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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 72 Received in Senate (RDS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 72

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                 May 25 (legislative day, May 15), 1995

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
            Providing for an adjournment of the two Houses.
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Thursday, May 
25, 1995, it stand adjourned until noon on Tuesday, June 6, 1995, or 
until noon on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
first; and that when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the close of 
business on Thursday, May 25, 1995, Friday, May 26, 1995, or Saturday, 
May 27, 1995, pursuant to a motion made by the majority leader or his 
designee, in accordance with this resolution, it stand recessed or 
adjourned until 10 a.m. on Monday, June 5, 1995, or until noon on the 
second day after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 
2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the majority leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the minority leader of 
the House and the minority leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and Senate, respectively, to reassemble whenever, 
in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.
            Passed the House of Representatives May 25, 1995.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
##### 



Exhibit 12.1
Statement of Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
 Three MonthsEndedMarch 31,2003
    
    2004
    
    2005
    
    2006
    
    2007(in thousands)EarningsIncome From Continuing Operations *
    
    
    104,958
    
    
    
    112,658
    
    
    
    138,639
    
    
    
    158,538
    
    
    
    43,160Fixed Charges
    
    
    93,294
    
    
    
    80,695
    
    
    
    93,414
    
    
    
    101,905
    
    
    
    26,732Distributed Income of
Equity Investment
    
    
    28,003
    
    
    
    47,213
    
    
    
    37,085
    
    
    
    63,483
    
    
    
    40,304Capitalized Interest
    
    
    (5,290
    )
    
    
    (4,227
    )
    
    
    (6,759
    )
    
    
    (10,681
    )
    
    
    (3,728
    )Total Earnings
    
    
    220,965
    
    
    
    236,339
    
    
    
    262,379
    
    
    
    313,245
    
    
    
    106,468Fixed ChargesInterest Expense
    
    
    84,250
    
    
    
    72,053
    
    
    
    81,861
    
    
    
    86,171
    
    
    
    22,211Capitalized Interest
    
    
    5,290
    
    
    
    4,227
    
    
    
    6,759
    
    
    
    10,681
    
    
    
    3,728Rental Interest Factor
    
    
    3,754
    
    
    
    4,415
    
    
    
    4,794
    
    
    
    5,053
    
    
    
    793Total Fixed Charges
    
    
    93,294
    
    
    
    80,695
    
    
    
    93,414
    
    
    
    101,905
    
    
    
    26,732Ratio: Earnings / Fixed Charges
    
    
    2.37
    
    
    
    2.93
    
    
    
    2.81
    
    
    
    3.07
    
    
    
    3.98
 
 *
    
    Excludes discontinued operations, gain on sale of assets, provision for taxes and undistributed equity earnings.
Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

§ 306.113 Cases not requiring bonds of indemnity. A bond of indemnity will not be required as a condition of relief for the loss, theft, destruction, mutilation, or defacement of registered securities in any of the following classes of cases unless the Secretary of the Treasury deems it essential in the public interest: ( a ) If the loss, theft, destruction, mutilation, or defacement, as the case may be, occurred while the security was in the custody or control of the United States, or a duly authorized agent thereof (not including the Postal Service when acting solely in its capacity as public carrier of the mails), or while in the course of shipment effected under regulations issued pursuant to the Government Losses in Shipment Act (parts 260, 261, and 262 of this chapter).
( b ) If substantially the entire security is presented and surrendered and the Security of the Treasury is satisfied as to the identity of the security and that any missing portions are not sufficient to form the basis of a valid claim against the United States.
( c ) If the security is one which by the provisions of law or by the terms of its issue is nontransferable or is transferable only by operation of law.
( d ) If the owner or holder is the United States, a Federal Reserve bank, a Federal Government corporation, a State, the District of Columbia, a territory or possession of the United States, a municipal corporation, or, if applicable, a political subdivision of any of the foregoing, or a foreign government.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                               48377
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       652200
<ALLOWANCES>                                        (24500)
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   1065764
<PP&E>                                             1216731
<DEPRECIATION>                                     (106253)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     9230464
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              3732176
<BONDS>                                             347250
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                             16
<COMMON>                                              1603
<OTHER-SE>                                         5149419
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       9230464
<SALES>                                            1694787
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   1694787
<CGS>                                              1541277
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      1541277
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   2027601
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  (71212)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (1879684)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (1879684)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (1879684)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (0.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.15)
        


</TABLE>
40371.

#### TODD v. THE STATE.

Jordan, Judge.

