alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 15.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form F-3 (File No. 333-205489), the Registration Statement on Form F-3 (File No.333-204728) and the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-190918) of securities to be offered to employees in employee benefit plans of Qiwi plc of our report dated March 15, 2016, relating to the financial statements of QIWI plc and theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of QIWI plc, included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of QIWI plc for the year ended December 31, 2015. 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLC 

Moscow, Russia 

March 15, 2016
Exhibit A to Employment Agreement between West and Paul Mendlik



 Exhibit 10.53 
 

 
 To: Paul M. Mendlik 
 From: West Corporation Compensation Committee 
 Date: February 11, 2010

 Re: Exhibit A 
  

This Exhibit A for 2010 is entered into pursuant to your Employment Agreement. 
  

	1.	Your base salary will be $450,000. 

  

	2.	Effective January 1, 2010, you will be eligible to receive a performance bonus based upon West Corporation’s EBITDA (“Compensation EBITDA”) growth
in 2010. Compensation EBITDA for each quarter will be compared to the same quarter in the previous year to advance a pro-rata portion of the bonus. Each $1M increase in Compensation EBITDA for the year over 2009 Compensation EBITDA will result in a
$5,516 bonus. If any portion of the bonus is advanced, 75% of the pro-rata bonus will be paid within thirty (30) days from the end of the quarter. 100% of the total bonus earned will be paid within thirty (30) days of the final
determination of 2010 Compensation EBITDA. 

 Should Compensation EBITDA exceed $690M for the year, you will be
eligible to receive $6,895 for every $1M of Compensation EBITDA above that threshold. 
 In the event there is a negative
year-to-date profit calculation at the end of any quarter and a pro-rata portion of the bonus has been advanced in a previous quarter, “loss carry forward” will result and be applied to the next quarterly or year-to-date calculation. In
the event that at the end of the year, or upon your termination if earlier, the aggregate amount of the bonus which has been advanced exceeds the amount of bonus that otherwise would have been payable for 2010 (in the absence of advances) based on
the performance during 2010, (or, in the case of your termination, based on the performance during 2010 and the projection for performance for the balance of 2010 as of your termination date), then the amount of such excess may, in the discretion of
the Compensation Committee, either (i) result in a “loss carry forward” which shall be applied to the quarterly or year-to-date calculation of bonus payable in subsequent periods, or (ii) be required to be paid back to the
company upon such request. 
  

	3.	All objectives are based upon West Corporation operations and will not include results derived from mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures or stock buy backs except to
the extent approved by West Corporation’s Compensation Committee. 

  

	4.	At the discretion of the Compensation Committee, you may receive an additional bonus based on the Company’s and your individual performance.



	
	
	/s/ Paul M. Mendlik
	Employee – Paul M. Mendlik
Editorial Note on Part 35
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 35 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 35.61 Calibration of survey instruments. ( a ) A licensee shall calibrate the survey instruments used to show compliance with this part and 10 CFR Part 20 before first use, annually, and following a repair that affects the calibration. A licensee shall— ( 1 ) Calibrate all scales with readings up to 10 mSv (1000 mrem) per hour with a radiation source;
( 2 ) Calibrate two separated readings on each scale or decade that will be used to show compliance; and
( 3 ) Conspicuously note on the instrument the date of calibration.
( b ) A licensee may not use survey instruments if the difference between the indicated exposure rate and the calculated exposure rate is more than 20 percent.
( c ) A licensee shall retain a record of each survey instrument calibration in accordance with § 35.2061.
Subpart 843.2 - Change Orders

Parent topic: PART 843 - CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS

843.205 Contract clauses.

As authorized in the introductory text of clauses FAR 52.243-1, Changes - Fixed-Price; FAR 52.243-2,

Changes - Cost-Reimbursement; and FAR 52.243-4, Changes, and in the prescription at FAR

43.205(c) for FAR 52.243-3, Changes - Time-and-Materials or Labor-Hours, the contracting officer

may vary the period within which a contractor must assert its right to an equitable adjustment but

the extended period shall not exceed 60 calendar days.

