alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Tukuh Technologies U.S. Department
of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590

August 28
,2015 Re: Request to Amend Exemption No
.11916 to Regulatory Docket No FAA-2015

-1255 for Tukuh Technologies for additional Aircraft

. Dear Sir orMadam: Tukuh Technologies respectfully requests the addition of the following aircraft to our Exemption No. 1255 and COA FAA
-2015

-1255-333E

: Additional Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Requested

: 1. DJIInspire 1- Previous Grants of Exemption approved for Drone Fleet & Aerospace Management Inc. (Exempt

i onNo
.11253A) and Pacific Aviation LLC (Exemption No. 11336) 2 .SenseFiy eXam- Previous Grant of Exemption approved for SenseFiy Ltd. (Exemption No. 11263A) Tukuh Technologies existing Unmanned Aircraft System Aviation Standard Operating Procedures (TASOPS) and UAS Education and Training Program will apply to the additional Aircraft. We will follow the recommended maintenance and operations parameters set forth by each of these respective UAS manufacturers.

At all times the UAS Ope

rator will comply with federal rule, regulation, or publ

i claw regardless of UAS manufacturer publications

. If youhave anyfurther questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.Thank youfor yourconsideration
of this matter. 1600 Genessee, Su

i te 860 Kansas City, MO 64102
www

.tu k uh

.com Page 11
§ 51.313 Just, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms and conditions for the provision of unbundled network elements. ( a ) The terms and conditions pursuant to which an incumbent LEC provides access to unbundled network elements shall be offered equally to all requesting telecommunications carriers.
( b ) Where applicable, the terms and conditions pursuant to which an incumbent LEC offers to provide access to unbundled network elements, including but not limited to, the time within which the incumbent LEC provisions such access to unbundled network elements, shall, at a minimum, be no less favorable to the requesting carrier than the terms and conditions under which the incumbent LEC provides such elements to itself.
( c ) An incumbent LEC must provide a carrier purchasing access to unbundled network elements with the pre-ordering, ordering, provisioning, maintenance and repair, and billing functions of the incumbent LEC's operations support systems.
§ 213.0 Authority. ( a ) The voice and message precedence procedures for departments and agencies of the Federal Government prescribed by this part are prescribed pursuant to Executive Order No. 12046 (43 FR 13349 *et seq.*) and the President's memorandum of August 21, 1963, which established the National Communications System (28 FR 9413; 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 858).
( b ) The procedures applicable to communications common carriers and non-Federal Government users prescribed by this part are prescribed by authority conferred upon the President by subsection 606(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and delegated to the National Security Council by Executive Order 12046. That authority under section 606(a) may be exercised only during the continuance of a war in which the United States is engaged.
?

100

100

400

100

100

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

200

¬«98

¬«98

¬«98

¬«98

H Y D E R D

CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

ESTADOS UNIDOS MEXICANOS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

ESTADOS UNIDOS MEXICANOS

IMPERIAL CO

Yuha Wash

Yuha Wash

Yuha Wash

D IXIE D RAIN TW O

D I XI E D RA I N T W O

D I XI E D

RAI N

TW

O

Westside

Main

Canal

Sunrise

Butte

Yuha Buttes

Yuha Desert

Shell

Beds

West Mesa

Yuha

Basin

Mount

Signal

Painted

Gorge

Yuha

Basin

Seeley

Coyote

Wells

Plaster

City

3612

36

36

13

14

21

17

36

36

15

36

36

36

3622

36

19

36

36

16

20

18

24000m

23

36 N

16

36

13

18

12

17

36

36

36

36

14

36

23

36

36

20

11

36

36

36 000mN

36

21

22

19

6

3624

6 607 08 6 10 11 6 6 000m 06 09 6 6 612 613 14 615 616 17 E

607 608 609 610 611 6 6 6

6

13 616

680

6 000m 06 E 12 614 15

40'

FEET

1

710000 FEET

50'

30"

47'

42'

6

000 FEET

40'

30"

000

42'

30"

850

115°

115°52'30" 50' 47'30"

30"

45'

37'30"

52' 45'

32°

32°

37'

115°

45'

32°

30"

32°

810

FEET

45'

1 000

115°

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

CALIFORNIA

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

YUHA BASIN, CA-BCN

2012

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

YUHA BASIN QUADRANGLE

CALIFORNIA-BAJA CALIFORNIA NORTE

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

This map was produced to conform with the

National Geospatial Program US Topo Product Standard, 2011.

