alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §12854. Definitions

For purposes of this subchapter:

#### (1) Board of Directors

The term "Board of Directors" or "Board" means the Board of Directors of the National Homeownership Trust under section 12851(b) of this title.

#### (2) Displaced homemaker

The term "displaced homemaker" means an individual who—

(A) is an adult;

(B) has not worked full-time full-year in the labor force for a number of years, but has during such years, worked primarily without remuneration to care for the home and family; and

(C) is unemployed or underemployed and is experiencing difficulty in obtaining or upgrading employment.

#### (3) Fund

The term "Fund" means the National Homeownership Trust Fund established in section 12853 of this title.

#### (4) Single parent

The term "single parent" means an individual who—

(A) is unmarried or legally separated from a spouse; and

(B)(i) has 1 or more minor children for whom the individual has custody or joint custody; or

(ii) is pregnant.

#### (5) State

The term "State" means the States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United States.

#### (6) Trust

The term "Trust" means the National Homeownership Trust established in section 12851 of this title.

(Pub. L. 101–625, title III, §305, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4132.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Termination of Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

For termination of Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, see note set out preceding section 1681 of Title 48, Territories and Insular Possessions.
EXHIBIT 10.1


August 6, 2007


Mr. Marty Albertson


Dear Marty:


I am writing with reference to the Second Amended and
Restated Employment Agreement (as amended, the “Agreement”), dated as of October 8,
2004, between you and Guitar Center, Inc. (the “Company”). Section 4(f)(ii) of
the Agreement provides that for fiscal 2007 the Company’s obligations under Section 4(f) to
grant an annual equity incentive to you shall be satisfied by granting to you
options to purchase 32,000 shares of the common stock of the Company. It is our
understanding that you have agreed to waive the Company’s obligation to grant
the 2007 options. Please confirm that our understanding is correct by signing
this letter in the space indicated below.


Best
regards,


	
  GUITAR
  CENTER, INC.

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ LELAND P. SMITH

  	
   

  
	
  Leland P. Smith

  	
   

  
	
  Executive Vice President of
  Corporate

  	
   

  
	
  Development and General Counsel

  	
   

  
	
  Confirmed:

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ MARTY ALBERTSON

  	
   

  
	
  Marty Albertson
IIB 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2452

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 14, 2003

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 339 Hicksville Road in Bethpage, New York, 

as the ‘‘Brian C. Hickey Post Office Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 2452 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 339 Hicksville Road in Bethpage, New York, 

4 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Brian C. Hickey 

5 Post Office Building’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

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

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

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

10 to the ‘‘Brian C. Hickey Post Office Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives October 8, 

2003. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
§ 1611.35 Testing certain classes of fabric and film. ( a ) *Fabric not customarily washed or dry cleaned.* ( 1 ) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, any textile fabric or article of wearing apparel, which, in its normal and customary use as wearing apparel would not be dry cleaned or washed, need not be dry cleaned or washed as prescribed in §§ 1610.4 (d) and (e) when tested under the Standard for the Flammability of Clothing Textiles if such fabric or article of wearing apparel, when marketed or handled, is marked in a clear and legible manner with the statement: “Fabric may be dangerously flammable if dry cleaned or washed.” An example of the type of fabric referred to in this paragraph is bridal illusion.
( 2 ) Section 1610.4(a)(4) of the Standard for the Flammability of Clothing Textiles, which requires that certain samples shall be dry cleaned or washed before testing, shall not apply to disposable fabrics and garments. Additionally, such disposable fabrics and garments shall not be subject to the labeling requirements set forth in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
( b ) A coated fabric need not, upon test under the procedures outlined in subpart A of part 1610, be dry cleaned as set forth in § 1610.4(d).
( c ) In determining whether a textile fabric having a raised-fiber surface, which surface is to be used in the covered or unexposed parts of articles of wearing apparel, is so highly flammable as to be dangerous when worn by individuals, only the opposite surface or surface intended to be exposed need be tested under the applicable procedures set forth in section 4(a) of the act, providing an invoice or other paper covering the marketing or handling of such fabric is given which clearly designates that the raised-fiber surface is to be used only in the covered or unexposed parts of articles of wearing apparel.
( d ) ( 1 ) Items which are subject to the Standard for the Flammability of Vinyl Plastic Film from which a test specimen 3 inches by 9 inches cannot be taken lengthwise to the direction of processing shall not be tested in the lengthwise direction.
( 2 ) Items which are subject to the Standard for the Flammability of Vinyl Plastic Film from which a test specimen 3 inches by 9 inches cannot be taken transverse to the direction of processing shall not be tested in the transverse direction.
[40 FR 59898, Dec. 30, 1975, as amended at 50 FR 51671, Dec. 19, 1985]
#### Harry Klonick, Appellant, v. Morris Rosenbloom and Others, Respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concurred.
### §12707. Citizen participation

