alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EATON CORPORATION
SECOND QUARTER 2008 REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
ITEM 6
EXHIBIT 12
RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
 Six monthsendedJune 30,
    
    
    Year ended December 312008
    
    
    2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003Income from continuing operations
before income taxes
    
    $
    640
    
    
    $
    1,041
    
    
    $
    969
    
    
    $
    964
    
    
    $
    749
    
    
    $
    463AdjustmentsMinority interest in consolidated
subsidiaries
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    10
    
    
    
    5
    
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    12(Income) losses of equity investees
    
    
    (5
    )
    
    
    (6
    )
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (3
    )Interest expensed
    
    
    99
    
    
    
    193
    
    
    
    139
    
    
    
    109
    
    
    
    88
    
    
    
    93Amortization of debt issue costs
    
    
    2
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    2Estimated portion of rent expense
representing interest
    
    
    26
    
    
    
    44
    
    
    
    41
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    37
    
    
    
    38Amortization of capitalized interest
    
    
    6
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    17
    
    
    
    13Distributed income of equity investees
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    4
    
    
    
    3Adjusted income from continuing
operations before income taxes
    
    $
    775
    
    
    $
    1,300
    
    
    $
    1,174
    
    
    $
    1,134
    
    
    $
    902
    
    
    $
    618Fixed chargesInterest expensed
    
    $
    99
    
    
    $
    193
    
    
    $
    139
    
    
    $
    109
    
    
    $
    88
    
    
    $
    93Interest capitalized
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    13
    
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    7Amortization of debt issue costs
    
    
    2
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    2Estimated portion of rent expense
representing interest
    
    
    26
    
    
    
    44
    
    
    
    41
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    37
    
    
    
    38Total fixed charges
    
    $
    134
    
    
    $
    252
    
    
    $
    195
    
    
    $
    161
    
    
    $
    133
    
    
    $
    140Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    5.78
    
    
    
    5.16
    
    
    
    6.02
    
    
    
    7.04
    
    
    
    6.78
    
    
    
    4.41
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0115

______________________________________

THE CITY OF MISSOULA, 

Plaintiff/Appellee,

v.

MOUNTAIN WATER COMPANY, a Montana Corporation; and CARLYLE 

INFRASTRUCTURE PARTNERS, LP, a Delaware limited partnership,

Defendants/Appellants,

and

THE EMPLOYEES OF MOUNTAIN WATER COMPANY, et al.

Intervenors. 

______________________________________

ORDER GRANTING THE CITY OF MISSOULA’S UNOPPOSED 

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

______________________________________

Appellee City of Missoula has moved the Court, pursuant to Montana Rule of

Appellate Procedure 26(1), for a 30-day extension of time to file its response brief, 

currently due on November 18, 2020. Good cause appearing therefor,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee City of Missoula has up to and 

including December 18, 2020, in which to file its opening brief.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

November 9 2020

11/09/2020
"Document has been coded “B” may be requested by contacting the OPP 

Docket on (703) 305-5805 or under the Freedom of Information Act 

http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/foia/ but access is restricted to entities not 

