alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 1956
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1956 appear at 80 FR 9901, Feb. 24, 2015.

§ 1956.142 Delinquent adjustment agreements. ( a ) The servicing official is responsible for notifying debtors in advance of the due dates of payments on debt settlement agreements and for monitoring compliance with the terms of settlement agreements. If a payment is delinquent, the servicing official should contact the debtor promptly to determine the reason for the delinquency and the debtor's plan for completing the agreement.
( b ) Delinquencies of 30 days or more will be reported to the State Director along with other pertinent information and the recommendation of the servicing official regarding further handling of the case.
( c ) The State Director may extend, for ninety days, the time for making the payments when the circumstances of the case justify an extension. Extensions for a greater period of time may be made by the State Director upon the recommendation of the County Committee and the servicing official.
( d ) When the debtor is financially unable to meet the terms of the debt settlement agreement, the State Director may void the existing agreement and process a new settlement more consistent with the debtor's repayment ability, provided the facts in the case justify such action.
( e ) If the State Director determines that the debtor cannot or will not meet the terms of the settlement agreement and if the facts do not justify approval of a new settlement agreement, the State Director will void the existing agreement and direct the servicing official to take other servicing actions appropriate to the circumstances of the case.
( f ) When an adjustment agreement is voided, the State Director will notify the debtor giving the reasons in writing, with a copy to the Finance Office and to the servicing official. Upon receipt, the Finance Office will return the original Form RD 1956-1 to the State Office.
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED**

**PURSUANT      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| (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/                Yale Farar                          |
|--------------------------------------------------------|
| Yale                Farar                              |
| President                (Principal Executive Officer) |
| November                2, 2007                        |

| /s/                Mitchell W. Turk    |
|----------------------------------------|
| Mitchell                W. Turk        |
| Chief                Financial Officer |
| November                2, 2007        |

----
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta name="pdf:PDFVersion" content="1.2">
<meta name="xmp:CreatorTool" content="Acrobat Capture Server 2.0">
<meta name="pdf:hasXFA" content="false">
<meta name="access_permission:modify_annotations" content="true">
<meta name="dc:creator" content="capture">
<meta name="dcterms:created" content="1998-09-04T11:05:24Z">
<meta name="dcterms:modified" content="1998-09-04T11:05:27Z">
<meta name="dc:format" content="application/pdf; version=1.2">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:creator_tool" content="Acrobat Capture Server 2.0">
<meta name="access_permission:fill_in_form" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:modified" content="1998-09-04T11:05:27Z">
<meta name="pdf:hasCollection" content="false">
<meta name="pdf:encrypted" content="false">
<meta name="Content-Length" content="88595">
<meta name="pdf:hasMarkedContent" content="false">
<meta name="Content-Type" content="application/pdf">
<meta name="access_permission:can_print_faithful" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:creator" content="capture">
<meta name="pdf:producer" content="Acrobat PDFWriter 3.02 for Windows NT">
<meta name="access_permission:extract_for_accessibility" content="true">
<meta name="access_permission:assemble_document" content="true">
<meta name="xmpTPg:NPages" content="2">
<meta name="pdf:hasXMP" content="false">
<meta name="access_permission:extract_content" content="true">
<meta name="access_permission:can_print" content="true">
<meta name="X-TIKA:Parsed-By" content="org.apache.tika.parser.DefaultParser">
<meta name="X-TIKA:Parsed-By" content="org.apache.tika.parser.pdf.PDFParser">
<meta name="access_permission:can_modify" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:producer" content="Acrobat PDFWriter 3.02 for Windows NT">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:created" content="1998-09-04T11:05:24Z">
<title></title>
</head>
<body><div class="page"><p></p>
<p>OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 
</p>
<p>AUSTIN 
., </p>
<p></p>
</div>
<div class="page"><p></p>
<p>_. </p>
<p></p>
<div class="ocr">ia.

Honorable J. i. Looney, Fage 2

Auditer, Tarrant Ceunty, Fort Forth, Texas, dated Decenber i,
1937, and an opinion written by Honorable Joe J. Alaup, Ano

pistant Attorney General, addreased to Hr, By As oa

County Auditor,  afkin, exaa, and dated December 16, 19

In opinion Ho, 061162, a sopy of whieh ia enel osed
herewith 1¢ wae held among other things, in effeet, that a
Justies of the Pease is not entitied to five persent sommis-
sien on fines eollected by the Justice of the Pease. (Alsace
gee the case of MelLennan County ¥. Bogese, 139 5S. Ye 1054).

