alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal L 1/2014

| | ISSN 1977-0677
  doi:10.3000/19770677.L_2014.001.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 1 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 574 January 2014 |

ISSN 1977-0677

doi:10.3000/19770677.L_2014.001.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 1

English edition

Legislation

Volume 574 January 2014

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1/2014 of 28 August 2013 establishing Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences | 1 |
| | | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2/2014 of 3 January 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 4 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1/2014 of 28 August 2013 establishing Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences

1

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2/2014 of 3 January 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

4

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
Searched for **http://www.digitalgov.gov/**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **http://www.digitalgov.gov/**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
§ 1261.607 Obtaining the services of a hearing official. ( a ) When the debtor does not work for the creditor agency and the creditor agency cannot provide a prompt and appropriate hearing before an administrative law judge or before a hearing official furnished pursuant to another lawful arrangement, the creditor agency may contact an agent of the paying agency designated in appendix A of 5 CFR part 581 to arrange for a hearing official, and the paying agency must then cooperate as provided by 4 CFR 102.1 and provide a hearing official.
( b ) When the debtor works for the creditor agency, the creditor agency may contact any agent (of another agency) designated in appendix A of 5 CFR part 581 to arrange for a hearing official. Agencies must then cooperate as required by 4 CFR 102.1 and provide a hearing official.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

310 

CAF 10-01172 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND GORSKI, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF MICHAEL KAPUSCINSKI, 

PETITIONER-RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT, 

 

V ORDER

GISELLE JELLETT, RESPONDENT-PETITIONER-APPELLANT. 

MELVIN & MELVIN, PLLC, SYRACUSE (ELIZABETH A. GENUNG OF COUNSEL), FOR

RESPONDENT-PETITIONER-APPELLANT. 

WALTER J. BURKARD, DEWITT, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

KELLY M. CORBETT, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, FAYETTEVILLE, FOR BRAYDIN

K. AND BRENTEN K. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Onondaga County (Martha

E. Mulroy, J.), entered August 4, 2009 in a proceeding pursuant to

Family Court Act article 6. The order, inter alia, granted sole

custody of the parties’ children to petitioner-respondent. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision

at Family Court.

Entered: March 25, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan

Clerk of the Court
800 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, DC 20591

December 4, 2014

Mr. Henry Perritt Modovolate Aviation, LLC

1131 Carol Lane Glencoe, IL 60022

Dear Mr. Perritt:

Thank you for your July 9, 2014 letter sent to the public docket (Docket No. FAA-2014-0473) petitioning the Federal Aviati on Administration (FAA) to initiate rulemaking to regulate small unmanned ai rcraft systems as consumer products by requiring, as a precondition for sale, that th ey automatically limit height above ground, automatically limit range from the operato r, and provide reliable capabilities automatically to land safely or to return to the launching point if the control link is interrupted, the flight vehicle approaches Class B, C, or D airspace, or the operator is incapacitated.

The FAA has initiated a no tice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on this matter, “Operation and Certification of Small Un manned Aircraft Systems” (RIN 2120-AJ60). You can check the status of that rule by visiting www.dot.gov/regula tions. Once the rule has been published in the Federal Register (www.regula tions.gov), it will be open for public comment. We will put a copy of your petition into the docket for consideration during the comment period.

For the reasons above, we will not consider yo ur petition as a new petition to initiate rulemaking in accordance with 14 CFR 11.73.

Sincerely,

/s/

Lirio Liu Director, Office of Rulemaking
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, June 01, 2017. 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, June 01, 2017 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A17D0427. MICHAEL C. CRAWFORD, JR. v. LORRIE LYNN ROY CRAWFORD.
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 2014CV250779
#### McCammon et al. *v.*Morris.

[No. 21,774.

Filed November 1, 1912.]

From Superior Court of Marion County (78,590) ; *James M. Leathers,*Judge.

Action by Lewis A. McCammon and another against Benjamin F. Morris. From a judgment for defendant, the plaintiffs appeal.

*Affirmed.*

*Robert W. McBride, Lewis A. McCammon*and *William S. Lines,*for appellants.

*Benjamin P. Morris,*for appellee.

Morris, J.

