alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 34 (Monday, February 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7597-7598]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3279]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisition of Shares of Bank or 
Bank Holding Companies

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec. [thinsp]225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. 
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth 
in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than March 8, 2010.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (Nadine Wallman, Vice 
President) 1455 East Sixth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44101-2566:
    1. Harris Rakestraw, III, Somerset, Kentucky, individually; and The 
Rogers Family Immediate Family Control Group, consisting of Harold D. 
Rogers, individually, and as Trustee of the Harold D. Rogers Revocable 
Trust, Anthony M. Rogers, and John M. Rogers, all of Somerset, 
Kentucky, and Margaret Allison Rogers, Versailles, Kentucky; to acquire 
voting shares of Citizens Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly 
acquire voting shares of Citizens

[[Page 7598]]

National Bank of Somerset, both of Somerset, Kentucky.
    2. Timothy Robert Aiken, Trustee of Hometown Bancshares, Inc. 
401(k) Profit Sharing Plan, Middlebourne, West Virginia; to retain 
voting shares of Hometown Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly 
retain voting shares of Union Bank, both of Middlebourne, West 
Virginia.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant 
Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:
    1. Donna M. Curry, Trustee of the The Galen L. Curry Marital Trust, 
and as Voting Trustee of the Voting Trust Agreement, both of Piqua, 
Kansas; to retain control of My Anns Corporation, and thereby 
indirectly retain control of Piqua State Bank, both in Piqua, Kansas.
    C. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Kenneth Binning, Vice 
President, Applications and Enforcement) 101 Market Street, San 
Francisco, California 94105-1579:
    1. Charles W. Reinking, Santa Rosa, California; to become co-
Trustee of the Frank P. Doyle Trust, Article IX, and thereby retain 
voting shares of Exchange Bank, both of Santa Rosa, California.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 16, 
2010.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-3279 Filed 2-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
```
Josiah Winterhoff

302 South 7th Avenue

Wausau, WI 54401

Cell: 715-574-1050

Email: josiah.winterhoff@gmail.com

I, Josiah Winterhoff, hereby submit this petition for exemption under Section 333; FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Public Law 112-95 FEB. 14, 2012, Section 333.

I request this exemption in order to operate my UAV/UAS, DJI Phantom 2 Vision Plus 

Professional Quadcopter Aircraft, in order to provide services for profit to include aerial 

photography, aerial cinematography, aerial filming and photography for real estate, 

construction firms, aerial mapping, agriculture mapping, special events to include but not 

limited to weddings, private or public parties/events, business advertising, promotional 

events, geological surveying, and environmental studies.

The ability to provide these services to other local businesses and individuals in my 

community will benefit them by opening up opportunities they otherwise did not have before. 

Traditional methods of aerial photography/videography are simply not viable options for the 

average consumer as they are costly and involve greater risks to everyone involved; i.e. the 

use of larger aircraft carrying humans and flammable fuel. By utilizing the UAV/UAS the same 

results can be achieved with much safer conditions.

Prior to each flight/operation of the UAV/UAS, I will conduct a Pre-Flight Safety Inspection.

Only the manufacturers authorized repair facilities/ providers will perform any and all 

repairs. Flights will not take place over densely populated areas or private property without 

the owners permission. The UAV/UAS will only be operated within visual line of sight and will 

not be flown near airports or above 400 feet. The FAA can be confident that operations of this 

UAV/UAS will achieve at least the equivalent or greater level of safety.

The requests of this petition are similar to those of Mr. Todd Thomas Drone Pics, and Mr. Mike 

Lloyd & Associates, all of who have received Section 333 exemptions for comparable aircraft 

for similar operations.

The specific sections of 14 C.F.R from which I am seeking exemption are as follows:

14 C.F.R. Part 21;

14 C.F.R. 45.23(b);

14 C.F.R. 61.101(e)(4), & (5);

14 C.F.R. 61.113(a) & (b);

14 C.F.R. 61.133 (a);

14 C.F.R. 61.23(a) & (c);

14 C.F.R 91.7(a)

14 C.F.R. 91.9(b)(2);

14C.F.R. 91.109(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.119;

14 C.F.R. 91.121;

14 C.F.R. 91.151(a);

14 C.F.R. 91.203(a) & (b);

14 C.F.R. 91.405(a);
14 C.F.R. 91.407(a)(1);

14 C.F.R. 91.409(a)(2};

14 C.F.R. 91.417(a) & (b).

Please find the included User Manual of which I have reviewed for safe flight operations.

