alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 1962
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1962 appear at 80 FR 9902, Feb. 24, 2015.

§ 1962.14 Account and security information in UCC cases. Within 2 weeks after receipt of a written request from the borrower, the Agency must inform the borrower of the security and the total unpaid balance of the Agency indebtedness covered by the Financing Statement. ( a ) If the Agency fails to provide the information, it may be liable for any loss caused the borrower and, in some States, other parties, and also may lose some of its security rights. The UCC provides that the borrower is entitled to such information once every 6 months without charge, and the Agency may charge up to $10 for each additional statement. However, the Agency provides them without charge.
( b ) Although the UCC only requires the Agency to give information pursuant to the borrower's written request, the Agency will also answer oral requests. Furthermore, the UCC does not prohibit giving this information to others who have a proper need for it, such as a bank or another creditor contemplating advancing additional credit to the borrower.
[50 FR 45783, Nov. 1, 1985, as amended at 54 FR 47960, Nov. 20, 1989; 61 FR 35930, July 9, 1996]
# Primary menu

Skip to content
- BASIC SEARCH
- ADVANCED SEARCH
- ABOUT NTRS
- OAI HARVEST
- SEARCH TIPS
- CONTACT / HELP

System Exception Encountered

					The system has encountered an unrecoverable error when trying to process your request. Please try again later.We're sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused.					

					If you need to contact us by mail, phone, or email, please use the following: 					

						NASA STI Information Desk						Mail Stop 148						NASA Langley Research Center						Hampton, VA 23681-2199, USA												Phone: 757-864-9658						Email: help@sti.nasa.gov

About
Clear
No Fear Act
Freedom of Information Act
Privacy
Office of Inspector General
Agency Financial Reports

Disclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | 			NASA OCIO | 			USA.gov | 			NASA.gov

Some documents on this site may require viewers:			Free Adobe PDF Reader | Free MS Word Viewer

STI Program
Contact Us
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), 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 grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Heart, Lung, and Blood Initial Review Group, NHLBI Institutional Training Mechanism Review Committee.                    

*Date:*                         December 10, 2010.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Charles Joyce, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7196, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924. 301-435-0288.                         *cjoyce@nhlbi.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: November 10, 2010.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-28984 Filed 11-16-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Elder, Beal es and Senior Judge Annunziata

MISTY GIBSON MEMORANDUM OPINION * v. Record No. 0014-09-3 PER CURIAM MAY 26, 2009 ROANOKE CITY DE PARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE William D. Broadhurst, Judge (Thomas E. Wray, on brief), for appellant. Appellant submitting on brief. (William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Heather P. Ferguson, Assistant City Attorney, on brief), for appellee. Appellee submitting on brief. (Marta J. Anderson , on brief), Guardian ad litem for the minor child. Guardian ad litem submitting on brief.

Misty Gibson (mother) appeals the trial court’ s order terminating her parental rights to her son, N.B., under Code § 16.1-283(C)(1), (C)(2) and (E ). On appeal, mother challenges the proof of conditions necessary for termination pursuan t to Code § 16.1-283(C)(1) and (C)(2), and does not challenge the proof of cond itions necessary for terminatio n under Code § 16.1-283(E). For the following reason, we affirm the trial court’s decision.

In Fields v. Dinwiddie Count y Dep’t of Soc. Servs. , 46 Va. App. 1, 3, 614 S.E.2d 656, 657 (2005), a parent appealed to this Court from the trial cour t’s decision to terminate her parental rights pursuant to Code § 16.1-283(C)(2 ) and Code § 16.1-283(E)(i). On appeal, she contended the evidence did not support the te rmination under Code § 16.1-283(C)(2), but she did

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opin ion is not designated for publication.- 2 - not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the termination pursuant to Code § 16.1-283(E)(i). This Court f ound that, in light of the uncha llenged termination pursuant to Code § 16.1-283(E)(i), it was not re quired to consider the sufficien cy of the evidence to support the termination under Code § 16.1-283(C)(2). Fields , 46 Va. App. at 8, 614 S.E.2d at 659. Here, likewise, mother does not challe nge the termination pursuant to Code § 16.1-283(E). Accordingly, we need not consider mother’s challenge to the termination under Code § 16.1-283(C)(1) and (C)(2). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s decision.

