mortgage thereon should have been employed (and not 4% and 1%), in determining whether the landlord was entitled to an increase in store rentals *(Matter of Court Square Bldg.*v. *City of New York,*298 N. Y. 380, 386; *Schack*v. *Handel,*271 App. Div. 1). However, we find no error in the result arrived at, as expenses of $21,000 claimed by the landlord were not applicable to the stores in question but were properly chargeable only to the apartments in the upper fourteen stories of the building. Increasing the return to 6% and *2%*would increase the rental value by only $15,360. Accordingly, from the figures submitted by the landlord, there would be no basis for an increase in rentals as to respondents. Moreover, no attempt was made by the landlord, who has the burden of proof, to show what was the rental value of the stores as against that of the apartments.

The order appealed from should accordingly be affirmed, with costs.

*829Peek, P. J., Dore, Cohn, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ., concur.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements.
Amendment to the ON Semiconductor Corporation 2000 Stock Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 10.2 
 AMENDMENT TO THE 
 ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION 
 2000 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN 
 ON
Semiconductor Corporation (“Company”), formerly SCG Holding Corporation, previously approved and adopted the ON Semiconductor 2000 Stock Incentive Plan (“Plan”). The Plan has been amended from time to time and was recently
amended and restated, effective May 19, 2004. By this instrument, the Company desires to further amend the Plan to help prevent inadvertent earnings charges under the revised Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (“FAS
123R”), “Share-Based Payment” (“Amendment”). 
  

	 	1.	The provisions of this First Amendment shall be effective as of the date adopted by the Company’s Compensation Committee. 

  

	 	2.	Section 14(e) of the Plan is hereby amended to read as follows: 

 (e) OUTSTANDING AWARDS – OTHER CHANGES. In the event of any other change in the capitalization of the Company or corporate change other than those specifically referred to in Article 14, the Committee shall make
such adjustments in the number and class of shares subject to Awards outstanding on the date on which such change occurs and in the per share exercise price of each Award to prevent dilution or enlargement of rights. 
  

	 	3.	This Amendment shall amend only the provisions of the Plan as set forth herein. Those provisions of the Plan not expressly amended shall be considered in full force and effect.


 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be
executed by its duly authorized representative on this 16th day of May, 2007. 
  

			
	ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	/s/ G. SONNY CAVE
		 	G. Sonny Cave,
		 	Senior Vice President, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of PR Specialists, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Lawrence Ruden, President of our Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to my knowledge:

1.

The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of our Company.



/s/ Lawrence Ruden

Lawrence Ruden,

President (Principal Executive Officer)

Date:  July 28, 2009
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Joe M. Marino, Respondent, against Theodore Demettriades et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation *880Board, Respondent.

Foster, P. J., Hefiernan, Brewster, Deyo and Bergan, JJ., concur.
§ 1027.1 Purpose and scope. ( a ) This regulation provides procedures for the collection by administrative offset of a Federal employee's salary without his/her consent to satisfy certain debts owed to the Federal government. These regulations apply to all Federal employees who owe debts to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and to current employees of CPSC who owe debts to other Federal agencies. This regulation does not apply when the employee consents to recovery from his/her current pay account.
( b ) This regulation does not apply to debts or claims arising under: ( 1 ) The Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, 26 U.S.C. 1 *et seq.;*
( 2 ) The Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 301 *et seq.;*
( 3 ) The tariff laws of the United States; or
( 4 ) Any case where a collection of a debt by salary offset is explicitly provided for or prohibited by another statute.
( c ) This regulation does not apply to any adjustment to pay arising out of an employee's selection of coverage or a change in coverage under a Federal benefits program requiring periodic deductions from pay if the amount to be recovered was accumulated over four pay periods or less.
( d ) This regulation does not preclude the compromise, suspension, or termination of collection action where appropriate under the standards implementing the Federal Claims Collection Act, 31 U.S.C. 3711 *et seq,* and 4 CFR parts 101 through 105.
( e ) This regulation does not preclude an employee from requesting waiver of an overpayment under 5 U.S.C. 5584, 10 U.S.C. 2774, or 32 U.S.C. 716, or in any way questioning the amount or validity of the debt by submitting a subsequent claim to the General Accounting Office. This regulation does not preclude an employee from requesting a waiver pursuant to other statutory provisions applicable to the particular debt being collected.
( f ) Matters not addressed in these regulations should be reviewed in accordance with the Federal Claims Collection Standards at 4 CFR 101.1 *et seq.*
EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and(2)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
periods indicated.
  Dated: February 9, 2010
    /s/ BRET W. JOHNSENBret W. JohnsenSenior Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer and Treasurer
### SUBCHAPTER I–D—FEDERAL ABSENTEE VOTING ASSISTANCE
Titles Added During 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Advances in cellular and molecular biology of plants
NAL call no. - QK728.A38 