A metadata file associated with this product is draft version 0.6.1

CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET

NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0

MILES

1

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

Imagery......................................................NAIP, May 2010

Roads................................................©2006-2011 TomTom

Names...............................................................GNIS, 2011

Hydrography.................National Hydrography Dataset, 2010

Contours.............................National Elevation Dataset, 2006

Boundaries..............Census, IBWC, IBC, USGS, 1972 - 2010

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 11S

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: California Coordinate System of 1983

(zone 6)

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

PS

11S

×

Ù

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2012 MAGNETIC NORTH

DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

0° 38 ́

11 MILS

11° 46 ́

209 MILS
#### § 32.6532 Network administration expense.

This account shall include costs incurred in network administration. This includes such activities as controlling traffic flow, administering traffic measuring and monitoring devices, assigning equipment and load balancing, collecting and summarizing traffic data, administering trunking, and assigning interoffice facilities and circuit layout work.
#### § 25.401 Satellite DARS applications subject to competitive bidding.

Mutually exclusive initial applications for DARS service licenses are subject to competitive bidding. The general competitive bidding procedures set forth in part 1, subpart Q of this chapter will apply unless otherwise provided in this part.

[67 FR 45373, July 9, 2002]
Exhibit 23 (a)

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Numbers 333-33214, 333-47824, and 333-136863) of Pinnacle Data Systems, Inc. of our report relating to the financial statements of Pinnacle Data Systems, Inc. dated March 21, 2007,
appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Pinnacle Data Systems, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006.



|                             
|-----------------------------
|                             
|/s/ HAUSSER + TAYLOR LLC     
|Columbus, Ohio March 29, 2007
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"19-2130: SHEA v. US [OPINION], Precedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"oqyBPjUH65\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/9-24-2020-19-2130-shea-v-us-opinion-19-2130-opinion-9-24-2020_1658501\/\">19-2130: SHEA v. US [OPINION], Precedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/9-24-2020-19-2130-shea-v-us-opinion-19-2130-opinion-9-24-2020_1658501\/embed\/#?secret=oqyBPjUH65\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“19-2130: SHEA v. US [OPINION], Precedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"oqyBPjUH65\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Opinions\/Orders posted: SHEA v. US [OPINION](pdf) Appeal Number: 19-2130 Origin: CFC Precedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
§ 301.110 Organization and operations. ( a ) *Chair.* ( 1 ) The member of the Technical Panel appointed by the Assistant Secretary pursuant to § 301.100(a) of this subpart shall be the Chair of the Technical Panel.
( 2 ) The Chair of the Technical Panel may designate a Vice-Chair who may act as Chair in the absence of the Chair.
( b ) *Procedures of and actions by the Technical Panel.* ( 1 ) The Technical Panel may meet either in person or by some mutually agreeable electronic means to take action on the reports required by § 301.120 of this subpart or in providing technical assistance to a Dispute Resolution Board pursuant to § 301.130 of this subpart.
( 2 ) Meetings of the Technical Panel may be convened as necessary for the efficient and timely dispatch of business by either NTIA or the Chair of the Technical Panel to consider reports and any action thereon and to provide technical assistance to a Dispute Resolution Board pursuant to § 301.130 of this subpart.
( 3 ) The Technical Panel shall endeavour to reach its decisions unanimously. Absent unanimous consent of all three members of the Technical Panel, a concurring vote of a majority of the total panel membership constitutes an action of the Technical Panel.
( 4 ) A majority of the Technical Panel members constitutes a quorum for any purpose.
( 5 ) The Chair of the Technical Panel, in consultation with the other members, may adopt additional policies and procedures to facilitate the efficient and timely dispatch of panel business.
( 6 ) The Technical Panel may consult Federal entity subject matter experts as necessary regarding Federal mission risks and other relevant issues while assessing the reasonableness of costs and timelines in the Federal entity's Transition Plans so long as such consultations are disclosed in the Technical Panel's report.
( c ) *Administrative support.* NTIA shall provide the Technical Panel with the administrative support services necessary to carry out its duties under this part.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Judge Biographies - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"2NpYeS0Aa8\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/home\/the-court\/judges\/judge-biographies\/\">Judge Biographies<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/home\/the-court\/judges\/judge-biographies\/embed\/#?secret=2NpYeS0Aa8\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Judge Biographies” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"2NpYeS0Aa8\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Kimberly A. Moore, Chief Circuit Judge KIMBERLY A. MOORE was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2006 and assumed the duties of Chief Circuit Judge on May 22, 2021.\u00a0 Prior to her appointment, Chief Judge Moore was a Professor of Law from 2004 to 2006 and Associate Professor of Law from 2000 to 2004 […]"}
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

