alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Amendment to First State Bancorporation 2003 Equity Incentive Plan.



 Exhibit 10.15 
 Erratum – The attached third amendment to the First State Bancorporation 2003 Equity Incentive Plan should be the fourth amendment to the plan. 
 THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE 
 FIRST STATE BANCORPORATION 2003 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN  
 1. Recitals. Pursuant to its authority under Section 13.1 of the First State Bancorporation 2003 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), First State Bancorporation wishes to revise certain provisions
of the Plan. 
 2. Amendment of Plan. The following amendment to the Plan is adopted, effective as provided in Paragraph 3 below:

  

	 	A.	Section 2.2 of the plan is amended in its entirety to read as follows: 

 “Award” shall mean the grant of Options, Restricted Stock, Stock Appreciation rights (“SARs) or other stock-based grant under the Plan. Unless otherwise specified in the applicable Option
Agreement or Restricted Stock Award Agreement, any Award hereunder shall be granted on the date of a quarterly meeting of the Board of Directors. 
  

	 	B.	Subsection 2.13(a) of the Plan is amended in its entirety to read as follows: 

 (a) Publicly Traded. If the Stock is listed on any established stock exchange or traded on the Nasdaq National Market or the Nasdaq SmallCap Market, then the Fair Market Value per share shall be deemed
to be closing sale price for the Stock or security in the over-the-counter market on the date of Award as reported by the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotation System, or, if the price is not reported thereby, the closing
bid on the date of Award, as reported by the National Quotations Bureau. 
  

	 	C.	Section 2.31 of the Plan is amended in its entirety to read as follows: 

 “SAR” shall mean a stock appreciation right granted pursuant to Section 8 of the Plan. 
 3. Effective Date. This Third Amendment shall be effective as of March 1, 2007. 
 4. Terms and Conditions of
Plan. Except for the amendment in paragraph 2, all terms and conditions of the Plan are unamended and shall remain in full force and effect. 
 [Next page is execution page.] 
  







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, First State Bancorporation has caused this Third Amendment to be executed by its duly
authorized officer as of the date set forth below. 
  

			
	FIRST STATE BANCORPORATION
		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Leonard J. DeLayo, Jr.

		
	 Title:
	 	 Chairman, First State Bancorporation

		
	 Date:
	 	 January 23, 2007
Exhibit 99.2

                            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 the Annual Report of Huayang International
Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge, that:

     (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 results of operations of
the Company.

/s/ Mary Wang
Mary Wang
Chief Financial Officer
April 23, 2003
§ 1213.3 Requirements. ( a ) *Guardrails.* ( 1 ) Any bunk bed shall provide at least two guardrails, at least one on each side of the bed, for each bed having the underside of its foundation more than 30 inches (760 mm) from the floor.
( 2 ) One guardrail shall be continuous between each of the bed's end structures. “Continuous” means that any gap between the guardrail and end structure shall not exceed 0.22 inches (5.6 mm) (so as to not cause a finger entrapment hazard for a child).
( 3 ) The other guardrail may terminate before reaching the bed's end structures, providing there is no more than 15 inches (380 mm) between either end of the guardrail and the nearest bed end structures.
( 4 ) For bunk beds designed to have a ladder attached to one side of the bed, the continuous guardrail shall be on the other side of the bed.
( 5 ) Guardrails shall be attached so that they cannot be removed without either intentionally releasing a fastening device or applying forces sequentially in different directions.
( 6 ) The upper edge of the guardrails shall be no less than 5 inches (130 mm) above the top surface of the mattress when a mattress of the maximum thickness specified by the bed manufacturer's instructions is on the bed. This requirement does not prohibit a wall-side guardrail that terminates in a quarter-circle bend and attaches to the side rail of the upper bunk foundation.
( 7 ) With no mattress on the bed, there shall be no openings in the structure between the lower edge of the uppermost member of the guardrail and the underside of the upper bunk's foundation that would permit passage of the wedge block shown in Figure 1 of this part when tested in accordance with the procedure at § 1213.4(a).
( b ) *Bed end structures.* ( 1 ) The upper edge of the upper bunk end structures shall be at least 5 inches (130 mm) above the top surface of the mattress for at least 50 percent of the distance between the two posts at the head and foot of the upper bunk when a mattress and foundation of the maximum thickness specified by the manufacturer's instructions is on the bed.
( 2 ) With no mattress on the bed, there shall be no openings in the end structures above the foundation of the upper bunk that will permit the free passage of the wedge block shown in Figure 1 when tested in accordance with the procedure at § 1213.4(b).
( 3 ) When tested in accordance with § 1213.4(c), there shall be no openings in the end structures between the underside of the foundation of the upper bunk and upper side of the foundation of the lower bunk that will permit the free passage of the wedge block shown in Figure 1, unless the openings are also large enough to permit the free passage of a 9-inch (230-mm) diameter rigid sphere.
( 4 ) All portions of the boundary of any opening required by §§ 1213.4(c)(1) and (2) to be probed by the wedge block of Figure 1, and that permits free passage of a 9-inch diameter sphere, must conform to the neck entrapment requirements of § 1213.4(c)(3).
#### § 300.35 Hearings under section 4(d) of the act.