This is the second appearance of this case which arose out of a proceeding to revoke the probationary or sus*616pended feature of certain consecutive sentences given the defendant under a nine-count indictment to which he entered a plea of guilty on May 13, 1959. In *Todd v. State,*107 Ga. App. 771 (131 SE2d 201), the judgment of the sentencing court which revoked the suspended feature of the sentences given the defendant under counts 3 and 4 of said indictment was reversed on the ground that the court was without authority to revoke the probationary or suspended feature of a sentence which was not in effect and being served at the time of the purported revocation. The case was remanded to the sentencing court and a second revocation hearing was held on June 27, 1963; and a new order was entered revoking the probationary feature of the sentence given to the defendant under count 2 of the indictment, the sentence given under count 1 of the indictment having expired on June 12, 1963.

The defendant has excepted to this judgment on the ground that the sentencing court was without authority to revoke the probationary feature of said sentence since the sentence was not in effect and being served by the defendant at the time of his alleged commission of the unlawful acts upon which the revocation proceeding was predicated. *Held:*

Under the ruling of this court in *Jackson v. State,*91 Ga. App. 291 (1) (85 SE2d 444), a probated or suspended sentence may be revoked provided the sentence being revoked is in effect and being served at the time the order of revocation is made. This is true even though the *act*upon which the revocation is based was committed prior to the date the defendant actually begins serving such probated sentence, but after the date of the imposition of the sentence, as was the factual situation in *Jackson v. State,*supra, and which exists here.

The sentencing judge retains jurisdiction over the probated person during the entire term of such probated sentence, but of course cannot revoke any sentence which has expired at the time the revocation proceedings are had nor revoke any future sentence which has not begun to run at the time of such revocation proceedings. *..Code Ann.*§ 27-2709; *Reed v. State,*101 Ga. App. 714 (115 SE2d 270); *Harris v. Grimes,*215 Ga. 373 (110 SE2d 747); and *Todd v. State,*107 Ga. App. 771, supra.

Accordingly, since the record in this case discloses that the only sentence revoked was the one which the defendant was serv*617ing at the time the revocation order was passed, and sufficient cause for revocation being shown at the hearing, there was no error in the court below and the judgment must be affirmed.

Decided November 5, 1963.

*Walter B. Fincher,*for plaintiff in error.

*William T. Boyd, Solicitor General, J. Walter LeCraw,*contra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Nichols, P. J., and Franlcum, J., concur.*
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

 

Application of ) 

 ) 

 Kalitta Air, LLC ) 

 ) Docket OST-2010-0017 

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 40109 for an ) 

exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41101 ) 

(U.S.-China All-Cargo) ) 

 ) 

APPLICATION OF KALITTA AIR, LLC 

FOR RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION AUTHORITY 

Communications with respect to this document should be addressed to: 

 Mark W. Atwood 

 Elizabeth J. Wadsworth 

Cozen O’Connor

 The Army and Navy Club Bldg. 

1627 I Street, N.W. 

 Suite 1100 

Washington, DC 20006 

 (202) 463-2513 

 Counsel for Kalitta Air, LLC 

Dated: May 10, 2012 

NOTICE: Interested persons may support or oppose this application by filing an 

answer with the Department in the above-referenced docket, and serving it on 

above counsel and all persons on the service list attached hereto. Answers must 

be filed no later than May 25, 2012.
IA

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 179

Designating the Civil War Center at Louisiana State University as the United

States Civil War Center, making the center the flagship institution for

planning the sesquicentennial commemoration of the Civil War, and

for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 16, 1996

Mr. BAKER of Louisiana (for himself, Mr. MCCRERY, Mr. HAYES, Mr. LIVINGSTON, Mr. TAUZIN, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. FIELDS of Louisiana, Mr.

GOODLING, Mr. FOGLIETTA, Mr. GEKAS, Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania, and

Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania) introduced the following joint resolution;

which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

JOINT RESOLUTION

Designating the Civil War Center at Louisiana State University as the United States Civil War Center, making the

center the flagship institution for planning the sesquicentennial commemoration of the Civil War, and for

other purposes.

