alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Western Global Airlines, LLC 

5566 Broadcast Court 

Sarasota, FL 34620 

941-313-4781 

August 19, 2014 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations 

West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear U.S. Department of Transportation 

.. = ..J 

Enclosed you will find a revised request for our exemption to 14 CFR 121.434. The request was revised 

on the advice of FAA AFS-280 and our FAA Principal Operations Inspector. Please call me at the 

telephone number listed above if you have any questions. 

WGA appreciates your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

-Js91J! 

Thomas J. Quehl 

Vice President, Operations 
Western Global Airlines, LLC 

5566 Broadcast Court 

Sarasota, FL 34620 

August 19, 2014 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations 

West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Subject: Request for Exemption to 14 CFR 121.434{3) (c) {1) (ii) 

Dear U.S. Department of Transportation 

Western Global Airlines, LLC {"WGA") is requesting and exemption to 14 CFR 121.434{3) (c) {1) (ii), the 

requirement for a Pilot in Command completing initial or upgrade training to be observed by a Federal 

Aviation Administration {"FAA") Inspector during at least one flight leg which includes takeoff and 

landing, during the Operating Experience as specified by 14 CFR 121.434. 

WGA is requesting the FAA to permit WGA to substitute a qualified and authorized check airman in 

place of a FAA inspector to observe a qualifying pilot in command who is completing the initial or 

upgrade training specified in Section 121.424 during at least one flight leg that includes a takeoff and a 

landing. 

WGA's business is predominantly engaged in international flying. Requiring an FAA inspector to conduct 

the observation would result in a substantial burden on both the FAA and WGA due to the thirty day 

lead time required for an FAA Inspector to obtain foreign country clearance. WGA is an ad-hoc ACMI air 

carrier and rarely has the ability to schedule a flight thirty days in advance. 

Most, if not all of Operating Experience for initial and upgrade training will be conducted outside of the 

United States of America. WGA requests the privileges ofthe exemption outside ofthe United States of 

America due to FAA Inspector availability foreign country clearance requirements. 

WGA proposes three check airmen be designated this authority. 

Granting this exemption is in the public interest in that it allows the FAA to utilize Inspectors for more 

immediate needs and should also provide financial savings in avoiding FAA inspector travel expense. 
WGA appreciates your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

; (~/} () 

-~1.::< Vice President, Operations
UTILITY IMPACT ANALYSIS

James E. McMahon

(JEMcMahon@LBL.gov)

Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

U.S. DOE Workshop on Standards

for Commercial Unitary Air Conditioners and

Heat Pumps

September 12, 2001

EE-RM-STD-01-375 COMMENT 02OO

, ' 

• '.' ~'. .,.. •• ~ ••• ~. 1" ~ 

UTILITY IMP ACT ANALYSIS 

James E. McMahon 

(lEMcMahon@LBL.gov) 

Ernest Orlando L,awrence Berkeley National Laboratory 

·U.S. DOE Workshop on Standards 

for Commercial Unitary Air Conditioners and , 

Heat Pumps 

September 12, 2001 
Utility Impact Analysis:

PURPOSE AND METHOD

PURPOSE

- Estimate effects on electricity suppliers of reduced

energy sales due to new energy efficiency standards

METHOD uses NEMS-BRS

- Integrated model of U.S. energy sector, including

supply and demand

- Publicly available model, with forecast through 2020

* extrapolate beyond 2020

- Current basis: EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2001

* will update model when EIA does (usually annually)

11.J.I

EE-RM-STD-01-375 COMMENT 02OO

Utility Impact Analysis: 

PURPOSE AND METHOD 

• • ~'f. " :. 'O'}" ~:' 

• PURPOSE 

- Estimate effects on electricity suppliers of reduced 

energy sales due to new energy efficiency standards 

• METHOD uses NEMS-BRS 

- Integrated model of u.s. energy sector, including 

supply and demand 

- Publicly available model, with forecast through 2020 

• extrapolate beyond 2020 

- Current basis: EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2001 

• will update model when EIA does (usually annually) 

IlLJ.} 
Utility Impact Analysis:

INPUTS

Annual energy consumption and savings for

commercial unitary air conditioners and

heat pumps from National Energy Saving

spreadsheet

All other inputs from EIA

III.J.2

EE-RM-STD-01-375 COMMENT 02OO

Utility Impact Analysis: 

INPUTS 

, 

• Annual energy consumption and savings for 

commercial unitary air conditioners and 

heat pumps from National Energy Saving 

spreadsheet 

• All other inputs from EIA 

111.1.2 
Utility Impact Analysis:

METHOD and OUTPUT

METHOD

- NEMS-BRS balances all supply and demand given

savings from new energy efficiency standard

OUTPUT

- Change in energy sales and price by fuel type

(electricity, gas, oil) by region

- Change in mix of electricity generation

- Change in new capacity construction

III.J.3

EE-RM-STD-01-375 COMMENT 02OO

Utility Impact Analysis: 

METHOD and OUTPUT 

·'MET'HOD 

- NEMS-BRS balances all supply and demand given 

savings from new energy efficiency standard 

• OUTPUT 

" - Change in energy sales and price by fuel type 

(electricity, gas, oil) by region 

- Change in mix of electricity generation 

, - Change in new capacity construction 

111.1.3 
Utility Impact Analysis:

DOE Requests Input from Stakeholders

-soI., .

':

;. . I ::i.:? :',: -....

Should we consider using alternative

methods to NEMSfor conducting the utility

impacts analysis?

III.J.4

EE-RM-STD-01-375 COMMENT 02OO

Utility Impact Analysis: 

DOE Requests Input from Stakeholders . " '. .. " ..... ~ ... ~~ '. 

• Should we consider using alternative 

methods to NEMS for conducting the utility 

impacts analysis? 

III.JA
Case 1:06-cv-00699-WHA-CSC Document 9 Filed 12/21/2006 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:06-cv-00699-WHA-CSC Document 9 Filed 12/21/2006 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:06-cv-00699-WHA-CSC Document 9 Filed 12/21/2006 Page 3 of 3
usbank(logo)

 

Global CorporateTrust

190 S. LaSalleStreet, 7th Floor

MK-IL-SL7C

Chicago, IL 60603

 

usbank.com

** **

**Annual Statement of Compliance**

**GS Mortgage Securities Trust 2012-GCJ9**

** **

*VIA EMAIL*

 

GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II

200 West Street

New York, New York 10282-2198

Attention: Leah Nivison

leah.nivison@gs.com

 

Re:	GS Mortgage Securities Trust2012-GCJ9, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2012-GCJ9 (the “Trust”),issued pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of November 1, 2012 (the “Agreement”), by and amongGS Mortgage Securities Corporation II, as depositor, U.S. Bank National Association, as certificate administrator (the “CertificateAdministrator”) and trustee, Pentalpha Surveillance, LLC, as operating advisor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, asmaster servicer, and Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer.

 

I, Kimberly O. Jacobs,a Senior Vice President of U.S. Bank National Association, as Certificate Administrator, hereby certify that:

 

(1) A review of the activitiesof the Certificate Administrator during the preceding calendar year (the “Reporting Period”) and of the performanceof the Certificate Administrator under the Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

 

(2) To the best of my knowledge,based on such review, the Certificate Administrator has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout such Reporting Period.

 

Capitalized terms usedbut not defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Agreement.

 

Date: March 1, 2019

 

U.S. Bank National Association, as Certificate Administrator
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3047 

To reduce temporarily the duty on unit asy-battery hi volt. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 25, 2006 

Mr. HATCH introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To reduce temporarily the duty on unit asy-battery hi volt. 

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

3 SECTION 1. UNIT ASY-BATTERY HI VOLT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.85.03 Nickel-metal hydride storage 

batteries, exceeding 300 V, 

the foregoing designed for 

use in hybrid motor vehicles 

of heading 8703 (provided 

for in subheading 

8507.80.80) ......................... 2.8% No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 


sroberts on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•S 3047 IS 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


sroberts on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

jlf/Inventory

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NELLY HERNANDEZ SILVA; et al.,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-73241

Agency Nos. A095-302-146

A095-302-147

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 11, 2010 ** 

Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Nelly Hernandez Silva and Alex Barcia Ramirez, natives and citizens of

Mexico, petition pro se for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration

Appeals denying their motion to reopen the underlying denial of their application

FILED

JAN 19 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
jlf/Inventory 2 08-73241

for cancellation of removal based on their failure to establish the requisite hardship

to their qualifying relatives.

