alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 135.423 Maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration organization. ( a ) Each certificate holder that performs any of its maintenance (other than required inspections), preventive maintenance, or alterations, and each person with whom it arranges for the performance of that work, must have an organization adequate to perform the work.
( b ) Each certificate holder that performs any inspections required by its manual under § 135.427(b) (2) or (3), (in this subpart referred to as *required inspections*), and each person with whom it arranges for the performance of that work, must have an organization adequate to perform that work.
( c ) Each person performing required inspections in addition to other maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations, shall organize the performance of those functions so as to separate the required inspection functions from the other maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration functions. The separation shall be below the level of administrative control at which overall responsibility for the required inspection functions and other maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration functions is exercised.
[Doc. No. 16097, 43 FR 46783, Oct. 10, 1978. Redesignated by Amdt. 135-81, 67 FR 72765, Dec. 6, 2002. Redesignated by Amdt. 135-81, 70 FR 5533, Feb. 2, 2005]
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4206-4 Filed:11/09/18 Entered:11/09/18 22:19:52 Desc:

Exhibit Page 1 of 3
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4206-4 Filed:11/09/18 Entered:11/09/18 22:19:52 Desc:

Exhibit Page 2 of 3
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4206-4 Filed:11/09/18 Entered:11/09/18 22:19:52 Desc:

Exhibit Page 3 of 3
[No. 26432-3-II.

Division Two.

October 25, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. John Allen Brower, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Cowlitz County, No. 99-1-00847-0, Stephen M. Warning, J., entered September 11, 2000. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Morgan, J., concurred in by Seinfeld and Bridgewater, JJ.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**Section 302 Certifications for the Signatures**

 

I,Anthony J. Gould Executive Vice President, Chief Financial and Chief AccountingOfficer, certify that:

 

1.I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Western Sierra Bancorp(the “Registrant”);

 

2.Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterlyreport;

 

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

 

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

 

a) designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared;

 

b) evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

c) Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,  to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors:

 

a) all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

b) any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:  August 6, 2004 |                                    |   |
|-----------------------|-----------------------------------------|--------|
|                  |                                    |   |
|                  | /s/ Anthony J. Gould                    |   |
|                  | Chief Financial and  Accounting Officer |   |

 

----
IN THE MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS

MAY 27, 2014

 WESTERN DISTRICT

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

WD75967 Charles A Mahone vs. State of Missouri

WD76042 William A Turner, Jr. vs. State of Missouri

WD76426 Andrew Brown vs. State of Missouri

WD76483 Bobbi Jean Bissell vs. Thi C Mai

WD76517 Consolidated with WD76483

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 30.25(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

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

WD76889 State of Missouri vs. James L. Vann

WD76189 State of Missouri vs. Clifton S Sparkling
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as added by

Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Pulaski Financial Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-K
for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as added by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirement of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Pulaski Financial as of and for the period
covered by the Report.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |  |  |                               
|----------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------
|                        |  | 
|Date: December 13, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/ Ramsey K. Hamadi          
|                        |  |  |  | Name: Ramsey K. Hamadi        
|                        |  |  |  | Title: Chief Financial Officer
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4487 

To extend limits on discretionary spending through fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

AUGUST 6, 2020 

Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on the Budget 

A BILL 

To extend limits on discretionary spending through fiscal 

year 2024. 

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 ‘‘Pandemic Pay-For Act 

5 of 2020’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS. 