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Donald R. Chappel, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Williams Partners L.P.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) [Intentionally omitted pursuant to SEC Release No. 34-47986];  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and  d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: May 2, 2006       /s/ Donald R. Chappel         Donald R. Chappel    Chief Financial Officer of Williams Partners GP    LLC, general partner of Williams Partners L.P.    (Principal Financial Officer)
SCHEDULE TO EXHIBIT
10.18


 


Indemnification
Agreements with Directors and Executive Officers


 


	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name

  	
   

  	
  Date of Agreement

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Directors:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  David H. Batchelder

  	
   

  	
  January 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Michael R. D’Appolonia

  	
   

  	
  March 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  William J. Flanagan

  	
   

  	
  April 19, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  C. Scott Greer

  	
   

  	
  March 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Stephen G. Hanks

  	
   

  	
  January 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  William H.
  Mallender

  	
   

  	
  March 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Michael P.
  Monaco

  	
   

  	
  March 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Cordell Reed

  	
   

  	
  March 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Dennis R.
  Washington

  	
   

  	
  January 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Bettina M. Whyte

  	
   

  	
  March 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Dennis K.
  Williams

  	
   

  	
  March 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Officers:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Stephen M.
  Johnson

  	
   

  	
  January 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  George H.
  Juetten

  	
   

  	
  January 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Jerry K. Lemon

  	
   

  	
  October 13, 2003

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Larry L. Myers

  	
   

  	
  January 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Richard D. Parry

  	
   

  	
  January 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Cynthia M.
  Stinger

  	
   

  	
  January 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Craig G. Taylor

  	
   

  	
  January 25, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Earl L. Ward

  	
   

  	
  August 14, 2002

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Thomas H. Zarges

  	
   

  	
  January 25, 2002
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 9:46 AM

To: 'bestboatman@gmail.com'

Cc: Pappas, Rob (FAA); Schandler, Andrea (FAA); Cooper, Thuy (FAA); Pearson, Lakisha 

(FAA)

Subject: Request for Additional Information: The Barefoot Group, Inc.

February 18, 2015 

Mr. JohnWappenstein 

The Barefoot Group, Inc. 

P.O. Box 1363 

Saint Augustine, FL 32085 

Dear Mr. Wappenstein: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-0997). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your 

petition. 

 Provide description of proximity to airports and to populated areas. 

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit 

any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via e-mail to 

333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information 

described above by March 4, 2015 . If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without 

notifying you further. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

Nia Daniels 

Program Analyst 

Nia Daniels, ARM‐108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUS’TlN 

. . 

. 

- 

c 

i&at8$ ‘or s6lc&&laa8, 108 Is. s. Sqfi? 47.L 

. . 

ATTORNEY GENEFUL OF TEXAS
###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Notes:

1. Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 83 FR 22178, May 14, 2018.

2. Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 83 FR 61310, Nov. 29, 2018

3. Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 85 FR 65504, Oct. 15, 2020.

4. Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 87 FR 44266, July 26, 2022.

#### § 2.2 Authority of the Secretary to prescribe regulations.

The general authority of the Secretary to prescribe regulations governing the work of the Department is based on 5 U.S.C. 301 which provides that the head of an Executive department may prescribe regulations for the government of his department, the conduct of its employees, the distribution and performance of its business, and the custody, use and preservation of its records, papers, and property.
-----------------~Ju l--8;-2 14---------------- --

Memorandum 

Subject: 

From: 

To: 

June 12, 2014 Informal Teleconference between the Southern Ute Tribe 

and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Chris Stoneman, Policy Advisor ~ ~~ Outreach and Information Division, 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) 

