alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 221.101 Determination and effect of purpose of loan. ( a ) Under this part the original purpose of a loan is controlling. In other words, if a loan originally is not for the purpose of purchasing or carrying margin stock, changes in the collateral for the loan do not change its exempted character.
( b ) However, a so-called increase in the loan is necessarily on an entirely different basis. So far as the purpose of the credit is concerned, it is a new loan, and the question of whether or not it is subject to this part must be determined accordingly.
( c ) Certain facts should also be mentioned regarding the determination of the purpose of a loan. Section 221.3(c) provides in that whenever a lender is required to have its customer execute a “Statement of Purpose for an Extension of Credit Secured by Margin Stock,” the statement must be accepted by the lender “acting in good faith.” The requirement of “good faith” is of vital importance here. Its application will necessarily vary with the facts of the particular case, but it is clear that the bank must be alert to the circumstances surrounding the loan. For example, if the loan is to be made to a customer who is not a broker or dealer in securities, but such a broker or dealer is to deliver margin stock to secure the loan or is to receive the proceeds of the loan, the bank would be put on notice that the loan would probably be subject to this part. It could not accept in good faith a statement to the contrary without obtaining a reliable and satisfactory explanation of the situation.
( d ) Furthermore, the purpose of a loan means just that. It cannot be altered by some temporary application of the proceeds. For example, if a borrower is to purchase Government securities with the proceeds of a loan, but is soon thereafter to sell such securities and replace them with margin stock, the loan is clearly for the purpose of purchasing or carrying margin stock.
§ 21.1 Purpose and scope of subpart A of this part. ( a ) This subpart is issued by the Comptroller of the Currency pursuant to section 3 of the Bank Protection Act of 1968 (12 U.S.C. 1882) and is applicable to all national banking associations. It requires each bank to adopt appropriate security procedures to discourage robberies, burglaries, and larcenies and to assist in identifying and apprehending persons who commit such acts.
( b ) It is the responsibility of a bank's board of directors to comply with this regulation and ensure that a security program which equals or exceeds the standards prescribed by this part is developed and implemented for the bank's main office and branches (as the term “branch” is used in 12 U.S.C. 36).
[56 FR 29564, June 28, 1991, as amended at 73 FR 22244, Apr. 24, 2008]
From: Barnett.Keith@epamail.epa.gov

Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 12:08 PM

To: Michael.Pelan@lafarge

‐ na.com

Cc: Fruh.Steve@epamail.epa.gov; Laney, Michael N.; Branscome, Marvin

R.; silverman.steven@epamail.epa.gov

Subject:Re: Collection of additional data

Dear Mike:

It would be desirable to have THC and HCl tests from enough different sources to increase the number

of sources making up the MACT floor (2 kilns for THC and 4 kilns for HCl) to at least 5 kilns, though the

more data we have the more representative the floor number will be of the general population. To use

five kilns to set the existing source floor you need a minimum data set of 34 kilns (0.12 x 34 = 4.08 and

we can round up) for both pollutants. We currently have THC CEM data for 14 kilns and HCl data for 32

kilns.

It is important that the results be representative of normal operations. For CEMS, our smallest data set

is 31 days, so I would say a month of readings is enough. We could get by with less (maybe 2

‐ 3 weeks)

if we are sure we have captured the variability, especially for kilns with in

‐ line raw mills.

For HCl, the minimum is 3 one hour runs with Method 321. We don't want to use Method 26 data

because we have concerns about the accuracy of Method 26 for this source category at the emission

levels we see.Another important factor is the choice of sources. For example, if someone submits data from some of

their kilns, but not others, we need to know the reason why those kilns were chosen. Our concern

would

be potential bias in the data. The sources selected should be either be representative of the source

category as a whole, or the best performing sources.

Keith W. Barnett

USEPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MMG

Mail Code D243

‐ 02

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

919

‐ 541

‐ 5605

barnett.keith@epa.gov

Michael.Pelan@lafarge

‐ na.com

05/07/2009 11:55 AM

To

Keith Barnett/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject

Collection of additional dataKeith:

Questions for you:

If the cement industry (or Lafarge in particular) chooses to augment the

database for EPA for the PC MACT rulemaking effort by collecting

additional data (i.e., temporary CEMS), how much data would be required

for the data to be included in the database? For example, if we were to

install a temporary CEMS and collect 2

‐ 3 weeks of THC data from a

particular kiln, would this be sufficient to include in the current

database?