In view of the foregoing you axe xe renreet ily ada
vised that the Justices of the Peace nention in year ‘inquisy
have no legal authori chetecever to retain the f @ pereent
ecominsion for colleeting Sines and trial fees. Therefore,
your question az above subnitted becomes moot,

Yours very truly
 ATTORERY GENERAL OF TEXAS

ell leabby

wiiliens
Assistant
aMinp
mae APEROVEE ME Ro ae
AMMOREEY "

ee Hae as
CYL R TEKS

APPROVED

OPINION
COMMITTEE

</div>

</div>
</body></html>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Franklyn Palmer, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered November 2, 1979, unanimously affirmed. Appellant’s appeal from the judgment rendered September 26, 1977 is dismissed, since by reason of resentence that judgment was vacated and the judgment rendered November 2, 1979 substituted therefor and it is only from that judgment that an appeal lies. No opinion. Concur—Sandler, J. P., Sullivan, Markewich, Lupiano and Carro, JJ.
|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| 1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Werner Enterprises, Inc.; |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period covered by this report; |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| 3. | [Intentionally omitted]; |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| 4. | [Intentionally omitted]; |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| 5. | [Intentionally omitted]. |

|       |
|-------|
|       |  |  |  |  |
| Date: | March 17, 2015 |   |   |   |

|                                           |
|-------------------------------------------|
|                                           |
| /s/ Gregory L. Werner                     |
| Gregory L. Werner                         |
| Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
# Greenbrier Valley Airport and Industrial Park P.O. Box 329 •Lewisburg, WV 24901 (304) 645-3961 • Fax (304) 645-4683



### "LongestRunwayIn West Virginia"

May 9, 2012 Mr. Dennis DeVany Chief, Essential Air Service Division Office ofAviation Analysis Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue SE, Washington, D.C. 20590 Reference; DOT-OST-2003-15553 JERRY O'SULLIVAN Manager

(}1 t..v Essential Air Service at Greenbrier/White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia DearMr. DeVany, This letter is a response from the Greenbrier County Airport Authority to the request for proposals for Essential Air Service at Greenbrier/White Sulphur Springs. We appreciate the ability to respond and the consideration that the Department gives to our response. As a Member ofthe Greenbrier County Airport Authority I can state all the members ofthe authority fully support the proposal by Silver Airlines. The proposed flight schedule to Atlanta twice a day on 34 seat aircraft will continue the last several years ofdeveloping our Atlanta market which is now over 10,000 enplanements per year and provide the extra capacity to continue to expand this market. Greenbrier Valley Airport serves The Greenbrier, a world famous resort that hosts an annual PGA tournament, numerous businesses including: ABB Process Analytics, United Technologies, MeadWest Vaco, BO Mullican, and many local passengers. This service is vital to ourregion which includes The Homestead a majorresort in Bath County, VA and Snowshoe Mountain Ski Resort in SlatyFork, WV. Ourcommunity welcomesthousands ofvisitors each year, many who prefer to travel by air, who spend millions ofdollars and support over 3,000jobs. Maintaining air service with the essential links to the national air service system is critical to our community. The proposal from Silver Airways more than adequately addresses our community's air service needs. Byproviding service in coordination with the major airlines, Silver Airways will maintain Greenbrier ValleyAirport's link to the world. Therefore, the Greenbrier County Airport Authority supports the selection ofSilver Airways as the Essential Air Service carrier for Greenbrier/White Sulphur Springs. Bestregards, ( 

# V',d/C-**rfl~**

,. WilliamD. Goodwin, Member Greenbrier County Airport Authority



### Closestmajorairportto The Greenbrier, The HomesteadandSnowshoeresorts
|  |  |  |  |  |
|--|--|--|--|--|
|  |  |  |  |

