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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### International Trade Administration

Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-651, as amended by Pub. L. 106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301), we invite comments on the question of whether instruments of equivalent scientific value, for the purposes for which the instruments shown below are intended to be used, are being manufactured in the United States.

Comments must comply with 15 CFR 301.5(a)(3) and (4) of the regulations and be postmarked on or before September 17, 2009. Address written comments to Statutory Import Programs Staff, Room 3720, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230. Applications may be examined between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. at the U.S. Department of Commerce in Room 3720.

*Docket Number: 09-047.*                     Applicant: Washington State University, P.O. Box 641020, Pullman, WA 99164. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech Republic. Intended Use: The instrument will be used to study bulk amorphous metal alloys, nano-particle ceramics, nano-particle metals, polymer matrices and ceramic matrices. The instrument will be used to measure the thickness of deposited coatings at 1.0 nm resolution. Justification for Duty-Free Entry: No instruments of same general category are manufactured in the United States. Application accepted by Commissioner of Customs: July 31, 2009.                

Dated: August 24, 2009.

Christopher Cassel,

Acting Director, IA Subsidies Enforcement Office.

[FR Doc. E9-20824 Filed 8-27-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
{"@context": "https://wayback.archive-it.org/16698/20210520143726/http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "item": {"@id": "https:\/\/wayback.archive-it.org\/16698\/20210520143726\/http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/gpoprinter", "name": "USGPO"}}]}

















© 2021 Google LLC
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

###### Editorial Note on Part 363

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 363 appear at 70 FR 57433, Sept. 30, 2005, 70 FR 57442, Sept. 30, 2005, and 75 FR 70815, Nov. 19, 2010.

#### § 363.161 What definitive savings bonds are eligible to be converted to book-entry bonds?

Series E, Series EE, and Series I savings bonds issued in denominations of $25 or greater are eligible for conversion to book-entry bonds in TreasuryDirect ®.

[74 FR 19420, Apr. 29, 2009]
40518.

#### BAGGETT TRANSPORTATION COMPANY v. BARNES.

Decided February 5, 1964.

*99*Mitchell, Clarke, Pate & Anderson, William M. Pate,*for plaintiff in error.

*William V. George,*contra.

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

The deputy director found that the claimant timely reported the second injury to Mr. Horn, the acting terminal manager, and it is the employer’s contention that such finding was not authorized.

While mere notice of an incapacity is not sufficient to put the employer on notice of an injury which might be compensable (See *Fountain v. Georgia Marble Co.,*95 Ga. App. 21, 96 SE2d 656; *Crews v. General Motors Corp.,*107 Ga. App. 592, 130 SE2d 925), yet, “This does not mean that a claimant must say to his employer, T have had such and such an accident and injury within the meaning of the Workmen’s Compensation Act for which I think you are liable.’ It means only that there must be something (as in the cited cases of *Railway Exp. Agency v. Harper,*70 Ga. App. 795, 29 SE2d 434; *Davison-Paxon Co. v. Ford,*88 Ga. App. 890, 78 SE2d 257; and *Ideal Mutual Ins. Co. v. Ray,*92 Ga. App. 273, 88 SE2d 428) to put the employer on notice that there is at least a probability that the injury of which he is informed is connected with an accident arising out of and in the course of the employment.” *Employers Mut. &c. Ins. Co. v. Holloway,*98 Ga. App. 265, 267 (105 SE2d 370). The evidence authorized the finding that the employer had the required notice of the second injury, and the evidence authorized the award of compensation.

The sole remaining contention of the employer is that the board erred in refusing to allow credit for payments made to the claimant after he was disabled but before any notice of the accidental injury or claim was filed with the board and before any agreement was filed for approval by the board.

In cases where medical treatment or compensation was paid to the claimant without any agreement being filed for approval and no claim filed it has been held that such payments or services were mere gratuities and did not toll the statute requiring a claim to be filed within one year from the date of *100the alleged injury. See *Thomas v. Lumberman’s Mut. Cas. Co.,*57 Ga. App. 434 (195 SE 894), and cases cited. See also *Hennessee v. Jennings,*48 Ga. App. 188 (3) (172 SE 583), where payments made without an approved agreement are discussed. The payments to the claimant being mere gratuities which would not toll the time of filing a claim must be held, as to the employer, not payments for which credit can be taken. See *Attaway v. First Nat. Bank,*49 Ga. App. 270 (175 SE 258); *City of Hapeville v. Preston,*67 Ga. App. 350 (20 SE2d 202). The board did not err in failing to give the employer credit for gratuitous payments made to the claimant in the absence of an approved agreement or award of the board. Accordingly, the superior court did not err in affirming the award of the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation.

*Judgment affirmed,.*

*Hall and Bussell, JJ., concur.*
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2840

To assure that all Federal employees work and are paid.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

DECEMBER 27 (legislative day, DECEMBER 22), 1995

Mrs. MORELLA (for herself, Mr. DAVIS, Mr. WOLF, and Mr. MORAN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

A BILL

To assure that all Federal employees work and are paid.