engaged in the production sale or distribution of pesticides outside the United 

States." Completion of the Affirmation of Non-Multinational Status for is 

required - http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/foia/affirmation.htm
**Exhibit 23.1**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting FirmWe consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-8) and relatedProspectuses pertaining to the New Era of Networks, Inc. Amended and Restated 1995 Stock OptionPlan, New Era of Networks, Inc. 1998 Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan, Convoy Corporation 1997 StockOption Plan, Microscript, Inc. 1997 Stock Option Plan, InphoMatch, Inc. 2000 Equity Incentive Plan,Mobile 365, Inc. 2004 Equity Incentive Plan, MobileWay, Inc. 2000 Stock Option Plan, Sybase, Inc.1988 Stock Incentive Plan, Amended and Restated Sybase, Inc. 2003 Stock Plan, Sybase, Inc. 1999Nonstatutory Stock Plan, Sybase, Inc. 1996 Stock Plan, Sybase, Inc. 2001 Director Stock OptionPlan, Sybase, Inc. 1992 Director Stock Option Plan, the Sybase, Inc. 1991 Employee Stock PurchasePlan and 1991 Foreign Subsidiary Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the Registration Statement (FormS-3) dated as of June 26, 2000, for the issuance of 7,381,917 shares in connection with Sybase’sacquisition of Home Financial Network, and the Registration Statement (Form S-4) dated as of March15, 2001, the Registration Statement (Form S-3) dated as of July 29, 2005, for $460.0 million ofSybase’s 1.75% convertible subordinated notes due 2025 and the issuance of up to 18,239,506 shares,of our reports dated February 27, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements andschedule of Sybase, Inc., and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting ofSybase, Inc, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2007.  /s/ Ernst & Young LLPSan Francisco, CA
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:Annual report.**
 
2001 | 2002| 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009
2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016
 
SuDoc Number:SI 1.1:
Item Number:0909 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000598313
 
May 9, 2018
# C_2010037EN.01004802.xml

| 13.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/48

---

Order of the General Court of 16 December 2009 — Bactria v Commission

(Case T-76/04) (1)

1

2010/C 37/70

Language of the case: English

Language of the case: English

The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 106, 30.4.2004.

1

---
### **CHAPTER 21—DEFINITIONS**

Sec.
2101.
Civil service; armed forces; uniformed services.
2101a.
The Senior Executive Service.
2102.
The competitive service.
2103.
The excepted service.
2104.
Officer.
2105.
Employee.
2106.
Member of Congress.
2107.
Congressional employee.
2108.
Veteran; disabled veteran; preference eligible.
2108a.
Treatment of certain individuals as veterans, disabled veterans, and preference eligibles.
2109.
Air traffic controller; Secretary.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2011**—Pub. L. 112–56, title II, §235(a)(2)(B), Nov. 21, 2011, 125 Stat. 723, added item 2108a.

**1980**—Pub. L. 96–347, §1(d), Sept. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 1150, substituted "controller; Secretary" for "controller" in item 2109.

**1978**—Pub. L. 95–454, title IV, §401(e), Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1154, added item 2101a.

**1972**—Pub. L. 92–297, §1(b), May 16, 1972, 86 Stat. 141, added item 2109.
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 30, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 86572]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28842]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center for Advancing Translational 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; SBIR Contract Review Topic 20.
    Date: January 12, 2021.
    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, 
National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Room 1078, 
Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Rahat (Rani) Khan, Ph.D. Scientific Review 
Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Center for Advancing 
Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 6701 
Democracy Boulevard, Room 1078 Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-7319 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#117a79707f6323517262633f7f78793f767e67"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="660d0e070814542605151448080f0e48010910">[email protected]</span></a>.

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.859, 
Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.350, 
B--Cooperative Agreements; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research 
Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)


    Dated: December 22, 2020.
David W. Freeman,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-28842 Filed 12-29-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
July 28, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

EUGENE JENKINS, Appellant

NO. 14-15-00409-CV V.

FORT BEND COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, Appellee

________________________________

Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the 

judgment signed by the court below on November 17, 2014. Having considered the 

motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by 

appellant, Eugene Jenkins.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
§ 273.1 Purpose. ( a ) This part is composed of several subparts, each containing its own purpose. In accordance with the authority in DoD Directive 5134.12, “Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness (ASD(L&MR))” (available at *http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/513412p.pdf*); DoD Instruction 4140.01, “Supply Chain Materiel Management Policy” (available at *http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/414001p.pdf*); and DoD Instruction 4160.28, “DoD Demilitarization (DEMIL) Program” (available at *http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/416028p.pdf*), this part: ( 1 ) Prescribes uniform procedures for the disposition of DoD personal property.
( 2 ) Establishes the sequence of processes for disposition of personal property of the DoD Components.
( b ) This subpart: ( 1 ) Implements the statutory authority and regulations under which DoD personal property disposal takes place, as well as the scope and applicability for the program.
( 2 ) Defines the responsibilities of personnel and agencies involved in the Defense Materiel Disposition Program.
( 3 ) Provides procedures for disposal of excess property and scrap.
( 4 ) Provides procedures for property donations, loans, and exchanges.
From: Higgins, Cortney [mailto:Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 11:51 AM 

To: Wayland, Robertj 

Subject: RE: BB4 - Further Discussion? 