If Lafarge were to re

‐ test some of our kilns for HCl, does EPA require a

specific test method (i.e,. 321??). If so, again, what period of

testing is needed to have the data be considered valid for inclusion in

the database.

Thanks,

Mike
#### § 308.147 Investigations confidential.

Investigations shall be confidential. Information and documents obtained by the FDIC in the course of such investigations shall not be disclosed, except as provided in part 309 of this chapter and as otherwise required by law.

[80 FR 5013, Jan. 30, 2015]
# C_2017002EN.01000401.xml

| 5.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 2/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 2/4

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 16 December 2015

in Case E-13/15

Abuelo Insua Juan Bautista v Liechtensteinische Invalidenversicherung

(Coordination of social security systems — Article 87(2) of Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 — Binding effect of medical findings of institution of place of stay or residence — Right to challenge those findings — Principle of equal treatment)

(2017/C 2/04)

In Case E-13/15, Abuelo Insua Juan Bautista v Liechtensteinische Invalidenversicherung — REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by the Princely Court of Appeal (Fürstliches Obergericht) concerning the interpretation of Article 87(2) of Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 16 December 2015, the operative part of which is as follows:

Fürstliches Obergericht

Article 87(2) of Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 does not prevent a recipient or claimant of benefits from challenging the findings of an institution of the place of stay or residence made under the said provision in an administrative procedure before a debtor institution.

---
ex10-1




EXHIBIT 10.1


AMENDMENT TWENTY TO MARKETING AGREEMENT


This document is Amendment Twenty to the Marketing Agreement, made and entered
into effective June 1, 1993, and amended by Amendment One to Marketing
Agreement dated September 16, 1993; Amendment Two to Marketing Agreement dated
June 4, 1998; Amendment Three to Marketing Agreement dated September 25, 1998;
Amendment Four to Marketing Agreement dated October 19, 1998; and Amendment
Five to Marketing Agreement dated December 15, 1998; Amendment Six to Marketing
Agreement dated March 25, 1999, Amendment Seven to Marketing Agreement dated
May 10, 1999, Amendment Eight to Marketing Agreement dated June 24, 1999,
Amendment Nine to Marketing Agreement dated August 5, 1999, Amendment Ten to
Marketing Agreement dated October 1, 1999, Amendment Eleven to Marketing
Agreement dated January 31, 2000, Amendment Twelve to Marketing Agreement dated
March 1, 2000, Amendment Thirteen to Marketing Agreement dated April 19, 2000,
Amendment Fourteen to Marketing Agreement dated July 31, 2000, Amendment
Fifteen to Marketing Agreement dated September 25, 2000, Amendment Sixteen to
Marketing Agreement dated October 31, 2000, Amendment Seventeen dated November
29, 2000, Amendment Eighteen to Marketing Agreement dated January 24, 2001, and
Amendment Nineteen to Marketing Agreement dated March 14, 2001, (the
“Agreement”), by and between American National Insurance Company (“American
National”) a Texas corporation, and Legacy Marketing Group (“LMG”), a
California corporation.


In consideration of mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as
follows:



	1.	 	Section 3.1 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the
following new Section 3.1 shall be substituted therefore:




	 	 	 	“3.1 Subject to termination as hereinafter provided, this Agreement shall
remain in force and effect until the close of business on June 30, 2001,
the term of this Agreement. This Agreement may be renewed by mutual
agreement for successive terms of one (1) year unless terminated by
either party by prior written notice to the other at least one hundred
eighty (180) days prior to the end of the initial term or the renewal
term.”



Except as specifically amended hereby, all terms and provisions of the
Marketing Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.


IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement.