I truly thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Josiah Winterhoff

http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/phantom_2_vision_plus/en/Phantom_2_Vision_Plus_User_Manual_v1.8_en.pdf
# EUR-Lex - 31993D0042 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31993D0042

**93/42/EEC: Commission Decision of 21 December 1992 concerning additional guarantees relating to infectious bovine rhinotracheitis for bovines destined for Denmark **

*
Official Journal L 016 , 25/01/1993 P. 0050 - 0050 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 21 December 1992 concerning additional guarantees relating to infectious bovine rhinotracheitis for bovines destined for Denmark

(93/42/EEC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 64/432/EEC (1) of 26 June 1964 on animal health problems affecting intra-community trade in bovine animals and swine, as last amended by Directive 92/65/EEC (2) and in particular Article 10 thereof,

Whereas Denmark considers that its territory is free from infectious bovine rhinotracheitis and has submitted documentation to the Commission as provided for in Article 10 of Directive 64/432/EEC;

Whereas an eradication programme was commenced in Denmark for IBR in 1984;

Whereas the programme is regarded to have been successful in eradicating this disease from Denmark;

Whereas the authorities of Denmark apply for national movement of bovine animals rules at least equivalent as those foreseen in the present Decision;

Whereas it is appropriate to propose certain additional guarantees to protect the progress made in Denmark;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Bovine animals intended for breeding and production coming from other member states and destined for Denmark must fulfill the following conditions:

1. according to official information, no clinical or pathological evidence of IBR disease must have been recorded in the herd of origin for the past 12 months;

2. the bovines must have been isolated in accommodation approved by the competent authority for the 30 days immediately prior to movement;

3. the bovines must have been subjected to a serological test for IBR on sera taken at least 21 days after entry into isolation, with negative results. All animals in isolation must also have given negative results to this test;

4. The bovines must not have been vaccinated against IBR.

Article 2

Bovines intended for slaughter coming from other Member States and destined for Denmark must be transported directly to the slaughterhouse of destination.

Article 3

The health certificate provided for in Annex F of Council Directive 64/432/EEC must be completed by the following for bovines being sent to Denmark:

'bovines in accordance with Commission Decision 93/42/EEC of 21 December 1992 concerning IBR for bovines being sent to Denmark.'

Article 4

This Decision shall enter into force on 1 January 1993.

Article 5

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 21 December 1992.

For the Commission

Ray MAC SHARRY

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No 121, 29. 7. 1964, p. 1988/64.

(2) OJ No L 268, 14. 9. 1992, p. 54.
§ 850.36 Medical consent. ( a ) The responsible employer must provide each beryllium-associated worker with a summary of the medical surveillance program established in § 850.34 at least one week before the first medical evaluation or procedure or at any time requested by the worker. This summary must include: ( 1 ) The type of data that will be collected in the medical surveillance program;
( 2 ) How the data will be collected and maintained;
( 3 ) The purpose for which the data will be used; and
( 4 ) A description of how confidential data will be protected.
( b ) Responsible employers must also provide each beryllium-associated worker with information on the benefits and risks of the medical tests and examinations available to the worker at least one week prior to any such examination or test, and an opportunity to have the worker's questions answered.
( c ) The responsible employer must have the SOMD obtain a beryllium-associated worker's signature on the informed consent form found in Appendix A to this part, before performing medical evaluations or any tests.
(logo)****CURCIO

+COHEN

 

 

**Report of Independent RegisteredPublic Accounting Firm**

 

Managing Member

Park Bridge Lender ServicesLLC

New York, NY

 

 

We have examinedmanagement’s assertion, included in the accompanying Management’sReport on Assessment of 2016 Compliance by Park Bridge Lender Services LLC withRegulation AB Servicing Criteria (“Management’s Report”),that Park Bridge Lender Services LLC (the “Company”) complied withthe servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the U.S. Securities andExchange Commission’s Regulation AB as of and for the year ended December31, 2016, excluding those criteria noted as not applicable (N/A) within ExhibitB to Management’s Report. The transactions covered by this report areonly those transactions processed by the Company in its capacity as trust advisoror operating advisor for the asset backed securities transactions (the“Platform”) identified in Management’s Report. ReferenceExhibit A to Management’s Report for the transactions covered by thisexamination. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance withthe applicable servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinionon management’s assertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conductedin accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting OversightBoard (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis,evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicingcriteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in thecircumstances. Our examination included testing of a selected sample of theservicing activities related to the Platform, determining whether the Companyperformed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicingcriteria during the specified period. Our procedures were limited to theselected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company duringthe period covered by this report. Our examination was not designed to detectmaterial noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to orsubsequent to our tests, that may have affected the Company’s servicingactivities during the period covered by this report. We believe that ourexamination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination doesnot provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with theapplicable servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion,management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementionedapplicable servicing criteria identified in Exhibit B to Management’sReport with respect to the transactions identified in Exhibit A toManagement’s Report as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016, forthe Platform, is fairly stated in all material aspects.

 

 

/s/ Curcio & Cohen,CPA’s, P.C.

 

 

New York, NY

February 2, 2017

 

 

CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTSPC 7 PENN PLAZA, SUITE 1500 NEW YORK NY 10001

TEL: 212 557-9800  FAX:212 557 9819   WEBSITE: WWW.CWCCPAFIRM.COM
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 247 (Monday, December 27, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 81319]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32374]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service\TM\.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Postal Service notice of filing of a request with the Postal 
Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to 
the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification 
Schedule's Competitive Products List pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 
3632(b)(3).

DATES: December 27, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[reg] hereby 
gives notice that on December 16, 2010, it filed with the Postal 
Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to 
Add Priority Mail Contract 32 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at http://www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2011-11, CP2011-47.

Neva R. Watson,
Attorney, Legislative.