Hi Bob, 

Let’s just wait until the comments come in. 

Thanks, 

Cortney 

From: Wayland, Robertj [mailto:Wayland.Robertj@epa.gov] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 11:47 AM 

To: Higgins, Cortney 

Subject: BB4 - Further Discussion? 

Cortney – 

Do we still need to schedule further discussion specifically on BB4, or would you prefer to just wait 

until we get the written comments from the interagency and just go from there? 

thanx! 

bob 

Robert J. Wayland, Ph.D. 

Leader, Energy Strategies Group 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

Sector Policies and Programs Division 

Mail Code D243-01 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 

Office: (919) 541-1045 

Cell: (919) 306-2290 

Fax: (919) 541-5450 

Email: wayland.robertj@epa.gov 

************************************* 

 DRAFT/Deliberative Document - FOIA Exempt 

*************************************
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Michael W. Zellner, hereby certify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in my capacity as an officer of PMC-Sierra, Inc. (PMC), that, to my knowledge, the Annual Report of PMC on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 30, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13 (a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PMC.



|                        |  |  |  |     |  |  |  |                             
|----------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  |  |  | ----------------------------
|Date: February 21, 2008 |  |  |  | By: |  |  |  | /s/ Michael W. Zellner      
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |  |  | Michael W. Zellner          
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |  |  | Vice President              
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer and 
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |  |  | Principal Accounting Officer
#### In re McDONALD.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 6, 1903.)

In the matter of John B. McDonald. G. L. Rives, for appellant. G. W. Wickersham, for respondent.

No opinion. Reargument ordered.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Gilbert Leroy Dillenbeck, Appellant.

Order unanimously reversed and proceeding remitted to Jefferson County Court for a hearing. Memorandum: The record indicates that a hearing should have been had on the contentions urged by the defendant in his petition. (Appeal from order of Jefferson County Court denying, without a hearing, motion to vacate a judgment of conviction for attempted robbery, second degree, entered March 26, 1959.) Present — Williams, P. J., Goldman, Henry and Noonan, JJ.
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1019 

Condemning the Nicaraguan Government’s unjust imprisonment of individuals 

affiliated with Mountain Gateway Ministry. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2024 

Mr. MOORE of Alabama (for himself, Mr. ADERHOLT, Ms. SEWELL, Mr. ROY, 

Mr. CARL, and Mr. PALMER) submitted the following resolution; which 

was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Condemning the Nicaraguan Government’s unjust imprisonment of individuals affiliated with Mountain Gateway 

Ministry. 

Whereas, in December 2023, eleven individuals affiliated with 

Mountain Gateway Ministry, Marcos Sergio Herna ́ndez 

Jiro ́n; Harry Lening Rios Bravo; Manuel de Jesu ́s Rı ́os 

Flores; Jose ́ Luis Orozco Urrutia; A ́lvaro Daniel Escobar 

Caldera; Juan Carlos Chavarrı ́a Zapata; Juan Luis 

Moncada; Orvin Alexis Moncada Castellano, Ce ́sar 

Facundo Burgalin Miranda, Walner Omier Blando ́n 

Ochoa, and Maricela de Fa ́tima Mejı ́a Ruiz were arrested 

by the Government of Nicaragua; 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HRES 1019 IH 

Whereas there is concern the Nicaraguan Government has 

charged each of the listed individuals for crimes on baseless claims of money laundering and organized crime; 

Whereas the accused do not have adequate access to legal 

counsel; 