The questions presented in this appeal are the same as those decided in the case of *Selvage*v. *Talbott*(1911), 175 Ind. 648, 95 N. E. 114, and on the authority of that case the judgment from which this appeal is prosecuted is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, William J. McEntee, Jr., certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Interep National Radio Sales, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;



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



a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;



b) (Intentionally omitted)



c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors:



a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; 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 over financial reporting.



|                      |  |                                                  
|--------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 13, 2004 |  | /s/ William J. McEntee, Jr.                      
|                      |  | William J. McEntee, Jr.                          
|                      |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Served: November 1 , 2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 1 st of November, 2013

Essential Air Service at

WATERTOWN, NEW YORK

49 U.S.C. 41731 et seq

. Docket DOT

- OST

- 2013

- 0188

(Docket DOT

- OST

- 1997

- 2842)

NOTICE

Until recently

, air service at Massena, Ogdensburg, and Watertown , New York, was linked and

the three communities shared a single docket. At this time a ir service to Watertown is linked

with neither Massena nor Ogdensburg. Therefore by this notice we are opening a new docket for

Watertown, New York.

We shall serve this notice on all persons on the service list for this docket.

By:

Kevin D. Schlemmer, Chief,

EAS and Domestic Analysis

(SEAL)

An electronic version of this document is available at

http://www.regulations.gov
Riparian Priority 

Recovery Areas

Alternatives B and D

0 2 4 8 12 16 20

Miles

Map 11

^ Harlowton

^

Roundup

^Pompeys

Pillar

Big Timber

^

Billings^

^Columbus

^

Bridger

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

Montana

 Wyoming

Wyoming

Billings & Pompeys Pillar 

National Monument RMP / EIS

Legend

Location Map

Montana

Billings

Field 

Office

Ü

Map scale 1:900,000

Map generated by the Billings Field Office in July 2011

Albers Equal Area, NAD83 Projection

This map is intended for display purposes. No warranty is made by the Bureau of

Land Management as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the data for

individual or aggregate use with other data, or for purposes not intended by BLM. 

This map may not meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This product was

developed through digital means and information may be updated without notification.

State Border

Planning Area Boundary

Priority Recovery Areas

Streams

Rivers

^ Towns
#### § 791.1 Scope.

The rules contained in this subpart are the rules of procedure governing how the Board conducts its business. These rules concern the Board's exercise of its authority to act on behalf of NCUA; the conduct, scheduling and subject matter of Board meetings; and the recording of Board action.
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 Defense

###### Office of the Secretary 

          - [Transmittal No. 00-31]

# AGENCY:

Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. J. Hurd, DSCA/COMPT/RM, (703) 604-6575. 

The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 00-31 with attached transmittal and policy justification. 

Dated: April 24, 2000.

L.M. Bynum, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. 

      ( print page 24923)          ( print page 24924)          ( print page 24925)    

BILLING CODE 5001-10-C

[FR Doc. 00-10574  Filed 4-27-00; 8:45 am]
§ 1206.801 Chief FOIA Officer. ( a ) The Associate Administrator, Office of Communications, is designated as the Chief FOIA Officer for the Agency. The Chief FOIA Officer is delegated authority for administering the FOIA and all related laws and regulations within the Agency. The Associate Administrator has delegated the day-to-day oversight of the Agency FOIA Program to the Deputy Associate Administrator for Communications.
( b ) The Deputy Associate Administrator for Communications has delegated the overall responsibility for developing and administering the FOIA program within NASA to the Principal Agency FOIA Officer, located in the Office of Communications. This includes: ( 1 ) Developing regulations in consultation with the Office of General Counsel, providing guidelines, procedures, and standards for the Agency's FOIA program;
( 2 ) Overseeing all FOIA offices and programs and ensuring they are in compliance with FOIA laws and regulations;
( 3 ) Ensuring implementation of the FOIA Programs throughout the Agency and keeping the Chief FOIA Officer and the Deputy Associate Administrator for Communications informed of the Agency's FOIA performance;
( 4 ) Providing program oversight, technical assistance, and training to employees to ensure compliance with the Act;
( 5 ) Preparing the Agency's FOIA Annual Report to the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Congress, as well as the Chief FOIA Officer's Report;
( 6 ) Preparing all other reports as required to DOJ, OGIS, and Congress or within the Agency;
( 7 ) Developing, conducting, and reviewing all internal Agency FOIA training for NASA FOIA staff;
( 8 ) Directly supervising the Headquarters FOIA Office.
( c ) The Chief FOIA Officer is responsible for ensuring NASA has appointed FOIA Public Liaisons, who are responsible for and able to assist in reducing delays, increasing transparency and understanding of the status of requests, and assisting in the resolution of disputes at each Center or Component.
[79 FR 46678, Aug. 11, 2014, as amended at NASA-2019-0005, 84 FR 54778, Oct. 11, 2019]
Exhibit 10(a)















	EXHIBIT 10(a)




	INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT




	We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Post-Effective
      Amendment No.4 to Registration Statement No. 333-88849 of Merrill Lynch
      Strategy Series, Inc. (the “Series”) on Form N-1A of our report
      dated February 21, 2003 on Merrill Lynch Strategy Growth and Income Fund,
      Merrill Lynch Strategy Long-Term Growth Fund and Merrill Lynch Strategy
      All-Equity Fund (the Funds constituting Merrill Lynch Strategy Series, Inc.),
      appearing in the December 31, 2002 Annual Report of the Series, in the Statement
      of Additional Information which is part of this Registration Statement.
      We also consent to the reference to us under the caption “Financial
      Highlights” in the Prospectus, which is also part of this Registration
      Statement.




