alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- Under Secretary Home
- About Us
- Remarks and Releases

HomeUnder Secretary for Arms Control and International Security...Remarks and Releases – Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security

# 						Remarks and Releases – Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security					

126 items
Clear All Filters

## View collection by:

Select a Year2024202320222021

Select a MonthJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember

Select a SpeakerAntony J. BlinkenBonnie Denise JenkinsStanley L. Brown

Select a LocationAlbaniaAustraliaAustriaBelgiumBeninBosnia and HerzegovinaBulgariaCambodiaCanadaChinaCroatiaEquatorial GuineaFranceGeorgiaGermanyGhanaIranJapanKenyaKosovoLaosLatviaMontenegroMoroccoNetherlandsNew ZealandNorth KoreaNorth MacedoniaPhilippinesPolandRomaniaRussiaSerbiaSingaporeSouth AfricaSouth KoreaSwitzerlandTogoUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited KingdomVietnamZambia

Select a Release TypeDipNoteFPC BriefingFact SheetMedia NoteOther ReleasePress StatementRemarksSpecial BriefingSpecial Briefing via TelephoneTestimonyVideo Remarks

Select a Bureau/OfficeBrussels Media HubBureau of African AffairsBureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and StabilityBureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsBureau of Educational and Cultural AffairsBureau of Energy ResourcesBureau of European and Eurasian AffairsBureau of International Security and NonproliferationBureau of Near Eastern AffairsBureau of Political-Military AffairsBureau of Western Hemisphere AffairsDeputy Secretary of StateForeign Press CentersOffice of Chemical and Biological Weapons AffairsOffice of Missile, Biological, and Chemical NonproliferationOffice of Nuclear Energy, Safety, and SecurityOffice of Public LiaisonOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of StateUnder Secretary for Arms Control and International Security

          -    Media Note  		Under Secretary Jenkins Travels to Boston	  May 7, 2024 
          -    Media Note  		Under Secretary Jenkins Travels to New York	  April 30, 2024 
          -    Media Note  		Inaugural Plenary Meeting for the Political Declaration on Responsible Military Use of Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy	  March 29, 2024 
          -    Media Note  		Secretary’s International Security Advisory Board Releases Report on New Security Challenges	  March 27, 2024 
          -    Media Note  		Under Secretary Jenkins Travels to Brussels	  March 19, 2024 
          -    Remarks  		Under Secretary Jenkins’ Remarks on AI in the Evolving Global Security Environment	  Bonnie Denise JenkinsMarch 14, 2024Georgia Institute of TechnologyAtlanta, Georgia 
          -    Media Note  		Under Secretary Jenkins Travels to Atlanta, GA	  March 13, 2024 
          -    Media Note  		Under Secretary Jenkins Travels to Australia and New Zealand	  February 29, 2024 
          -    Media Note  		Under Secretary Jenkins Travels to Geneva	  February 25, 2024 
          -    Remarks  		Under Secretary Jenkins’ Remarks at the Korea Society on Deterring North Korea	  Bonnie Denise JenkinsFebruary 22, 2024New York City, New York 

123…13next page

Back to Top
HomeLocal Law Enforcement...Jose Luis Wilfredo Saravia Avila

# 									Jose Luis Wilfredo Saravia Avila							

DS Memorial

February 11, 1992

		Diplomatic Security Memorial		

**Local Law Enforcement****Year of Death: 1992**

Jose Luis Wilfredo Saravia Avila, Local Law Enforcement, was killed when a car bomb exploded outside the Chief of Mission residence in Lima, Peru, February 11, 1992. He was a captain of the Peruvian National Police and a member of the ambassador’s protective detail.

**Photo: U.S. or Peruvian Government image**

Tags

DS Local Law EnforcementPeru

Back to Top
HomeCyber Issues...Cyber Issues

# Cyber Issues

92 items

        -    		Cybercrime	   
        -    		Cyber Sanctions	   

previous page1…8910

Back to Top
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.4



                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



The Board of Directors
Castle Energy Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
33-88760) on Form S-8 of Castle Energy Corporation of our report dated November
25, 1997, relating to the consolidated balance sheet of Castle Energy
Corporation and subsidiaries as of September 30, 1997, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for
the year ended September 30, 1997, which report appears in the September 30,
1997, annual report on Form 10-K of Castle Energy Corporation.




