alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w20



 






Exhibit 10.20




AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO

CONSULTING AGREEMENT AND RESIGNATION




     WHEREAS, HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc. (“HCC” or the “Company”) and Stephen L. Way
(“Executive”) entered into that certain Consulting Agreement and Resignation dated as of November
17, 2006 (the “Agreement”); and



     WHEREAS,
effective February 20, 2007, Executive has retired from his position as Chairman of
the Board of the Company’s Board of Directors and as a Member of the Board of Directors; and



     WHEREAS, as a result of such retirement, the Company and Executive wish to amend the Agreement
pursuant to the terms of this Amendment No. 1 (the “Amendment”);



     NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows:



     1. Effective February 20, 2007, paragraphs 16 and 17 relating to Executive’s
position as Chairman of the Board of the Company’s Board of Directors are hereby deleted; and



     2. Paragraph 31 (xi) shall be deleted effective February 20, 2007 so that Executive is
hereby permitted to sell, in accordance with the federal securities laws, any and all of
Executive’s holdings in the Company’s common stock without the consent of the Board of
Directors of the Company



     3. All other terms and
provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment the 21stday
of February, 2007.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	/s/ Stephen L. Way	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Stephen L. Way	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	HCC INSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	/s/ Frank J. Bramanti	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	Frank J. Bramanti	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 145 (Thursday, July 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 38040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18208]



[[Page 38040]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[F-93724; AK-965-1410-KC-P]


Alaska Native Claims Selection

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of decision approving lands for conveyance.

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

SUMMARY: As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that 
an appealable decision approving the surface and subsurface estates in 
certain lands for conveyance pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act will be issued to Elim Native Corporation. The lands are 
in the vicinity of Elim, Alaska, and are located in:

Kateel River Meridian, Alaska

T. 6 S., R. 15 W.,
    Sec. 10.

    Containing 2.45 acres.

T. 6 S., R. 17 W.,
    Secs. 33 and 34.

    Containing 1,280 acres.

T. 7 S., R. 17 W.,
    Secs. 4, 5, and 6;
    Secs. 8 and 9.

    Containing 3,162.46 acres.

T. 8 S., R. 18 W.,
    Sec. 22.

    Containing 0.01 acre.
    Aggregating 4,444.92 acres.

    Notice of the decision will also be published four times in the 
Nome Nugget.


DATES: The time limits for filing an appeal are:
    1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely 
affected by the decision shall have until August 31, 2009 to file an 
appeal.
    2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail 
shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal.
    Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the 
requirements of 43 CFR part 4, subpart E, shall be deemed to have 
waived their rights.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the decision may be obtained from: Bureau of Land 
Management, Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, <greek-i>13, 
Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Bureau of Land Management by phone 
at 907-271-5960, or by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#82e3e9ace0eeeface1edecf4e7fbe3ece1e7c2e3e9ace0eeeface5edf4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="492822672b2524672a26273f2c3028272a2c092822672b2524672e263f">[email protected]</span></a>. Persons 
who use a telecommunication device (TTD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, 
seven days a week, to contact the Bureau of Land Management.

Jennifer L. Noe,
Land Law Examiner, Land Transfer Adjudication II Branch.
[FR Doc. E9-18208 Filed 7-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 1.1082-2 Basis of property acquired upon exchanges under section 1081 (a) or (e). ( a ) In the case of an exchange of stock or securities for stock or securities as described in section 1081 (a), if no part of the gain or loss upon such exchange was recognized under section 1081, the basis of the property acquired is the same as the basis of the property transferred by the taxpayer with proper adjustments to the date of the exchange.
( b ) If, in an exchange of stock or securities as described in section 1081 (a), gain to the taxpayer was recognized under section 1081 (e) on account of the receipt of money, the basis of the property acquired is the basis of the property transferred (adjusted to the date of the exchange), decreased by the amount of money received and increased by the amount of gain recognized upon the exchange. If, upon such exchange, there were received by the taxpayer money and other nonexempt property (not permitted to be received without the recognition of gain), and gain from the transaction was recognized under section 1081 (e), the basis (adjusted to the date of the exchange) of the property transferred by the taxpayer, decreased by the amount of money received and increased by the amount of gain recognized, must be apportioned to and is the basis of the properties (other than money) received on the exchange. For the purpose of the allocation of such basis to the properties received, there must be assigned to the nonexempt property (other than money) an amount equivalent to its fair market value at the date of the exchange.
( c ) Section 1081(e) provides that no loss may be recognized on an exchange of stock or securities for stock or securities as described in section 1081(a), although the taxpayer receives money or other nonexempt property from the transaction. However, the basis of the property (other than money) received by the taxpayer is the basis (adjusted to the date of the exchange) of the property transferred, decreased by the amount of money received. This basis must be apportioned to the properties received, and for this purpose there must be allocated to the nonexempt property (other than money) an amount of such basis equivalent to the fair market value of such nonexempt property at the date of the exchange.
( d ) Section 1082 (a) does not apply in ascertaining the basis of property acquired by a corporation by the issuance of its stock or securities as the consideration in whole or in part for the transfer of the property to it. For the rule in such cases, see section 1082 (b).
( e ) For purposes of this section, any reference to section 1081 shall be deemed to include a reference to corresponding provisions of prior internal revenue laws.
PUBLIC LAW 113–71—DEC. 26, 2013 127 STAT. 1209 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 3343: 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 113–267 (Comm. on Oversight and Government Reform). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 159 (2013): 

