alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeDirect Line for American Business...Critical Minerals and Mining Equipment in Kazakhstan

# 									Critical Minerals and Mining Equipment in Kazakhstan							

Direct Line Event

March 21, 2024

register by April 3, 2024

**Hosts:**  U.S. Ambassador to Kazakhstan Daniel Rosenblum 

**Date and Time:  **11:00 am ET Wednesday, April 10, 2024  

**Description:**  

Join U.S. Ambassador to Kazakhstan Daniel Rosenblum and Jennifer Miel, Executive Director of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s U.S.-Kazakhstan Business Council to learn about the mining and emerging critical minerals and critical materials sector in Kazakhstan and the experiences of companies operating in these evolving markets.  Kazakhstan possesses significant mineral wealth, including 17 critical materials on the U.S. Department of Energy’s Critical Minerals’ List, and seeks to attract additional foreign investment.

**Experts**:

Simon Glancy, Managing Partner of Strategic Solutions, a consulting firm which advises global companies on doing business in Central Asia’s strategic industries, including mining, will provide a brief overview of state mining policy and foreign investor activity in the mining industry in Kazakhstan, focusing on critical minerals. He will also discuss business opportunities for firms to sell equipment and services in these markets. 

Alex Walker is the Founder and CEO of East Star Resources PLC, a Kazakhstan focused copper exploration and resource development company with advanced exploration in the East Region. Alex is a mining investment banker and resources executive who for the last 2.5 years has been based full-time in Almaty, Kazakhstan. He has more than 15 years of mining finance and management experience and has a MSc in Mineral and Energy Economics, a GDip in Applied Finance and Investment, a Bcomm, a BSocSci, a GAICD, and is a former Captain in the Australian Army Reserves.

Tags

Bureau of Economic and Business AffairsKazakhstan

Back to Top
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Human Genome Research Institute Initial Review Group; Genome Research Review Committee.                    

*Date:*                         November 5-6, 2009.                    

*Time:*                         8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.                     

*Contact Person:*                         Ken D. Nakamura, Ph D, Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301 402-0838.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.172, Human Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: September 1, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-21773 Filed 9-9-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
# C_2006036EN.01001301.xml

| 11.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 36/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 36/13

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 15 December 2005

in Case C-253/04: Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2002/21/EC - Electronic communications networks and services - Common regulatory framework - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2006/C 36/23)

Language of the case: Greek

In Case C-253/04 Commission of the European Communities (Agents: G. Zavvos and M. Shotter) v Hellenic Republic (Agent: N. Dafniou) — action for failure to fulfil obligations under Article 226 EC, brought on 14 June 2004 — the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of J. Makarczyk, President of the Chamber, R. Silva de Lapuerta and P. Kūris (Rapporteur), Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 15 December 2005, in which it:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive), the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive), the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.

| 2. | Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 201, 07.08.2004

1

---
<PAGE>


CERTIFICATIONS
--------------

I, Robert V. Condon, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Merrimac Industries,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

         a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

         b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

         c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

         a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

         b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: April 21, 2003

                                                   /s/ Robert V. Condon
                                                   ---------------------------
                                                   Vice President, Finance
                                                   and Chief Financial Officer
# C_2006075EN.01001901.xml

| 28.3.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 75/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/19

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4090 — WEST LB/Odewald/ASH)

(2006/C 75/09)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 7 February 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32006M4090. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32006M4090. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
#### James Stediford *against*James Ferris.

ON CERTIORARI,

Service of summons, *(a)*

Confession of judgment by third person.

(a)

**Cited in *Stults vs. Outcalt, 1 Hal. 130.*Ross *vs. Ward, 1 Har. 23. Murat vs. Hutchinson, 1 Har. 46. Gardner vs. Small, 2 Har. 162.*

OPINION of the Court,

Kirkpatrick C. J.

In this case the constable returned the summons *served,*but *when*or *how*he does not say, *121wliereas the statute requires, that he shall, upon his oath of office, endorse Upon the process *the time and manner executed the same, and sign his name*thereto; this particularity is necessary, because the justice is to judge of the legality of the service, and not the constable, and because too the manner of the service must appear on record, in order to support the judgment in case of error brought. It has been holden indeed, that the appearance of the defendant cures defects of this kind, because the whole object of the summons is to bring the party into court. But hero, there was no appearance, and therefore no proceeding could lawfully be had against him. (a)

Besides, the record is in this wise. On the return of the summons, the plaintiff appeared and filed his plea, and the defendant by his friend *Daniel Farrand,,*confessed a judgment in favour of the plaintiif; whereupon I gave judgment in favour of the plaintiff’, for 80 dollars and 8 cents, with costs.