Whereas the sesquicentennial of the beginning of the Civil

War will occur in the year 2011;

Whereas the sesquicentennial will be the last significant opportunity for most Americans alive in the year 2011 to

recall and commemorate the Civil War;
2

HJ 179 IH

Whereas the Civil War Center in Louisiana State University

in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, has as its principal missions

to create a comprehensive database that contains all Civil

War materials and to facilitate the study of the Civil War

from the perspectives of all ethnic cultures and all professions; academic disciplines, and occupations;

Whereas the two principal missions of the Civil War Center

are consistent with commemoration of the sesquicentennial;

Whereas the missions of the Civil War Institute at Gettysburg College parallel those of the Civil War Center; and

Whereas advance planning to facilitate the four-year commemoration of the sesquicentennial is required: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF THE UNITED STATES CIVIL

4 WAR CENTER.

5 The Civil War Center, located on Raphael Semmes

6 Drive at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, Lou7 isiana (hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘center’’), shall be

8 known and designated as the ‘‘United States Civil War

9 Center’’.

10 SEC. 2. LEGAL REFERENCES.

11 Any reference in any law, regulation, paper, record,

12 map, or any other document of the United States to the

13 center referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a

14 reference to the ‘‘United States Civil War Center’’.
3

HJ 179 IH

1 SEC. 3. FLAGSHIP INSTITUTIONS.

2 The center and the Civil War Institute of Gettysburg

3 College, located at 233 North Washington Street in Get4 tysburg, Pennsylvania, shall be the flagship institutions

5 for planning the sesquicentennial commemoration of the

6 Civil War.

Æ
Home2022 Certificates of Competency for Nominees to be Chiefs of Mission...Aggeler, Angela Price – Republic of North Macedonia – June 2022

# 									Aggeler, Angela Price – Republic of North Macedonia – June 2022							

Certificate of Competency

June 1, 2022

REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

UNITED STATES SENATE

SUBJECT: Ambassadorial Nomination:  Certificate of Demonstrated Competence — Foreign ServiceAct, Section 304(a)(4)

POST:Republic of North Macedonia

CANDIDATE:Angela Price Aggeler

Angela Price Aggeler, a career member of the Senior Foreign Service with the rank of Minister-Counselor, recently served as Chargé d’affaires ad interim of the U.S. Mission to Pakistan, and previously as Deputy Chief of Mission.  Before that she was Minister Counselor for Public Affairs at the U.S. Embassy in Paris, France; Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs and the Office of the Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan in Washington, D.C.; and, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Press and Public Diplomacy in the Bureau of Press and Public Diplomacy.  Earlier, she was Counselor for Public Affairs at the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan.  Previous assignments include Public Affairs Officer at the American Embassy in Skopje, Macedonia; Cultural and Press Attaché of the U.S. Embassy in Hanoi, Vietnam; Spokesperson for the Bureau of Consular Affairs at the State Department; and assignments at the U.S. Embassy in Paris, France and U.S. Embassy in New Delhi, India.  Aggeler’s substantive regional experience, coupled with her language skills, extensive management experience and demonstrated ability to lead large interagency teams, make her a well-qualified candidate to be the U.S. Ambassador to North Macedonia.  

Prior to joining the Foreign Service, Aggeler worked at U.S. Embassies in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso and Budapest, Hungary, as well as the Consulate General in Madras, India.  Earlier in her career, she was a Peace Corps Volunteer in the Central African Republic.  Aggeler is the recipient of numerous State Department awards, including the Assistant Secretary’s Award for Excellence and the Mildred Sinclaire Award for Language.  A graduate of the University of Utah, she speaks French, Macedonian, and some Hindi.  

 

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
BATHYMETRIC MAP

Pitkahed at Wirpheapen, DC : — POWELL

US. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

MANONAL OCEANIC AND AIMORMUNC ADAIIETRATION
MATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE NOS NJ 19-5

tas.
BADCOMETIS OOM TOUR MATERYALE 99 METERS 1D MAKAULNN OEP
#### § 1024.310 Reports of transactions in currency.

The reports of transactions in currency requirements for mutual funds are located in subpart C of part 1010 of this chapter and this subpart.
**MEMORANDUM TO RECORD** 

**SUBJECT:** Meeting with Robert Weaver on P roposed Revisions to the Water Quality

Standards Regulation . **DATE :**  Monday , February 28, 2011 **T IME**  **:** 3:00 PM