Docket- EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151 

This memorandum to docket provides a brief summary of the main discussion points 

made at the subject, informal meeting during the comment period for the Advance Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR): "Managing Emissions from Oil and Natl.rral Gas 

Production in Indian Country." (79 Federal Register 32502, June 5, 2104) 

Teleconference details: 

When: June 16, 2014; 3:00-4:00 p.m. ET 

Participants: Chris Stoneman, EPA, OAQPS 

Toni Colon, EPA, OAQPS 

Mary Tom Kissell, EPA, OAQPS 

Dee Rothery, EPA, Region 8 

Claudia Smith, EPA, Region 8 

Matt Langenfeld, EPA, Region 8 

Sam Manes, Private Attorney 

Southern Ute Tribe: 

Mark Hutson, Air Quality Technical Manager 

Tom Johnson, Division Head for Environmental Department 

Danny Powers, Air Quality Scientist (Lead Permit Writer) 

Michael Freeman, Compliance 

Danny Powers, Air Quality 

Oakley Hayes, Air Quality 

During the teleconference, EPA provided an overview of several key aspects of the minor 

source general permit program for Indian country and the recently-issued ANPR for New 

Source review (NSR) minor source oil and natural gas activity in Indian country. During 

th€ course of the meeting the Southern Ute raised several questions as follows that were 

discussed between both parties on the phone: 

• The 90-day application review process for general permits prescribed in the 

Indian Country Minor NSR rule; 

• The geographic scope of a potential general permit, permit by rule or Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) for oil and natural gas sources in Indian country; 
·--------• HowJ:.o s.trucJl.l,UUlpotentiaiAgener.alpermit,_permit_by_r_ule_os_ IP at us cover 

several different, diverse air sheds of Indian country, and different basin 

characteristics with oil and natural gas activity; 

• Whether EPA is considering air quality modeling in connection with oil and· 

natural gas sources; 

• How EPA would handle compliance for minor oil and natural gas sources; and 

• Funding for an oil and natural gas permit or FIP and how revenues will be 

generated. 

The EPA answered basic questions about the content of the proposed Bundle # 1 proposal 

and ANPR and offered to be available for further informal discussions if the Southern 

Ute desires. 

This memorandum will be filed in the docket for the ANPR and will be available for 

public review. 

2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JAMIE CLAIRE, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No.: 4:20cv20-MW/MAF

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF

MANAGEMENT SERVICES, et al.,

Defendants.

____________________________/

ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING

Several pending motions are before this Court, including cross-motions for 

summary judgment. See ECF Nos. 123, 125, & 126. Plaintiffs have brought claims 

under Title VII and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, 

alleging that Defendants have unlawfully discriminated against them on the basis of 

sex by denying them coverage for gender-affirming medical care. The Plaintiffs’ 

arguments with respect to the Equal Protection claim rely in part on the now-vacated 

opinion in Adams v. Sch. Bd. of St. Johns Cnty, 968 F.3d 1286 (11th Cir. 2020). The 

substituted opinion in Adams was subsequently vacated upon the granting of 

rehearing en banc in that case. See ECF No. 152 (Plaintiffs’ second notice of 

supplemental authority). Now, the Eleventh Circuit has issued its en banc opinion in 

Case 4:20-cv-00020-MW-MAF Document 158 Filed 01/03/23 Page 1 of 2
2

Adams, holding that “separating school bathrooms based on biological sex passes 

constitutional muster . . . .” Adams v. Sch. Bd. of St. Johns Cnty, --- F.4th ---, 2022 

WL 18003879, *1 (11th Cir. Dec. 30, 2022) (en banc). Accordingly, given the 

parties’ reliance on the original Adams opinion in their papers, the parties must file 

supplemental briefs addressing how the en banc decision in Adams affects the merits 

of Plaintiffs’ claims and whether they wish to file amended summary-judgment 

papers given this development. The parties’ supplemental briefs are due on or 

before Tuesday, January 17, 2023.