Whereas there is concern that United States citizens affiliated with Mountain Gateway Ministry are being targeted 

for arrest and extradition by the Nicaraguan Government; 

Whereas this follows a pattern by the Nicaraguan Government to quell the free speech and religious rights of 

Christians and other non-governmental organizations in 

Nicaragua; 

Whereas, on November 30, 2022, in accordance with the 

International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, the Secretary of State designated Nicaragua a ‘‘Country of Particular Concern’’ for having engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom; 

Whereas the Nicaraguan Government’s actions are yet another example of an extreme intolerance of religious organizations; and 

Whereas Congress has a vested interest in upholding international religious freedom and human rights: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) condemns the targeting and imprisonment 

3 of individuals affiliated with Mountain Gateway Min4 istry without due process of law; and 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HRES 1019 IH 

1 (2) calls on the Nicaraguan Government to take 

2 prompt action to address these violations of religious 

3 freedom and international human rights. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

February 28, 2006

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 05-13843

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 04-80782-CV-WJZ

STEPHEN N. MARTYAK, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

versus 

JUDITH A. MARTYAK, 

SANDRA MCSORLEY, Honorable, 

Fifteenth Judicial Circuit 

Court of Florida, in her

official capacity, 

FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT 

COURT OF FLORIDA, The Honorable 

Edward Fine, Chief Judge, in 

his Official Capacity, 

JAMES ZINGALE, Chairman, 

Executive Director Florida 

Department of Revenue in his 

Official capacity, 

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 

Defendants-Appellees. 
2

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

_________________________

(February 28, 2006)

Before BLACK, BARKETT and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Stephen N. Martyak appeals an order awarding attorney’s fees to his exwife, Judith A. Martyak, for Mr. Martyak’s improper removal of a state case to

federal court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). We affirm.

In 1991, Judith A. Martyak initiated dissolution of marriage proceedings in

Florida state court against Mr. Martyak, and alimony was awarded in favor of Ms.

Martyak. Mr. Martyak brought several appeals in Florida courts challenging the

judgment, but the award of alimony was affirmed in each appeal. In August 2005,

Mr. Martyak filed a notice of removal in federal district court and sought reversal

of the alimony award on the ground that it violated several provisions of the U.S.

Constitution. The district court concluded that Mr. Martyak’s claims sought

federal review of a final state court judgment and it lacked subject matter

jurisdiction to review the claims under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. See D.C.

Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 476, 103 S. Ct. 1303, 1311 (1983);
3

Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 416, 44 S. Ct. 149, 150 (1923). The

district court remanded the case to state court and, because Mr. Martyak sought

removal in violation of well-settled law, ordered Mr. Martyak to pay Ms. Martyak

$8850 in attorney’s fees.

We review an order awarding attorney’s fees for abuse of discretion. Fowler

v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 915 F.2d 616, 617 (11th Cir. 1990). Section 1447(c)

provides, “An order remanding the case may require payment of just costs and any

actual expenses, including attorney fees, incurred as a result of the removal.” 28

U.S.C. 1447(c). “Central to the determination of whether attorneys’ fees should be

granted is the propriety of the defendant’s decision to remove.” Garcia v. Amfels,

Inc., 254 F.3d 585, 587 (5th Cir. 2001).

Mr. Martyak’s removal of the case was clearly improper. “[A] United States

District Court has no authority to review final judgments of a state court in judicial

proceedings.” Powell v. Powell, 80 F.3d 464, 466 (11th Cir. 1996) (quoting

Feldman, 460 U.S. at 482, 103 S. Ct. at 1315). The district court did not abuse its

discretion.

AFFIRMED.
6

Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2013-0461 Directorate Identifier: 2012-NM-169-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours 

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Inspection 30.0 $2,550.0

0 $0 $2,550.00 234 $596,700.00

or 49.0 $4,165.0

0 $0 $4,165.00 234 $974,610.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $1,571,310

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

No Data $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): N/A
7

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: