alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1203.21 Response to the application for award. ( a ) Agency counsel must file a response within 30 days after service of an application for award of fees and other expenses except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. In the response, agency counsel must explain any objections to the award requested and identify the facts relied upon to support the objections. If any of the alleged facts are not already in the record of the underlying adversary adjudication, agency counsel must include with the response either supporting affidavits or a request for further proceedings under § 1203.25.
( b ) If agency counsel and the applicant believe that the issues in the application for award can be settled, they may jointly file a statement of their intent to negotiate a settlement. The filing of this statement will extend the time for filing a response for an additional 30 days. Upon request by agency counsel and the applicant, the adjudicative officer may grant for good cause further time extensions.
( c ) Agency counsel may request that the adjudicative officer extend the time period for filing a response. If agency counsel does not respond or otherwise does not contest or settle the application for award within the 30-day period or the extended time period, the adjudicative officer may make an award of fees and other expenses upon a satisfactory showing of entitlement by the applicant.
§ 1254.4 Requirements for use of a credit score. ( a ) *Enterprise use of a credit score.* An Enterprise is not required to use a credit score for any business purpose. However, if an Enterprise conditions its purchase of a mortgage on the provision of a credit score for the borrower: ( 1 ) The credit score must be derived from a credit score model that has been approved by the Enterprise in accordance with this part; and
( 2 ) The Enterprise must provide for the use of the credit score by any automated underwriting system that uses a credit score and any other procedures and systems used by the Enterprise that use a credit score for mortgage purchases.
( b ) *Replacement of credit score model.* An Enterprise may replace any credit score model then in use after a new credit score model has been approved in accordance with this part.
( c ) *No right to continuing use.* Enterprise use of a particular credit score model does not create any right to or expectation of continuing, future, or permanent use of that credit score model by an Enterprise.
§ 1075.102 Fund administrator. ( a ) *In general.* There is established the position of Civil Penalty Fund Administrator (Fund Administrator). The Fund Administrator will report to the Chief Financial Officer. The Chief Financial Officer may, to the extent permitted by applicable law, relieve the Fund Administrator of the duties of that position without notice, without cause, and prior to the naming of a successor Fund Administrator.
( b ) *Powers and duties.* The Fund Administrator will have the powers and duties assigned to that official in this part.
( c ) *Interpretation of these regulations.* ( 1 ) On its own initiative or at the Fund Administrator's request, the Civil Penalty Fund Governance Board may advise or direct the Fund Administrator on the administration of the Civil Penalty Fund, including regarding the interpretation of this part and its application to particular facts and circumstances.
( 2 ) The Fund Administrator must follow any written directions that the Civil Penalty Fund Governance Board provides pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
( d ) *Unavailability of the Fund Administrator.* If there is no Fund Administrator or if the Fund Administrator is otherwise unavailable, the Chief Financial Officer will perform the functions and duties of the Fund Administrator.
42435.

#### SUTKER et al. v. PENNSYLVANIA INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

Argued November 9, 1966

Decided November 15, 1966.

*Kravitch & Hendrix, Aaron Kravitch, Bart E. Shea,*for appellants.

*Bramen, Clark & Hester, Perry Bramen, Richardson, Doremus & Karsman, W. Ward Newton,*for appellees.

Eberhardt, Judge.

This action upon an insurance contract was amended by adding three counts seeking, inter alia, a reformation of the contract to include a coverage for loss sustained by the insured from the negligent act of an uninsured motorist. The petition, as thus amended, was dismissed upon general demurrer.

The amendment of the petition, seeking reformation of the contract, converted the action from one at law to one in equity, and hence the Supreme Court rather than the Court of Appeals, has jurisdiction of the appeal. Art. VI, Sec. II, Par. IV, Constitution of 1945 *(Code Ann.*§ 2-3704); *American Associated Companies v. Vaughan,*210 Ga. 141, 144 (1) (78 SE2d 43); *Benton v. Benton,*164 Ga. 541 (139 SE 68); *Dixie Belle Mills v. Specialty Machine Co.,*103 Ga. App. 478 (2) (120 SE2d 54). “The jurisdiction of [the Supreme Court] is not limited to good cases in equity, but will embrace both good and bad equity cases.” Consequently, “even though [the petition, as amended] may not state a valid and subsisting cause of action for [equitable] relief,” it is within that court’s jurisdiction. *O’Callaghan v. Bank of Eastman,*180 Ga. 812, 818 (180 SE 847). The appeal is accordingly

*Transferred to the Supreme Court.*

*Bell, P. J., and Jordan, J., concur.*
#### § 1248.8 *De minimis* exception.