Hearings under section 4(d) of the act will be held when deemed by the Commission to be in the public interest. Interested persons may file applications for such hearings. Such applications shall be filed in quadruplicate and shall contain a detailed technical description of the class or classes of articles or products regarding which applicant requests a determination and announcement by the Commission concerning express or implied representations of fiber content of articles or concerning insignificant or inconsequential textile content of products.

(Sec. 4(d), 54 Stat. 1129; 15 U.S.C. 68b(d))
Filed by Bowne Pure Compliance



 




EXHIBIT 10.1






Amendment, as of July 19,
2007, to Employment Arrangement with Edward S. Northup




On July 19, 2007, the
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors approved an increase in the
amount of the relocation allowance for Edward S. Northup, the Company's Chief
Operating Officer, not to exceed $75,000.
Meeting Summary:

The meeting took place at EPA Region 6 office @ 2:00 PM on July 28,2010.

Luminant had requested to meet with EPA. Guy Donaldson, Richard Bartley, and Alan

Shar from Region 6 met with the representatives ofthe Electric Utility Industry listed in

the attached document. They were representing companies with coal fired power plants

controlled by electrostatic precipitators. They stated the ESPs can not be turned on until

the stack gets hot enough or there will be explosion hazards and caking offly ash on the

plates. They are concerned with EPA's proposed partial disapproval ofthe affirmative

defense provisions in the Texas rules that companies would be forced to knowingly

violate opacity standards during start up and shut down activities. They acknowledged

that with the sunset provisions in the previous Texas SIP revision that it could be

.interpreted to mean that affirmative defense already doesn't apply. We pointed out that

EPA policy would allow an affirmative defense for excess emission during start up and

. shut down, but not during maintenance events. Because ofthe way the Texas rules are

structured with start up/shutdown and maintenance treated together in section 101.222(h),

we could not separate our rulemaking action to disapprove the affirmative defense for

excess emissions during maintenance from the action on start up and shutdown. We

mentioned our need to take final action on the SIP revision by October 31. The meeting

ended about 3:00 PM.
ov

S'12:n up Sheet - Meetin~ EPA Re~on 6 and Luminant

Name Organization Email Address or Phone

Li~ {f~r~'//iA<~ L~"'Ai~~,/ /A."- ,4",k'r" L/h r i_ /,4/,.;@ /L7/,- 1£.

J I.J../J/~ (1,llA_lC . 1MPkr Z;; t/.I

CCJ,a~~.wy'~ 0

1-.

,r7 r ""~j .H1~ -- _... Yl.l ' J A-'~~ "'- ....

GaLl-5' 7 , ,.. 7 /

J.Z,;S At:f KFX>~ J A &a-e./J i C[) Vh

().S1fA TV«NOr<.. /...UM lAJAN/ ()~ .fvn-t.L.-v£ l()ytA~~.~

~~ C:-v7;i,- .s~"V ;!1?vA'r j.R v liil' @)S/J?1-e?-~" /VII /,- el.pv i/lf{ ?~ ()j!J

$tfN (2l~~ 1\IIIt~f,~IIt..A, q •\ Xl l€:::IQ ~ta~-COYYl ..... I v f "-../~ l::){~ f\~~) L~S:l"" ..... hl!?

A '(' P/~,,'\.., Dl>r-o. })sv", ' v V Ai) p/Po-,,0

~u..J<"" 'bj~n..1' l!'f OfCll., () f ~r, 10llll-\ /'

boAI~/.•rtdl.ArJ~dePQ'~6V ,

COlJfl~c..'

A\CtV\ Sh~r ~PA R6 shac A{ 0lV\ ee p<.\ · ~C) \f
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2495

To amend the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama and Coushatta Indian 

Tribes of Texas Restoration Act to decrease the requisite blood quantum 

required for membership in the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo tribe. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 17, 2003

Mr. REYES introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Resources 

A BILL

To amend the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama and 

Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act to 

decrease the requisite blood quantum required for membership in the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo tribe.

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

3 SECTION 1. BLOOD QUANTUM REQUIRED FOR TRIBAL 

4 MEMBERSHIP DECREASED. 

5 Section 108(a)(2)(i) of the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and 

6 Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restora-
2

•HR 2495 IH 

tion Act (25 U.S.C. 1300g–7) is amended by striking ‘‘1 1 ⁄8’’ 

and inserting ‘‘1 2 ⁄16’’.