7 Section 251(c)(8) of the Balanced Budget and Emer8 gency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(c)(8)) 

9 is amended in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4487 IS

1 striking ‘‘fiscal year 2021’’ and inserting ‘‘each of fiscal 

2 years 2021 through 2024’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
§ 420.53 Control of public access. ( a ) A licensee shall prevent unauthorized access to the launch site, and unauthorized, unescorted access to explosive hazard facilities or other hazard areas not otherwise controlled by a launch operator, through the use of security personnel, surveillance systems, physical barriers, or other means approved as part of the licensing process.
( b ) A licensee shall notify anyone entering the launch site of safety rules and emergency and evacuation procedures prior to that person's entry unless that person has received a briefing on those rules and procedures within the previous year.
( c ) A licensee shall employ warning signals or alarms to notify any persons at the launch site of any emergency.
§ 372.33 Nontransferability. ( a ) An operating authorization shall be nontransferable and shall be effective only with respect to the person named therein or his successor by operation of law, subject to the provisions of this section. The following persons may temporarily continue operations under an operating authorization issued in the name of another person, for a maximum period of 6 months from the effective date of succession, by giving written notice of such succession to the Department within 60 days after the succession: ( 1 ) Administrators or executors of deceased persons;
( 2 ) Guardians of incapacitated persons;
( 3 ) Surviving partner or partners collectively of dissolved partnerships; and
( 4 ) Trustees, receivers, conservators, assignees, or other such persons who are authorized by law to collect and preserve the property of financially disabled persons.
( b ) All operations by successors, as above authorized, shall be performed in the name or names of the prior holder of the operating authorization and the name of the successor, whose capacity shall also be designated. Any successor desiring to continue operations after the expiration of the 6-month period above authorized must file an application for a new operating authorization within 120 days after such succession. If a timely application is filed, such successor may continue operations until final disposition of the application by the Department.
§ 35.41 Overspeed and overtorque. ( a ) When the applicant seeks approval of a transient maximum propeller overspeed, the applicant must demonstrate that the propeller is capable of further operation without maintenance action at the maximum propeller overspeed condition. This may be accomplished by: ( 1 ) Performance of 20 runs, each of 30 seconds duration, at the maximum propeller overspeed condition; or
( 2 ) Analysis based on test or service experience.
( b ) When the applicant seeks approval of a transient maximum propeller overtorque, the applicant must demonstrate that the propeller is capable of further operation without maintenance action at the maximum propeller overtorque condition. This may be accomplished by: ( 1 ) Performance of 20 runs, each of 30 seconds duration, at the maximum propeller overtorque condition; or
( 2 ) Analysis based on test or service experience.
[Amdt. 35-8, 73 FR 63349, Oct. 24, 2008]
§ 27.1459 Flight data recorders. ( a ) Each flight recorder required by the operating rules of Subchapter G of this chapter must be installed so that: ( 1 ) It is supplied with airspeed, altitude, and directional data obtained from sources that meet the accuracy requirements of §§ 27.1323, 27.1325, and 27.1327 of this part, as applicable;
( 2 ) The vertical acceleration sensor is rigidly attached, and located longitudinally within the approved center of gravity limits of the rotorcraft;
( 3 ) ( i ) It receives its electrical power from the bus that provides the maximum reliability for operation of the flight data recorder without jeopardizing service to essential or emergency loads.
( ii ) It remains powered for as long as possible without jeopardizing emergency operation of the rotorcraft.
( 4 ) There is an aural or visual means for preflight checking of the recorder for proper recording of data in the storage medium;
( 5 ) Except for recorders powered solely by the engine-driven electrical generator system, there is an automatic means to simultaneously stop a recorder that has a data erasure feature and prevent each erasure feature from functioning, within 10 minutes after any crash impact; and
( 6 ) Whether the cockpit voice recorder and digital flight data recorder are installed in separate boxes or in a combination unit, no single electrical failure external to the recorder may disable both the cockpit voice recorder and the digital flight data recorder.
( b ) Each nonejectable recorder container must be located and mounted so as to minimize the probability of container rupture resulting from crash impact and subsequent damage to the record from fire.
( c ) A correlation must be established between the flight recorder readings of airspeed, altitude, and heading and the corresponding readings (taking into account correction factors) of the first pilot's instruments. This correlation must cover the airspeed range over which the aircraft is to be operated, the range of altitude to which the aircraft is limited, and 360 degrees of heading. Correlation may be established on the ground as appropriate.
( d ) Each recorder container must: ( 1 ) Be either bright orange or bright yellow;
( 2 ) Have a reflective tape affixed to its external surface to facilitate its location under water; and
( 3 ) Have an underwater locating device, when required by the operating rules of this chapter, on or adjacent to the container which is secured in such a manner that they are not likely to be separated during crash impact.
( e ) When both a cockpit voice recorder and a flight data recorder are required by the operating rules, one combination unit may be installed, provided that all other requirements of this section and the requirements for cockpit voice recorders under this part are met.
[Amdt. 27-22, 53 FR 26144, July 11, 1988, as amended by Amdt. 27-43, 73 FR 12564, Mar. 7, 2008; 74 FR 32800, July 9, 2009; Amdt. 27-45, 75 FR 17045, Apr. 5, 2010]
§ 431.7 Payload and payload reentry determinations. ( a ) A payload determination is required to launch a payload unless the proposed payload is exempt from payload review under § 415.53 of this chapter. Requirements for obtaining a payload determination are set forth in part 415, subpart D of this chapter.
( b ) A payload reentry determination is required to reenter a payload to Earth on an RLV unless the proposed payload is exempt from payload reentry review.
( c ) A payload reentry determination made under a previous license application under this subchapter may satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section.
( d ) The FAA conducts a review, as described in subpart D of this part, to make a payload reentry determination. Either an RLV mission license applicant or a payload owner or operator may request a review of the proposed payload using the application procedures contained in part 413 of this subchapter. Upon receipt of an application, the FAA may conduct a payload reentry review independently of an RLV mission license application.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the accompanying QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2004, I,Anthony J. Gould, Executive Vice President,Chief Financial and Chief Accounting Officer of  theCompany, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  that:

 

(1)           suchQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30,2004, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           theinformation contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company forthe period ended June 30, 2004, fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of Western Sierra Bancorp.

 

 
| Dated:   August 6, 2004 |                                    |   |
|------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|--------|
|                         |                                    |   |
|                         | /s/ Anthony J. Gould                    |   |
|                         | Chief Financial and  Accounting Officer |   |

 

1

----
#### § 25.1513 Minimum control speed.