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

3 SECTION 1. ALL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES DEEMED TO BE ES4 SENTIAL EMPLOYEES.

5 Section 1342 of title 31, United States Code, is

6 amended for the period December 15, 1995 through Feb7 ruary 1, 1996—

8 (1) by inserting after the first sentence ‘‘All of9 ficers and employees of the United States Govern10 ment or the District of Columbia government shall

11 be deemed to be performing services relating to
2

HR 2840 IH

1 emergencies involving the safety of human life or the

2 protection of property.’’; and

3 (2) by striking out the last sentence.

Æ
#### Anthony E. WILEY, Claimant-Appellant, v. Hershel W. GOBER, Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 01-7004.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Jan. 9, 2001.

ORDER

DYK, Circuit Judge.

The Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs moves without opposition for a remand to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for further proceedings consistent with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000, Pub.L. No. 106-475, 114 Stat. 2096.

Upon consideration thereof,

*757IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion is granted.
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

###### Editorial Note on Part 363

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 363 appear at 70 FR 57433, Sept. 30, 2005, 70 FR 57442, Sept. 30, 2005, and 75 FR 70815, Nov. 19, 2010.

#### § 363.39 Will I receive a confirmation of my request to purchase a Treasury security?

At the time that you submit a request to purchase a Treasury security through your TreasuryDirect ® account, we will make available a printable online confirmation of your request. Final confirmation will occur when the security is issued into your account. You will not receive a mailed confirmation.
#### § 561.303 UNSC Resolution 1747.

The term *UNSC Resolution* *1747* means United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747, adopted March 24, 2007.
CEHR-E

Engineer Pamphlet

690-1-11(07)

Department of the Army

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Washington, DC 20314-1000

EP 690-1-11(07)

25 May 1993

Command-wide Recruitment and 

Outreach Materials

CAREER PROFILE SUPPLEMENT -

HYDRAULICS

Distribution Restriction Statement

Approved for public release; distribution is 

unlimited.
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2016-4224 Directorate Identifier: 2015-NM-170-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Inspection 6 $ 510.00 0 $ 510.00 76 $38,760.00

$ 0.00 $0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $38,760

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

If found certain 

damage, parts needs 

to be replaced 

4 $ 340.00 8880.30 $9,220.30

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):
Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
#### § 583.305 Foreign person.

The term *foreign person* means any citizen or national of a foreign state (including any such individual who is also a citizen or national of the United States), or any entity not organized solely under the laws of the United States or existing solely in the United States, but does not include a foreign state.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certifications Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes—Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I,Marcel Martin, the Vice President Finance and Chief Financial Officer of HaynesInternational, Inc., certify that (i) the quarterly report on Form 10-Qfor the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Haynes International, Inc. as of the dates andfor the periods set forth therein.

 
|     | /s/ Marcel Martin             |
|----------|-------------------------------|
|     | Marcel Martin                 |
| * * | *Vice  President Finance and* |
| * * | *Chief  Financial Officer*    |
|     |                          |
|     | May 7, 2009              |
|     | Date                          |

 

I,Mark Comerford, the President and Chief Executive Officer of HaynesInternational, Inc., certify that (i) the quarterly report on Form 10-Qfor the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Haynes International, Inc. as of the dates andfor the periods set forth therein.

 
|     | /s/ Mark Comerford                       |
|----------|------------------------------------------|
|     | Mark Comerford                           |
| * * | *President  and Chief Executive Officer* |
| * * | * *                                 |
|     | May 7, 2009                         |
|     | Date                                     |

 

1

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                      29,872,192
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,141
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                            12,800,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 49,521,330
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      96,265,967
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        98,371,056
<LOANS>                                    331,360,183
<ALLOWANCE>                                (2,943,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             537,322,171
<DEPOSITS>                                 470,281,807
<SHORT-TERM>                                   602,100
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          6,294,940
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    14,000,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  46,143,324
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             537,322,171
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             28,841,420
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            9,522,168
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               253,497
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            38,647,085
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          17,218,537
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          17,304,390
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       21,342,695
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                1,940,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             487,972
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             16,063,382
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             10,281,628
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 7,053,952
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     5.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.65
<LOANS-NON>                                  2,953,772
<LOANS-PAST>                                    18,460
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             2,926,063
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                2,064,138
<RECOVERIES>                                   141,075
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,943,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 43166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20451]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-70,801]


Tolleson Lumber Co., Inc., Preston, GA; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    In accordance with Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as 
amended, an investigation was initiated on May 28, 2009 in response to 
a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Tolleson 
Lumber Co., Inc., Preston, Georgia.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 27th day of July 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-20451 Filed 8-25-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-84,740-03

EX PARTE ALFRED EUGENE AISHMAN, JR., Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 114-1136-05-B IN THE 114TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM SMITH COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual

assault of a child and was sentenced to fifty years’ imprisonment. 