Now this is wholly erroneous. Who is *Daniel Farrand ?*By what authority does he confess judgment ? Certainly none appears. (b) Therefore,

Let the judgment be reversed.

(a)

*Budd vs. Marvin, post 248. Ayers vs. Swayze, 2 South. 813. Snedeker vs. Quick, 6 Hal. 181. Murat vs. Hutchinson, 1 Har. 46. English vs. Bonham, 2 Har. 352. Paterson R. R. vs. Ackerman, 4 Zab. 536. Steward vs. Sears, 7 Vr. 175.*

(b)

*Campbell vs. Cooper, 1 Hal. 142. Cade vs. Young, 3 Hal. 369. Young vs. Stout, 5 Hal. 302.*
# Togo

59 items

        -    Report  		Togo	  July 11, 2019 
        -    Report  		Togo	  June 21, 2019 
        -    Report  		Togo	  June 20, 2019 
        -    Report  		Togo	  March 13, 2019 
        -    Report  		2018 END Wildlife Trafficking Report	  October 10, 2018 
        -    Report  		Togo	  July 19, 2018 
        -    Report  		Togo	  June 28, 2018 
        -    Report  		Togo	  May 29, 2018 
        -    Report  		Togo	  April 20, 2018 
        -    Report  		2017 END Wildlife Trafficking Report	  November 16, 2017 

previous page1…3456next page

Back to Top
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Frank C. FEEBACK and Irma Jean Wilhite.

No. 66883.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 14, 1980.

In re Frank C. Feeback and Irma Jean Wilhite, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Oua-chita. Nos. M:41470 and 38942.

Denied. Adequate remedy by review in the event of conviction.
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 01630

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

x 01630\01630_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

01630\01630_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

01630\01630_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 01630\01630_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file

01630\Cerification Statement_01630.pdf Plant certification statement

01630\Supporting Documentation\Cover Letter_Plant Id_01630.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Fiji National Day

# 									Fiji National Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

October 8, 2021

On behalf of the United States of America, I offer my congratulations to the people of Fiji as you celebrate your independence day on October 10.

On this 51st year of your independence, Fijians have shown their underlying grit and determination to overcome effects of the COVID-19 pandemic by coming together as a community. No matter the challenge, the United States will work closely with Fiji, bilaterally and multilaterally, to create a more healthy, secure, and prosperous Indo-Pacific for all.

Please accept my best wishes as you mark this special day.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsFijiOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
§ 415.202 Services of residents not in approved GME programs. ( a ) *General rules.* For services of a physician employed by a hospital who is authorized to practice only in a hospital setting and for the services of a resident who is not in any approved GME program, payment is made to the hospital on a Part B reasonable cost basis regardless of whether the services are furnished to hospital inpatients or outpatients.
( b ) *Payment.* For services described in paragraph (a) of this section, payment is made under Part B by reducing the reasonable costs of furnishing the services by the beneficiary deductible and paying 80 percent of the remaining amount. No payment is made for other costs of unapproved programs, such as administrative costs related to teaching activities of physicians.
#### § 137.40 What is a funding agreement?

A funding agreement is a legally binding and mutually enforceable written agreement that identifies the PSFAs that the Self-Governance Tribe will carry out, the funds being transferred from service unit, area and headquarters levels in support of those PSFAs and such other terms as are required or may be agreed upon pursuant to Title V.
HomeBurma