Nov. 18, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 20, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 113–71 

113th Congress 

An Act 

To amend the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to clarify the rules regarding 

the determination of the compensation of the Chief Financial Officer of the District 

of Columbia. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION 

OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA. 

(a) DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION.—Section 424(b)(2)(E) of 

the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (sec. 1–204.24(b)(2)(E), 

D.C. Official Code) is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘(E) PAY.—The Chief Financial Officer shall be paid 

at a rate such that the total amount of compensation paid 

during any calendar year does not exceed an amount equal 

to the limit on total pay which is applicable during the 

year under section 5307 of title 5, United States Code, 

to an employee described in section 5307(d) of such title.’’. 

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by subsection (a) 

shall apply with respect to pay periods beginning on or after the 

date of the enactment of this Act. 

Approved December 26, 2013. 

Dec. 26, 2013 

[H.R. 3343] 


ccoleman on DSK8P6SHH1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsHardware Interface Description for the Integrated Power, Avionics, and Software (iPAS) Space Telecommunications Radio Ssystem (STRS) RadioThe Space Telecommunications Radio System (STRS) provides a common, consistent framework for software defined radios (SDRs) to abstract the application software from the radio platform hardware. The STRS standard aims to reduce the cost and risk of using complex, configurable and reprogrammable radio systems across NASA missions. To promote the use of the STRS architecture for future NASA advanced exploration missions, NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) developed an STRS-compliant SDR on a radio platform used by the Advance Exploration System program at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) in their Integrated Power, Avionics, and Software (iPAS) laboratory. The iPAS STRS Radio was implemented on the Reconfigurable, Intelligently-Adaptive Communication System (RIACS) platform, currently being used for radio development at JSC. The platform consists of a Xilinx ML605 Virtex-6 FPGA board, an Analog Devices FMCOMMS1-EBZ RF transceiver board, and an Embedded PC (Axiomtek eBox 620-110-FL) running the Ubuntu 12.4 operating system. Figure 1 shows the RIACS platform hardware. The result of this development is a very low cost STRS compliant platform that can be used for waveform developments for multiple applications.The purpose of this document is to describe how to develop a new waveform using the RIACS platform and the Very High Speed Integrated Circuits (VHSIC) Hardware Description Language (VHDL) FPGA wrapper code and the STRS implementation on the Axiomtek processor.Document ID20170004669Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsShalkhauser, Mary Jo W.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Roche, Rigoberto*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Date AcquiredMay 23, 2017Publication DateMay 1, 2017Subject CategoryAircraft Communications And NavigationCommunications And RadarReport/Patent NumberGRC-E-DAA-TN36465E-19321NASA/TM-2017-219432Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 089407.01.22Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.KeywordsFlight ComputerVHDLBit Error RateSoftwareSoftware Defined RadioSTRSRadio ElectronicsModulationFirmwareAvailable DownloadsNameType20170004669.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 114 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 114

 To authorize the Newington-Cropsey Foundation to erect on the Capitol 
  Grounds and present to Congress a ``Bill of Rights Eagle'' monument 
                    dedicated to the Bill of Rights.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 17, 1995

  Mr. Gilman submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 To authorize the Newington-Cropsey Foundation to erect on the Capitol 
  Grounds and present to Congress a ``Bill of Rights Eagle'' monument 
                    dedicated to the Bill of Rights.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION.

    The Newington-Cropsey Foundation is authorized to erect on the 
Capitol Grounds and present to Congress a ``Bill of Rights Eagle'' 
monument (in this resolution referred to as the ``monument'') dedicated 
to the Bill of Rights. The monument shall be erected and presented 
without expense to the United States.

SEC. 2. APPROVAL.

    The plans for the monument shall be subject to approval by the 
Architect of the Capitol. The monument shall be erected on a site to be 
determined by the Architect of the Capitol. Such determination shall 
be--
            (1) subject to approval by the Committee on House Oversight 
        of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Rules and 
        Administration of the Senate; and
            (2) made in consultation with the Newington-Cropsey 
        Foundation.

SEC. 3. ACCEPTANCE.

