alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HOMECONTACT       USLINKSMEDCOM SITEMAPARMY.MILAKOSEARCH
ACCESS TO CAREBORDEN INSTITUTE       HOMEABOUT THE       TEXTBOOKSPUBLISHED       VOLUMESOTHER       PUBLICATIONSBOOKS IN       PRODUCTIONORDERING       INFORMATIONAUTHOR       INFORMATION

War       Surgery in Afghanistan and Iraq

Published       Volumes
Contents 
Front Matter and Prologue
- Acute Resuscitation and Critical Care
- Face, Neck, and Eye Trauma
- Head and Spine Trauma
- Thoracic Trauma
- Abdomino Pelvic Trauma
- Soft-Tissue Trauma and Burns
- Orthopaedic Trauma
- Vascular Trauma
- Special Scenarios

Index and Appendices

Download Adobe Reader

Privacy       & Security Notice | External       Links Disclaimer | Disclaimer:       Web Site Medical Information Posting RestrictionsWeb       Accessibility | Last Modified 06/08/2009This       Web site provides an introduction to the U.S. Army Medical Department's       headquarters organizations, which are the Office of the Army Surgeon       General andU.S. Army Medical Command headquarters. It is intended for       interested members of the public, news media and Army Medical Department       beneficiaries.
EXHIBIT 99.1
   
 
  The undersigned, Joseph Panepinto, Vice President of The Bank of New York Mellon (formerly The Bank of New York), a New York corporation (the
Trustee), hereby certifies in such capacity that, based on his knowledge, the Trustee has complied, in all
material respects, with all conditions and covenants applicable to the Trustee under the Standard Terms for Trust
Agreements dated February 20,1998 between Merrill Lynch Depositor, Inc. as depositor (the Depositor) and the
Trustee, as successor to United States Trust Company of New York, as trustee and securities intermediary (the
Securities Intermediary), in each case as amended by a series supplement between the Depositor, the Trustee and
the Securities Intermediary for each trust series listed in the attached schedule with the exception of the items identified below:


| | With respect to the PPLUS Trust Series JPM-1 distribution on June 16, 2008, the amount of interest to be paid by the Trust was calculated incorrectly.  As such, on September 25, 2008, BNY corrected this error and a revised 8-K was filed on October 6, 2008.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
| | With respect to the PreferredPLUS Trust Series GEC-1, the September 15, 2008 Exhibit 99.1 within the Form 8-K incorrectly referenced the March 17, 2008 distribution date. On March 5, 2009 a revised 8-K was filed to reflect the correct distribution date.   

| |                                                                                                  |                      |                  | 
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | -------------------- | ---------------- | 
| | Very truly yours,
The Bank of New York Mellon (formerly

      The Bank of New York), as Trustee |                     
| | By:                                                                                              | /s/
Joseph Panepinto |                 
| |                                                                                                  | Name:                | Joseph Panepinto | 
| |                                                                                                  | Title:               | Vice President   | 





---






---
### §40126. Severable services contracts for periods crossing fiscal years

(a) In General.—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may enter into a contract for procurement of severable services for a period that begins in 1 fiscal year and ends in the next fiscal year if (without regard to any option to extend the period of the contract) the contract period does not exceed 1 year.

(b) Obligation of Funds.—Funds made available for a fiscal year may be obligated for the total amount of a contract entered into under the authority of subsection (a).

(Added Pub. L. 106–181, title VII, §705(a), Apr. 5, 2000, 114 Stat. 157.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section applicable only to fiscal years beginning after Sept. 30, 1999, see section 3 of Pub. L. 106–181, set out as an Effective Date of 2000 Amendments note under section 106 of this title.
#### § 27.31 Testing methods.

A methane-monitoring system shall be tested by MSHA to determine its functional performance, and its explosion-proof and other safety characteristics. Since all possible designs, arrangements, or combinations cannot be foreseen, MSHA reserves the right to make any tests or to place any limitations on equipment, or components or subassemblies thereof, not specifically covered herein, to determine and assure the safety of such equipment with regard to explosion and fire hazards.
### §11907. Punishment of corporation for violations committed by certain individuals

An act or omission that would be a violation of this part if committed by a director, officer, receiver, trustee, lessee, agent, or employee of a rail carrier providing transportation or service subject to the jurisdiction of the Board under this part that is a corporation is also a violation of this part by that corporation. The penalties of this chapter apply to that violation. When acting in the scope of their employment, the actions and omissions of individuals acting for or employed by that rail carrier are considered to be the actions and omissions of that rail carrier as well as that individual.

(Added Pub. L. 104–88, title I, §102(a), Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 852.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 11915 of this title prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, §102(a).

