alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 34500]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13353]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice 00-057]


Notice of Agency Report Forms Under OMB Review

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as part of 
its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, 
invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this 
opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information 
collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Public 
Law 104-13, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). The reports will be utilized by 
the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization as a method 
for determining if developmental assistance provided to small 
disadvantaged businesses by prime contractor's performance meets the 
standards established in NASA policy. The Agency's ability to manage 
the program effectively would be greatly diminished without receiving 
the described reports, which are part of the ongoing performance fee 
evaluation process.

DATES: All comments should be submitted on or before July 30, 2000.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to Mr. Richard Kall, Code 
HK, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC 
20546-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carmela Simonson, NASA Reports 
Officer, (202) 358-1223.
    Title: Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business Concerns.
    OMB Number: 2700-0078.
    Type of review: Extension.
    Need and Uses: Reports are required to monitor Mentor-Protege 
performance and progress according to the Mentor-Protege Agreement. 
Reports are internal control to determine if Agency objectives are met.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.
    Number of Respondents: 48.
    Responses Per Respondent: 2.
    Annual Responses: 96.
    Hours Per Request: 1\1/2\.
    Annual Burden Hours: 140.
    Frequency of Report: Semi-annually.

David B. Nelson,
Deputy Chief Information Officer, Office of the Administrator.
[FR Doc. 00-13353 Filed 5-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          89,623
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,036
<ALLOWANCES>                                       782
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               157,318
<PP&E>                                          25,957
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,419
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 346,533
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           36,387
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           927
<OTHER-SE>                                     299,719
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   346,533
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                64,116
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,863
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                26,447
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,006)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,812
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,319
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,493
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,493
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.05


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Mercury General Corporation (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



(i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the
period ended December 31, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



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



|                        |  |  |  |                                         
|----------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------
|Date: February 25, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/    GABRIEL TIRADOR                  
|                        |  |  |  | Gabriel Tirador, Chief Executive Officer



The foregoing certifications are being furnished
solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, and are not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company,
whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
[Cite as Pishok v. Kelly, 122 Ohio St.3d 292, 2009-Ohio-3452.] 

PISHOK, APPELLANT, v. KELLY, WARDEN, APPELLEE. 

[Cite as Pishok v. Kelly, 122 Ohio St.3d 292, 2009-Ohio-3452.] 

Appeal from dismissal of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus — Habeas corpus 

not available to remedy claim concerning validity or sufficiency of an 

indictment — Judgment affirmed. 

(No. 2009-0342 — Submitted July 14, 2009 — Decided July 21, 2009.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Trumbull County, 

No. 2008-T-0093, 2009-Ohio-287. 

__________________ 

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the 

petition for a writ of habeas corpus of appellant, David J. Pishok. Habeas corpus 

is not available to challenge the validity or sufficiency of a charging instrument. 

McCuller v. Hudson, 121 Ohio St.3d 168, 2009-Ohio-721, 902 N.E.2d 979, ¶ 1. 

Following Pishok’s conviction and sentence for crimes charged in the indictment, 

the judgment bound him, and he had an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of 

law by appeal to raise his claim that the indictment was defective. Monroe v. 

Jackson, 119 Ohio St.3d 344, 2008-Ohio-4480, 894 N.E.2d 43, ¶ 4. 

Judgment affirmed. 

MOYER, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR, 

O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 

__________________ 

 David J. Pishok, pro se. 

 Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and M. Scott Criss, Assistant 

Attorney General, for appellee. 

______________________
```

                                                                   Exhibit 32(b)

                CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In  connection  with  the  Annual  Report  of Lynch  Corporation,  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-K for the year ended  December 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Eugene
Hynes, Principal Financial Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.
C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to my knowledge:

          (1)  The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a)
               of 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 the Company.

May 18, 2006
                                     /s/ Eugene Hynes
                                     ---------------------------------------
                                     Name: Eugene Hynes
                                     Title: Principal Financial Officer
```
#### § 780.12 Work exempt under another section of the Act.

The combination (tacking) of exempt work under one exemption with exempt work under another exemption is permitted. For instance, the overtime pay requirements are not considered applicable to an employee who does work within section 13(b)(12) for only part of a workweek if all of the covered work done by him during the remainder of the workweek is within one or more equivalent exemptions under other provisions of the Act. If the scope of such exemptions is not the same, however, the exemption applicable to the employee is equivalent to that provided by whichever exemption provision is more limited in scope. For instance, an employee who devotes part of a workweek to work within section 13(b)(12) and the remainder to work exempt under section 7(c) must receive the minimum wage and must be paid time and one-half for his overtime work during that week for hours over 10 a day or 50 a week, whichever provides the greater compensation. Each activity is tested separately under the applicable exemption as though it were the sole activity of the employee for the whole workweek in question. The availability of a combination exemption depends on whether the employee meets all the requirements of each exemption which is sought to combine.
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 20IO-NM-230-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory action"?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES () explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
1