Petitioners contend that the BIA erred in denying their motion to reopen

because they are entitled to relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”)

based on changed country conditions in Mexico, and because they presented

sufficient new evidence of hardship to support their claim for cancellation.

The evidence of hardship arising from the male petitioner’s diabetes and the

United States citizen child’s education difficulties concerned the same basic

hardship ground as their initial application for cancellation of removal. We

therefore lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that the

evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie case of hardship. See

Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 601-03 (9th Cir. 2006). To the extent that

petitioners allege that conditions in Mexico constitute extreme hardship, the BIA

did not abuse its discretion in denying reopening based on its conclusion that the

petitioners did not show that similar evidence was previously unavailable. See 8

C.F.R. § 1003.2(c); Romero-Ruiz v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1057, 1063 (9th Cir. 2008). 

In addition, petitioners have failed to establish a basis for reopening due to their

failure to provide sufficient evidence that changed country conditions in Mexico
jlf/Inventory 3 08-73241

establish a prima facie case for CAT relief. See Nuru v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 1207,

1216 (9th Cir. 2005).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED IN PART; DENIED IN PART.
|   | 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. |

| April      15, 2010  | /s/      Leroy D. Nott       |                                                                                                  |
|---------------------------|-----------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                      | Name:                   | Leroy      D. Nott                                                                               |   |
|                      | Title:                  | Chief      Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)                                       |   |
|                      |                              |                                                                                                  |
| April      15, 2010  | /s/      Scott D. Olmstead   |                                                                                                  |
|                      | Name:                   | Scott      D. Olmstead                                                                           |   |
|                      | Title:                  | Chief      Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer and PrincipalAccounting      Officer)  |   |
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DEBRA BEYAH, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO.:

) 1:06-cv-00659-CSC

WAL MART STORES, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY AND

DISPOSITION MOTION DEADLINES, AND STAY OF CASE FOR MEDIATION

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Debra Beyah, and the Defendant, Wal Mart Stores, Inc., and

jointly move this Honorable Court to extend the discovery and dispositive motion deadlines fortyfive (45) days, and stay the above-styled cause for mediation. In support of this motion, the parties

state as follows:

1. Pursuant to theCourt’s Scheduling Order, the dispositive motion deadline is May 30,

2007 and the discovery deadline is August 14, 2007.

2. Extensive paper discovery has been conducted, the deposition of the plaintiff has

been taken, and the plaintiff hastaken two depositions and hasre-noticed depositions

of six (6) individuals to be taken on May 30 and June 1, 2007. The depositions are

taking longer than originally anticipated and may or not be completed on these two

dates. However, sufficient discovery has been completed for the parties to conclude

that mediation may be productive at this point in the litigation.

3. The parties request a stay in the case for mediation purposes to avoid incurring

additional legal fees and expenses, which may hinder settlement negotiations.

Case 1:06-cv-00659-CSC Document 25 Filed 05/18/2007 Page 1 of 3
2

4. The parties request this Court extend the current discovery deadline and dispositive

motion deadline by forty-five (45) days, the dispositive motion deadline to be

extended to July 16, 2007, and the discovery deadline to be extended to September

28, 2007. The parties are not requesting an extension of the present trial date set for

October 1, 2007.

5. The parties do not anticipate that any further extensions will be necessary.

6. Counsel for the defendant has reviewed this Motion and has given counsel for the

plaintiff permission to submit her electronic signature hereon.

WHEREFORE, the parties jointly move the Court to enter an order granting the extension

of the discovery and dispositive motion deadlines, and for stay of the case for mediation as set out

herein.

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Ann C. Robertson

Ann C. Robertson

Temple D. Trueblood

Attorneys for the Plaintiff

OF COUNSEL:

WIGGINS, CHILDS, QUINN & PANTAZIS, L.L.C.

The Kress Building

301 19th Street North

Birmingham, Alabama 35203

(205)314-0500

Case 1:06-cv-00659-CSC Document 25 Filed 05/18/2007 Page 2 of 3
3

CO-COUNSEL:

Bobbie S. Crook, Esq.

367 South St. Andrews Street

Dothan, AL 36301

(334) 671-8062

s/ Charlotte K. McClusky

Charlotte K. McClusky

Attorney for the Defendant

Charlotte K. McClusky

LITTLER MENDELSON

A Professional Corporation

3348 Peachtree Road, N.E.

Suite 1100

Atlanta, Georgia 30326-1008

(404) 233-0330

CO-COUNSEL:

Scott A. Forman, Esq.

LITTLER MENDELSON

A Professional Corporation

2 South Biscayne Blvd.

One Biscayne Tower, Ste. 1500

Miami, Florida 33131

(305) 400-7500

Case 1:06-cv-00659-CSC Document 25 Filed 05/18/2007 Page 3 of 3
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 2 D0 31 9

. J USTI N ANDRE LAMOUREUX v

. ELLEN MARI E BROW N et a l

.

Act i ng p ro s e, J us t i n An d re Lam o ureu x fi l ed t h i s d i s cret io n ary ap pl i cat i o n in

t h e Su p rem e Co u rt o f Geo rg i a, s eek in g rev i ew o f t h e su p eri o r co u rt ’ s ord ers g ran t i n g

t h e res p o n d en t s ’ m ot i o n s t o d i s m i ss h i s p et i t i o n , i n wh ich he s o u g h t cu s t o d y o f h i s

m i n o r ch il d

. 1 Cas e No

. S2 2 D0 6 8 8

. Th e Su prem e Co urt fo u nd no b as i s fo r ex erci s i n g

i t s ju ri sd i ct i o n i n t h e cas e, an d t ran sferred t he ap p li cat i o n t o t h i s Co u rt

. Un d e r OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (a) (1 1 ), d i rect ap p eal s are p erm i t t ed fro m “ [a] l l
ju d g m en t s o r o rd ers i n ch il d cu s t o d y cas es award i n g , refu si ng t o c h a n g e, o r

m o di fy i n g ch i l d cu st o d y [.] ” Th u s , t h e s u p e r i o r co u rt ’ s o rd ers here are d i rect l y

ap p eal ab l e. Id .; s ee W

o o d r u f f v. Ch o a t e , 3 34 Ga. Ap p. 57 4

, 5 7 8 -5 7 9 (1 ), (2 ) (a) (7 8 0

SE2 d 2 5 ) (2 0 1 5 ) (o rd er d i s m i s s i n g p et i t i o n t o m o d i fy ch i l d cu s t o d y is s u b ject to

d i rect ap p eal ). Th i s Co u rt wi ll g ran t a t i m el y ap p li cat i o n fo r d i s cret i o n ary rev i ew i f

t h e l o w er co u rt ’ s o rd er i s s u b ject t o d i rect ap p eal

. Se e OCGA § 5 -6 -3 5 (j).

Acco rd in g ly , t h i s ap p l i cat i o n i s h ereb y GRANTED.

Lam o ureu x s h al l hav e t en d ay s fro m t h e d at e o f t hi s o r d e r t o fi l e a n o t i ce o f

ap p eal i n t he s u p eri o r co u rt

. See OCGA § 5-6 -3 5 (g ). If h e has al read y fi l ed a n o t i ce

o f ap p eal i n t h e s u p eri o r co u rt

, t h en h e n eed n o t fi l e a seco n d no t i ce. Th e cl erk o f t h e

s u p eri o r co u rt i s DIRECTED t o i n cl u d e a co p y o f th i s o rd er i n t h e reco rd t ran s m i t t ed

1 Res p o n d en ts El l en Bro wn , Eri c Sch reffl er an d An n Sch reffl er fi l ed a m o t i o n
t o d is m i s s Lam o ureu x ’ s p et i t i o n

. Res p o n d en t Bret t W aro n ick i al s o fi l ed a m o t i o n to d i s m i s s t h e p et i t i on

. Th e co urt g ran t ed b o t h m ot i o ns o n t h e s am e d at e, i n s ep arat e

o rd ers

. April 26, 2022t o t he Co u rt o f Ap p eal s

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

.
W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 04/26/2022
160 So.2d 596

#### Alf CRUMB and Viney Crumb v. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, Halliburton Company and Meredith S. Hailey.

No. 47087.

Feb. 24, 1964.

Court of Appeal, Third Circuit.