                                    KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

Houston, Texas
December 2, 1997
§ 455.202 Limitation on contractor liability. ( a ) A program contractor, a person, or an entity employed by, or having a fiduciary relationship with, or who furnishes professional services to a program contractor will not be held to have violated any criminal law and will not be held liable in any civil action, under any law of the United States or of any State (or political subdivision thereof), by reason of the performance of any duty, function, or activity required or authorized under this subpart or under a valid contract entered into under this subpart, provided due care was exercised in that performance and the contractor has a contract with CMS under this subpart.
( b ) CMS pays a contractor, a person, or an entity described in paragraph (a) of this section, or anyone who furnishes legal counsel or services to a contractor or person, a sum equal to the reasonable amount of the expenses, as determined by CMS, incurred in connection with the defense of a suit, action, or proceeding, if the following conditions are met: ( 1 ) The suit, action, or proceeding was brought against the contractor, person or entity by a third party and relates to the contractor's, person's or entity's performance of any duty, function, or activity under a contract entered into with CMS under this subpart.
( 2 ) The funds are available.
( 3 ) The expenses are otherwise allowable under the terms of the contract.
SUBSIDIARIES OF MERRIMAC INDUSTRIES, INC. (the "Company")


                                                              Percentage owned
           NAME                Jurisdiction of Organization    by the Company  
           ----                ----------------------------    ----------------
 1.  Merrimac International,          Virgin Islands,
     Inc., FSC                            U.S.A.                     100%

 2.  508790 N.B. Inc.                  Province of                   100%
                                   New Brunswick, Canada
 
 3.  Filtran Microcircuits Inc.        Province of                   100%
                                   New Brunswick, Canada 

 4.  Industrias Merrimac
     Incorporada, S.A.                   Costa Rica                  100%




                                      -1-
#### John J. SCUSSEL and Paul Wolf, Appellants, v. David BALTER, Appellee.

No. 78-997.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 8, 1980.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 4, 1980.

*1228James 0. Nelson, Miami, for appellants.

Bailey & Dawes and Guy B. Bailey, Jr., Miami, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, HUBBART and SCHWARTZ, JJ.

SCHWARTZ, Judge.

This appeal is from a judgment for compensatory and punitive damages entered pursuant to a jury verdict finding that the appellant John Scussel,1 one of the defendants below, had maliciously interfered with an advantageous business relationship between the plaintiff David Balter and Paul Wolf.2 Scussel claims the right to the entry of judgment in his favor on two separate grounds. We find no merit in either and affirm.

Scussel first contends that he could not be found to have tortiously interfered with the Balter-Wolf relationship because there was no showing that Wolf violated any specific contractual obligation he owed Balter. We need not determine whether this was in fact the case. This is so because an action lies for intentional interference with a business expectancy which arises even from an unenforceable agreement when, as the jury could find in this case, the understanding would have been complied with if the defendant had not improperly intervened. *United Yacht Brokers, Inc. v. Gillespie,*377 So.2d 668 (Fla.1979), and cases cited; *John B. Reid & Associates, Inc. v. Jimenez,*181 So.2d 575 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965).

Scussel secondly suggests that his actions were protected by the privilege afforded an agent3 who, upon request, gives “honest advice” that it is in his principal’s best interests to breach an existing relationship. See 4 Restatement (Second) of Torts § 772(b) (1979). We find, however, that the showings in the record of Scussel’s active involvement in Wolf’s affairs and of his personal motivations and ulterior purposes *1229for securing Wolfs withdrawal from his undertaking with Balter demonstrate the inapplicability of this principle. See *London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Horn,*206 Ill. 493, 69 N.E. 526 (1903); *Morgan v. Andrews,*107 Mich. 33, 64 N.W. 869 (1895); W. Prosser, Law of Torts § 129 text and authorities at 944, nn. 5-7 (4th ed. 1971).

Affirmed.

1

. We have considered other aspects of the action, as they relate to other defendants, in *Balter v. Pan American Bank of Hialeah,*383 So.2d 256 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); *Balter v. Frank,*386 So.2d 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); and *Ethyl Corp. v. Balter,*386 So.2d 1220 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

2

. The jury also found and judgment was entered against Wolf. See *Ethyl Corp. v. Balter,*supra, note 5. While Wolf initially joined in the notice of appeal in this case, he has since abandoned the appeal and the judgment against him is therefore affirmed without further discussion.

3

.Scussel improperly represented himself as Wolfs attorney and was disciplined for doing so by the supreme court in *Florida Bar v. Scussel,*240 So.2d 153 (Fla.1970).
#### John Hilton LAMBETH, alias v. STATE.

1 Div. 902.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

Nov. 20, 1979.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 18, 1979.

BOWEN W. SIMMONS, Retired Circuit Judge.

Appellant’s motion for a rehearing has merit and is granted. The opinion and judgment of affirmance entered following remand by the Supreme Court is vacated and held for naught. We now address issues pretermitted in the original opinion.