Amino acids
NAL call no. - QD431.A1A45 

Biotechnology software & Internet journal
NAL call no. - TA166.B46 

European journal of agricultural education and extension
NAL call no. - S530.E97 

Food testing & analysis
NAL call no. - TX541.F665 

FoodService director
NAL call no. - TX901.F662 

Genome science & technology
NAL call no. - QH447.G466 

International journal of technology management
NAL call no. - T1.I59 

Journal of extension computer file
NAL call no. - LC45.4.J682 

Journal of liquid chromatography & related technologies
NAL call no. - QD79.C454J68 

Journal of quantitative trait loci
NAL call no. - QK981.45.J68 

Microbial pathogenesis
NAL call no. - QR175.M53 

Molecular breeding: new strategies in plant improvement
NAL call no. - QK981.4.M63 

Proceedings - National Grain Pearl Millet Symposium
NAL call no. - SB191.P4N37 

Proceedings of the Technology Transfer Society...Annual Meeting, International Symposium and Exhibit
NAL call no. - T174.3.T43 

Reviews of weed science
NAL call no. - SB610.R47 

Rural cooperatives
NAL call no. - aHD1491.U6R87 

Technological forecasting and social change
NAL call no. - T174.T25 

Texas journal of agriculture and natural resources
NAL call no. - S1.T49 

Transgenic research
NAL call no. - QH442.6.T74 

Turf grass trends
NAL call no. - SB433.T874 

Virus genes
NAL call no. - QH434.V57 
----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# November 2012 Report on the Status of Public Petitions Under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 2.206.

Accession Number: ML12334A346

Date Released: Friday, December 21, 2012

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML12334A349 - Cover Memo: November 2012 Report on the Status of Public Petitions Under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations,Section 2.206. (3 page(s), 12/13/2012)
    - ML12334A351 - Enclosure: November 2012 Report on the Status of Public Petitions Under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations,Section 2.206. (26 page(s), 12/13/2012)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
Exhibit 23.1

 

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

The Board of Directors

HSBC Finance Corporation

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-134419 and No. 333-134419-01) on Form S-3 of HSBC Credit Card Master Note Trust (USA) I of our attestation report dated March 30, 2009 with respect to HSBC Finance Corporation’s (the Company) assessment of compliance with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation ABapplicable to the servicing of asset backed securitization transactions secured by receivables in the HSBC Credit Card Master Note Trust (USA) I program, except for the criteria set forth in Sections 1122(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(3)(i)(D), 1122(d)(4)(i), 1122(d)(4)(ii), 1122(d)(4)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(vii), 1122(d)(4)(viii), 1122(d)(4)(ix), 1122(d)(4)(x), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii), 1122(d)(4)(xiii),1122(d)(4)(xiv), and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the Company’s activities, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2008. Our attestation report appears in the December 31, 2008 annual report on Form 10-K of HSBC Credit Card Master Note Trust (USA) I.  

 

/s/ KPMG LLP

 

Chicago, Illinois

March 30, 2009
GENERAL CONTACT REPORT

I. Type of Contact (Telephone, Meeting, etc.): Telephone . , . CBI? /a i' --

Yes.=
II. EPA Information Name(s) of EPA Representative(s):

Greg Fritz 1%41 Date/Time: c•-• ....._ _,- 11/03/03 11:37AM c--,"

i Division/Branch & Phone #:

EETD/ICB (202) 564-8583 Contact Initiator? 1 Yes k_o

.)