FHFA may exclude from the requirements of this part covered programs, policies, or practices of an Enterprise as long as those covered programs, policies, or practices do not affect more than $5 billion in unpaid principal balance of that Enterprises' TBA-eligible MBS.
HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2022 Fiscal Transparency Report…Vietnam

# 					2022 Fiscal Transparency Report: Vietnam			

 In this section										

                -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Vietnam 

## Government-by-Government Assessments: Vietnam

During the review period, the government made its executive budget proposal and enacted budget accessible to the public, including online, but the government did not publish its end-of-year report within a reasonable period.  Information on debt obligations of state-owned enterprises was not publicly available.  Publicly available budget documents provided a fairly complete picture of the government’s planned expenditures and revenue streams, including natural resource revenues, but the government maintained non-transparent off-budget accounts.  Budget information was considered generally reliable, although the government was still working to adopt internationally accepted accounting standards.  While the supreme audit institution lacked independence that met international standards, it did review the government’s accounts, made its report publicly available and followed up on its findings.  The government specified in law or regulation and appeared to follow in practice the criteria and procedures for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses.  Basic information on natural resource extraction awards was not always publicly available.

Vietnam’s fiscal transparency would be improved by:

- Publishing its end-of-year budget report within a reasonable period;
- Publicizing information on state-owned enterprise debt obligations;
- Eliminating off-budget accounts or subjecting them to adequate audit and oversight;
- Ensuring the supreme audit institution meets international standards of independence; and
- Publicizing basic information on natural resource extraction awards.

## View report by:

### On This Page

                    -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Vietnam 

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsBureau of Economic and Business AffairsDivision for International Finance and DevelopmentVietnam

Back to Top

                - White House
                - USA.gov
                - Office of the Inspector General
                - Archives
                - Contact Us

follow us
FacebookXInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery

              - Privacy Policy
              - Accessibility Statement
              - Copyright Information
              - FOIA
              - No FEAR Act

## U.S. Department *of* State

#### The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future
§ 74.20 What is a verification examination and what will CVE examine? ( a ) *General.* A verification examination is an investigation by CVE officials, which verifies the accuracy of any statement or information provided as part of the VIP Verification application process. Thus, examiners may verify that the concern currently meets the eligibility requirements, and that it met such requirements at the time of its application or its most recent size recertification. An examination may be conducted on a random, unannounced basis, or upon receipt of specific and credible information alleging that a participant no longer meets eligibility requirements.
( b ) *Scope of examination.* CVE may conduct the examination at one or all of the participant's offices or work sites. CVE will determine the location(s) of the examination. CVE may review any information related to the concern's eligibility requirements including, but not limited to, documentation related to the legal structure, ownership, and control. Examiners may review any or all of the organizing documents, financial documents, and publicly available information as well as any information identified in § 74.12.
[83 FR 48232, Sept. 24, 2018]
- State of--

North Dakota 

Office of the Governor 

Jack Dalrymple 

Governor 

Mr. Shaun McGrath 

Regional Administrator 

Region 8 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1595 Wynkoop St. 

Denver, Colorado 80202- 1129 

Dear Mr. McGrath: 

June 14, 2013 

The enclosed North Dakota 1422 UIC program application for Class VI primacy 

enforcement responsibility is hereby formally submitted for USEP A approval. The 

application contains all the elements required for submission under 40 CFR Part 145.22. 

The State of North Dakota has the statutory authority, the manpower, and the 

expertise through the North Dakota Industrial Commission, Department of Mineral 

Resources, Oil and Gas Division to effectively implement the Class VI Underground 

Injection Control program. 

I hereby request an expedited EPA review and approval of the North Dakota 

Class VI primacy application. 