[FR Doc. 2010-32374 Filed 12-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 61 

Recognizing the unique effects that proposals to reform Social Security may 

have on women. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2005 

Ms. DELAURO (for herself, Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD, Ms. JACKSON-LEE

of Texas, Ms. MCCOLLUM of Minnesota, Mrs. MCCARTHY, Mrs. JONES

of Ohio, Ms. SOLIS, Ms. WOOLSEY, Ms. BORDALLO, Mrs. CAPPS, Ms. 

LEE, Ms. WATERS, Ms. KAPTUR, Ms. LINDA T. SA ́NCHEZ of California, 

Ms. WATSON, Mrs. LOWEY, Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California, Ms. BALDWIN, Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr. SMITH of Washington, Mr. KENNEDY of 

Rhode Island, Mr. LANTOS, Mr. KUCINICH, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. MORAN of 

Virginia, Mr. HONDA, Mr. EMANUEL, Mr. WEXLER, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. 

NADLER, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. STARK, and Mr. AL GREEN

of Texas) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the unique effects that proposals to reform 

Social Security may have on women. 

Whereas Social Security is a successful, efficient middle-class 

retirement program; 

Whereas Social Security provides a predictable, guaranteed 

benefit for women, who tend to live longer than men and 

have fewer lifetime earnings; 
2 

•HRES 61 IH 

Whereas the Social Security benefit structure is of particular 

importance to low-wage women, especially widows and 

wives of retirees; 

Whereas Social Security is the only source of retirement income for 29 percent of unmarried elderly women; 

Whereas women represent 58 percent of all Social Security 

beneficiaries aged 62 and older and approximately 70 

percent of beneficiaries aged 85 and older; 

Whereas without Social Security, 52 percent of white women, 

65 percent of African American women, and 61 percent 

of Hispanic women over 65 years of age would live in 

poverty; 

Whereas women reaching age 65 in 2004 are expected to live, 

on average, an additional 20 years compared with 17 

years for men; 

Whereas women’s earnings relative to men are 77 percent in 

2002; 

Whereas at the end of 2003, women’s average monthly retirement benefit was $798, and men’s average benefit was 

$1,039; 

Whereas elderly women are less likely than elderly men to 

have significant income from pensions other than Social 

Security; and 

Whereas for unmarried women––including widows––aged 65 

and older, Social Security comprises 52 percent of their 

total income, contrasted with 38 percent of unmarried elderly men’s retirement income and 35 percent of elderly 

couples’ income: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives recog2 nizes the unique obstacles that women face in ensuring 
3 

•HRES 61 IH 

1 retirement security and survivor and disability stability 

2 and the essential role that Social Security plays in guaran3 teeing inflation-protected financial stability for women 

4 throughout their entire old age, and it is the sense of the 

5 House of Representatives that the Congress and the Presi6 dent should take these factors into account when consid7 ering proposals to reform the Social Security system. 

Æ
Editorial Note on Part 63
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 63 appear at 81 FR 86909, Dec. 2, 2016.

§ 63.131 General requirements. ( a ) The performance confirmation program must provide data that indicate, where practicable, whether: ( 1 ) Actual subsurface conditions encountered and changes in those conditions during construction and waste emplacement operations are within the limits assumed in the licensing review; and
( 2 ) Natural and engineered systems and components required for repository operation, and that are designed or assumed to operate as barriers after permanent closure, are functioning as intended and anticipated.
( b ) The program must have been started during site characterization, and it will continue until permanent closure.
( c ) The program must include in situ monitoring, laboratory and field testing, and in situ experiments, as may be appropriate to provide the data required by paragraph (a) of this section.
( d ) The program must be implemented so that: ( 1 ) It does not adversely affect the ability of the geologic and engineered elements of the geologic repository to meet the performance objectives.
( 2 ) It provides baseline information and analysis of that information on those parameters and natural processes pertaining to the geologic setting that may be changed by site characterization, construction, and operational activities.
( 3 ) It monitors and analyzes changes from the baseline condition of parameters that could affect the performance of a geologic repository.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Thomas M. Duff, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Wellman, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internalcontrol over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) Designed such internal control over financialreporting, or caused such internal control overfinancial reporting to be designed under oursupervision, to provide reasonable assurance regardingthe reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for externalpurposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented inthis report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors: a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controlover financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the 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 have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.        Date      November 9, 2007 By:  /s/ Thomas M. Duff    Chief Executive Officer
H. Res. 862

In the House of Representatives, U.S., 

June 13, 2006.

Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule 

XIII for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House 

is waived with respect to any resolution reported on the legislative day of June 13, 2006, providing for consideration of 

the bill (H.R. 5576) making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban 

Development, the Judiciary, District of Columbia, and independent agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 

2007, and for other purposes.

Attest: 

Clerk.
#### HOLMAN, Respondent, v. CITY OF BUFFALO, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

May 27, 1914.)

Action by Samuel Holman against the City of Buffalo.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

LAMBERT and MERRELL, JJ.,

dissent, upon the ground that plaintiff failed to file the notice required by section 1 of chapter 572 of the Laws of 1886, showing the place at which the injuries complained of were received.