# Burma

244 items

        -    Remarks  		Under Secretary Zeya’s Remarks at a High-Level UNGA Side Event Ensuring Continued Global Solidarity with Rohingya	  Uzra ZeyaSeptember 21, 2023UNGANew York City, New York 
        -    Press Statement  		United States Announces $116 Million in Humanitarian Assistance to People in Burma, Bangladesh, and the Region	  Antony J. BlinkenSeptember 21, 2023 
        -    Remarks  		Under Secretary Zeya’s Remarks at Rohingya Genocide Remembrance Day Event	  Uzra ZeyaAugust 25, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		The Sixth Anniversary of Genocide Against Rohingya	  Antony J. BlinkenAugust 24, 2023 
        -    Special Briefing  		Digital Press Briefing with David M. Turk, U.S. Department of Energy	  August 24, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Expanding Burma Sanctions Authorities and Imposing Sanctions on Additional Jet Fuel Suppliers	  Matthew MillerAugust 23, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Transactions with Sanctioned Burmese Banks Must Be Wound Down by August 5, 2023	  Matthew MillerAugust 4, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – August 1, 2023	  Matthew MillerAugust 1, 2023Washington, D.C. 
        -    Press Statement  		Burma Military Regime’s Ongoing State of Emergency	  Matthew MillerJuly 31, 2023 
        -    Report  		2023 Investment Climate Statements: 	  July 26, 2023 

previous page12345…25next page

Back to Top
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3233

To amend titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act to repeal denial

of approval of nurse aide training programs based on reasons not associated with quality or operation.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 15, 1996

Mr. EHRLICH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Commerce,

for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case

for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the

committee concerned

A BILL

To amend titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act

to repeal denial of approval of nurse aide training programs based on reasons not associated with quality or

operation.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3233 IH

1 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF DENIAL OF APPROVAL OF NURSE

2 AIDE TRAINING PROGRAMS BASED ON REA3 SONS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH QUALITY OR

4 OPERATION.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1819(f)(2)(B) of the So6 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395i–3(f)(2)(B)) and sec7 tion 1919(f)(2)(B) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r(f)(2)(B))

8 are each amended by striking clause (iii) and the sentence

9 that follows and inserting the following:

10 ‘‘(iii) shall prohibit approval of such a

11 program that does not comply with the re12 quirements for nurse aide training and

13 competency evaluation programs and nurse

14 aide competency evaluation programs es15 tablished by the Secretary under subpara16 graph (A).’’.

17 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—(1) The amendments made

18 by this section shall apply to programs approved on or

19 after the date of the enactment of this Act.

20 (2) The Secretary of Health and Human Services

21 shall promulgate such regulations (on an interim final or

22 similar basis) as may be required to carry out the amend23 ments made by this section on a timely basis.

Æ
§ 10.24 340B ADR Panel decision reconsideration process. ( a ) Either party may initiate a reconsideration request, or the HRSA Administrator may decide to initiate the process without such a request. In the event of a reconsideration request, the 340B ADR Panel's decision is held in abeyance until such time the HRSA Administrator makes a reconsideration decision of the 340B ADR Panel decision (or in the event of a declination). A reconsideration decision will affirm or supersede a 340B ADR Panel decision.
( b ) The request for a reconsideration of the 340B ADR Panel's decision must be made to the HRSA Administrator within 30 business days of the date of the 340B ADR Panel's decision letter. ( 1 ) The request for reconsideration must include a copy of the 340B ADR Panel decision letter, and documentation indicating why a reconsideration is warranted.
( 2 ) New facts, information, legal arguments, or policy arguments may not be submitted as part of the reconsideration process in order to remain consistent with the facts that were reviewed by the 340B ADR Panel in determining their decision.
( 3 ) In the case of joint or consolidated claims, the reconsideration request must include an attestation confirming that all of the entities have agreed to be part of the reconsideration process.
( c ) The standard for review of the reconsideration request by the HRSA Administrator, or their designee, will include a review of the record, including the 340B ADR Panel decision, and a determination of whether there was an error in the 340B ADR Panel's decision. The HRSA Administrator, or designee, may consult with other HHS officials, as necessary.
( d ) The HRSA Administrator, or their designee, will make a determination based on the reconsideration request by either issuing a revised decision or declining to issue a revised decision.
( e ) The reconsideration decision letter will be effective 30 business days from issuance and serve as the final agency decision unless within 30 business days of issuance, the Secretary makes a determination that the Secretary will review the decision. The final agency decision will be binding upon the parties involved in the dispute unless invalidated by an order of a Federal court.
( f ) The OPA Director will determine any necessary corrective action, or consider whether to take enforcement action, and the form of any such action, based on the final agency decision.