At the close of the state’s evidence at nisi prius the defendant moved to exclude the evidence because inter alia the prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations applying to misdemeanors as here involved. § 15-3-2, Code of Alabama *9261975. The evidence shows without dispute that the alleged assault and battery, charged in the indictment that was returned on July 1,1977, occurred on April 22, 1976. Thus, it appears that more than twelve months had elapsed between the date of the alleged offense (a misdemeanor) and the return of the indictment. The prosecution was barred. *Harris v. State,*54 Ala.App. 10, 304 So.2d 252; *Calvert v. State,*26 Ala.App. 189, 155 So. 389. Defendants in criminal cases need not specially plead the limitation statute. *Harris*and *Calvert,*supra. The motion to exclude properly raised the issue. There is no evidence in the record that interdicts or suspends the operation of the statute of limitations, supra. The judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded.

We find that the trial court gave a very elaborate and comprehensive oral charge that adequately covered applicable law. The multiple refused written charges were either covered by this oral charge, were abstract, or were incorrect statements of law. § 12-16-13, Code of Alabama 1975; *Barnes v. State,*Ala.Cr.App., 361 So.2d 390. We are unwilling to say that the refusal of any charge constituted error.

We reverse and remand because of the error at nisi prius in refusing to exclude the evidence.

The foregoing opinion was prepared by the Honorable BOWEN W. SIMMONS, a retired Circuit Judge, serving as a Judge of this Court, under the provisions of § 6.10, of the Judicial Article (Constitutional Amendment No. 328); his opinion is hereby adopted as that of the Court.

APPLICATION FOR REHEARING GRANTED.

REVERSED AND REMANDED

All the Judges concur.
§ 435.126 Individuals eligible as qualified disabled and working individuals. ( a ) *Basis.* This section implements sections 1902(a)(10)(E)(ii) and 1905(s) of the Act.
( b ) *Eligibility.* The agency must provide medical assistance to individuals who meet all of the following: ( 1 ) Are entitled to Medicare Part A based on the eligibility requirements set forth in § 406.20(c) of this chapter.
( 2 ) Have income, subject to paragraphs (b)(2)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section, that is less than or equal to 200 percent of the federal poverty level. ( i ) During a transition month (as defined in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section), any income attributable to a cost of living adjustment in Social Security retirement, survivors, or disability benefits does not count in determining an individual's income.
( ii ) A transition month is any month of the year beginning when the cost of living adjustment takes effect, through the month following the month of publication of the revised official poverty level.
( 3 ) Have resources that do not exceed twice the SSI resource standard described in section 1613 of the Act.
( c ) *Scope.* Medical assistance included in paragraph (b) of this section is coverage of the Part A premium.
[87 FR 66511, Nov. 3, 2022]
Jump to main content.

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)

Recent Additions |         Contact Us**Search:**All         EPAThis         Area

    - You are here:  EPA Home
    - Air
    - Indoor Air Quality
    - Publications
    - Indoor Air Pollution: An Introduction for Health Professionals

----

# Indoor Air Pollution: An Introduction for Health Professionals 

|  |
|--|
HomeReports – U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy...Optimizing Engagement: Research, Evaluation, and Learning in Public Diplomacy (2018)

# 									Optimizing Engagement: Research, Evaluation, and Learning in Public Diplomacy (2018)							

ACPD Special Report

May 1, 2018

In February 2018, the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy organized a Research, Evaluation, and Learning Summit at the U.S. Institute of Peace to highlight best practices and identify key gaps and areas for improvement in efforts to continually assess, learn, and improve the effectiveness of public diplomacy programs. By bringing together members of the State Department’s research and evaluation community with experts from the inter-agency and the private sector, the Summit advanced our mission to measure and design impactful public engagement efforts. Coinciding with the Summit, ACPD commissioned M&C Saatchi World Services to conduct an audit of global best practices in assessing public diplomacy programs, the results of which are included in this report. Put simply, this field-defining effort is a comprehensive accounting of best practices from around the world. Drawing upon 28 detailed case studies, it provides in-depth analysis of the research and assessment practices from 17 countries.

The Commission invites you to explore this report in great depth. The findings are both instructive for research and assessment professionals, but also aspirational for those overseeing public diplomacy campaigns, offices, and operations. The report’s Foreword includes a set of recommendations for improving research and assessment efforts supporting U.S. government public diplomacy activities, including:
        - Consolidate existing evaluation units across the R family into a single, cohesive unit able to coordinate and synchronize all public diplomacy research and assessment efforts;
        - Establish a strategic framework to guide the structure and decision-making processes of public diplomacy research and evaluation operations;
        - Consolidate existing knowledge management platforms into a single user and mobile friendly system that is streamlined, adaptable, and reduces the burden for diplomats in the field;
        - Create ACPD’s Research and Assessment Subcommittee to provide external expertise to help inform ongoing research and assessment activities.