600 E Boulevard Ave. • Bismarck, ND 58505-0001 • Phone: 701.328.2200 • Fax: 701.328.2205 • governor.nd.gov
§ 21.48 Severance of service-connection—reduction to noncompensable degree. When a rating action is taken which proposes severance of service-connection or reduction to a noncompensable degree, the provisions of the following paragraphs will govern the veteran's entitlement to rehabilitation and employment assistance under 38 U.S.C. Chapter 31. ( a ) *Applicant.* If the veteran is an applicant for rehabilitation or employment assistance when the proposed rating action is taken, all processes respecting determination of entitlement or induction into training shall be immediately suspended. In no event shall any veteran be inducted into a rehabilitation program or provided employment assistance during the interim periods provided in § 3.105 (d) and (e) of this title. If the proposed rating action becomes final, the application will be denied. See also § 21.50 as to initial evaluation. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3104)
( b ) *Reduction while in a rehabilitation program.* If the proposed rating action is taken while the veteran is in a rehabilitation program and results in a reduction to a noncompensable rating of his or her disability, the veteran may be retained in the program until the completion of the program, except if “discontinued” under § 21.198 he or she may not reenter. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3103)
( c ) *Severance while in a rehabilitation program.* If the proposed rating action is taken while the veteran is in a rehabilitation program and results in severance of the service-connection of his or her disability, rehabilitation will be terminated effective as of the last day of the month in which severance of service-connection becomes final.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3103)
# Official Journal C 90/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.090.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 90 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5627 March 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.090.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 90

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5627 March 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Council |
| 2013/C 090/01 | Common Military List of the European Union | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

2013/C 090/01

Common Military List of the European Union

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 32  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PUSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended January 31, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report fairly presents in all material respect the financial condition and results of operations of Vitro Diagnostics, Inc.   Date:  March 15, 2011 By: ____/s/ James R. Musick Name:  James R. Musick Title: President, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer Vitro Diagnostics, Inc.
§ 1249.12 Law governing rights and obligations of United States, Federal Reserve Banks, and Enterprises; rights of any person against United States, Federal Reserve Banks, and Enterprises; law governing other interests. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the following rights and obligations are governed solely by the book-entry regulations contained in this part, the Securities Documentation, and Federal Reserve Bank Operating Circulars (but not including any choice of law provisions in the Securities Documentation to the extent such provisions conflict with the Book-entry regulations contained in this part): ( 1 ) The rights and obligations of an Enterprise and the Federal Reserve Banks with respect to: ( i ) A Book-entry Enterprise Security or Security Entitlement; and
( ii ) The operation of the Book-entry System as it applies to Enterprise Securities; and
( 2 ) The rights of any Person, including a Participant, against an Enterprise and the Federal Reserve Banks with respect to: ( i ) A Book-entry Enterprise Security or Security Entitlement; and
( ii ) The operation of the Book-entry System as it applies to Enterprise Securities;
( b ) A security interest in a Security Entitlement that is in favor of a Federal Reserve Bank from a Participant and that is not recorded on the books of a Federal Reserve Bank pursuant to § 1249.13(c)(1), is governed by the law (not including the conflict-of-law rules) of the jurisdiction where the head office of the Federal Reserve Bank maintaining the Participant's Securities Account is located. A security interest in a Security Entitlement that is in favor of a Federal Reserve Bank from a Person that is not a Participant, and that is not recorded on the books of a Federal Reserve Bank pursuant to § 1249.13(c)(1), is governed by the law determined in the manner specified in paragraph (d) of this section.
( c ) If the jurisdiction specified in the first sentence of paragraph (b) of this section is a State that has not adopted Revised Article 8, then the law specified in paragraph (b) of this section shall be the law of that State as though Revised Article 8 had been adopted by that State.
( d ) To the extent not otherwise inconsistent with this part, and notwithstanding any provision in the Securities Documentation setting forth a choice of law, the provisions set forth in 31 CFR 357.11 regarding law governing other interests apply and shall be read as though modified to effectuate the application of 31 CFR 357.11 to the Enterprises.
CIVIL AVIATION BUREAU

MINISTRY OF LAND, INFRASTRUCTURE, 

TRANSPORT AND TOURISM

2-1-3, Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku

Tokyo, 100-8918, JAPAN

TEL: +81-3-5253-8707, FAX: +81-3-5253-1656

February 24, 2012

Nippon Cargo Airlines Co.,Ltd.

