alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 4281.1 Purpose and scope. ( a ) *General* — ( 1 ) *Purpose.* When a multiemployer plan terminates by mass withdrawal under section 4041A(a)(2) of ERISA, the plan's assets and benefits must be valued annually under section 4281(b) of ERISA, and plan benefits may have to be reduced or suspended to the extent provided in section 4281 (c) or (d). This part implements the provisions of section 4281 and provides rules for applying for financial assistance from the PBGC under section 4261 of ERISA. The plan valuation rules in this part also apply to the determination of reallocation liability under section 4219(c)(1)(D) of ERISA and subpart B of part 4219 of this chapter for multiemployer plans that undergo mass withdrawal (with or without termination).
( 2 ) *Scope.* This part applies to multiemployer plans covered by title IV of ERISA that have terminated by mass withdrawal under section 4041A(a)(2) of ERISA (including plans created by partition pursuant to section 4233 of ERISA). Subpart B of this part also applies to covered multiemployer plans that have undergone mass withdrawal without terminating.
( b ) *Subpart B.* Subpart B establishes rules for determining the value of multiemployer plan benefits and assets, including outstanding claims for withdrawal liability, for plans required to perform annual valuations under section 4281(b) of ERISA or allocate unfunded vested benefits under section 4219(c)(1)(D) of ERISA.
( c ) *Subpart C.* Subpart C sets forth procedures under which the plan sponsor of a terminated plan shall amend the plan to reduce benefits subject to reduction in accordance with section 4281(c) of ERISA and § 4041A.24(b) of this chapter. Subpart C applies to a plan for which the annual valuation required by § 4041A.24(a) indicates that the value of nonforfeitable benefits under the plan exceeds the value of the plan's assets (including claims for withdrawal liability) if, at the end of the plan year for which that valuation was done, the plan provided any benefits subject to reduction. Benefit reductions required to be made under subpart C shall not apply to accrued benefits under plans or plan amendments adopted on or before March 26, 1980, or under collective bargaining agreements entered into on or before March 26, 1980.
( d ) *Subpart D.* Subpart D sets forth the procedures under which the plan sponsor of an insolvent plan must suspend benefit payments and issue insolvency notices in accordance with section 4281(d) of ERISA and § 4041A.25 (c) and (d) of this chapter. Subpart D applies to a plan that has been amended under section 4281(c) of ERISA and subpart C of this part to eliminate all benefits subject to reduction and to a plan that provided no benefits subject to reduction as of the date on which the plan terminated.
```

[115th Congress Public Law 266]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 132 STAT. 3755]]

Public Law 115-266
115th Congress

                                 An Act

 
  To reauthorize the Global Food Security Act of 2016 for 5 additional 
              years. <<NOTE: Oct. 11, 2018 -  [S. 2269]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: Global Food 
Security Reauthorization Act of 2017.>> 
SECTION 1. <<NOTE: 22 USC 9301 note.>>  SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Global Food Security Reauthorization 
Act of 2017''.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    (a) Assistance To Implement the Global Food Security Strategy.--
Section 6(b) of the Global Food Security Act of 2016 (22 U.S.C. 9305(b)) 
is amended by striking ``fiscal years 2017 and 2018'' and inserting 
``fiscal years 2017 through 2023''.
    (b) Emergency Food Security Program.--Section 492(a) of the Foreign 
Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2292a(a)) is amended by striking 
``fiscal years 2017 and 2018'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2017 through 
2023''.
SEC. 3. GLOBAL FOOD SECURITY STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS.

    Section 8(a) of the Global Food Security Act of 2016 (22 U.S.C. 
9307(a)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``Not later than 1 year and 2 years'' and 
        inserting ``During each of the first 7 years''; and
            (2) by striking ``for 2017 and 2018'' and inserting ``at the 
        end of the reporting period''.

    Approved October 11, 2018.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S. 2269:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018):
            June 19, considered and passed Senate.
            Sept. 28, considered and passed House.

                                  <all>
```
§ 511.8 Prehearing statements. ( a ) Every employer, employee, trade association, trade union, or group of employers, employees, associations, or unions in the industry as defined, or in such industry elsewhere in the United States, and every other person who, in the judgment of the committee has an interest sufficient to justify the participation proposed by such party, shall be considered an interested person. No member of the committee may participate as an interested person.
( b ) Any interested person who wishes to participate on his or her own behalf or by counsel shall file a written prehearing statement within such period of time as may be prescribed in a notice of hearing, or other notice published in the Federal Register. The number of copies of such statements and the time and places for filing them will be specified in notices of hearings. The prehearing statement shall describe the person's interest in the proceeding and shall contain: ( 1 ) The prepared statement he or she proposes to give, if any;
( 2 ) A statement of the individual classifications and minimum wage rates, if any, he or she proposes to support;
( 3 ) The written data he or she proposes to introduce in evidence, including all tangible objective data to be submitted pursuant to § 511.13;
( 4 ) The names and addresses of the witnesses he or she proposes to call and a summary of the evidence he or she proposes to develop;
( 5 ) The name and address of the individual who will present his or her case; and
( 6 ) A statement of the approximate length of time his or her case will take. If the prehearing statement is in conformity with the above requirements, the person shall have the right to participate as a party. In accordance with section 6(c) of the Administrative Procedure Act, the industry committee shall, after considering the advice of committee counsel, issue subpoenas, authorized by section 9 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, to parties who make a request therefor accompanied by a clear showing of general relevance and reasonable scope of the evidence sought.
( c ) Prehearing statements of parties shall be made available for examination at the offices where they are filed. Each person who files a prehearing statement should, if requested, make himself or herself available for conference with the committee staff to make any needed clarification of his or her prehearing statement, and arrange details of presenting his or her testimony or case.
( d ) In exceptional circumstances a person who has not filed the prehearing statement required by this section and who does not appear on a witness list filed by a party may nevertheless be permitted, in the discretion of the committee, to offer testimony.
[25 FR 14024, Dec. 31, 1960, as amended at 55 FR 53298, Dec. 28, 1990]
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:**� Sextant Conference, November-December 1943 :papers and minutes of meetings, Sextant and Eureka Conferences
epub|mobi| pdf|
 