    After completion of the monument according to the approved plans, 
the monument shall be accepted by the Congress on behalf of the people 
of the United States for permanent placement on the Capitol Grounds.
                                 <all>
```
Petition for Exemption

Shawn W. Skenandore

ImageKeepers-Photography

454 Cottage Grove Ave Green Bay Wis,54304

I, Shawn W. Skenandore , 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 3 Professional Quad copter 

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, 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, Quick Start Guide and Smart Flight Battery Safety Guidelines

I truly thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Shawn Skenandore

Imagekeepers-Photography

http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/phantom_3/en/PHANTOM3_User_Manual_v1.4_en.pdf
http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/phantom_2/en/PHANTOM2_Quick_Start_Guide_en.pdf

http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/phantom_2_vision_plus/Smart_Flight_Battery_Safety_Guidelines.pdf
#### Jennie Fillipone *v.*Corporation of The Church of the Immaculate Conception

*Eugene II. Kaplan,*on the motion.

Submitted December 26, 1963

decided January 7, 1964

The motion by the plaintiff for permission to file a corrected brief in the appeal from the Superior Court in New Haven County is granted.
EX-10.63



 






Exhibit 10.63




AMENDMENT NUMBER FOURTEEN TO




THE METLIFE PLAN FOR TRANSITION ASSISTANCE FOR OFFICERS




     The METLIFE PLAN FOR TRANSITION ASSISTANCE FOR OFFICERS (the “Plan”) is hereby amended as
follows:




1. Section 1.4.07 of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:




“1.4.07 Discontinuance of Employment for Performance: ‘Discontinuance of Employment
for Performance’ means the involuntary cessation of an Employee’s employment with the Company
or a Subsidiary because the Employee has failed to meet standards of job performance despite
the Employee’s good faith and diligent efforts to perform all aspects of the Employee’s job,
including all performance improvement assignments and expectations, each as determined by the
Company or a Subsidiary in its discretion, or, in the event of a claim, by the Plan
Administrator in its discretion.”




2. Section 1.4.16 of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:




“1.4.16 Performance Participant: ‘Performance Participant’ means an Employee who has
received a Notice of Discontinuance and whose employment is terminated because of
Discontinuance of Employment for Performance; provided, however, that the Company or
Subsidiary may in its sole discretion deem any Employee whose employment is terminated
because of Discontinuance of Employment for Performance to be a Performance Participant.”




3. Section 1.4.09(g) of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:




“(g) is not performing services for the Company or a Subsidiary under an agreement in which
such individual acknowledges that he or she is an independent contractor and that he or she
is not entitled to participate in the Company’s or Subsidiary’s employee benefit plans, or
under an agreement entered into between the Company or a Subsidiary and some other person
(other than a MetLife Enterprise Affiliate), in either case notwithstanding the fact that a
regulatory body or court determines that such an individual is a common law employee.”




4. Section 1.4.09(c) of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:




“(c) is any one or more of (1) an officer of the Company, Metropolitan Property and Casualty
Insurance Company, MetLife Bank, N.A., or MetLife Group, Inc.; or (2) anyone whose
compensation is classified in the Company’s or a Subsidiary’s employee compensation
classification system in an officer or officer-equivalent grade level, in each case as
determined by the Company or a Subsidiary in its discretion, or, in the event of a claim, by
the Plan Administrator in its discretion.”




5. This amendment shall be effective January 1, 2007.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this amendment to be executed by an officer
thereunto duly authorized on the date noted below the officer’s signature.




METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY



			
	 
	By: /s/ Debra Capolarello	 
	 
	 
	 
	Date:  1-26-07	 
	 
	 
	 
	Witness: /s/ Judith N. Eidenberg
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsAutonomous Inspection of Electrical Transmission Structures with Airborne UV Sensors - NASA Report on Dominion Virginia Power Flights of November 2016The report details test and measurement flights to demonstrate autonomous UAV inspection of high voltage electrical transmission structures. A UAV built with commercial, off-the-shelf hardware and software, supplemented with custom sensor logging software, measured ultraviolet emissions from a test generator placed on a low-altitude substation and a medium-altitude switching tower. Since corona discharge precedes catastrophic electrical faults on high-voltage structures, detection and geolocation of ultraviolet emissions is needed to develop a UAV-based self-diagnosing power grid. Signal readings from an onboard ultraviolet sensor were validated during flight with a commercial corona camera. Geolocation was accomplished with onboard GPS; the UAV position was logged to a local ground station and transmitted in real time to a NASA server for tracking in the national airspace.Document ID20170004692Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsMoore, Andrew J.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Schubert, Matthew*(Analytical Mechanics Associates, Inc. Hampton, VA, United States)*Nicholas Rymer*(National Inst. of Aerospace Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredMay 23, 2017Publication DateMay 1, 2017Subject CategoryAeronautics (General)Report/Patent NumberL-20808NF1676L-26882NASA/TM-2017-219611Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 154692.02.70.07.02Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20170004692.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

March 24, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135605 & (80)(81)(82) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 135605 

 COA: 273056 
 Wayne CC: 06-006411-01

DERRICK CLAYTON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 18, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motions 

for miscellaneous relief are DENIED. 

t0317 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

March 24, 2008 

 Clerk