Business Strategy & International Affairs

Second International Section 

 Aviation Industry Division

Aviation Network Department

 Civil Aviation Bureau

 Ministry of Land Infrastructure Transport and Tourism

 

Approval cases of 3rd countries charter operation by USA carriers

Attached list shows the result of approval cases toward USA carriers’ application for the 3

rd countries 

charter operation since Sep 2012.
Charter Result from SEP2011to JAN 2012

Operating Carrier Date FLT NO. Point in Japan 3rd country Origin Transit point Destination Air Craft Type Pax Cargo(t) Description Charter Type

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/9/16 GTI8924 Narita Germany Frankfurt Karaganda Narita B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/9/19 GTI8925 Narita Germany Frankfurt Karaganda Narita B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/9/23 GTI8934 Narita Germany Frankfurt Karaganda Narita B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/9/26 GTI8936 Kansai Germany Frankfurt Karaganda Kansai B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

SOUTHERN AIR,INC 2011/9/28 SOO519 Kagoshima Canada Calgary Anchorage Kagoshima B747F 90 Live horse SCHORNO AGRI-BUSINESS OWN

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/9/29 GTI8934 Narita Germany Frankfurt Karaganda Narita B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/10/6 GTI8936 Kansai Germany Frankfurt Karaganda Kansai B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/10/8 GTI8934 Narita Germany Frankfurt Karaganda Narita B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/10/13 GTI8934 Narita Germany Frankfurt Karaganda Narita B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/10/30 GTI8090 Narita The Netherland Amsterdam Karaganda Narita B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/11/20 GTI8160 Narita The Netherland Amsterdam Karaganda Narita B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

ATLAS AIR INC 2011/11/25 GTI8090 Narita The Netherland Amsterdam Karaganda Narita B747F 90 Cigarette PHILIP MORRIS OWN

SOUTHERN AIR,INC 2012/1/24 SOO519 Kagoshima Canada Calgary Anchorage Kagoshima B747F 90 Live horse Willjill Farms INC. OWN

SOUTHERN AIR,INC 2012/1/31 SOO519 Kitakyushu Canada Calgary Anchorage Kitakyushu B747F 90 Live horse HEAARTLAND LIVESTOCK SERVICE OWN

1/1
HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2022 Fiscal Transparency Report…Zambia

# 					2022 Fiscal Transparency Report: Zambia			

 In this section										

                -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Zambia 

## Government-by-Government Assessments: Zambia

During the review period, the government made significant progress by making its debt obligations, including overall state-owned enterprise debt, publicly available and updated within a reasonable period.  The government also made significant progress by including financial allocations to and earnings from major state-owned enterprises in the budget.  The government made its executive budget proposal, enacted budget, and end-of-year report accessible to the public, including online.  Publicly available budget documents provided a substantially complete picture of the government’s planned expenditures and revenue streams, including natural resource revenues.  Debt information for some major state-owned enterprises remained limited.  Actual revenues and expenditures did not reasonably correspond to those in the enacted budget.  While the government did not issue a revised or supplementary budget, it sought and obtained retroactive legislative approval for excess expenditures.  The supreme audit institution did not meet international standards of independence but did review the government’s accounts and made its report publicly available within a reasonable period.  The government specified in law or regulation but did not appear to always follow in practice the criteria and procedures for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses.  The government published basic information on natural resource extraction awards.

Zambia’s fiscal transparency would be improved by:

- Publishing the debt holdings of all major state-owned enterprises;
- Ensuring actual revenues and expenditures reasonably correspond to those in the enacted budget;
- Producing and publicly issuing revised budget estimates or passing a supplementary budget when actual revenues or expenditures do not reasonably correspond to those in the enacted budget;
- Ensuring the supreme audit institution meets international standards of independence; and
- Following laws and regulations for awarding natural resource licenses in practice.

## View report by:

### On This Page

                    -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Zambia 

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsBureau of Economic and Business AffairsDivision for International Finance and DevelopmentZambia

Back to Top

                - White House
                - USA.gov
                - Office of the Inspector General
                - Archives
                - Contact Us

follow us
FacebookXInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery

              - Privacy Policy
              - Accessibility Statement
              - Copyright Information
              - FOIA
              - No FEAR Act

## U.S. Department *of* State

#### The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future
§ 52d.2 Definitions. ( a ) *Act* means the Public Health Service Act, as amended.
( b ) *Director, NCI,* means the Director of the National Cancer Institute and any other officer or employee of said Institute to whom the authority involved has been delegated.
( c ) [Reserved]
( d ) *Board* means the National Cancer Advisory Board established by section 407 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 286b).
( e ) *Affiliated teaching hospital* means a hospital which, although not owned by such school, has a written agreement with a school of medicine, osteopathy, dentistry, or public health eligible for assistance under this part, providing for effective control by the school of the teaching in the hospital.
( f ) *Specialized cancer institute* means an institution which has as its primary mission the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of cancer.
[45 FR 12247, Feb. 25, 1980; 45 FR 20096, Mar. 27, 1980, as amended at 47 FR 53012, Nov. 24, 1982]