159 So.2d 11.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

JOHN DEREK WILLIAMS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CASE NO. 2:06-cv-716-WKW

)

BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF )

ALABAMA and NEW HORIZONS )

CHURCH, )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

The parties are directed to show cause in writing by June 11, 2007, why no status report

was filed per the order of the court dated November 21,2006 (Doc. # 12).

DONE this 1st day of June, 2007. 

 /s/ W. Keith Watkins 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00716-WKW-WC Document 13 Filed 06/01/2007 Page 1 of 1
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Xoaorablo George 8. $hrppartl 

Oanptmller of Publlo Aooount.8 

AuLurrtin,. Texas 

Dear Slra 

Pour -letter of Dee 

dapartmW&t up083 the QUOBtio 

18 it within the 

teapornrily pl*o* a 

plaeommt unt uQe 

le the future this 

QS the 46th Le(t 

& Qepwtmeat head to 

whioh at the tiar the 

a orrtaia given tLa0 

bL8 hea@uartrra. 

3oaate Ml1 4387, hot8 

1 not pay, nna a0 

of the dopartoternmmt &all 

o? 'stationing' employees 18 one vhlbh 

wily to the blsarettoa af the &partit aannat ba said t&t olrouartmoer may aot exist W&I would 

@8t%fJ a tI#8pOrRry as#iglU4etit rather thrn a OhsfIge Of 8t8tiOB, 

though it hnd bum bo%deil by the departsont heab that at a 

later date a psraaaent obange oi rtatlon would bo l r r e0td 

The papem ~~~~p~ttytgg JQUF wmr inamt6 merely 

that Che mployes u&a placed en terpalraly asrlgnaent to the 
25 

Bonorable O8orge R. Bhoppud, Pagr B 

El Pa80 oiiI.oe during the latter half of lorember &s derlgaated 

h8adquarterr rsmainlng In Harllngrn aurrng the fuil loath of 

llovembrr; an& that on Daormber 1 an aotual ahange of hea6quarters 

rroa Harlingon to the Icl Pa80 offloe ua8 effecrtad by l otlon o? 

the department head. Thlr infolrstlon I8 Inmft~olent to l h8u 

upon it8 iaor a violation a? th8 proriaioncl of Senate Bill 4B7 

quoted above. A aora full developmrgt of the irots will b8 

aeorrauy to dotmmlno the questIon of 8 porrlble violation 

of the prorIrion OS the Approprlatlon Bill quoted. 

The document8 enolored wtth yonr letter ue lutonred 

--. to you herewIth. 

Your* +*I7 trosr 

ATTOIWCX 6EWSAL OI TEXAl 

B, &245&i& 

A. Y. ~aIr8hlld 

As*i*taat 

RWTtdb 

Bnolo8uro 

APPROVEDJAN 13, 1941
SUBPART 43.1 — GENERAL

Parent topic: PART 43 – CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS

43.102 Policy.

(S-90) Telecommunications contracts/orders that are issued in Integrated Defense Enterprise

Acquisition System (IDEAS) with CLINs that are intended to track usage, shall report usage

expended monthly through automatic modifications. Automatic modifications will include an IDEAS

Generated Auto-Modification signature block. IDEAS will automatically generate the modifications

that account for usage by using the monthly usage expenditures received by the DISA Financial

Management System. The usage amounts will also be reported via a contract action report in FPDSNG and auto-filed in IDEAS. A CLIN will be used for usage charges in telecommunications

contracts/orders. SLINs will be added under the usage CLIN via the automatic modifications each

month to report obligation amounts.
§ 985.51 Recommendations for volume regulation. ( a ) If the Committee's marketing policy considerations indicate a need for limiting the quantity of oil of each class marketed, the Committee shall recommend to the Secretary a salable quantity and allotment percentage for the ensuing marketing year. Such recommendations shall be made prior to February 15, or such other date as the Committee, with the approval of the Secretary, may establish.
( b ) At any time during the marketing year for which the Secretary, pursuant to § 985.52(a), has established a salable quantity and an allotment percentage for each class of oil, the Committee may recommend to the Secretary that such quantity be increased with an appropriate increase in the allotment percentage. Each such recommendation, together with the Committee's reason for such recommendation, shall be submitted promptly to the Secretary.
( c ) As soon as practical following the effective date of this subpart and the organization of the Committee, the Committee may recommend a salable quantity for the 1980-81 marketing year.