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

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 217 (Wednesday, November 10, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 69154]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28317]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Land Release for Long Island MacArthur Airport

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice, request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration is requesting public 
comment on the Long Island MacArthur Airport (ISP), Ronkonkoma, New 
York, notice of proposed release from aeronautical use of approximately 
17.69 acres of airport property, to allow for non-aeronautical 
development.
    The parcel is located on the northeast corner of the Long Island 
MacArthur Airport. The tract currently consists of 17.69 acres of land 
and it is currently vacant. The requested release is for the purpose of 
permitting the airport owner to sell and convey title of 17.62 acres 
for use by the Long Island Rail Road.
    Documents reflecting the Sponsor's request are available, by 
appointment only, for inspection at the Airport Managers office and the 
FAA New York Airport District Office.

DATES: Comments must be received by December 10, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered to 
the FAA at the following address: John R. Dermody, Manager, FAA New 
York Airports District Office, 600 Old Country Road, Suite 446, Garden 
City, New York 11530. In addition, a copy of any comments submitted to 
the FAA must be mailed or delivered to Ms. Teresa Rizzuto, Airport 
Manager, at the following address: 100 Arrival Avenue Ronkonkoma, NY. 
11799-7398.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John R. Dermody, Manager, New York 
Airports District Office, 600 Old Country Road, Suite 446, Garden City, 
New York 11530; telephone (516) 227-3803; FAX (516) 227-3813; e-mail 
John. Dermody@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 125 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation 
Investment and Reform Act for the 1st Century (AIR21) requires the FAA 
to provide an opportunity for public notice and comment before the 
Secretary may waive a sponsor's Federal obligation to use certain 
airport land for aeronautical use.

    Issued in Garden City, New York on November 2, 2010.
John R. Dermody,
Manager, New York Airports District Office, Eastern Region.
[FR Doc. 2010-28317 Filed 11-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-22-00234-CV

LANCE HOWERTON, Appellant

V.

AMERICAN PRECISION AMMUNITION,

LLC, A/K/A PRECISION AMMUNITION 

AND MATTHEW CAMPBELL, Appellees

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 415th District 

Court

of Parker County (CV-21-0594)

April 13, 2023

Memorandum Opinion by Justice 

Birdwell

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was error in the trial court’s order. It is ordered that the order of the trial court is 

reversed. We render judgment dismissing the fraud and DTPA claims against Lance 

Howerton and dismissing the defamation claims based on his actions as a city 

employee and remand the case to the trial court.

It is further ordered that Appellees American Precision Ammunition, LLC, 

a/k/a Precision Ammunition and Matthew Campbell shall pay all costs of this appeal, 

for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Wade Birdwell

 Justice Wade Birdwell
#### § 38.785 Recordkeeping.

Grantees must ensure that records are maintained in accordance with 2 CFR 200.333. Grantees must produce such records at VA's request.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(d), 2400 note and 2 CFR 200.333)
§ 1209.57 Judicial review; no automatic stay. ( a ) *Judicial review.* Judicial review of any final order of the Director shall be exclusively as provided by section 1374 of the Safety and Soundness Act (12 U.S.C. 4634).
( b ) *No automatic stay.* Commencement of proceedings for judicial review of a final decision and order of the Director may not, unless specifically ordered by the Director or a reviewing court, operate as a stay of any order issued by the Director. The Director may, in his or her discretion and on such terms as he finds just, stay the effectiveness of all or any part of an order of the Director pending a final decision on a petition for review of that order.
§ 1403.7 Request for amendment to record. ( a ) If, after disclosure of the requested information, an individual believes that the record is not accurate, relevant, timely, or complete, that person may request in writing that the record be amended. Such a request shall be submitted to the Privacy Act Officer and shall identify the system of records and the record or information therein, a brief description of the material requested to be changed, the requested change or changes, and the reason for such change or changes.
( b ) The Privacy Act Officer shall acknowledge receipt of the request within 10 days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays) and, if a determination has not been made, advise the individual when that person may expect to be advised of action taken on the request. The acknowledgment may contain a request for additional information needed to make a determination.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, March 10, 2016. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, March 10, 2016 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A16I0140. ATLANTIC SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. NANCY LEWIS et al. . Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 15CV1205
# Official Journal C 108A/12 M