.. - III. Second Party Information .. 1 Name(s) of Second Party Representative(s):

Bill Buxton PMN Number: FMG ECA Company & Phone #:

DuPont / (302) 999-4658 Contact Initiator? No
IV. Summary of Issues Discussed and Comments Received:
The company representative was informed of the internal EPA confusion regarding [31784- 04-0] being listed on the FMG incineration ECA list of chemicals to be tested. These internal discussions centered around the future Agency dissemination of a list of chemicals and concern that inclusion of the chemical name and CAS Registry Number (CRN) was a breach of company confidentiality. This CRN and associated chemical name, Ethene, tetrafluoro-, polymer with trifluoro(pentafluoroethoxy)ethene (9CI), had been claimed as CBI. The following conversation confirms it is not a CBI disclosure to use the CRN or

name. Q) Can we release the chemical name and CRN in our public ECA documents? A) Yes, the name and CAS Registry Number were protected under company patents and no longer needed CBI protection.

Signature of EPA Official: 

### .-/—_--- , - , __,:c Date: (I 

# t Ler.% 

# DwP•orr beeT -2 , 03 -Pdolei
Docket Number: FAA-2012-0333
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between George Rugen, as President of District Lodge No. 15, International Association of Machinists, A. F. of L., Respondent, and North American Philips Co., Inc., Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion. Present — Cohn, J. P., Breitel, Bastow, Botein and Bergan,- JJ.
#### § 1.63 Injunctions: Wool, fur, and textile cases.

In those cases arising under the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, Fur Products Labeling Act, and Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, where it appears to the Commission that it would be to the public interest for it to do so, the Commission will apply to the courts for injunctive relief, pursuant to the authority granted in such Acts.

[32 FR 8444, June 13, 1967, as amended at 41 FR 4814, Feb. 2, 1976]
### [§805. Repealed. Pub. L. 99–145, title VI, §683(b)(1), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 665]

Section, Pub. L. 87–649, Sept. 7, 1962, 76 Stat. 486, required commanding officer to discourage the sale of pay by members of naval service. See section 701 of this title.
No: II-14-041 August 5, 2014

CONTACT: Roger Hannah 404-997-4417 

Joey Ledford 404-997-4416

NRC Assigns New Resident Inspector to Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in Atlanta have selected Alejandro Alen as the 

resident inspector for Southern Nuclear Operating Co.’s Vogtle nuclear power plant, located near 

Waynesboro, Ga.

The Vogtle plant is about 26 miles southeast of Augusta, and Alen joins NRC Senior Resident 

Inspector Mike Cain. 

Alen joined the NRC in 2008. He completed the agency’s 

Nuclear Safety Professional Development Program and was 

qualified as a reactor inspector in 2010. He has worked as a reactor 

inspector in the Region II Division of Reactor Safety conducting 

engineering team inspections at operating nuclear power plants. 

He also served as the acting resident inspector at the Turkey Point 

nuclear plant in Florida in 2011 and a project engineer in the 

Region II Division of Reactor Projects beginning this year. 

Alen graduated with high honors from the University of 

Puerto Rico with a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering. 

“Alejandro Alen has the background and commitment to carry out the NRC mission of 

protecting people and the environment by helping to ensure the safety of the Vogtle plant,” said NRC 

Region II Administrator Victor McCree. 

At least two NRC resident inspectors are assigned to each operating U.S. commercial nuclear 

plant. They serve as the agency’s eyes and ears at the facility, conducting inspections, monitoring major 

work projects, and interacting with plant workers and the public. Resident inspectors can serve at a 

reactor site for up to seven years. 

 The Vogtle resident inspectors can be reached at 706-554-9901.
#### 325 Church Avenue Corporation, Respondent, v. Nilow Realty Corporation, Tenant, and Michael’s Fair-Mart Food Stores, Inc., Appellant.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Appellate Division granted. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Wenzel, JJ.