#### (a) In general

Before submitting a housing strategy under this section,1 a jurisdiction shall—

(1) make available to its citizens, public agencies, and other interested parties information concerning the amount of assistance the jurisdiction expects to receive and the range of investment or other uses of such assistance that the jurisdiction may undertake;

(2) publish a proposed housing strategy in a manner that, in the determination of the Secretary, affords affected citizens, public agencies, and other interested parties a reasonable opportunity to examine its content and to submit comments on the proposed housing strategy;

(3) hold one or more public hearings to obtain the views of citizens, public agencies, and other interested parties on the housing needs of the jurisdiction; and

(4) provide citizens, public agencies, and other interested parties with reasonable access to records regarding any uses of any assistance the jurisdiction may have received during the preceding 5 years.

#### (b) Notice and comment

Before submitting any performance report or substantial amendment to a housing strategy under this section,1 a participating jurisdiction shall provide citizens with reasonable notice of, and opportunity to comment on, such performance report or substantial amendment prior to its submission.

#### (c) Consideration of comments

A participating jurisdiction shall consider any comments or views of citizens in preparing a final housing strategy, amendment to a housing strategy or performance report for submission. A summary of such comments or views shall be attached when a housing strategy, amendment to a housing strategy or performance report is submitted. The submitted housing strategy, amendment, or report shall be made available to the public.

#### (d) Regulations

The Secretary shall by regulation establish procedures appropriate and practicable for providing a fair hearing and timely resolution of citizen complaints related to housing strategies or performance reports.

(Pub. L. 101–625, title I, §107, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4091.)

1 So in original. The words "this section" probably should be "section 12705 of this title".
#### Donald Kaplan et al., Respondents, v Defoe Corp. et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[821 NYS2d 562]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered June 1, 2005, which, inter alia, denied as untimely defendants-appellants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Appellants’ summary judgment motion was made almost one year after the deadline for making summary judgment motions set by the court, and appellants failed to show good cause for their delay *(see*CPLR 3212 [a]; *Brill v City of New York,*2 NY3d 648 [2004]; *Perini Corp. v City of New York [Department of Envtl. Protection],*16 AD3d 37 [2005]; *Colon v City of New York,*15 AD3d 173 [2005]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Nardelli, Catterson and McGuire, JJ.
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Region III

2443 Warrenville Road

Lisle IL 60532

Site: www.nrc.gov

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

No. III-12-038

Contact: Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662

 Prema Chandrathil (630) 829-9663

September 26, 2012

E-Mail: OPA3 @nrc.gov 

NRC TO DISCUSS PRELIMINARY SPECIAL INSPECTION RESULTS; 

WEBINAR TO BE HELD OCTOBER 1

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold an Oct. 1 webinar on the preliminary results of the 

NRC’s August special inspection of a leak from a control rod drive mechanism at the Palisades nuclear 

plant. The NRC Region III office in Lisle, Ill., will present NRC’s findings and answer public questions 

during the webinar.

The plant is owned by Entergy Nuclear Operations and is located in Covert, Mich., approximately 

40 miles west of Kalamazoo.

The webinar will be held from 1-2 pm CDT. Participants will be able to view presentation slides 

prepared by NRC staff and submit questions in writing over the Internet. Interested members of the public 

must register at https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/977718426 or by following the instructions on

the meeting notice.

“We are committed to keeping members of the public informed about the NRC’s continued 

oversight of the Palisades plant,” said NRC Region III Administrator Charles Casto. “The webinar will 

give us an opportunity to share with the public the preliminary results of the NRC’s two-week special 

inspection and answer questions from members of the community.” 

The NRC dispatched a three-person special inspection team to the plant August 15 to better 

understand the circumstances around the leak from the control rod drive mechanism. The drive 

mechanism moves the rods in the reactor to control reactor power levels. NRC regulations prohibit any 

leaks in this equipment. NRC inspectors ensured the leak was fixed and proper testing was done to ensure 

plant safety. They independently verified that the leak did not challenge public health.

The report on this special inspection will be issued and publically available in the November 

timeframe through the NRC’s online public documents system, ADAMS.