A prior section 11907, Pub. L. 95–473, Oct. 17, 1978, 92 Stat. 1459, related to interference with railroad car supply, prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, §102(a). See section 11902 of this title.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1996, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 104–88, see section 2 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of this title.
#### Jennifer Lawrence *v.*New Hampshire Insurance Company

*Donald P. Guerrini,*in support of the petition.

*Robert R. Sheldon,*in opposition.

Decided December 22, 1992

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 29 Conn. App. 484 (AC 10851), is denied.
§ 256.77 Cancellation of leases. ( a ) Any nonproducing lease issued under the act may be cancelled by the authorized officer whenever the lessee fails to comply with any provision of the act or lease or applicable regulations, if such failure to comply continues for 30 days after mailing of notice by registered or certified letter to the lease owner at the owner's record post office address. Any such cancellation is subject to judicial review as provided in section 23(b) of the Act.
( b ) Producing leases issued under the Act may be cancelled by the Secretary whenever the lessee fails to comply with any provision of the Act, applicable regulations or the lease only after judicial proceedings as prescribed by section 5(d) of the Act.
( c ) Any lease issued under the Act, whether producing or not, shall be canceled by the authorized officer upon proof that it was obtained by fraud or misrepresentation, and after notice and opportunity to be heard has been afforded to the lessee.
( d ) Pursuant to section 5(a) of the Act, the Secretary may cancel a lease when: ( 1 ) Continued activity pursuant to such lease would probably cause serious harm or damage to life, property, any mineral, National security or defense, or to the marine, coastal or human environment;
( 2 ) The threat of harm or damage will not disappear or decrease to an acceptable extent within a reasonable period of time; and
( 3 ) The advantages of cancellation outweigh the advantages of continuing such lease or permit in force. Procedures and conditions contained in § 550.182 shall apply as appropriate.
Support Documents for 

Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) on 

Premanufacture Notice (PMN) 

P-02-872 

EPA Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0577 

EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 16
Index

A-001 Structure Activity Team (SAT) Report for 

PMN P-02-872 

A-002 Initial Review Engineering Report for 

PMN P-02-872 

A-003 Initial Review Exposure Report for 

PMN P-02-872 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 16
A-001 

Structure Activity Team (SAT) Report

for PMN P-02-872 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 16
 

 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 16
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 16
EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 16
A-002 

Initial Review Engineering Report

for PMN P-02-872 

EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 16
The IRER was revised based on discussion with the submitter (via 

Jeff Bauer;10/25/02:NCB). The changes are bolded. The revised IRER 

is files as P020872.en1.

DRAFT 

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT 

PMN: 02-0872 ENGINEER: Blouin/JB 

PV (kg/yr): SUBMITTER: Ashland, Inc. 

USE: 

OTHER USES: none found. 

MSDS: Yes 

General Eqp.: 

Respirator: 

Health Effects: 

TLV/PEL (PMN or raw materials): 

 

 

CRSS: 

Chemical Category: 

VP: <1E-6 torr @25C 

S-H2O: 0.0001 g/L 

MW: 420 39% < 500 65% < 1000 

Phys State: Neat: 

Mfg: 

Proc/Form: ; End 

Use: 

Consumer Use: No 

SAT (concerns): RELATED CASES: 

Migration to Groundwater = negligible 

PBT Potential = P1B1T1 

Health: 1 (no exposures needed) XB: 

EPA SANITIZED Page 8 of 16
Eco: 3 (all releases to water) XB:

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT Page # 2 

PMN: 02-0872 

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: NR 

ASSUMPTIONS: 

The submitter was contacted to answer questions, see contact 

report. 

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW 

EPA SANITIZED Page 9 of 16
INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT Page # 3 

PMN: 02-0872 

MFG: 

Site/Location: 

Days/yr: (submission) 

Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES (Eqpt. cleaning, container residue, etc.): 

: 

 

 

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE 

 Tot. # of workers: (submission) 

 Days/yr: (submission) 

Inhalation: Not required, per SAT 

 

Dermal: Not required, per SAT 

EPA SANITIZED Page 10 of 16
INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT Page # 4 

PMN: 02-0872 

PROC/USE: 

Site/Location: (submission) 

Days/yr: (submission) 

Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES (Eqpt. cleaning, container residue, etc.): 

from: 

Basis: 

 

 

 

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE 

 Tot. # of workers: 

 Days/yr: (submission) 

Inhalation: Not required, per SAT 

Dermal: Not required, per SAT 

EPA SANITIZED Page 11 of 16
 (Telephone Log) 

PMN: 02-0872 

CALL BY: Jennifer Biancuzzo (ERG) for EPA/OPPT/CEB 

CALL TO: 

SUBMITTER: Ashland, Inc. 