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 108A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5012 May 2007 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 108A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5012 May 2007

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | |
| 2007/C 108A/01 | NOTICE TO READERS | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

2007/C 108A/01

NOTICE TO READERS

1

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | Council |
| 2007/C 108A/02 | Open competition CONS/AD/427 — Organised by the Council — in the field of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) | 7 |

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

Council

2007/C 108A/02

Open competition CONS/AD/427 — Organised by the Council — in the field of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP)

7

---

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

EN
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          43,574
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             156
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 5,039
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    122,871
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          90,237
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            91,020
<LOANS>                                        830,021
<ALLOWANCE>                                     10,243
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,130,742
<DEPOSITS>                                     971,279
<SHORT-TERM>                                    37,960
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             10,310
<LONG-TERM>                                      9,217
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,017
<OTHER-SE>                                      94,960
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,130,742
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 53,591
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                9,320
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   988
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                63,899
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              27,273
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              28,781
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           35,118
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,289
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   8
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 22,353
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 15,657
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      15,657
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,680
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.53
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.87
<LOANS-NON>                                     10,858
<LOANS-PAST>                                        69
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 8,921
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      735
<RECOVERIES>                                       182
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               10,243
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            10,243
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
§ 75.115 Risk analysis. If a data breach involving sensitive personal information that is processed or maintained by VA occurs and the Secretary has not determined under § 75.114 that an accelerated response is appropriate, the Secretary shall ensure that, as soon as possible after the data breach, a non-VA entity with relevant expertise in data breach assessment and risk analysis or VA's Office of Inspector General conducts an independent risk analysis of the data breach. The preparation of the risk analysis may include data mining if necessary for the development of relevant information. The risk analysis shall include a finding with supporting rationale concerning whether the circumstances create a reasonable risk that sensitive personal information potentially may be misused. If the risk analysis concludes that the data breach presents a reasonable risk for the potential misuse of sensitive personal information, the risk analysis must also contain operational recommendations for responding to the data breach. Each risk analysis, regardless of findings and operational recommendations, shall also address all relevant information concerning the data breach, including the following: ( a ) Nature of the event (loss, theft, unauthorized access).
( b ) Description of the event, including: ( 1 ) Date of occurrence;
( 2 ) Data elements involved, including any personally identifiable information, such as full name, social security number, date of birth, home address, account number, disability code;
( 3 ) Number of individuals affected or potentially affected;
( 4 ) Individuals or groups affected or potentially affected;
( 5 ) Ease of logical data access to the lost, stolen or improperly accessed data in light of the degree of protection for the data, e.g., unencrypted, plain text;
( 6 ) Time the data has been out of VA control;
( 7 ) The likelihood that the sensitive personal information will or has been compromised (made accessible to and usable by unauthorized persons); and
( 8 ) Known misuses of data containing sensitive personal information, if any.
( c ) Assessment of the potential harm to the affected individuals.
( d ) Data breach analysis, as appropriate.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 5724, 5727)
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Brian Carter, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of DIRT Motor Sports, Inc. 2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisannual report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and15d-14) for the registrant and have:a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this annual report is being prepared;b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresas of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the“Evaluation Date”); andc) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure 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 recentevaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls whichcould adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any materialweaknesses in internal controls; andb) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly reportwhether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors thatcould significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recentevaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses.        Date:  May 15, 2007 /s/ Brian Carter   Brian Carter,   Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2663 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2663

   To amend title 49, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of 
 Homeland Security to extend a requirement for the prescreening of air 
  passengers to international flights that overfly the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 11, 2007

 Mr. Shuster introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Homeland Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 49, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of 
 Homeland Security to extend a requirement for the prescreening of air 
  passengers to international flights that overfly the United States.

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

SECTION 1. PRESCREENING OF INTERNATIONAL PASSENGERS.

    (a) In General.--Section 44909(c)(6)(A) of title 49, United States 
Code, is amended by inserting after ``international flight to or from 
the United States'' the following ``, and for any international flight 
that overflys the United States,''.
    (b) Definitions.--Section 44909(c)(6) of such title is amended by 
adding at the end the following:
                    ``(C) Definitions.--In this subsection, the 
                following definitions apply:
                            ``(i) International flight that overflys 
                        the united states.--The term `international 
                        flight that overflys the United States' means 
                        any flight departing from a place outside the 
                        United States that transits the territorial 
                        airspace of the United States en route to a 
                        place outside the United States.
                            ``(ii) Territorial airspace of the united 
                        states.--The term `territorial airspace of the 
                        United States' means the airspace over the 
                        United States and the airspace overlying the 
                        territorial waters between the United States 
                        coast and 12 nautical miles from the United 
                        States coast.''.
    (c) Rulemaking.--Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or a designee of the 
Secretary, shall issue a notice of proposed rulemaking to carry out the 
amendments made by this section.
                                 <all>
```
#### Charles E. BROWN *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 75-39

524 S.W. 2d 616

Opinion delivered June 30, 1975

*Harold Hall,*by: *John Achor,*for appellant.

*Jim Guy Tucker,*Atty. Gen., by: *Alston Jennings Jr.,*Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

Upon charges of burglary and grand larceny the appellant, having waived a jury trial, was found guilty upon each count. There was also a finding of guilty under the habitual criminal statute, two previous convictions for burglary and two for grand larceny being shown. The trial judge imposed two 21-year sentences, to run concurrently. For reversal the public defender contends that the evidence, being circumstantial, is insufficient to support the finding of guilt.

On June 13, 1974, a Little Rock police officer, in response to a burglar alarm call, went to a building at 2800 Cumberland Street. There he found the appellant putting an *361air conditioner (valued at about $460) into the trunk of his car. There was uncontradicted proof that the building had been broken into and that the air conditioner had been removed. The defendant testified that as he was driving in the neighborhood a stranger flagged him down and offered him $15 to help move the air conditioner, which was already at the curbing, to somewhere on 33rd Street. When the police officer arrived the stranger apparently saw him and “just vanished.”

In questioning the sufficiency of the proof counsel rely upon the rule, frequently stated in instructions to the jury, that circumstantial evidence must be consistent with guilt and inconsistent with any other reasonable conclusion. That rule, however, as we pointed out in *Abbott*v. *State,*256 Ark. 561, 508 S.W. 2d 733 (1974), is usually for the jury (or for the trial judge in a non-jury case), the test in this court being the requirement of substantial evidence. As we said in *Abbott:*“It is only when circumstantial evidence leaves the jury, in determining guilt, solely to speculation and conjecture that we hold it insufficient as a matter of law.” Here the trial court did not have to resort to mere speculation to conclude that it was not likely that some unknown third person stole an object such as an air conditioner with no means of carrying it away except by flagging down a passing motorist, after dark.

Affirmed.
HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2021 Fiscal Transparency Report…Kazakhstan

# 					2021 Fiscal Transparency Report: Kazakhstan			

 In this section										

                -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Kazakhstan 

## Government-by-Government Assessments: Kazakhstan

During the review period, the government published its executive budget proposal and enacted budget, but not its end-of-year report in a reasonable period of time.  Information on debt obligations was widely and easily accessible to the public, including online.  The budget was substantially complete and generally reliable.   The supreme audit institution reviewed the government’s accounts and made its reports publicly available, however it. did not meet international standards of independence.  The process for allocating licenses and contracts for natural resource extraction was outlined in law and appeared to be followed in practice.  Basic information on natural resource extraction awards was publicly available.  Sovereign wealth funds disclose source of funding and general approach to withdrawals. Kazakhstan’s fiscal transparency would be improved by:

- publishing its end-of-year report within a reasonable period of time; and
- ensuring its supreme audit institution meets international standards of independence.

## View report by:

### On This Page

                    -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Kazakhstan 

Tags

Bureau of Economic and Business AffairsDivision for International Finance and DevelopmentKazakhstan

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