  Utah

> - Salt Lake City
- West Valley City

----
§ 2500.104 Eligibility requirements. Proposals may be submitted by any of the following: ( a ) Any community-based organization, network, or coalition of community-based organizations that: ( 1 ) Has demonstrated experience in providing agricultural education or other agriculturally related services to socially disadvantaged farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners;
( 2 ) Has provided to the Secretary documentary evidence of work with, and on behalf of socially disadvantaged farmers, ranchers, or forest landowners during the three-year period preceding the submission of a proposal for assistance under this program; and
( 3 ) Does not engage in activities prohibited under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
( b ) An 1890 institution or 1994 institution (as defined in 7 U.S.C. 7601), including West Virginia State University.
( c ) An Indian tribal community college or an Alaska Native cooperative college.
( d ) A Hispanic-serving institution (as defined in 7 U.S.C. 3103).
( e ) Any other institution of higher education (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 1001) that has demonstrated experience in providing agriculture education or other agriculturally related services to socially disadvantaged farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners in a region.
( f ) An Indian tribe (as defined in 25 U.S.C. 450b) or a national tribal organization that has demonstrated experience in providing agriculture education or other agriculturally-related services to socially disadvantaged farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners in a region.
( g ) Other organizations or institutions that received funding under this program before January 1, 1996, but only with respect to projects that the Secretary considers are similar to projects previously carried out by the entity under this program.
<PAGE>
Exhibit 10.48

Summary of Compensation Arrangements with Non-Employee Directors

The following summarizes the current compensation and benefits received by the
Company's non-employee directors.  It is intended to be a summary of existing
arrangements, and in no way is intended to provide any additional rights to any
non-employee director.

Retainer Fees

During 2005, non-employee directors receive a $30,000 annual retainer, except
that the Presiding Director is entitled to a retainer of $60,000 per year.  In
addition, the chairpersons of the Compensation Committee and the Nominating and
Corporate Governance Committee each receive a supplemental retainer of $6,000
per year, and the chairperson of the audit committee a supplemental retainer of
$12,000 per year.

The chair of the special committee formed in February of 2005 for the purpose
of evaluating, recommending and/or approving strategic transactions (the
"Special Committee") is entitled to a one-time supplemental retainer of
$20,000, and the other members are each entitled to a one-time supplemental
retainer of $15,000.

Meeting Fees

Per meeting fees for non-employee directors are as follows:

* A $1,500 daily attendance fee for attendance at Board meetings and the annual
meeting of shareholders;

* A $1,000 daily attendance fee for attendance at meetings of committees of
which they are a member, except that no attendance fee is payable with respect
to the Special Committee.

Equity Compensation

        Under the terms of the Company's stock incentive plan, directors are
eligible to receive stock options, stock awards, and other types of
equity-based compensation awards. Non-employee directors receive an annual
grant of an option to purchase 10,000 shares [confirm], subject to the terms
of the Company's standard form of non-employee director option agreement, a
copy of which is filed as an exhibit to this Form 10-K.

Consulting Arrangements

        Director Jonathan Golden, through his professional corporation,
Jonathan Golden, P.C., a wholly owned professional corporation, is a partner in
the Atlanta, Georgia law firm of Arnall Golden Gregory LLP, which provides
legal services to the Company.  Mr. Golden's professional corporation provides
the Company financial advisory and management consulting services as well. The
Company currently pays Mr. Golden's wholly owned professional corporation a
consulting fee of $6,000 per month. The consulting agreement may be terminated
by either party for any reason upon not less than 30 days prior notice.

Reimbursement of Expenses

All non-employee directors are entitled to reimbursement of expenses for all
services as a director, including committee participation or special
assignments.
#### § 29.1135 Rule 29.

Any lot of tobacco containing 25 percent or more of an adjacent group, which otherwise meets the specifications of a grade shall be treated as a special factor grade by placing the special factor “M” preceding the grademark.

[60 FR 36028, July 13, 1995]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IN RE: 3M ADMINISTRATIVE 

DOCKET 

This Document Relates To: 

Admin Docket No. 

Case No. 3:19-mc-87

JUDGE M. CASEY RODGERS

MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R. JONES

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL FROM ADMINISTRATIVE DOCKET

I. PLAINTIFF INFORMATION

MDL Centrality Plaintiff ID:

Name:

First M.I. Last

Are there any unresolved representation issues pending before the Court in the plaintiff’s 

administrative case?

Yes/No

Are there any disputes involving initial census submissions pending before the Court in the plaintiff’s 

administrative case?