SuDoc Number:D 5.2:C76/6
Item Number:0315 (online)
CGP systemNumber:001021887
January 29, 2019
§ 4001.3 Trades or businesses under common control; controlled groups. For purposes of title IV of ERISA: ( a ) ( 1 ) The PBGC will determine that trades and businesses (whether or not incorporated) are under common control if they are “two or more trades or businesses under common control”, as defined in regulations prescribed under section 414(c) of the Code.
( 2 ) The PBGC will determine that all employees of trades or businesses (whether or not incorporated) which are under common control shall be treated as employed by a single employer, and all such trades and businesses shall be treated as a single employer.
( 3 ) An individual who owns the entire interest in an unincorporated trade or business is treated as his own employer, and a partnership is treated as the employer of each partner who is an employee within the meaning of section 401(c)(1) of the Code.
( b ) In the case of a single-employer plan: ( 1 ) In connection with any person, a controlled group consists of that person and all other persons under common control with such person.
( 2 ) Persons are under common control if they are members of a “controlled group of corporations”, as defined in regulations prescribed under section 414(b) of the Code, or if they are “two or more trades or businesses under common control”, as defined in regulations prescribed under section 414(c) of the Code.
_______________________________________ __ Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 28, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh 127987 Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices

v SC: 127987 COA: 252178 Jackson CC: 03-000659-FC JAMAAL SHAHEED HUNT, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 16, 2004 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

p0919 I, CORBIN R. DAVIS, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 28, 2005

Clerk
#### § 779.100 Basic coverage in general.

Except as otherwise provided in specific exemptions, the minimum wage, maximum hours, overtime pay, equal pay, and child labor provisions of the Act have applied and continue to apply subsequent to the 1966 amendments to employees who are individually engaged in interstate commerce or in the production of goods for such commerce as these terms are defined in the Act and to employees in certain enterprises described in the amended section 3(s) which were covered under section 3(s) of the Act prior to the amendments. Through the broadening of the definition of a covered enterprise the Act's coverage was extended to additional employees because of their employment in certain enterprises beginning February 1, 1967, and in certain other enterprises beginning February 1, 1969. Such covered enterprises are described in section 3(s) as enterprises engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce and further described in sections 3(s) (1) through (4) of the amended Act. A detailed discussion of the coverage of employees in those enterprises covered under the prior and amended Act of interest to the retail industry is contained in subpart C of this part. The employer must comply with the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Act with respect to all employees who are covered either because they are individually engaged in interstate or foreign commerce or in the production of goods for such commerce, or because of their employment in an enterprise covered under the prior or amended enterprise definition of the Act, except those who may be denied one or both of these benefits by virtue of some specific exemption provision of the Act. Of special interest to the retailer in a covered enterprise is the exemption from the minimum wage and overtime provisions for certain small retail or service establishments of such enterprise. This exemption is applicable under the conditions and subject to exceptions stated in section 13(a) (2) of the Act to any retail or service establishment which has an annual dollar volume of sales of less than $250,000 (exclusive of certain excise taxes) even if the establishment is a part of an enterprise that is covered by the Act. This exemption and other exemptions of particular interest to retailers and their employees are discussed in subparts D and E of this part. The child labor provisions as they apply to retail or service businesses are discussed in subpart F of this part.
#### § 783.43 Computation of seaman's minimum wage.

Section 6(b) requires, under paragraph (2) of the subsection, that an employee employed as a seaman on an American vessel be paid wages at not less than the rate which will provide to the employee, for the period covered by the wage payment, wages which are equal to compensation for all hours on duty in such period at the hourly rate prescribed for employees newly covered by the Act's minimum wage requirements by reason of the 1961 Amendments (see §§ 783.23 and 783.26). Although the Act takes the workweek as the unit of time to be used in determining compliance with the minimum wage of overtime requirements and in applying the exemptions, Congress, in recognition of the unique working conditions of seamen and of the customs in the industry, made this special provision. Under section 6(b)(2) periods other than a workweek may be used, in accordance with established customs in the industry, as the basis for calculating wages for covered seamen provided the wages equal the compensation at the applicable minimum hourly rate which would be due to the employee for his hours actually spent on duty in the period. This would mean that the wage period may properly cover, for example, the period of a month or of a voyage so long as the seaman receives at the appropriate time compensation at least equal to the prescribed minimum rate for each compensable hour in that pay period. (See also § 531.26 of this chapter concerning requirements of other laws governing calculation of wages and frequency and manner of payment.) To illustrate, where seamen have customarily been paid monthly under an arrangement to perform seamen's duties during stipulated periods and to be off duty during stipulated periods during the month, if such a seaman works 300 hours during the month and receives his monthly compensation in an amount equal to a payment for that number of hours at the applicable minimum rate, there would be compliance with the requirements of section 6(b)(2). The fact that this seaman works a varying number of hours during the weeks comprising the monthly period or that the monthly compensation is disbursed in two or four partial payments to the seaman during the month would not warrant a contrary conclusion.
Sanitized – Attachment 001Page1of1
§ 4043.81 PBGC Form 200, notice of failure to make required contributions; supplementary information. ( a ) *General rules.* To comply with the notification requirement in section 303(k)(4) of ERISA and section 430(k)(4) of the Code, a contributing sponsor of a single-employer plan that is covered under section 4021 of ERISA and (if that contributing sponsor is a member of a parent-subsidiary controlled group) the ultimate parent must complete and submit in accordance with this section a properly certified Form 200 that includes all required documentation and other information, as described in the related filing instructions. Notice is required whenever the unpaid balance of a contribution payment required under sections 302 and 303 of ERISA and sections 412 and 430 of the Code (including interest), when added to the aggregate unpaid balance of all preceding such payments for which payment was not made when due (including interest), exceeds $1 million. ( 1 ) Form 200 must be filed with PBGC no later than 10 days after the due date for any required payment for which payment was not made when due.
( 2 ) If a contributing sponsor or the ultimate parent completes and submits Form 200 in accordance with this section, PBGC will consider the notification requirement in section 303(k)(4) of ERISA and section 430(k)(4) of the Code to be satisfied by all members of a controlled group of which the person who has filed Form 200 is a member.
( b ) *Supplementary information.* If, upon review of a Form 200, PBGC concludes that it needs additional information in order to make decisions regarding enforcement of a lien imposed by section 303(k) of ERISA and section 430(k) of the Code, PBGC may require any member of the contributing sponsor's controlled group to supplement the Form 200 in accordance with § 4043.3(d).
[80 FR 55002, Sept. 11, 2015, as amended at 85 FR 6064, Feb. 4, 2020]
#### § 780.613 “By such farmer.”

The employee's primary employment in agriculture during the exempt week is also required to be by “such farmer.” The phrase “such farmer” refers to the particular farmer by whom the employee is employed in agriculture and who engages in the livestock auction operations as an adjunct to his raising of livestock. Even if an employee may spend more than half of his work time in a workweek in agriculture, he would not be exempt if such employment in agriculture were engaged in for various persons so that less than the primary portion of his workweek was performed in his employment in agriculture by such farmer. For example, an employee may work a 60-hour week and be employed in agriculture for 50 of those hours, of which 20 hours are worked in his employment by the farmer who is engaged in the livestock auction operations, the other 30 being performed for a neighboring farmer. Although this employee was primarily employed in agriculture during the workweek he is not exempt. His primary employment in agriculture was not by the farmer described in section 13(b)(13) as required.
Exhibit 32


                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                     18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wizzard Software Corporation
(the "Registrant") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Quarterly Report"), I, Christopher J. Spencer, President, CEO and Treasurer
of the Registrant, 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 Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


Date: 8/16/04                            /s/Christopher J. Spencer
                                         Christopher J. Spencer
                                         President, CEO, Treasurer and
                                         director
I certify that Johnstown Redevelopment Authority- Dornick Point Sewage Treatment Plant, which operates underNPDES PermitNo. PA0026034, will not accept any oil and gas exploration and/orproduction wastewaters at this facility. Forthe purpose ofthis certification, oil and gas exploration and/or production wastewaters includes, but is not limited to: ground waterproduced from coal seams, shale formation ground water, well drilling fluids, fracturing fluids, shale gas produced water, water produced from conventional and unconventional wells, pit water, containment pond water, and storage pond water.
IfJohnstown Redevelopment Authority
- Dornick Point Sewage Treatment Plant desires to accept oil and gas exploration and/orproduction wastewater after signing this certification, Johnstown Redevelopment Authority
- Dornick Point Sewage Treatment Plant will, prior to acceptance: notify EPA Region III and PADEP ofits intent, take all actions necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act (CWA) and receive all necessary approvals from EPA and PADEP.
As a managing company official, I certify that this statement is true and correct. I am aware that violations ofCW A are punishable under the civil and criminal provisions ofSection 309 ofthe CWA, which provide for the assessment ofpenalties, injunctive reliefand imprisonment. RECEIVED EPA REGION Ill



## OCT 052011 NPDES ENFORCErviENTBRANCH (3WP42)

(Title) Chief Plant Operator

(Date) 

### 9/30/2011
[S. F. No. 1934.

Department Two.

December 23, 1901.]

#### CHARLES W. WELBY, Appellant, v. THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO LAND AND IMPROVEMENT COMPANY, Respondent.

Corporation—Action for Salary—Finding against Contract—Conflicting Evidence—Review upon Appeal.—In an action against a corporation, to recover a salary alleged to be due under a verbal contract, where the judgment was for the corporation, and the court found, upon conflicting evidence, that there was no such contract, the finding is determinative of the case, and it will not be disturbed upon appeal, notwithstanding it may be plausibly urged that the finding was against the preponderance of the evidence.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a new trial. J. M. Seawell, .Judge.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Henry C. Dibble & Dibble, for Appellant.

Jesse W. Lilienthal, for Respondent.

McFARLAND, J.

Action for salary, at the rate of five hundred dollars per month, alleged to be due from defendant to plaintiff for several months of the year 1894, commencing with February of that year. Judgment was for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

The only point made for reversal is the insufficiency of the evidence to support the findings and decision. Appellant’s cause of action rests upon the alleged fact that, on January 28, 1894, the parties verbally contracted that during that year appellant was to receive the same salary which he had been receiving during the previous year,—namely, five hundred dollars per month; but the court found that no such contract had been made, and this finding is determinative of the case against the appellant. Counsel for appellant argues, with a good deal of plausibility and force, that the preponderance of evidence is against the correctness of this finding; but he fails to show that the evidence on the issue was not fairly con*188flicting. The record shows that there was such conflicting evidence; and it cannot be rightly said that there was no substantial evidence pointing to the conclusion at which the court below arrived. Therefore, under the well-settled rule, the finding cannot be disturbed.

The judgment and order denying a new trial are affirmed.

Temple, J., and Henshaw, J., concurred.