843.205-70 Contract changes - supplement.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 852.243-70, Construction Contract Changes -

Supplement, in solicitations and contracts for construction that are expected to exceed the micropurchase threshold for construction.
§ 436.18 Measuring cost-effectiveness. ( a ) In accordance with this section, each Federal agency shall measure cost-effectiveness by combining cost data established under §§ 436.16 and 436.17 in the appropriate mode of analysis as described in § 436.19 through § 436.22.
( b ) Federal agencies performing LCC analysis on computers shall use either the Federal Buildings Life Cycle Costing (FBLCC) software provided by DOE or software consistent with this subpart.
( c ) Replacement of a building energy or water system with an energy or water conservation measure by retrofit to an existing Federal building or by substitution in the design for a new Federal building shall be deemed cost-effective if— ( 1 ) Life cycle costs, as described by § 436.19, are estimated to be lower; or
( 2 ) Net savings, as described by § 436.20, are estimated to be positive; or
( 3 ) The savings-to-investment ratio, as described by § 436.21, is estimated to be greater than one; or
( 4 ) The adjusted internal rate of return, as described by § 436.22, is estimated to be greater than the discount rate as set by DOE.
( d ) As a rough measure, each Federal agency may determine estimated simple payback time under § 436.23, which indicates whether a retrofit is likely to be cost effective under one of the four calculation methods referenced in § 436.18(c). An energy or water conservation measure alternative is likely to be cost-effective if estimated payback time is significantly less than the useful life of that system, and of the Federal building in which it is to be installed.
( e ) Mutually exclusive alternatives for a given building energy or water system, considered in determining such matters as the optimal size of a solar energy system, the optimal thickness of insulation, or the best choice of double-glazing or triple-glazing for windows, shall be compared and evaluated on the basis of life cycle costs or net savings over equivalent study periods. The alternative which is estimated to result in the lowest life cycle costs or the highest net savings shall be deemed the most cost-effective because it tends to minimize the life cycle cost of Federal building.
( f ) When available appropriations will not permit all cost-effective energy or water conservation measures to be undertaken, they shall be ranked in descending order of their savings-to-investment ratios, or their adjusted internal rate of return, to establish priority. If available appropriations cannot be fully exhausted for a fiscal year by taking all budgeted energy or water conservation measures according to their rank, the set of energy or water conservation measures that will maximize net savings for available appropriations should be selected.
( g ) Alternative building designs for new Federal buildings shall be evaluated on the basis of life cycle costs. The alternative design which results in the lowest life cycle costs for a given new building shall be deemed the most cost-effective.
[55 FR 48220, Nov. 20, 1990, as amended at 61 FR 32650, June 25, 1996]
##### 



Certification Pursuant to Section 302  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of B.H.I.T, 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.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:
    5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business
issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):




---



##### 



/s/ Andrew H. Scott

Andrew H. ScottInterim Chief Executive Officer
222 So.2d 63

#### Virgil WILLIAMS v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 49848.

May 8, 1969.

In re: Virgil Williams applying for writ of habeas corpus.

Writ refused. The showing made does not entitle relator to the relief prayed for.
§ 20.2003 Disposal by release into sanitary sewerage. ( a ) A licensee may discharge licensed material into sanitary sewerage if each of the following conditions is satisfied: ( 1 ) The material is readily soluble (or is readily dispersible biological material) in water; and
( 2 ) The quantity of licensed or other radioactive material that the licensee releases into the sewer in 1 month divided by the average monthly volume of water released into the sewer by the licensee does not exceed the concentration listed in table 3 of appendix B to part 20; and
( 3 ) If more than one radionuclide is released, the following conditions must also be satisfied: ( i ) The licensee shall determine the fraction of the limit in table 3 of appendix B to part 20 represented by discharges into sanitary sewerage by dividing the actual monthly average concentration of each radionuclide released by the licensee into the sewer by the concentration of that radionuclide listed in table 3 of appendix B to part 20; and
( ii ) The sum of the fractions for each radionuclide required by paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section does not exceed unity; and
( 4 ) The total quantity of licensed and other radioactive material that the licensee releases into the sanitary sewerage system in a year does not exceed 5 curies (185 GBq) of hydrogen-3, 1 curie (37 GBq) of carbon-14, and 1 curie (37 GBq) of all other radioactive materials combined.
( b ) Excreta from individuals undergoing medical diagnosis or therapy with radioactive material are not subject to the limitations contained in paragraph (a) of this section.
[56 FR 23403, May 21, 1991, as amended at 60 FR 20185, Apr. 25, 1995]
#### GLEASON, Respondent, v. SMITH, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

July 7, 1914.)

Action by Helen Gleason, an infant, etc., against Frank Sullivan Smith, as receiver, etc., of the Pittsburg, Shawmut & Northern Railroad Company.

No opinion. Judgment and.order affirmed, with costs.
<PAGE>

Exhibit No. 12.

Questar Pipeline Company and Subsidiaries
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

(Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                  12 months ended March 31,
                                                     2001            2000
                                                  -----------    ----------
                                                     (Dollars in Thousands)
<S>                                               <C>            <C>

Earnings

Income (loss) before income taxes                   $44,180        ($13,402)
Plus debt expense                                    17,154          17,988
Plus allowance for borrowed
   funds used during construction                     3,299           2,605
Plus interest portion of rental expense                 363             201
                                                  -----------    ----------
                                                    $64,996          $7,392
                                                  ===========    ==========
Fixed Charges

Debt expense                                        $17,154         $17,988
Plus allowance for borrowed
   funds used during construction                     3,299           2,605
Plus interest portion of rental expense                 363             201
                                                  -----------    ----------
                                                    $20,816         $20,794
                                                  ===========    ==========
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                     3.12            0.36


</TABLE>
0900006481129673.xlsx

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13
14 15 16 A B C D E **Name Title**  **Affiliation Phone Number**  **Email** Ballo, Timothy Associate Attorney Earthjustice (202) 667-4500 tballo@earthjustice.org Beck, Scott Product Engineering Manager Lakeview Metals (847) 838-9800 ScottB@LVMetals.com Petersen, Eric Director of Customer Services &

Research AK Steel (513) 425-5000 Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com Fernstrom, GarySenior Project Manager PG&E (510) 530-1789 gbf1@pge.com DeLaski, AndrewExecutive Director ASAP (617) 363-9470 adelaski@standardsASAP.org Roy, Robin Director NRDC (212) 727-2700 rroy@nrdc.org Nadel, Steve Executive Director ACEEE (202) 507-4011 snadel@aceee.org Robles, Eduardo Eaton (915) 238-9846 eduardorobles@eaton.com Greeson, RobertSr. Electrical Design Engineer Federal Pacific (276) 645-8210 rgreeson@federalpacific.com Tendulkar, Vijay ONYX Power vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com Kennedy, Chad Manager, Industry Standards Schneider (803) 695-7813chad.kennedy@us.schneiderelectric.com Caskey, John Assistant Vice President of

Industry Operations NEMA (703) 841-3233 john.caskey@nema.org Millure, David Sr. Vice President Metglas (843) 349-7380 dave.millure@metglas.com Cymbalsky, JohnSupervisory Operations Research

Analyst DOE (202) 287-1692 john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov Stoering, Mark VP of Business Development Xcel Energy; ERAC (612) 215-4570 mark.e.stoering@xcelenergy.com

Page 1 of 20900006481129673.xlsx

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13
14 15 16 A **Name** Ballo, Timothy Beck, Scott Petersen, Eric Fernstrom, Gary DeLaski, Andrew Roy, Robin Nadel, Steve Robles, Eduardo Greeson, Robert Tendulkar, Vijay Kennedy, Chad Caskey, John Millure, David Cymbalsky, John Stoering, Mark F G H I J K

**Alternates Alternates (2)**  Looby, KevinLakeview

Metals

Waltner, MegNRDC mwaltner@nrdc.org Siquieros, Carlos Eaton carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com

Patzner, Thomas Square D /

Schneider Electric thomas.patzner@us.schneiderelectric.com

Ryan, Paul Hitachi

Metals America paul.ryan@hitmet.com Berman, Robert Berman

EconomicsBermanEconomics

@gmail.com Cohen, Dan Asst Gen

Counsel Daniel.Cohen@hq.doe.gov

Page 2 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 2 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 2 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 2 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 2 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 4 of 4
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

 )

 v. ) CR. NO. 2:06mj82-SRW

)

Kimberly Joyce Sellers ) 

GOVERNMENT'S MOTION FOR DETENTION HEARING

Comes now the United States of America, by and through Leura G. Canary, United States

Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3142(e) and (f) moves for

a detention hearing for the above-captioned defendant.

1. Eligibility of Cases

This case is eligible for a detention order because this case involves:

Crime of violence (18 U.S.C. § 3156)

Maximum sentence of life imprisonment or death

X 10 + year drug offense

Felony, with two prior convictions in the above categories

X Serious risk the defendant will flee

X Serious risk of obstruction of justice

Felony involving a minor victim

Felony involving possession or use of a firearm or other destructive device

(as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 921) or any other dangerous weapon

Failure to register a sex offender (18 U.S.C. § 2250)

2. Reason For Detention

The Court should detain defendant because there are no conditions of release which will

Case 2:06-mj-00082-SRW Document 2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 1 of 2
2

reasonably assure:

X Defendant's appearance as required

 X Safety of any other person and the community

3. Rebuttable Presumption

The United States will invoke the rebuttable presumption against defendant under Section

3142(e).

X Probable cause to believe defendant committed 10 + year drug offense or an

offense in which a firearm was used or carried under Section 924(c)

Previous conviction for "eligible" offense committed while on pretrial bond

A period of five years has not elapsed from defendant's conviction or release

from imprisonment for the offense described above

4. Time For Detention Hearing

The United States requests the Court conduct the detention hearing:

At the initial appearance

X After continuance of 3 days 

The Government requests leave of Court to file a supplemental motion with additional

grounds or presumption for detention should this be necessary.

Respectfully submitted this the 17 day of August, 2006.

LEURA G. CANARY 

United States Attorney

/s/ K. David Cooke, Jr.

K. DAVID COOKE, JR.

Assistant United States Attorney

Post Office Box 197

Montgomery, Alabama 36101-0197

334.223.7280

334.223.7135 fax

david.cooke@usdoj.gov

Case 2:06-mj-00082-SRW Document 2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

BONITA J. OWENSBY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06cv796-WKW

)

J.F. INGRAM STATE )

TECHNICAL COLLEGE, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

Now pending before the court is the plaintiff’s motion for a continuance (doc. # 10)

filed on October 20, 2006. Upon consideration of the motion, and for good cause, it is

ORDERED as follows:

1. The motion for a continuance (doc. # 10) be and is hereby GRANTED. 

2. The plaintiff shall be allowed until November 22, 2006, to retain counsel to

represent her. Retained counsel shall file a notice of appearance on or before November 22,

2006. The plaintiff is advised that no further extensions of time shall be granted and that if

she is unable to secure representation, she will have to proceed pro se in this matter.

3. This matter be and is hereby set for a status and scheduling conference on

November 28, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 4B, United States Courthouse Complex, One

Church Street, Montgomery, Alabama. 

The plaintiff is advised that if she fails to appear as required by this order, the court

will treat the plaintiff’s failure to appear as an abandonment of the claims set forth in the

Case 2:06-cv-00796-WKW-CSC Document 11 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 1 of 2
2

complaint and as a failure to prosecute this action and the undersigned will recommend that

this action be dismissed.

Done this 23 day of October, 2006. rd

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00796-WKW-CSC Document 11 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ANGELA DENISE NAILS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CASE NO. 1:06-cv-737-WKW

)

DOTHAN RESCUE MISSION, )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

On March 5, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. # 51) in this case.

Plaintiff timely filed an objection (Doc. # 56). Upon an independent and de novo review of the file

and upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it is ORDERED that:

1. The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #51) is ADOPTED;

2. Plaintiff’s Objection (Doc. # 56) is OVERRULED; and

3. The defendant’s Motion to Strike (Doc. # 57) is DENIED as moot. 

An appropriate judgment will be entered.

DONE this 12th day of April, 2007.

 /s/ W. Keith Watkins 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 60 Filed 04/12/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### Thomas I. Fitzgerald, Public Administrator of the County of New York, as Administrator of the Estate of Carl P. Blume, Deceased, Respondent, v. American Trading and Production Corporation, Appellant.

Order entered July 1, 1969 unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements, and without prejudice to a motion for a further examination by defendant upon completion of the examination of defendant. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Markewich, Nunez and Tilzer, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                      1,000

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                                0
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 14,000
<PP&E>                                        2,558,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                  662,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                1,910,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         4,972,000
<BONDS>                                               0
<COMMON>                                        696,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (3,758,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  1,910,000
<SALES>                                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      0
<CGS>                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   231,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              165,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (396,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (396,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (396,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      (.01)



</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 2.801 Initiation of rulemaking.

Rulemaking may be initiated by the Commission at its own instance, on the recommendation of another agency of the United States, or on the petition of any other interested person, including an application for design certification under subpart B of part 52 of this chapter.

[72 FR 49482, Aug. 28, 2007]