	 	 	 
	LEGACY MARKETING GROUP		
AMERICAN NATIONAL INSURANCE
 COMPANY
	
	
	
	


	 
	By: /s/ H. Lynn Stafford		
By: /s/ Kelly M. Collier
	
	
	
	

	 
	Title: Chief Information Officer		
Title: Vice President
	
	
	
	

	 
	Witness: /s/ Stephanie Molteni		
Witness: /s/ Jynx Yucra
	
	
	
	

	 
	Date: May 4, 2001		
Date: May 1, 2001
# C_2013199EN.01001001.xml

| 11.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 199/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 199/10

---

Information communicated by the EFTA States regarding State aid granted under the Act referred to in point 1j of Annex XV to the EEA Agreement (Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General Block Exemption Regulation))

2013/C 199/07

PART I

| Aid No | GBER 6/13/EMP |
| --- | --- |
| EFTA State | Norway |
| Granting authority | Name | The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration |
| Address | PO Box 5 |
| 0130 Oslo |
| NORWAY |

Aid No

GBER 6/13/EMP

EFTA State

Norway

Granting authority

Name

The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration

Address

PO Box 5

0130 Oslo

NORWAY

Web page

http://www.nav.no

Title of the aid measure

Tilskudd til opprettelse av nye tiltaksplasser

(Grant to cover the cost of constructing, installing or expanding the establishment of sheltered employment)

National legal basis (Reference to the relevant national official publication)

Forskrift 11. desember 2008 nr. 1320 om arbeidsrettede tiltak mv.

(Reg. No 1320/2008)

Weblink to the full text of the aid measure

http://www.lovdata.no/for/sf/ad/xd-20081211-1320.html#map016

Type of measure

Scheme

X

Duration

Scheme

Permanent scheme

Economic sector(s) concerned

All economic sectors eligible to receive aid

X

Type of beneficiary

SME

X

Large enterprises

X

Budget

Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme

Approx. NOK 5 million

Aid instrument (Article 5)

Grant

X

PART II

| General objectives (list) | Objectives (list) | Maximum aid intensity in % or maximum aid amount in NOK | SME — bonuses in % |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Aid for disadvantaged and disabled workers
  (Articles 40-42) | Aid for the recruitment of disadvantaged workers in the form of wage subsidies
  (Article 40) | Wage subsidies up to 50 %, for up to one year | |
| | Aid for the employment of disabled workers in the form of wage subsidies
  (Article 41) | Wage subsidies up to 60 %, for up to 3 years | |

General objectives (list)

Objectives (list)

Maximum aid intensity in % or maximum aid amount in NOK

SME — bonuses in %

Aid for disadvantaged and disabled workers

(Articles 40-42)

Aid for the recruitment of disadvantaged workers in the form of wage subsidies

(Article 40)

Wage subsidies up to 50 %, for up to one year

Aid for the employment of disabled workers in the form of wage subsidies

(Article 41)

Wage subsidies up to 60 %, for up to 3 years

---
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2919

To assign liability for injury caused by genetically engineered organisms. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 25, 2003

Mr. KUCINICH (for himself, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. SANDERS, Ms. LEE, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. OLVER, Mr. ACEVEDO-VILA ́, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Mr. NADLER, 

Mr. OWENS, Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ, Ms. WATERS, Ms. WATSON, and Ms. 

WOOLSEY) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and 

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 assign liability for injury caused by genetically engineered 

organisms.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Genetically Engineered 

5 Organism Liability Act of 2003’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 The Congress finds the following: 
2

•HR 2919 IH 

1 (1) The negative consequences of genetically en2 gineered crops may impact farmers who grow these 

3 crops, neighbor farmers who do not grow these 

4 crops, and consumers. 

5 (2) Biotech companies are selling a technology 

6 that is being commercialized ahead of the new and 

7 unknown science of genetic engineering. 

8 (3) Farmers may suffer from crop failures, 

9 neighbor and nearby farmers may suffer from cross 

10 pollination, increased insect resistance, and un11 wanted volunteer genetically engineered plants, and 

12 consumers may suffer from health and environ13 mental impacts. 

14 (4) Therefore, biotech companies should be 

15 found liable for the failures of genetically engineered 

16 crops when they arise. 

17 SEC. 3. LIABILITY. 

18 (a) CAUSE OF ACTION.—A biotech company is liable 

19 to any party injured by the release of a genetically engi20 neered organism into the environment if that injury re21 sults from that genetic engineering. The prevailing plain22 tiff in an action under this subsection may recover reason23 able attorney’s fees and other litigation expenses as a part 

24 of the costs. 
3

•HR 2919 IH 

1 (b) INDEMNITY.—For the purposes of subsection (a), 

2 the term ‘‘injury’’ includes any liability of a person who 

3 uses that organism in accordance with applicable Federal 

4 and other law, if that liability arises from that use. 