###

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.
Patti Perry- Resident of Wilmette, IL 

(847-853-7420) pattikperry@sbcglobal.net 

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to testify. 

When my son was in grammar school about 10 years ago-1 read a study 

about health risks from riding a school bus (risks that included 

increased asthma attacks and lung cancer). I promptly decided to drive 

him to school instead. 

Since then a growing number of studies including the World Health 

Organization Study of 2012 have linked diesel exhaust exposure with 

cancer, heart attacks, and premature death. Diesel exhaust-soot 

particles lodge deeply in the lungs and penetrate the bloodstream. 

Diesel exhaust is one of the most dangerous forms of air pollution. 

And it's especially harmful for children. Children are more susceptible 

to these health problems because their lungs are not fully developed 

and breathe more rapidly than adults. They inhale more pollution than 

adults. 

Recently I was at the Glenview Environmental Town Hall and asked 

state legislators and environmental experts about rules preventing 

pollution from all school buses. They were not aware of them. 

I found out there are no rules/regulations that cover millions of old 

school buses. Buses made in 2007 model year are cleaner (reduce less 

harmful emissions). But there are no regulations for older school buses. 

I was shocked. I expected that in the 10 years that my son was in junior 

high- there would be rules in place to reduce diesel emissions from all 

school buses. 
1 wondered how many older school buses there were-model year 2006 

and earlier. 

I did a small sampling and called the North Shore Transit Corporation 

that provides school buses for Wilmette, Winnetka and other North 

Shore suburbs. They operate over 2200 buses. 

They said that half their fleet were pre-model 2007 buses. 

Again I was shocked. This well-funded area did not retrofit or replace 

old school buses. Why be surprised- there are no regulations. 

If kids are riding these old school buses- they can be breathing in black 

clouds of smoke from tail pipe and fuel leakage from engine. 

Millions of children ride old school buses powered by diesel fuel. 

Please create regulations for older school buses. These buses must 

reduce diesel emissions with filtration devices or be replaced. Protect 

our kids. 

Thank you for listening.
#### Mercy Felix, Respondent, v New York City Transit Authority et al., Appellants.

[819 NYS2d 835]

*528In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Solomon, J.), dated April 6, 2005, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955 [1992]; *Kearse v New York City Tr. Auth.,*16 AD3d 45 [2005] ). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. While the affirmed medical report of the plaintiffs examining neurologist noted limitations in the plaintiffs range of motion of her cervical and lumbar spine, this report failed to provide any medical proof that was contemporaneous with the subject accident *(see Ranzie v Abdul-Massih,*28 AD3d 447 [2006] ; *Suk Ching Yeung v Rojas,*18 AD3d 863 [2005]; *Nemchyonok v Peng Liu Ying,*2 AD3d 421 [2003]; *Ifrach v Neiman,*306 AD2d 380 [2003]). Moreover, the plaintiffs examining neurologist relied on the unsworn reports of others in reaching his conclusions *(see Mahoney v Zerillo,*6 AD3d *403 [2004]; Friedman v U-Haul Truck Rental,*216 AD2d 266 [1995]). The remaining submissions of the plaintiff, with the exception of her affidavit, were without probative value in opposing the motion since they were unsworn or unaffirmed *(see Grasso v Angerami,*79 NY2d 813 [1991]; *Hernandez v Taub,*19 AD3d 368 [2005]; *Pagano v Kingsbury,*182 AD2d 268 [1992]). In the absence of any admissible objective evidence of injury, the plaintiffs self-serving affidavit was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether she sustained a serious injuiy *(see Fisher v Williams,*289 AD2d 288 [2001]). Finally, the plaintiff failed to submit competent medical evidence that she was unable to perform substantially all of her daily activities for not less than 90 of the first 180 days subsequent to the subject accident *(see Sainte-Aime v Ho,*274 AD2d 569 [2000]). Miller, J.P., Ritter, Luciano, Spolzino and Dillon, JJ., concur.
#### § 995.20 General.

The requirements for certification as a “Certified NOAA ENC Distributor” (CED) and “Certified NOAA ENC Value Added Distributor” (CEVAD) are described in this subpart.
No: II-14-048 September 16, 2014

CONTACT: Roger Hannah 404-997-4417 

 Joey Ledford 404-997-4416 

NRC Schedules Sept. 30 Public Outreach Meeting in Erwin

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials have scheduled a public meeting in Erwin, Tenn., to 

provide local residents with information on the agency’s inspection and oversight activities at the 

Nuclear Fuel Services facility in Erwin.

The meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m. at the Erwin Town Hall, 211 N. Main Ave., in Erwin. 

After a series of presentations, local residents will be given an opportunity to ask questions of NRC 

officials.

NFS fabricates fuel for the U.S. Navy’s nuclear fleet.

NRC officials will discuss the current status of the facility, the plant’s safety culture and the 

results of an independent NRC sampling of stream and river water downstream from the facility.

In addition to the NRC presentations, a representative of the National Academy of Sciences 

will discuss the status of the ongoing study of cancer risks near seven nuclear facilities around the 

country, including NFS.

“This public meeting fulfills a commitment we made to local residents,” said Victor McCree, 

the NRC’s Region II administrator. “The NRC is open and transparent in our regulatory activities and 

we want the residents of the Erwin area to always be fully informed of our inspection and oversight 

activities at NFS.”
No: II-14-026 May 1, 2014

CONTACT: Roger Hannah 404-997-4417 

Joey Ledford 404-997-4416 

NRC Schedules Conference with Duke Energy to Discuss Brunswick Plant Flooding Issue

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled a regulatory conference with officials 

of Duke Energy for May 12 in Atlanta to discuss two apparent violations associated with flood 

protection, corrective actions and reporting of potential flood-related impacts at the company’s 

Brunswick plant.

The Brunswick plant is located about 30 miles south of Wilmington near Southport, N.C.

The NRC and Duke will discuss the safety significance of the issue, which involved the failure 

to promptly identify and correct conditions which may have impacted safety-related equipment during 

certain severe hurricane conditions. Specifically, some buildings were found to contain openings which 

might have allowed water to come in, including one opening that could have affected nine of the 10

safety-related service water pumps on Unit 2.

The meeting will begin at 1 p.m. in the NRC’s Region II office in Atlanta, located at 245 

Peachtree Center Ave., NE. The meeting is open to the public and visitors should check in at the 

security desk on the 8th floor. NRC officials will be available after the business portion of the meeting

to answer any questions.

The NRC evaluates regulatory performance at commercial nuclear power plants with a colorcoded process which classifies inspection findings and performance indicators as green, white, yellow 

or red, in increasing order of safety significance. The NRC’s preliminary evaluation has determined 

that the safety significance of the flooding issue at the Brunswick plant is white, meaning that it is 

considered to be of low to moderate safety significance.

No final decision on the safety significance, any apparent violation or any contemplated 

enforcement action will be made during the conference. NRC officials will make those decisions at a 

later time and that information will be available on the NRC’s web site at www.nrc.gov .
Searched for **https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/ES-05-11024.pdf**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/ES-05-11024.pdf**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk January 29, 2010

0125 

# Order

January 29, 2010

139943

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139943 COA: 284463 Wayne CC: 07-013655-FH CARTER CONRAD GREEN, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the September 22, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### § 315.4 Limits on requiring immediate payment.

A prescriber may require payment of fees for an eye examination, fitting, and evaluation before the release of a contact lens prescription, but only if the prescriber requires immediate payment in the case of an examination that reveals no requirement for ophthalmic goods. For purposes of the preceding sentence, presentation of proof of insurance coverage for that service shall be deemed to be a payment.
#### § 304.2 General requirement.

Imitation political or numismatic items subject to the Act shall be marked in conformity with the requirements of the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. Any violation of these regulations shall constitute a violation of the Act and of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
#### In the Matter of the Construction of the Will of Frederick L. Upjohn, Deceased. Alice E. C. Lake et al., Appellants-Respondents; Carleton B. Riker et al., as Trustees under the Will of Frederick L. Upjohn, Deceased, Respondents-Appellants; Saul Wolf, Special Guardian for Martha A. Riker and Others, Infants, et al., Respondents.

The case of *Matter of Horn*(256 N. Y. 294) is to be distinguished generally on its facts. Moreover, it is to be particularly noted *inter alia*there was not there, as here, an alternate method of distribution. *(Matter of Horn,*231 App. Div. 747; *Matter of Charles,*200 Misc. 452.) The provisions of the decree construing the language of the will in paragraph Seventh (B) dividing corpus, and directing distribution in accordance with that construction are struck out because this proceeding was exclusively concerned with the income provision of paragraph Seventh (C) of the will. It was an improvident exercise of discretion to charge corpus of trusts, other than the one affected, with the payment of costs and allowances. Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.