SO ORDERED on January 3, 2023.

s/Mark E. Walker 

Chief United States District Judge

Case 4:20-cv-00020-MW-MAF Document 158 Filed 01/03/23 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 10.15
                          INCENTIVE AGREEMENT

  THIS INCENTIVE AGREEMENT is made the 24th day of April 1996 by and
between Las Vegas Discount Golf & Tennis, Inc., a Colorado corporation
("LVDG") and Ronald S. Boreta, an individual ("Ron Boreta").

  WHEREAS, Ron Boreta serves as President of Saint Andrews Golf
Corporation, a majority owned subsidiary of LVDG ("SAGC"), and he also serves
as a member of the boards of directors of both LVDG and SAGC; and

  WHEREAS, Ron Boreta has been instrumental in the past in helping SAGC
raise money through SAGC's initial public offering; and

  WHEREAS, it is very important to the success of both LVDG and SAGC that
SAGC raises additional funding which will enable SAGC to pursue its business
plan of building sports entertainment parks, and if SAGC is able to carry out
this business plan it could be in the best interests of LVDG's shareholders;
and

  WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of LVDG believes that the best way to
accomplish this objective is to provide a significant incentive to Ron Boreta
to pursue such transaction;

  NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual promises
and covenants contained herein:

  THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

  1.   If LVDG determines to spin off its shares of SAGC to the LVDG
shareholders or if shares of SAGC are otherwise distributed or issued to LVDG
shareholders in any form of reorganization involving LVDG, LVDG will allow Ron
Boreta to convert the 512,799 shares of LVDG preferred shares he owns even if
the conversion  requirements specified on such shares have not been met.

  2.   This Agreement shall inure to and be binding upon the heirs,
executors, successors and assigns of each of the parties to this Agreement.

  AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED on the date first above written.

                                LAS VEGAS DISCOUNT GOLF & TENNIS, INC.

/s/ Ronald S. Boreta            By /s/ Vaso Boreta
Ronald S. Boreta                   Vaso Boreta, President
#### § 1786.104 Loan fund audit.

RUS shall have the right to audit within 6 months of closing, transactions involving the RUS construction fund established and maintained by the borrower pursuant to the terms of the RUS Loan Agreement and to inspect all books, records, accounts and other documents and papers of the borrower. Should RUS determine that the borrower has made disbursements of funds advanced pursuant to RUS Notes which do not comply with the requirements of the RUS Loan Agreement, the borrower shall be required to pay the Government an amount equal to the difference between the amount which the borrower prepaid on such RUS Notes evidencing RUS loans funds which were improperly disbursed and the amount which the borrower would otherwise have been required to return to the Government as a result of noncompliance if the borrower had not prepaid such RUS Notes. (See 7 CFR part 1721, Post-Loan Policies and Procedures for Insured Electric Loans.)
Editorial Note on Part 1955
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1955 appear at 80 FR 9895, Feb. 24, 2015.

§ 1955.141 Transferring title. ( a ) - ( c ) [Reserved]
( d ) *Rent increases for MFH property.* After approval of a credit sale for an occupied MFH project, but prior to closing, the purchaser will prepare a realistic budget for project operation (and a utility allowance, if applicable) to determine if a rent increase may be needed to continue or place project operations on a sound basis. 7 CFR part 3560, subpart E will be followed in processing the request for a rent increase. In processing the rent increase, the purchaser will have the same status as a borrower. An approved rent increase will be effective on or after the date of closing.
( e ) *Interest credit and rental assistance for MFH property.* Interest credit and rental assistance may be granted to program applicants purchasing MFH properties in accordance with the provisions of 7 CFR part 3560, subpart F.
[53 FR 27838, July 25, 1988, as amended at 56 FR 2257, Jan. 22, 1991; 57 FR 36592, Aug. 14, 1992; 60 FR 34455, July 3, 1995; 69 FR 69106, Nov. 26, 2004]