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK 

SKYWEST EAS BID FOR ABERDEEN, SD (ABR)

NOVEMBER 7, 2011

Absolutely!Aberdeen is generally pleased that SkyWest Airlines would submit a bid to 

serve ABR with two flights per day on regional jets. In the process of changing air 

service to ABR from Mesaba/Pinnacle to SkyWest, we would ask that SkyWest consider 

the following:

1) Possible 3rd Flight--ABR has a nice trend line to increasing ridership. To facilitate 

service to our growing community, we would ask that SkyWest keep the

communications lines open with ABR to work toward a possible third flight per day. 

2) Flight Times—We understand that SkyWest is open to community input on the flight 

times for its first two flights per day. A!A stands ready to provide input to SkyWest

about flight times that make sense to the business traveler from the Aberdeen area, 

knowing that several of the region’s economic engines depend on high-quality 

commercial air service, which includes flight times. 

3) Fares—ABR had done considerable work with Mesaba/Pinnacle regarding pricing of 

air service, which has served the region well. At some point the previous carrier had 

gotten to the point of price noncompetitive with its pricing strategy, which resulted in 

some decrease in ridership. In this transition, Absolutely!Aberdeen would request that 

the same pricing strategy remain in effect, and that the communications lines remain 

open with ABR and the business community to stay connected on this important issue.

4) High-Volume Seasons—ABR has a tradition of one or two high-volume flight 

seasons, which require additional assistance from the airline serving it. One of the 

primary high-volume flight seasons is Pheasant Season in NE South Dakota. We

understand that SkyWest is open to continuing to serve ABR with larger and more 

aircraft during this season, and asked that it be reminded of this need 4-5 months in 

advance. We would ask that SkyWest keep the communications lines open with ABR 

on this subject, including the possibility of having these discussions and determinations 

further in advance than 4-5 months to accommodate hunter schedules.
2

5) Marketing—To facilitate this transition, and the community’s desire to work toward a 

third flight again, A!A would ask that SkyWest keep its communications lines open to the 

community and business community to discuss cross-marketing opportunities and 

resources, as well as to get the “heads up’ when SkyWest is offering any “special 

promotions”, etc.

Absolutely!Aberdeen stands ready to facilitate any input from high-volume business 

users and SkyWest in any way that can be mutually beneficial.

Respectfully submitted,

Julie M. Johnson

Julie M. Johnson

Executive Director

Absolutely!Aberdeen/Prairie Vision

416 Production Street North

Aberdeen, SD 57401

605-725-5070

Cell: 605-280-3642

www.AberdeenSD.com

"Accelerating the Growth of Aberdeen and the Region!"
§ 96.54 Responsibility for subrecipient audits. Recipients of Federal assistance from DOL are responsible for ensuring that subrecipient organizations who expend $300,000 or more in a fiscal year or $500,000 for fiscal years ending after December 31, 2003 are audited and that any audit findings are resolved in accordance with this part. The recipient shall: ( a ) Determine whether appropriate audit requirements outlined in subpart A have been met;
( b ) Determine whether the subrecipient spent Federal assistance funds provided in accordance with applicable laws and regulations;
( c ) Ensure that appropriate corrective action is taken within six months after receipt of the audit report in instances of non-compliance with Federal law and regulations;
( d ) Consider whether subrecipient audits necessitate adjustment of the recipient's own records; and
( e ) Require that each subrecipient permit independent auditors to have access to the records and financial statements necessary to comply with this part.
[64 FR 14539, Mar. 25, 1999, as amended at 72 FR 37104, July 9, 2007]
_________________________________________ 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

June 26, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

133501 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 133501 

COA: 275452 

Grand Traverse CC: 05-009916-FC 

KENNETH DALE GILDERSLEEVE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 9, 2007 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

t0618 

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. 

June 26, 2007 

 Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 292 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 292

    Designating the week beginning September 9, 2007, as ``National 
                        Assisted Living Week''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             August 2, 2007

     Mr. Crapo (for himself and Mr. Thune) submitted the following 
    resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

                           September 6, 2007

                Reported by Mr. Leahy, without amendment

                           September 7, 2007

                        Considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Designating the week beginning September 9, 2007, as ``National 
                        Assisted Living Week''.