Download the report:
Download Report						 [60 MB]

Tags

Advisory CommitteePublic DiplomacyU.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy

Back to Top
BATCH PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR NCS MANUFACTURING

- Production Flows

NCS=New Chemical Substance Cleaning Flows

Unit Operation 1

M

I

Unit Operation 3

Unit Operation 

J

4

I

Unit Operation 5

M

Unit Operation 6

Unit Operation 7

-t

lSteam I

lffirF- 1

l(50'c ) |

.1,

Unit Operation 2

E_

2. (loss to environment of NCS-cleaning operation

heat 25 drums N1-(6-aminohexyl)-1,6-hexanediame to 60"C

or 4760 kg/batch

transfer drums to Reactor L)x

25 drums/batch containg total 25 kg residual to offsite

rum reclaimer

.2 drums (2-chloromethyl)-oxirane** or

76 kgs (2-chloromethyl)-oxirane pr batch added to Reactor 1

steam heating fiacketed reactor) (80"C)

**2 drums containg total 1 kg residual to off-site drum reclaimer

50% sodium hydroxide: 5542ke/batch to Reactor lfrom Tank

Deionized water: 5976kg/batch to Reactor lfrom Tank

Steam heat Reactor 1 to 80"C

Purge Reactor Headspace with Nitrogen after addition ( 50 kgs N2)

Seal Reactor after Nitrogen Purge

Cool Reactor 1 with cooling water to 40"C

Carbon disulfide (tank): 4018 kglbatch; 609 kg/day annualized

Reactor pressure controlled by addition rate of Carbon Disulfide

max pressure <20 psi)

nt reactor through caustic scrubber

nitrogen purge: L5 kg/batch;

inerization to 55 gallon drums (259 kg/drum)

inerization to 330 gallon plastic totes (1555 kg/tote)

,844kglbatch product: L0800 kglbatch as 100% NCS

1. (loss to environment of NCS)-cleaning operation

kg water/batch containing 1.45 kglbatch NCS (as 100% NCS)

on-site waste water treatment

disposal: 0.02 ke/batch NCS (as 100%)to offsite landfill

ng operations are per batch operations

100 kg water/batch and 2.5 kg NCS as 100%

To on site waste water treatment
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 28, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-30782

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LINDA G. HIMEL,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:03-CR-20046-1

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

Before REAVLEY, WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Linda G. Himel appeals the 24-month sentence imposed

following her guilty-plea conviction of harboring illegal aliens.

Himel argues for the first time on appeal that the district court

erred by not awarding her an additional one-level reduction for

acceptance of responsibility, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b). A

review of the record shows that the prerequisites for a

§ 3E1.1(b) reduction were not satisfied in this case. See

§ 3E1.1(b). Accordingly, the district court did not plainly err
No. 05-30782

-2-

by refusing to award the reduction. See United States v.

Medina-Anicacio, 325 F.3d 638, 647 (5th Cir. 2003). 

Himel also argues that the district court based its sentence

on an improper factual finding and that the sentence imposed was

unreasonable. Himel’s argument regarding the erroneous factual

finding is without merit. The record reflects that the district

court acknowledged and corrected its interpretation of Himel’s

testimony. The record further reflects that the initial,

erroneous finding was not a factor in the district court’s

decision to sentence Himel outside of the guideline range. 

The district court followed the proper procedure for

imposing a non-guideline sentence. See United States v. Smith,

440 F.3d 704, 707-09 (5th Cir. 2006). Additionally, the district

court’s upward deviation was supported by proper 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) factors. Id. at 710. Himel has not shown that the

six-month deviation from the advisory guideline range was

unreasonable. Id. Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Readout of Virtual Ministerial Meeting of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate

# 									Readout of Virtual Ministerial Meeting of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

March 14, 2023

Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry today hosted a virtual Ministerial meeting of the Major Economies Forum (MEF) on energy and climate in preparation for a MEF leaders meeting to be convened in April by President Biden.  The discussion focused on further actions the major economies can take individually and jointly to accelerate efforts toward keeping a 1.5-degree Celsius limit on warming within reach.  Secretary Kerry introduced ideas to help decarbonize energy, end deforestation, reduce non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions, and advance carbon management technologies.  Secretary Kerry also took the opportunity to underscore the importance of ongoing efforts to evolve the multilateral development bank system to better address global challenges, including accelerating global climate action.  Participants included ministers and other senior officials from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the People’s Republic of China, Egypt, the European Commission, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Türkiye, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, as well as senior representatives from the office of the United Nations Secretary-General.

Tags

ArgentinaAustraliaBrazilBureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific AffairsCanadaChinaClimate and EnvironmentEgyptEnergyFranceGermanyIndiaIndonesiaItalyJapanMexicoOffice of the SpokespersonSaudi ArabiaSouth KoreaTurkeyUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom

Back to Top