Yes/No

II. EFFECT OF REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

If there are no unresolved representation issues or disputes involving initial census submissions pending before the 

Court in the plaintiff’s administrative case at the time this Request for Dismissal is docketed, then the Request for 

Dismissal will be construed as a notice of voluntary dismissal and the plaintiff’s administrative case will be automatically 

dismissed without prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i), without a court order.

If there are unresolved representation issues or disputes involving initial census submissions pending before the Court 

in the plaintiff’s administrative case at the time this Request for Dismissal is docketed, then the Request for Dismissal 

will be construed as a motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2); in which case, plaintiff’s administrative case 

may only be dismissed by court order.

Dated: ____________________ Respectfully submitted, 

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         957,503
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   66,632
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               985,639
<PP&E>                                      19,607,415
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,567,021
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,192,632
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           71,223
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (5,882,589)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,192,632
<SALES>                                      2,420,332
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,521,650
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,351,346
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,317,852
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,147,548)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,147,548)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,147,548)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (11.78)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (11.78)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.2




               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS








ASA International Ltd.
Framingham, Massachusetts



    We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration
Statement No. 33-312933 of ASA International Ltd., on Form S-8 of our report
dated March 2, 2001, relating to the consolidated statements of operations,
comprehensive income, shareholders' equity and cash flows of ASA International
Ltd., for the year ended December 31, 2000 appearing in the Company's Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.


/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP


BDO Seidman, LLP


Boston, Massachusetts
March 26, 2003
#### § 29.1077 Unsound (U).

Damaged. (See Rule 21.)

[42 FR 21092, Apr. 25, 1977. Redesignated at 47 FR 51721, Nov. 17, 1982, 48 FR 29671, June 28, 1983, 49 FR 16756, Apr. 20, 1984, and 51 FR 25027, July 10, 1986]
#### § 29.1075 Undried.

The condition of unfermented tobacco which has not been air-dried or steam-dried.

[42 FR 21092, Apr. 25, 1977. Redesignated at 47 FR 51721, Nov. 17, 1982, 48 FR 29671, June 28, 1983, 49 FR 16756, Apr. 20, 1984, and 51 FR 25027, July 10, 1986]
#### § 28.902 Director.

The Director shall perform for and under the supervision of the Administrator, such duties as the Administrator may require in enforcing the regulations in this subpart.
§ 240.5 Cash in lieu of donated foods for commodity schools. ( a ) The school food authority of a commodity school may elect ( 1 ) to receive cash payments in lieu of up to five cents per lunch of the value specified in § 250.4(b)(2)(ii) of this chapter to be used for donated-food processing and handling expenses, or
( 2 ) to have such payments retained for use on its behalf by the State agency. The school food authority shall consult with commodity schools before making the election.
( b ) When a school food authority makes an election regarding receipt of cash payments and the amount of any payments to be received under this paragraph, such election shall be binding on the school food authority for the school year to which the election applies.
( c ) The State agency shall ( 1 ) no later than May 14, 1982 for the school year ending June 30, 1982, and no later than August 15 of each subsequent school year, contact all school food authorities of commodity schools to learn their election regarding cash payments under this section and the amount of any such payments, and
( 2 ) forward this information to the distributing agency and FNSRO, in accordance with § 210.14(d)(2) of this chapter.
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF BDO SEIDMAN LLP, INDEPENDENTREGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our report datedAugust 24, 2004, relating to the financial statements and schedule of CandelaCorporation (the “Company”) appearing in the Company’s Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended July 3, 2004 into the Company’s previously filedRegistration Statements on Form S-3 (No.’s 33-13793 and 33-46056) and Forms S-8(No.’s 33-18932, 33-29291, 33-35091, 33-37696, 33-37697, 33-37698, 33-55596,33-73040, 333-15113, 333-88295 and 333-55556.)

 

 
|                   |   | /s/ BDO  Seidman, LLP |   |
|------------------------|--------|-----------------------|--------|
| Boston,  Massachusetts |   |                  |
| September  14, 2004    |   |                  |

 

1

----
#### § 28.119 Fee when request for classification is withdrawn.

When the request for the classification or comparison of any cotton or an application for review shall be withdrawn after the classification of such cotton has been started pursuant thereto, the person filing the same shall pay the prescribed fee as to any such cotton already classified.