In the instant application, Applicant raises three grounds for review. Applicant alleges that

he is actually innocent of the offense to which he pleaded guilty. He also alleges prosecutorial and

judicial misconduct during post-conviction DNA proceedings pursuant to Chapter 64 of the Texas

Code of Criminal Procedure, which occurred after the final disposition of his initial application for

writ of habeas corpus. 
2

Applicant is not confined because of any error in his Chapter 64 proceedings. Therefore, the

post-conviction writ of habeas corpus is not available for his claims of error in that proceeding.

Ex parte Baker, 185 S.W.3d 894 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); Ex parte Suhre, 185 S.W.3d 898 (Tex.

Crim. App. 2006). Those claims are denied.

Applicant's remaining claims are barred from review; as such, they are dismissed. Tex. Code

Crim. Proc. art. 11.07 § 4. 

Filed: August 21, 2019

Do not publish
Towers Watson Limited Share Incentive Plan 2005 Deed to Change the Trust Deed



 Exhibit 10.10 
 Watson Wyatt Share Incentive Plan 2005 
 Deed to Change the Trust Deed
and Rules 
 This deed is made on 8 January 2010 between: 

 

	(1)	Watson Wyatt Limited; and 

  

	(2)	Halifax Corporate Trustees Limited 

  

	1	Introduction 

  

	1.1	Watson Wyatt Limited is the “Company” in relation to the Watson Wyatt Share Incentive Plan 2005 (the “Plan”). 


 

	1.2	Halifax Corporate Trustees Limited are the trustees for the time being of the Plan (the “Trustees”). 


 

	1.3	The Plan is governed by the trust deed and rules dated 7 September 2005 (the “Rules”). Rule 14 (Changing the Rules) provides that the Directors and the
Trustees may, by deed, change the rules at any time. 

  

	2	Operative Part 

  

	2.1	In the exercise of their powers under Rule 14.2, with effect from the date of this deed, the Directors and the Trustees change the Rules as set out in 2.2 below. The
change requires approval by HMRC, and will not take effect until such approval is granted if later than the date of this deed, but does not require the approval of the Company’s shareholders. 









	2.2	The Rules are modified by deleting the definition of “Share” and replacing it with the following: 


“Share” means a share of Class A common stock of par value US$0.01 of Towers Watson & Co. which meets the
requirements of Part 4 of Schedule 2, and any security which forms part of any new holdings referred to in paragraph 86 of Schedule 2.” 

This document has been executed as a deed on the date shown at the top of this document. 

 

	
	 Signed as a deed by
 Watson
Wyatt Limited
 Acting by:

	
	




	
	A Director and
	
	




	
	A Director/Secretary









	
	 Signed as a deed by
 Halifax
Corporate Trustees Limited
 Acting by:

	
	




	
	A Director and
	
	




	
	A Director
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 165 (Thursday, August 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43720-43721]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20676]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

Information Quality Guidelines Pursuant to Section 515 of the 
Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Revised Peer Review Guidelines.

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

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of Availability of the amended Information 
Quality guidelines of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
Enforcement (OSM). OSM's amended guidelines implement the Information 
Quality guidelines published by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) in the Federal Register. The OMB guidelines directed Federal 
agencies to issue and implement guidelines to ensure and maximize the 
quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of Government information 
disseminated to the public. Accordingly, OSM is amending its 
Information Quality Guidelines in order to provide current information 
about the title of the Information Quality contact. We are making no 
other substantive changes. We are making minor, non-substantive 
editorial and technical corrections. The corrected guidelines are 
available on the OSM Internet Web site at: http://www.osmre.gov/guidance/osm_info_quality.shtm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of the Chief Information 
Officer, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1951 
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20240. Telephone (202) 208-2961 
or by e-mail to [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    The OSM guidelines, as amended, implement guidelines published by 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the Federal Register on 
September 28, 2001 (66 FR 49718) and February 22, 2002 (67 FR 8451). 
The OMB guidelines directed Federal agencies to issue and implement 
guidelines to ensure and maximize the

[[Page 43721]]

quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of Government information 
disseminated to the public. Our Information Quality Guidelines were 
published in the Federal Register on November 13, 2002 (67 FR 68882). 
The amendments addressed in this notice reflect OSM organizational 
changes, by making appropriate changes in OSM contact information. Our 
amendments make no other substantive changes in our guidelines; 
however, they make other minor technical and editing corrections. As 
noted above, the corrected guidelines are available on the OSM Internet 
Web site at: http://www.osmre.gov/guidance/osm_info_quality.shtm.

    Dated: July 28, 2009.
Glenda H. Owens
Acting Director.
[FR Doc. E9-20676 Filed 8-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
```