Æ
#### Rose M. Van Epps et al., Appellants, v. William Carpenter, Respondent.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, without costs. Present — Poster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Imrie, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 799.]
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350
by Principal Accounting Officer

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of VSB Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the Report), I, Jonathan
B. Lipschitz, Vice President, Controller and Principal Accounting Officer of
the Company, certify, 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; and

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

|                        |  |                                                             
|----------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: November 10, 2009 |  |                                                             
|                        |  |                                                             
|                        |  | /s/ Jonathan B. Lipschitz                                   
|                        |  |                                                             
|                        |  | Jonathan B. Lipschitz                                       
|                        |  | Vice President, Controller
 and Principal Accounting Officer

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
```

[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 229 (Tuesday, November 30, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 69506]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26343]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2004-18826; Airspace Docket No. 04-ACE-52]

Modification of Class E Airspace; Lamar, MO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: This document confirms the effective date of the direct final 
rule which revises Class E airspace at Lamar, MO.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, January 20, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda Mumper, Air Traffic Division, 
Airspace Branch, ACE-520A, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone: 
(816) 329-2524.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA published this direct final rule 
with a request for comments in the Federal Register on October 4, 2004 
(69 FR 59129). The FAA uses the direct final rulemaking procedure for a 
non-controversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be no 
adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public that 
no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse 
comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an adverse 
comment, were received within the comment period, the regulation would 
become effective on January 20, 2005. No adverse comments were 
received, and thus this notice confirms that this direct final rule 
will become effective on that date.

    Issued in Kansas City, MO, on November 12, 2004.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Acting Area Director, Western Flight Services Operations.
[FR Doc. 04-26343 Filed 11-29-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
```
Issue Date: 12/14/15 1 15-029 

 NRC INSPECTION MANUAL DIRS 

Change Notice 15-029

 DELETED: TRANSMITTED: 

 Number Date Number Date

1. IMC 2550 12/14/15 

2. IP 43003 10/03/13 IP 43003 12/14/15 

3. IP 69020 12/14/15 

4. IP 69021 12/14/15 

5. IP 69022 12/14/15 

TRAINING: No 

REMARKS: IMC 2550, “Non-Power Protection Facilities (NPUFs) Licensed Under 10 CFR Part 

50: Construction Inspection Program (CIP),” is an initial issuance to document the 

Construction Inspection program for Non-Power Production and Utilization 

Facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 50. 

 IP 43003, “Reactive Inspection of Nuclear Vendors,” has been revised to add a 

pointer to IP 71152, as well as add guidance on qualified safety culture assessors. 

 IP 69020, “Inspections of Safety-Related Items (and Services) During Construction 

of Non-Power Production and Utilization Facilities,” is an initial issuance to provide 

guidance for the safety-related items and services during construction of nonpower and utilization facilities. 

 IP 69021, “Inspection of Quality Assurance Program Implementation During 

Construction of Non-Power Production and Utilization Facilities,” is an initial 

issuance to provide guidance for the QA inspections of non-power production and 

utilization facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 50. 

 IP 69022, “Inspections of Operational Readiness During Construction of NonPower Production and Utilization Facilities,” is an initial issuance to provide 

guidance for the operational readiness inspections of radionuclide production 

facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 50. 

DISTRIBUTION: 

 Standard 

 Official Use Only (OUO)-Security Related Information. 

 Please contact: _______________ Phone: ________ 

END
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 89 FR 71805, Sept. 4, 2024.

#### §§ 1.47-1.48 [Reserved]
§ 680.28 Effective date, compliance date, and prospective application. ( a ) *Effective date.* This part is effective January 1, 2008.
( b ) *Mandatory compliance date.* Compliance with this part is required not later than October 1, 2008.
( c ) *Prospective application.* The provisions of this part shall not prohibit you from using eligibility information that you receive from an affiliate to make solicitations to a consumer if you receive such information prior to October 1, 2008. For purposes of this section, you are deemed to receive eligibility information when such information is placed into a common database and is accessible by you.
EXHIBIT 32.2


Written Statement of the Chief Financial Officer


of CNA Financial Corporation


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350


(As adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)


The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of CNA Financial Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge:


• the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and


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


Dated:February 6, 2024By/s/ Scott R. LindquistScott R. LindquistChief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### Jennis M. Doroshaw, Respondent, v. Aetna Industrial Corporation et al., Appellants.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Callahan and Breitel, JJ. [Order denied motion to dismiss complaint.] [See *post,*p. 836.]
IIB 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3742 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 24, 2012 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

AN ACT 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 100 

North Church Street in Las Cruces, New Mexico, as 

the ‘‘Edwin L. Mechem United States Courthouse’’. 