5 (c) NOT WAIVABLE.—The liability created by sub6 section (a) may not be waived or otherwise avoided by con7 tract. 

8 (d) DEFINITION.—As used in this section, the term 

9 ‘‘biotech company’’ means a person—

10 (1) engaged in the business of genetically engi11 neering an organism; or 

12 (2) obtaining the patent rights to such an orga13 nism for the purposes of commercial exploitation of 

14 that organism.

Æ
# C_2012376EN.01000301.xml

| 6.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 376/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 376/3

---

No State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement

2012/C 376/03

The EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that the following measure does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement:

| Date of adoption of the decision | : | 27 June 2012 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Case number | : | 68532 |
| Decision number | : | 245/12/COL |
| EFTA State | : | Norway |
| Name and address of the grating authority | : | Andøy Municipality |
| 8480 Andenes |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

:

27 June 2012

Case number

:

68532

Decision number

:

245/12/COL

EFTA State

:

Norway

Name and address of the grating authority

:

Andøy Municipality

8480 Andenes

NORWAY

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

:

Sale of shares in A.H. Holding AS from the municipality to the other shareholders of the company

Form of aid

:

n.a.

Budget

:

Sales price of NOK 7,1 million (2010)

Duration

:

n.a.

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/

---
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 32.2

                  Certification of Principal Financial Officer
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the Quarterly report of News Communications, Inc. ("NCI") on
Form 10-QSB for the three months ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, E. Paul
Leishman, Chief Financial Officer of NCI, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.


/s/  E. Paul Leishman
---------------------
Name: E. Paul Leishman
Chief Financial Officer



Date: May 20, 2005
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 50219]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23598]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Research Resources; Notice of Closed Meeting

    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 Center for Research Resources 
Special Emphasis Panel.
    Date: October 20-22, 2009.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Radisson Hotel Sacramento, 500 Leisure Lane, Sacramento, 
CA 95815.
    Contact Person: Martha F. Matocha, PhD, Scientific Review 
Officer, Office of Review, National Center for Research Resources, 
National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Blvd., 1 Democracy 
Plaza, Rm. 1070, Bethesda, MD 20892. 301-435-0810. 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bad7dbced5d9d2dbd7fad7dbd3d694d4d3d294ddd5cc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4b262a3f2428232a260b262a222765252223652c243d">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.371, Biomedical 
Technology; 93.389, Research Infrastructure, 93.306, 93.333; 93.702, 
ARRA Related Construction Awards, National Institutes of Health, 
HHS)


    Dated: September 24, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-23598 Filed 9-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
V 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3105

For the relief of Elvira Arellano. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 16, 2003

Mr. GUTIERREZ introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

For the relief of Elvira Arellano.

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR ELVIRA 

4 ARELLANO. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi6 sion of law, for purposes of the Immigration and Nation7 ality Act, Elvira Arellano shall be eligible for issuance of 

8 an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of 

9 an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon 

10 filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa 

11 under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of status 

12 to lawful permanent resident. 
2

•HR 3105 IH 

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Elvira Arellano en2 ters the United States before the filing deadline specified 

3 in subsection (c), she shall be considered to have entered 

4 and remained lawfully and shall, notwithstanding any pro5 vision of the Immigration and Nationality Act, be eligible 

6 for adjustment of status under section 245 of the such 

7 Act as of the date of the enactment of this Act. 

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

12 within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.—

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to Elvira Arellano, the Secretary of State shall in16 struct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the current 

17 or next following fiscal year, the total number of immi18 grant visas that are made available to natives of the coun19 try of the alien’s birth under section 203(a) of the Immi20 gration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the total 

21 number of immigrant visas that are made available to na22 tives of the country of the alien’s birth under section 

23 202(e) of such Act.

Æ
#### § 335.331 Acquisition statements, acquisition of securities by issuers, and other matters.

The provisions of the applicable and currently effective SEC regulations under sections 13(d) and 13(e) of the Exchange Act shall be followed as codified at 17 CFR part 240.

[75 FR 73949, Nov. 30, 2010]