Whereas the number of elderly and disabled citizens of the United States is 
        increasing dramatically;
Whereas assisted living is a long-term care service that fosters choice, 
        dignity, independence, and autonomy in the elderly and disabled across 
        the United States;
Whereas the National Center for Assisted Living created National Assisted Living 
        Week;
Whereas the theme of National Assisted Living Week 2007 is ``Legacies of Love''; 
        and
Whereas this theme highlights the privilege, value, and responsibility of 
        passing the legacies of the lives of the elderly and disabled of the 
        United States down through the generations that care for and love them: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) designates the week beginning September 9, 2007, as 
        ``National Assisted Living Week''; and
            (2) urges all people of the United States--
                    (A) to visit friends and loved ones who reside at 
                assisted living facilities; and
                    (B) to learn more about assisted living services, 
                including how assisted living services benefit 
                communities in the United States.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 780.701 Statutory provision.

Section 13(b)(14) of the Fair Labor Standards Act exempts from the overtime provisions of section 7:

Any employee employed within the area of production (as defined by the Secretary) by an establishment commonly recognized as a country elevator, including such an establishment which sells products and services used in the operation of a farm: *Provided,* That no more than five employees are employed in the establishment in such operations * * *.
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 the Treasury

###### Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 

# AGENCY:

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

The Advisory Committee to the National Center for State and Local Law Enforcement Training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center will meet on June 7, 2000. The agenda for this meeting includes remarks by the Committee Co-Chairs, Karen Wehner, Deputy Assistant Secretary (LE), Department of the Treasury, and Mary Lou Leary, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, Department of Justice; progress reports on initiatives and training programs; and presentations on collaborative programs presented by the National Center. 

# ADDRESSES:

James J. Rowley Training Center, 9200 Powder Mill Road, Laurel, Maryland. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Hobart M. Henson, Director, National Center for State and Local Law Enforcement Training, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, Glynco, GA 31524, 912-267-2322. 

Dated: May 17, 2000. 

Hobart M. Henson, 

Director, National Center for State and Local Law Enforcement Training. 

[FR Doc. 00-12886 Filed 5-22-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810-32-P
MORGAN STANLEY DEAN WITTER
CREDIT CORPORATION

January 7, 2000

As of and for the year ended  December  31,  1999,  Morgan  Stanley  Dean Witter
Credit  Corporation  (the "Company") has complied in all material  respects with
the minimum servicing standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of
America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers. As of and for
this same period, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., the Company's parent, had in
effect a fidelity  bond in excess of $25  million  and an errors  and  omissions
policy in excess of $25 million under which the Company was covered.


Nancy S. Donovan
President

Leroy Hodo
Vice President and Controller

2500 Lake Cook Road. 3 West. Riverwoods. Illinois 60015
Argued and submitted November 13,

affirmed December 16, 1992

#### DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, *Respondent, v.*COLUMBIA COUNTY, *Petitioner.*

(LUBA 92-073; CA A76896)

843 P2d 996

John K. Knight, Columbia County Counsel, St. Helens, argued the cause and filed the brief for petitioner.

John T. Bagg, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Charles S. Crookham, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Deits and Durham, Judges.

RICHARDSON, P. J.

*209RICHARDSON, P. J.

Columbia County seeks review of LUBA’s decision that an amendment to the county’s zoning ordinance violates several applicable state statutes and regulations. The general thrust of the amendment is to allow the partition of lots in certain resource zones if two or more dwellings are located on any such lot as a nonconforming use. The partitions would not require the application of the approval standards and other requirements for uses on resource land under the state and corresponding local provisions. The general thrust of the county’s defense of the amendment is that divisions of resource land do not establish new uses, independently of the dwellings that the land surrounds, and statutory and regulatory approval standards therefore have no application. That general argument is wrong, *see*ORS 215.263; *1000 Friends of Oregon v. LCDC,*72 Or App 443, 696 P2d 550, *rev den*299 Or 584 (1985), and LUBA correctly rejected it. LUBA was also correct in rejecting the county’s more specific arguments, which warrant no discussion by us.

LUBA’s disposition was to affirm the amendment in part and to remand it in part. The basis for the partial affirmance was that, although the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) appealed from the adoption of the amendment as a whole, its assignments pertained to less than all of its provisions. The basis for a remand rather than an outright reversal of the parts of the amendment that LUBA held to be invalid is not apparent to us.

DLCD does not argue that LUBA’s disposition is wrong in those particulars, so our concerns will not affect our disposition. We nevertheless state them, because they may have some bearing on subsequent events. The parts of the amendment that DLCD did not challenge *may*acquire validation by virtue of ORS 197.625, independently of LUBA’s decision. However, LUBA accepted all of the bases for DLCD’s challenge and affirmed nothing. The partial affirmance appears inconsistent and should not have been included in its disposition. Under our reading of LUBA’s opinion, the parts of the amendment that DLCD did challenge were correctly held to be wholly invalid. Consequently, we *210also question why LUBA remanded the case instead of reversing the county ordinance.

Affirmed.