The minimum control speed *V**MC* determined under § 25.149 must be established as an operating limitation.
Docket No. EPA-HQ-2011-0660 Tyler Pidgeon Enfield, New Hanpshire Tyler.pidgeon@comcast.net Good afternoon, my name is Tyler Pidgeonand I'm from Enfield,NewHampshire. I am currently a student at St. Lawrence University in upstate NewYork studying Environmental Studies and Biology. Growing up in a rural and outdoorsy town allowed me to truly appreciate the beauty in the northeast. from the rolling mountains, to the lush forests, to the peaceful streams and rivers, and all the wildlife within. Going to school in the North Country has also closely connected me to theAdirondack region, which is still recovering from acid deposition causedby coal-firedpowerplant emissions in the Midwest.

I strongly support the EPA's proposed standard for carbonpollution for newpowerplants in order to protect these areas which Ihave come to call home. I want our elected officials to protect and preserve ourenvironment so that we, as well as future generations. can enjoy the benefits andrecreational opportunities a healthy ecosystem provides. For example, the native yet
rare pink lady slipper, NewHampshire's official state wildflower, is already threatened from habitat loss and I would hate to see the impacts ofglobal warming further reducethe numbers of
a beautiful and symbolic member ofthe orchidfamily.

In additionto protecting both the flora and fauna through the proposed carbonpollution standard. I want my ownhealth and the health ofothers to be protected. My brother andI both suffer from asthma, so reducing airpollution is not merely driven by our morals but by our own health and safety. Last summerI visitedNairobi, Kenya and experienced extremely poor air quality from lax airpollution standards. My first and only attempt to go for a run ended very abruptly as my airways constricted, making it extremely difficult to inhale a single breatheven afterthe use of my inhaler. My uncontrollable struggle to breathe felt as though my airways had become a coffee stirrer, requiring me to take multiple breaths merely walking back to ourcompound.

Such discomfort and difficulty to perform one ofourmost vital involuntary functions from preventable exposure to air pollutants should never be experienced by anyone, especially withinourown borders. I strongly urge the agency to quickly finalize these standards and develop additional standards for existing powerplants to safeguardthe health ofthe public and natural world.
t~r'p'T Or. ut. . ,), : , ~ , : l \ ., 

. ,i,~ The Honorable Rayl!.aHdod 

United States Department ofTransportation 

1200New'lersey Avenue, SE . :, 

Washitigton, DC'20590 I', 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

... ,on behalfQf Deloitte Touche Tohmatsll LLP, I alll. WT!!itig to express our str0l!g~. 

support for the application ofDelta Air Lities for new nonstop service between Seattle 

and Haneda, Tokyo International Airport. 

Approval ofDelta's new service would be a major benefit for our region, where 

many corporations have strong trade and market presence with Japan. There are many 

Japanese companies located iti Washitigton, and hundreds more whose business models 

rely on access to Japan and it's market. The growth ofour busitiess ties with Japan has 

created demand fOD increased capacity to Tokyo. Our business travelers look to the 

convenience:offlyitig' into Takyo's downtown Haneda airport. 

j '.1(Seattle is proven and successful gateway to Asia, and as airports that can support 

trans-pacific routes. The addition ofHaneda as a destination is a natural fit that would 

clearly benefit our travelers. 

Thank you for consideration ofthis request. 

Sincerely, 

Name: Hiroyasu Kikuchi 

Title: Japanese Services Group, Audit Manager 

Company: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu LLP 

Date: ...)..3 I Mttrolt., ~() I () 

Signature: fI,'~Vv ~lf..u~
**Exhibit 32.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with theaccompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period endedMarch 31, 2004, I, Gary D. Gall, President, Chief Executive Officerof the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

 

(1)            such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for theperiod ended March 31, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2004, fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofWestern Sierra Bancorp.

 
| Dated:  May 10, 2004             |
|---------------------------------------|
|                                  |
|                                  |
|                                  | /s/ Gary D. Gall |   |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
#### § 415.7 Payload determination.

A payload determination is required for a launch license unless the proposed payload is exempt from payload review under § 415.53 of this part. The FAA conducts a payload review, as described in subpart D of this part, to make the determination. Either a launch license applicant or a payload owner or operator may request a review of its proposed payload using the application procedures contained in part 413 of this subchapter. Upon receipt of an application, the FAA may conduct a payload review independently of a launch license application.
#### City Bank Farmers Trust Company, as Trustee, Appelant, *v.*The Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States et al., Respondents.

(Argued May 28, 1936;

decided July 8, 1936.)

*449
      *George S. Mittendorf*and *Arnold Furst*for appellant.

*Peter C. Mann*for the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, respondent.

*Dean Potter*for Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, respondent.

*Bayard H. Ames, Louis W. Dawson*and *Frederick L. Allen*for The Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ.