alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 92 (Thursday, May 11, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 30423]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11759]



[[Page 30423]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Library of Medicine; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), 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 Library of Medicine Special Emphasis 
Panel; Internet Connections for Medical Institutions.
    Date: June 8-9, 2000.
    Time: June 8, 2000, 1:30 p.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Marriott Hotel, 5151 Pooks Hill Road, Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Time: June 9, 2000, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Marriott Hotel, 5151 Pooks Hill Road, Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Sharee Pepper, Scientific Review Administrator, 
Health Scientist Administrator, Office of Extramural Programs, 
National Library of Medicine, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 301, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-4933.


(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.879, 
Medical Library Assistance, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: May 3, 2000.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-11759 Filed 5-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 99.5


CERTIFICATION


REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND


SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18


OF THE UNITED STATES CODE




Gildan Activewear Inc. (the “Corporation”) is filing its annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended September 29, 2013 (the “Report”) with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.




I, Glenn J. Chamandy, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:




1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. 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 the Corporation.




Dated: November 26, 2013




(S) Glenn J. Chamandy


Name:         Glenn J. Chamandy


Title:           President and Chief Executive Officer





CERTIFICATION


REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND


SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18


OF THE UNITED STATES CODE




Gildan Activewear Inc. (the “Corporation”) is filing its annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended September 29, 2013 (the “Report”) with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.




I, Laurence G. Sellyn, Executive Vice-President, Chief Financial and Administrative Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:




1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. 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 the Corporation.




Dated: November 26, 2013




(S) Laurence G. Sellyn


Name:     Laurence G. Sellyn


Title:
Executive Vice-President,

Chief Financial and Administrative Officer
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24857-

E
§ 29.511 Ground load: unsymmetrical loads on multiple-wheel units. ( a ) In dual-wheel gear units, 60 percent of the total ground reaction for the gear unit must be applied to one wheel and 40 percent to the other.
( b ) To provide for the case of one deflated tire, 60 percent of the specified load for the gear unit must be applied to either wheel except that the vertical ground reaction may not be less than the full static value.
( c ) In determining the total load on a gear unit, the transverse shift in the load centroid, due to unsymmetrical load distribution on the wheels, may be neglected.
[Amdt. 29-3, 33 FR 966, Jan. 26, 1968]
# EUR-Lex - 31996R2059 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31996R2059

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 2059/96 of 28 October 1996 postponing the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 on certain marketing standards for eggs in Sweden **

*
Official Journal L 276 , 29/10/1996 P. 0011 - 0011 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2059/96 of 28 October 1996 postponing the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 on certain marketing standards for eggs in Sweden

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, and in particular Article 149 thereof,

Whereas Sweden took measures, in accordance with Article 167 of the Act of Accession to postpone until 1 January 1997 the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 818/96 (2),

Whereas the economic situation of the Swedish egg industry after accession as well as other factors like the envisaged reorganization of the Swedish food control system, the uncertainty about future welfare and hygiene rules have delayed the transition from the existing Swedish regime to the common marketing standards for eggs; whereas Sweden should be authorized to postpone application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 until 1 January 1998 in accordance with Article 149 (1) of the Act of Accession;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Poultrymeat and Eggs,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 for eggs produced and marketed in Sweden shall be postponed until 1 January 1998.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 1 January 1997.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 28 October 1996.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 173, 6. 7. 1990, p. 5.

(2) OJ No L 111, 4. 5. 1996, p. 1.
#### HOUZE CONVEX GLASS CO. v. UNITED STATES

[81 C. Cls. 661; 296 U. S. 611]

Petition for writ of certiorari *denied*by the Supreme Court October 14, 1935.
Sarah Meservey Arlington, Virginia 

As a high school math teacher I try to make some part of every unit I teach relevant to the realworld and so I have sought out global data with patterns for students to analyze, and a while 

back I was struck by the data published- and in some cases by the US government, on Co2 

levels, global warming, ocean acidification, and loss of habitat and species extinction. It made 

for great linear and exponential regression projects. But it was alarming. Occasionally students 

doing these projects ask me what is being done about it. It's hard to say "not much" but that is 

the truth. 

My 16 year old son Max is in the Environmental Club at his high school and he testified in front 

of the VA state corporation commission last month about the dangers of co2 pollution, and 

about virginia being a top pollution creator and at the back of the pack for creating renewables. I 

told him to write a speech but he didn't. He just made some visuals and described the science 

behind the issues and talked about what needs to happen. I borrowed a couple of his charts to 

show you as they are fairly telling. (show some pictures). So we need national standards and 

enforcement because it isn't happening in virginia. 

He was so eloquent and I wish he could be here instead of me but the parting comment he left 

that commission with was ... Why can't we be near the top of the list. Why do we have to bring 

down the national average? And that was a good question for Virginia. And its relevant for the 

US as well. Why do we have to be creating the bulk of the C02 problem in the world and 

contributing less to the solution? Why can't we be our usual innovative selves and be up near 

the top of the list globally? And that's where the EPA comes in. 

I know it's out of fashion to talk about being a good steward of the earth, doing the right thing, 

being ethical. let's just make money. Money and jobs .. Well amazingly we are at the confluence 

of where doing right will also be doing the profitable thing. Study after study is showing that 

investment in renewables will bring unparalleled job growth. 

Look, we would not be in this fix right now if we had made industry and individuals pay for their 

pollution. If I drive down the highway and I dump my trash out the window I'm going to get in 

trouble. Right? It's actually totally amazing that dirty power companies are allowed to pollute to 

the level they are, and ordinary citizens have been paying massive subsidies to them for years. 

In closing, my principal always says "no excused" ---like "don't tell me the kids are to lazy, 

inspire them". Well that's what I'm saying here. We need results from our government and we 

need to bring down levels of C02 levels down drastically - and we need that now. This agency 

is tasked with protecting the environment, and ordinary citizens like me expect it to do its job, no 

matter the pressures. You need to put forth and enforce the strongest Carbon Pollution 

Standards possible.
J

~~ jEo STq T

~
S UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

p ~ ~ i Q

PROZ 02

~ G

~ \ 

### MAR 1 6 2011

OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION

J R Stroble, Manager National TRU Program Carlsbad Field Office U.S. Department of Energy P.O. Box 3090 Carlsbad, NM 88221-3090

Dear Mr. Stroble:
This letter provides the results of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) continued compliance inspection of the Central Characterization Project (CCP) waste characterization (WC) program for contact-handled (CH) and remote-handled (RH) transuranic (TRU) waste at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) near ldaho Falls, ID. This inspection occurred on November 16-17, 2010. As a result of this continued compliance inspection, F.,PA confirmed that the INL-CCP continues to characterize CH and RH TRU waste consistent with the conditions and limitations from EPA's baseline approval granted in November 2005 (CH) and January 2007 (RH) (EPA Air pocket No. A-98-49; II-A4-59 and No. A-98-49; I I-A4-72). The enclosed report (EPA Air pocket No. A-98-49;1I-A4-142) gives the details of the evaluation. In accordance with 40 CFR 194.8(b), during this on-site inspection, EPA sampled the following TRU waste characterization activities and processes: • Acceptable knowledge (AK) for CH and RH waste streams • Two nondestructive assay (NDA) systems operated by INL-CCP for characterizing CH TRU wastes: the Waste Assay Gamma Spectrometer (WAGS) and the Super High Efficiency Neutron Counter (SuperHENC) • Real-time radiography (RTR) for CH retrievably stored 'TRU debris waste (S5000) • Visual Examination (VE) for newly generated CH and RH TRU waste
During the inspection, EPA issued a concern in the area of RTR of CH waste. That concern is resolved based on the infonnation submitted to EPA and through follow up discussions between EPA and DOE.

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov RecycledlRecyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper

### EPA continues to approve the INL-CCP CH and RH TRU WC program in the

configuration observed during this inspection consistent with the limitations described in the baseline inspection report and in follow on Tier 1 approval reports as cited. EPA confirmed that INL-CCP has appropriately implemented and informed EPA of Tier 2 changes since the baseline inspections cited above. If you have any questions, please contact Rajani Joglekar (202 343-9462) or rd Feltcorn (202 343- 9422). Sincerely >

Tom Peake, Director Center for Waste Management and Regulations

Enclosure

ec:electronic distribution Alton Harris, DOE EM Ed Ziemianski, CBFO Court Fesmire, CBFO Norma Casteneda, CBFO Dennis Miehls, CBFO Martin Navarrete, CBFO Jon Edwards, EPA Steve Zappe, NMED David Ploetz, WTS Allison Pangle, CTAC
Editorial Note on Part 302
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 302 appear at 84 FR 15935, Apr. 16, 2019.

§ 302.702 Institution of proceedings. ( a ) Proceedings for the determination of rates of compensation for the transportation of mail may be commenced by the filing of a petition by an air carrier whose rate is to be fixed, or the U.S. Postal Service, or upon the issuance of an order by the DOT decisionmaker.
( b ) The petition shall set forth the rate or rates sought to be established, a statement that they are believed to be fair and reasonable, the reasons supporting the request for a change in rates, and a detailed economic justification sufficient to establish the reasonableness of the rate or rates proposed.
( c ) In any case where an air carrier is operating under a final mail rate uniformly applicable to an entire rate-making unit as established by the DOT decisionmaker, a petition must clearly and unequivocally challenge the rate for such entire rate-making unit and not only a part of such unit.
( d ) All petitions, amended petitions, and documents relating thereto shall be served upon the U.S. Postal Service by sending a copy to the Assistant General Counsel, Transportation Division, Washington, DC 20260-1124, by registered or certified mail, postpaid, prior to the filing thereof with the Department. Proof of service on the U.S. Postal Service shall consist of a statement in the document that the person filing it has served a copy as required by this section.
( e ) Answers to petitions shall be filed within twenty (20) days after service of the petition.
§ 417.101 Scope. This subpart contains public safety requirements that apply to the launch of an orbital or suborbital expendable launch vehicle from a Federal launch range or other launch site. If the FAA has assessed the Federal launch range, through its launch site safety assessment, and found that an applicable range safety-related launch service or property satisfies the requirements of this subpart, then the FAA will treat the Federal launch range's launch service or property as that of a launch operator without need for further demonstration of compliance to the FAA if: ( a ) A launch operator has contracted with a Federal launch range for the provision of the safety-related launch service or property; and
( b ) The FAA has assessed the Federal launch range, through its launch site safety assessment, and found that the Federal launch range's safety-related launch service or property satisfy the requirements of this subpart. In this case, the FAA will treat the Federal launch range's process as that of a launch operator.
#### § 260.3 Applicability.

This part applies to: covered carriers that are the merchants of record; covered carriers that operate the flight or, for multiple-carrier itineraries, covered carriers that operate the last segment of a flight where a ticket agent is the merchant of record for a checked bag fee; and covered carriers that fail to provide an ancillary service (other than checked bag service) for which the consumer paid where a ticket agent is the merchant of record for an ancillary service fee other than checked bag fee.
01/31/2012 13:52 FAX 3107256816 AWP-7 

To· ~· 

Company: 

_£hone: 

F'"x: 

From: 

;:Iitle: 

Date: 

Descnptlon of 

itc;m being 

transmitted: 

ALJ Goodwin; FAA Hearing Docket 

Clerk, & Robert Hajek, Esq. 

Department of Transportation, FAA, & 

Attornev at Law 

(202)366-7536, (202)493-5142 & 

(858) 792-1799 . 

Lierre Green 

Attorney 

January 31, 2012 

In the Matter of K.S. Awltlon d/b/a/ S1erra 

Academy of Aeronautics, Complainant's 

Withdrawal of the Compl<:lint 

PER YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW 

lill 001/003 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AWP-7 

PO Box 92007 

Los. Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

Telephone: (310) 725-7117 

Facsimile: (310) 725-6816 

Email: lierre.green@faa.go'r 

Facsimile 

Total Number of pages including the 

cover page: s 

D PLEASE COMMi=ONT 

IJ FOR COORDINATION X HARD COPY TO FOLLOW W/ ENCLOSURE;$ VIA US MAIL 

NOTES/COMMENTS: 

0 U.S. O..partm•m• of Transpe>rtllll<>n 
01/31/2012 13:52 FAX 3107256816 AWP-7 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

141002/003 

In the Matter of K.S. Aviation, INC. 

d/b/a SIERRA ACADEMY OF 

AERONAUTICS 

FAA Docket No.: [To Be Assigned] .• 

• 

Respondent. * FAA Region: Western-Pacific 

* 

* Judge: Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

* FDMS No.: FAA-2011-0483 ******~**************************************** 

MOTION TO WITHDRAW COMPLAINT 

To: The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin and Respondent and its counsel: 

The Regional Counsel for the Western-Pacific Region, Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) through counsel, ht:reby files this Motion for Withdrawal of 

Complaint and seeks dismissal of this action with prejudice. This motion is based on the 

fact the parties have settled this matter, and 1m Order Assesssing Civil Penalty reflecting 

said settlement will be issued :forthwith. 

Respectfully submitted, 

A orne 
01/31/2012 13:52 FAX 3107256816 AWP-7 141003/003 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this date I have faxed and placed in the United St:!tes mail, 

postage prepaid, the executed original of the COMPLAINANT'S MOTION TO 

WITHDRAW COMPLAINT, addressed as follows: 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrativ<' Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

Facsimile: (202)366-7536 

I further certify that on this date, I have faxed and placed in the Unit•~d States 

mail, postage prepaid, a true copy of the of the above to: 

Dated: JAN 3 1 2012 

JeffKam erg 

Legal Technician 

Federal Aviation Administmtion 

800 Independence Avenue, S. W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl 000 

Facsimile: (202)493-5142 

Robert H~ek, Esq. 

828 Stratford Court 

Del Mar, CA 92014-2727 

Facsimile: (858)792-1799 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Federal Aviation. Administration 

Western-Pacific Region 

Hawthorne, California 

2
ERROR.

[Hamilton Circuit Court,

1898.]

Day, Price and Norris, JJ. (Sitting in the First Circuit.)

#### Cincinnati Brick Co. v. John Evans.

Overruling Motion to Direct A Verdict or for new Suit is not a Final Order.

The mere overruling of a motion to direct a verdict or for a non-suit is not a final order affecting a substantial right or deciding the case, and error does not lie.

On Error to the Common Pleas o¿ Hamilton county.

Herron, *Gatch &*Herron, for plaintiff in error.

*Wm.*Littleford,, contra.

Day, J.
Exhibit
10.1

    


    Amendment
No. 1 to the Standard Microsystems Corporation 2008 Supplemental Executive
Retirement Plan

    


    Whereas
Standard Microsystems Corporation (“SMSC”) maintains a Supplemental Executive
Retirement Plan (“Plan”) that was amended and restated as of January 1,
2008;

    


    Whereas
SMSC desires to amend the Plan (the “Amendment”), to, inter alia, freeze the
benefit level for existing participants in the Plan, close the Plan to new
Participants, and correct certain typographical errors in the Plan;

    


    Now,
therefore, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

    


    1.  Section
1.5 of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following language after the
last sentence in Section 1.5:

    


    Notwithstanding anything to the
contrary in this Plan, the Base Annual Salary for Messrs. Peter Byrnes, Aaron
Fisher, Robert Hollingsworth, James Mulski, Walter Siegel and Johnson Tan shall
mean One Hundred and Five Percent (105%) of the annual base salary being earned
by each of them as of February 28, 2010.

    


    2.  Section
2.1 of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following text after the last
sentence in Section 2.1:

    


    The Plan has been closed to new
Participants as of November 3, 2009.

    


    3.  Section
5.1 of the Plan is hereby amended by changing the numbers “5.3” and “5.7” in the
first paragraph of that Section to “5.4” and “5.8” respectively.

    


    4.
Section 3.3 of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the text of this section
in its entirety and replacing it with the following new text:

    


    In the event of any Change in Control,
notwithstanding any provisions of the Plan to the contrary, all Participants who
are employees of  the Company at that time shall immediately become
100% vested in their benefits payable pursuant to the Plan.

    


    5.   Except
as expressly amended herein all terms and conditions of the Plan shall remain in
full force and effect.   All capitalized terms not defined herein
shall have the meaning set forth in the Plan.

    


    6.  This
Amendment shall be effective upon its execution by an officer of
SMSC.

    


    
      
        	
                Standard
      Microsystems Corporation

              
	 
      	 
      
	
                By:

              	
                
                  /s/
      Kris Sennesael

                

              
	
                Its:

              	
                Vice
      President and Chief Financial Officer