	/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP  




	Princeton, New Jersey 

      April 23, 2003
§ 121.95 Route width. ( a ) Approved routes and route segments over U.S. Federal airways or foreign airways (and advisory routes in the case of certificate holders conducting flag operations) have a width equal to the designated width of those airways or routes. Whenever the Administrator finds it necessary to determine the width of other approved routes, he considers the following: ( 1 ) Terrain clearance.
( 2 ) Minimum en route altitudes.
( 3 ) Ground and airborne navigation aids.
( 4 ) Air traffic density.
( 5 ) ATC procedures.
( b ) Any route widths of other approved routes determined by the Administrator are specified in the certificate holder's operations specifications.
[Doc. No. 6258, 29 FR 19194, Dec. 31, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 121-253, 61 FR 2610, Jan. 26, 1996]
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determine d that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-20257

Summary Calendar

MARTIN LEAL, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER
OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Southern District of Texas

(CA-H-93-3052)

September 12, 1996

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Martin Leal failed to timely appeal the district court’s

judgment affirming the denial of his disability benefits. Because

of this failure, this appeal is limited to a review of the district

court’s denial of Leal’s motion to amend the judgment under Fed. R.

Civ. P. 60(b).2

We affirm. A district court abuses its discretion in refusing

t o grant relief under Rule 60(b) only in the rare case. F irst

Nationwide Bank v. Summer House Joint Venture

, 902 F.2d 1197, 1200

(5th Cir. 1990). The court below did not abuse its discretion

here. Leal has already filed one application for disability

benefits f or at least some of the time period covered by this

application; th at application was denied, and the denial is now

final. To the extent that Leal seeks disability benefits prior to

December 21, 19 87, he is barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

See United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Co.

, 384 U.S. 394,

421-22 (1966). Because Leal has raised nothing other than a

conclusory constitutional argument, the d octrine of C alifano v.

Sanders

, 430 U.S. 99, 107-08 (1977), does not apply. S ee

Brandyburg v. Bowen , 803 F.2d 808, 810 (5th Cir. 1986).

To the extent tha t Leal seeks disability benefits post

December 31, 1987, he may not recover because his insured status

expired on that date. S ee Ivy V. Sullivan

, 898 F.2d 1045, 1048

(5th Cir. 1990).

AFFIRMED.
§ 121.99 Communications facilities—domestic and flag operations. ( a ) Each certificate holder conducting domestic or flag operations must show that a two-way communication system, or other means of communication approved by the responsible Flight Standards office, is available over the entire route. The communications may be direct links or via an approved communication link that will provide reliable and rapid communications under normal operating conditions between each airplane and the appropriate dispatch office, and between each airplane and the appropriate air traffic control unit.
( b ) Except in an emergency, for all flag and domestic kinds of operations, the communications systems between each airplane and the dispatch office must be independent of any system operated by the United States.
( c ) Each certificate holder conducting flag operations must provide voice communications for ETOPS where voice communication facilities are available. In determining whether facilities are available, the certificate holder must consider potential routes and altitudes needed for diversion to ETOPS Alternate Airports. Where facilities are not available or are of such poor quality that voice communication is not possible, another communication system must be substituted.
( d ) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, after February 15, 2008 for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes, each certificate holder conducting flag operations must have a second communication system in addition to that required by paragraph (c) of this section. That system must be able to provide immediate satellite-based voice communications of landline-telephone fidelity. The system must be able to communicate between the flight crew and air traffic services, and the flight crew and the certificate holder. In determining whether such communications are available, the certificate holder must consider potential routes and altitudes needed for diversion to ETOPS Alternate Airports. Where immediate, satellite-based voice communications are not available, or are of such poor quality that voice communication is not possible, another communication system must be substituted.
( e ) Operators of two-engine turbine-powered airplanes with 207 minute ETOPS approval in the North Pacific Area of Operation must comply with the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section as of February 15, 2007.
[Doc. No. 28154, 62 FR 13256, Mar. 19, 1997, as amended by Amdt. 121-329, 72 FR 1878, Jan. 16, 2007; Amdt. 121-333, 72 FR 31680, June 7, 2007; Docket FAA-2018-0119, Amdt. 121-380, 83 FR 9173, Mar. 5, 2018]