DATE: 8/14/02 

TIME: 10:45 am 

Q1: 

A1: 

Q2: 

A2: 

Q3: 

A3: 

Q4: 

A4: 

Q5: 

A5: 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 12 of 16
A-003 

Initial Review Exposure Report

for PMN P-02-872 

EPA SANITIZED Page 13 of 16
 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 14 of 16
EPA SANITIZED Page 15 of 16
EPA SANITIZED Page 16 of 16
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.455 What are the general requirements for a drilling fluid program?

You must design and implement your drilling fluid program to prevent the loss of well control. This program must address drilling fluid safe practices, testing and monitoring equipment, drilling fluid quantities, and drilling fluid-handling areas.
#### PLENTY et al., Appellants, v. COBIN, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 23, 1903.)

Action by Josephus Plenty and others against Israel J.

Cobin. S. J. Cowen, for appellants.

H. J. Morris, for respondent.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
#### Civil Service Employees Association, Inc., Respondent-Appellant, v County of Oneida et al., Appellants-Respondents.

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: At the time of oral argument the parties stipulated that the only issue presented to the court was the plaintiffs appeal from the order denying it summary judgment and that is the only issue we pass upon. (Appeals from order of Oneida Supreme Court —summary judgment, etc.) Present—Cardamone, J. P., Simons, Dillon, Hancock, Jr., and Denman, JJ.
#### SCHWARTZ, Respondent, v. PAINE, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 6, 1903.)

Action by Max Schwartz against J. Cverton Paine. G. R. Bristor, for appellant. N. Burkan, for respondent.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
### §13303. Service of notice in proceedings

(a) Agents for Service of Process.—A carrier, a broker, or a freight forwarder providing transportation or service subject to jurisdiction under chapter 135 shall designate, in writing, an agent by name and post office address on whom service of notices in a proceeding before, and of actions of, the Secretary may be made.

(b) Filing With State.—A motor carrier providing transportation under this part shall also file the designation with the appropriate authority of each State in which it operates. The designation may be changed at any time in the same manner as originally made.

(c) Notice.—A notice to a motor carrier, freight forwarder, or broker shall be served personally or by mail on the motor carrier, freight forwarder, or broker or on its designated agent. Service by mail on the designated agent shall be made at the address filed for the agent. When notice is given by mail, the date of mailing is considered to be the time when the notice is served. If a motor carrier, freight forwarder, or broker does not have a designated agent, service may be made by posting a copy of the notice at the headquarters of the Department of Transportation.

(Added Pub. L. 104–88, title I, §103, Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 858.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 10329 of this title prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, §102(a).

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1996, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 104–88, see section 2 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of this title.
### §20146. Institute for Railroad Safety

The Secretary of Transportation, in conjunction with a university or college having expertise in transportation safety, shall establish, within one year after November 2, 1994, an Institute for Railroad Safety. The Institute shall research, develop, fund, and test measures for reducing the number of fatalities and injuries relevant to railroad operations. There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary $1,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1996 through 2000 to fund activities carried out under this section by the Institute, which shall report at least once each year on its use of such funds in carrying out such activities and the results thereof to the Secretary of Transportation and the Congress.

(Added Pub. L. 103–440, title II, §210(a), Nov. 2, 1994, 108 Stat. 4621; amended Pub. L. 104–287, §5(49), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3393.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1996—Pub. L. 104–287 substituted "November 2, 1994" for "the date of enactment of the Federal Railroad Safety Authorization Act of 1994".
EXHIBIT 31.1
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Harold E. Miller,  Jr.  certify that:

1.   I am the senior officer of Franklin Capital Corporation (the "Servicer") in
     charge of servicing;

2.   I have reviewed  this annual  report on Form 10-K,  and all reports on Form
     8-K  containing  distribution  and  servicing  reports  filed in respect of
     periods included in the year covered by this annual report of Franklin Auto
     Trust 2004-1;

3.   Based on my knowledge,  the information in these reports, taken as a whole,
     does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
     material  fact  necessary  to make  the  statements  made,  in light of the
     circumstances  under which such  statements were made, not misleading as of
     the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

4.   Based on my  knowledge,  the  distribution  information  and the  servicing
     information  required  to be  provided  to  the  Indenture  Trustee  by the
     Servicer  under  the Sale and  Servicing  Agreement  is  included  in these
     reports;

5.   I am  responsible  for reviewing the  activities  performed by the Servicer
     under the Sale and Servicing Agreements and based upon my knowledge and the
     annual compliance  review required under the Sale and Servicing  Agreement,
     except  as  disclosed  in the  reports,  the  Servicer  has  fulfilled  its
     obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement; and

6.   The  reports  disclose  all  significant   deficiencies   relating  to  the
     Servicer's  compliance with the minimum servicing  standards based upon the
     report provided by an independent  public  accountant,  after  conducting a
     review  in  compliance  with  the  standard  as set  forth  in the Sale and
     Servicing Agreement that is included in these reports.

Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings ascribed to them
in the  Sale and  Servicing  Agreements,  dated  July 1,  2004  (the  "Sale  and
Servicing  Agreement"),  respectively,  among Franklin Receivables LLC, Franklin
Resources, Inc., the Servicer and the Trusts.


Date: December 7, 2004              /S/ HAROLD E. MILLER, JR.
                                    -------------------------
                                    HAROLD E. MILLER, JR.
                                    President & Chief Executive Officer
                                    (Chief Servicing Officer)
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

THE STATE OF WASHINGTON , Respondent ,

v.
GOMER CARL SPOTTEDBEAR , Appellan t

. No. 8 4134

- 3

- I
DIVISION ONE

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

B OWMAN , J.

— A jury convicted Gomer Carl Spotted Bear of one count of

domestic violence third degree assault , committed on November 29, 2021

. Spotted Bear argues he is entitled to resentencing because the State did not prove the existence of any prior felony convictions used to calculate his offender

score . The State concedes the error . We agree and remand for resentencing

. 1 In its presentence report, t he State included a written summary of Spotted
Bear’s criminal history , asserting he had five prior felony convictio ns and was on community custody at the time of the offense. As a result, i t calculated his
offender score at 7 and his standard sentence range at 33 to 43 months. At sentencing, t he court agreed and sentenced Spotted Bear to a special d rug

o ffender s ente ncing a lternative with 19 months of confinement and 19 months of community custody. Spotted Bear appeals the calculation of his offender score.

1 Spotted Bear also claims instructional error. But two months after he filed his opening brief, the parties discovered he relied on erroneous language in an inaccurate verbatim report of proceedings. The parties then jointly moved to amend the transcript , which we granted

. Because t he amended transcript shows that the trial court did not give the instruction to which Spotted Bear assigns error , we do not address the issue.No. 84 134

- 3

- I/ 2

2 We review a sentencing court’s calculation of an offender score de novo.
State v. Wilson , 113 Wn. App. 122, 136, 52 P.3d 545 (2002). At sentencing, t he
State must prove the existence of prior convictions by a preponderance of the

evidence. State v. Hunley , 175 Wn.2d 901, 9 09

- 10, 287 P.3d 584 (2012). 2 Such evidence may include certified cop ies of prior judgments, comparable documents of record, or transcripts of prior proceedings. Wilson , 113 Wn. App. at 136. But

b are assertions of a defendant’s criminal history are not enough to satisfy the
State’s burden. Hunley , 175 Wn.2d at 910.
Her e, t he State presented no evidence of Spotted Bear’s prior convictions

. Accordingly, w e accept the State’s concession and remand for resentencing. On remand, both parties may present any evidence relevant to ensure the accuracy of Spotted Bear’s criminal history. State v. Jones , 182 Wn.2d 1, 10

- 11, 338 P.3d 278 (2014)

.

WE CONCUR:

2 The State ma y be relieved of this burden if the defendant affirmatively acknowledges his offender score and criminal history. Hunley , 175 Wn.2d at 917. Spotted Bear did not do so

.
#### Berliana Corporation v. Narragansett Industries, Inc., et al.

to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs, unless the appellant procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to be served and filed on or before August 30, 1962, with notice of argument for September 11, 1962, said appeal to be argued or submitted when reached. Concur — Rabin, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
#### § 887.113 FSS funds.

Owners may access funding from any residual receipt accounts for the property to cover reasonable costs associated with operation of an FSS program, including hiring an FSS Program Coordinator or coordinators for their FSS program.
### **CHAPTER 482—ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS FOR AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FACILITIES**

Sec.
48201.
Advance appropriations.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Ruth Mang, Respondent, v Actus Automobile Distributors, Inc., et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed October 7, 1976. The board found: "based on the credible evidence, claimant was required to use his own automobile in order to perform his job; therefore his trip to work became part of his employment. It is, therefore, found that accident arising out of and in the course of employment is established.” Issues of fact are for the board and its decision is supported by substantial evidence and it is not erroneous as a matter of law (see *Matter of Lutgen v Conte Elec.,*50 AD2d 624; *Matter of Shafran v Board of Educ.,*25 AD2d 336, mot for lv to app den 18 NY2d 579). Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Greenblott, J. P., Main, Larkin, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.