– 4 :00 PM **Participants:**

 EPA HQ: Shari Barash, Christina Chris tensen  Robert Weav er , Kelly & Weaver **Summary of d iscussion points**  **from Bob Weaver :**  General:  Supports moving forward with the proposed rule . Compliance Schedule Authorizing Provision :  Supports discussion of compliance schedules in regulatory revision.  Does not think cons ent decrees should be used as the mechanism for allowing combined sewer overflows ( CSOs ) to comply with permits .  Indicated that long - term compliance schedules are needed , especiall y in the CSO context .  Recommends CWA section 303(e)(3)(F ) be recognized as a source of authority in this rulemaking, more specifically , it is his po sition that the CWA (303(e)(3)(F )), Starkist EAB decision , and DC WASA EAB decision make it clear th at the authority for granting compliance schedules lies with the state and that states also have the authority (from the Act) to set the length (any length) for compliance s chedules. He described the link as CWA section 303(e)(3)(F ) gives states the authority to prioritize water quality planning, including planning for compliance schedule s; therefore , allowing long term compliance schedules (e.g., for CSOs), is part of that water quality planning.  Indicated that he thinks our proposed rule (or preamble) should clarify this state authority for granting long - term compliance schedules . Vari ances:  Supports variances that would serve the purposes of the “Restoration Water Quality Standards” as described in the proposed rule for the Florida Inland Waters (Nutrients ) .
§ 19.970 Nonprocurement transaction. ( a ) *Nonprocurement transaction* means any transaction, regardless of type (except procurement contracts), including, but not limited to the following: ( 1 ) Grants.
( 2 ) Cooperative agreements.
( 3 ) Scholarships.
( 4 ) Fellowships.
( 5 ) Contracts of assistance.
( 6 ) Loans.
( 7 ) Loan guarantees.
( 8 ) Subsidies.
( 9 ) Insurances.
( 10 ) Payments for specified uses.
( 11 ) Donation agreements.
( b ) A nonprocurement transaction at any tier does not require the transfer of Federal funds.
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906**

**OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

                In connection with the QuarterlyReport of TEPPCO Partners, L.P. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterended September 30, 2005 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Barry R. Pearl, President and ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, asadopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

                1. The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended; and

 

                2. The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

 

 
| /s/ BARRY R. PEARL                                             |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Barry R. Pearl                                                 |   |
| President and Chief Executive  Officer                         |   |
| Texas Eastern Products Pipeline  Company, LLC, General Partner |
|                                                           |   |
| October 31, 2005                                               |   |
| Date                                                           |   |

 

Thiswritten statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionas an exhibit to such Form 10-Q.  Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to TEPPCO Partners, L.P. and will be retained by TEPPCO Partners, L.P.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

 

 

----
#### § 15.737-8 Special orders.

The General Counsel may issue special orders as he/she may consider proper in any case within the purview of this part.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Assistant Secretary Sison’s Travel to Berlin

# 									Assistant Secretary Sison’s Travel to Berlin							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

April 9, 2024

Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs Michele Sison will travel to Berlin, Germany, April 10-12.  During her visit, the Assistant Secretary will meet with German counterparts to discuss a variety of multilateral and UN issues, including the Summit of the Future, plans for the 2025 UN Peacekeeping Ministerial, and shared Human Rights Council priorities.   

While in Berlin, the Assistant Secretary will also participate in the third annual Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) Workshop for the Bureaus of European and Eurasian Affairs and International Organization Affairs.  For updates, follow @State_IO on Twitter/X.

Tags

Bureau of European and Eurasian AffairsBureau of International Organization AffairsDiversity and InclusionGermanyOffice of the SpokespersonOfficial International Travel

Back to Top
**
**Exhibit 35**

**SERVICER’S ANNUAL CERTIFICATION**

**MECHANICS BANK**

**PURSUANT TOSECTION 4.10 OF THE SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT**

This Servicer’s Annual Certification is delivered pursuant to a saleand servicing agreement dated as of February 1, 2017 (the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) by and among, California Republic Auto Receivables Trust 2017-1, California Republic Funding, LLC,Mechanics Bank, as Seller, Servicer, Administrator, Calculation Agent and Custodian (in such capacity, the “Servicer”), and U.S. Bank National Association, as indenture trustee (the “Indenture Trustee”). All capitalized termsused but not defined herein shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Appendix A to the Sale and Servicing Agreement. 

Theundersigned, a Responsible Officer of the Servicer, hereby certifies that: 

1.            A review of the activities of the Servicer and of theperformance of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement during the period from January 1, 2019 to and including December 31, 2019 (the “Review Period”) was conducted under my supervision. 

2.            To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, theServicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Review Period. 

[SIGNATURE APPEARS ON NEXT PAGE] 
**

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, in my capacity as specified below, has caused this certificateto be executed as of the date indicated below. 

 
 Dated: March 25, 2020  
/s/ Nathan J. Duda

Nathan J. Duda

Chief Financial Officer