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


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 3742 RFS

1 SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

2 Congress finds the following: 

3 (1) Edwin L. Mechem was a land surveyor with 

4 the United States Reclamation Service in Las 

5 Cruces, New Mexico, from 1932–1935. 

6 (2) He served as a member of the New Mexico 

7 State Police Commission. 

8 (3) He was a Special Agent with the Federal 

9 Bureau of Investigation. 

10 (4) He attended the New Mexico College of Ag11 riculture and Mechanic Arts, which later became the 

12 New Mexico State University in Las Cruces, New 

13 Mexico. 

14 (5) He was admitted to the New Mexico bar in 

15 1939, and practiced law in Albuquerque and Las 

16 Cruces, New Mexico. 

17 (6) He served in the New Mexico House of 

18 Representatives from 1947–1948. 

19 (7) He was the first New Mexico governor born 

20 in New Mexico after statehood. 

21 (8) He served four terms as Governor of New 

22 Mexico between 1951 and 1962. 

23 (9) He served as a United States Senator from 

24 New Mexico from 1962–1964. 

25 (10) He was confirmed by the United States 

26 Senate as a United States District Judge for the 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 3742 RFS

1 District of New Mexico on October 8, 1970, and 

2 served in that position until his death in 2002. 

3 (11) He led a rich and accomplished life dedi4 cated to public service which warrants recognition. 

5 SEC. 2. DESIGNATION. 

6 The United States courthouse located at 100 North 

7 Church Street in Las Cruces, New Mexico, shall be known 

8 and designated as the ‘‘Edwin L. Mechem United States 

9 Courthouse’’. 

10 SEC. 3. REFERENCES. 

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

12 paper, or other record of the United States to the United 

13 States courthouse referred to in section 2 shall be deemed 

14 to be a reference to the ‘‘Edwin L. Mechem United States 

15 Courthouse’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 23, 2012. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 ***** 

 AFFIRMATION SESSION 

 *** 

 PUBLIC MEETING

 *** 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Commission Hearing Room 

11555 Rockville Pike 

Rockville, Maryland 

January 13, 2015 

The Commission met in open session, pursuant to notice, at 9:25 AM., Stephen G. 

Burns, Chairman, presiding. 

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: 

STEPHEN G. BURNS, Chairman of the Commission 

KRISTINE L. SVINICKI, Member of the Commission 

WILLIAM C. OSTENDORFF, Member of the Commission 

JEFF BARAN, Member of the Commission 

STAFF AND PRESENTERS SEATED AT THE COMMISSION TABLE: 

MARGARET DOANE, General Counsel 

ANNETTE VIETTI-COOK, Secretary of the Commission 
2 

 DISCLAIMER 

This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission on January 13, 2015, in the Commission=s office at One White Flint North, 

Rockville, Maryland. The meeting was open to public attendance and observation. This 

transcript has not been reviewed, corrected or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies. 

The transcript is intended solely for general information purposes. As provided by 

10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed. 

Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determination or beliefs. 

No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as the result of, 

or addressed to, any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may 

authorize. 
3 

[9:25 a.m.] 

 P R O C E E D I N G S 

 CHAIRMAN BURNS: I call this session to order, affirmation session. Madame 

Secretary, lead us through. 

 ANNETTE VIETTI-COOK: This item is on Fermi Combined License Application. The 

Commission is being asked to act on a Memorandum and Order responding to the Atomic 

Safety and Licensing Board’s request for review, sua sponte, issues relating to the 

environmental impacts of the proposed transmission-line corridor for Fermi Unit 3 and 

Intervenor’s petition for review of the Board’s dismissal of a related proposed contention. 

The Commission has voted to approve a Memorandum and Order, which denies the Board’s 

request for sua sponte review and denies Intervenor’s petition for review. 

Would you please affirm your votes? 

 CHAIRMAN BURNS: Aye. 

 COMMISSIONER SVINICKI: Aye. 

 COMMISSIONER OSTENDORFF: Aye. 

 COMMISSIONER BARAN: Aye. 

 ANNETTE VIETTI-COOK: That’s all I have, thank you. 

 CHAIRMAN BURNS: Ok, we’re adjourned. 

 
4 

 CERTIFICATE 

This is to certify that the attached description of a meeting of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission entitled: 

TITLE OF MEETING: Affirmation Session 

 (PUBLIC MEETING) 

PLACE OF MEETING: Rockville, Maryland 

DATE OF MEETING: January 13, 2015 

was held as herein appears, is a true and accurate record of the meeting, and that this is the 

original transcript thereof taken stenographically by me, thereafter reduced to typewriting by 

me or under the direction of the court reporting company. 

Transcriber: Brenda Akstulewicz

Reporter: (TAPE RECORDING)