CLOUDOFCHANGE, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

NCR CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellant

______________________

2023-1111

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Western District of Texas in No. 6:19-cv-00513-ADA, Judge 

Alan D. Albright.

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

CLOUDOFCHANGE, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

NCR CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee

______________________

2023-1170

______________________

Case: 23-1111 Document: 60 Page: 1 Filed: 02/22/2024
2 CLOUDOFCHANGE, LLC v. NCR CORPORATION

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Western District of Texas in No. 6:19-cv-00513-ADA, Judge 

Alan D. Albright.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R

Upon consideration of CloudofChange, LLC’s unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss its cross-appeal, Appeal No. 2023-1170*, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 42(b), and the parties’ agreement as to the allocation of costs,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted to the extent that Appeal No. 

2023-1170 is dismissed.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs regarding Appeal 

No. 2023-1170.

(3) The revised official caption for Appeal No. 2023-

1111 is reflected in this order. 

 

* The motion incorrectly states that 

CloudofChange’s cross-appeal is Appeal No. 2023-1111. 

Case: 23-1111 Document: 60 Page: 2 Filed: 02/22/2024
CLOUDOFCHANGE, LLC v. NCR CORPORATION 3

(4) The Clerk of Court shall transmit a copy of this order to the merits panel assigned to Appeal No. 2023-1111.

February 22, 2024

 Date

FOR THE COURT

ISSUED AS A MANDATE (as to Appeal No. 2023-1170 

only): February 22, 2024

Case: 23-1111 Document: 60 Page: 3 Filed: 02/22/2024
Editorial Note on Part 1
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 1.703 Appearances. ( a ) *Hearings.* Except as otherwise required by § 1.221 regarding application proceedings, by § 1.91 regarding proceedings instituted under section 312 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, or by Commission order in any proceeding, no written statement indicating intent to appear need be filed in advance of actual appearance at any hearing by any person or his attorney.
( b ) *Oral arguments.* Within 5 days after release of an order designating an initial decision for oral argument or within such other time as may be specified in the order, any party who wishes to participate in the oral argument shall file a written statement indicating that he will appear and participate. Within such time as may be specified in an order designating any other matter for oral argument, any person wishing to participate in the oral argument shall file a written statement to that effect setting forth the reasons for his interest in the matter. The Commission will advise him whether he may participate. (See § 1.277 for penalties for failure to file appearance statements in proceedings involving oral arguments on initial decisions.)
( c ) *Commission counsel.* The requirement of paragraph (b) of this section shall not apply to counsel representing the Commission or the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau.
[28 FR 12450, Nov. 22, 1963, as amended at 67 FR 13223, Mar. 21, 2002]
No. 11-9510.

#### In re Reed.

Petition for writ of mandamus denied.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this

opinion s h ould not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________

No. 96-30932

_________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MICHAEL E WILLIAMS,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Eastern District of Louisiana

(96-CV-1152-F)

November 10, 1997

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Michael E. Williams appeals from the district court’s decision

to dismiss his second petition for habeas corpus pending

certification by this Court under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective

Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”). S ee 28 U.S.C. §

2244(b)(3)(A). Williams contends that the certification

requirement of AEDPA should not apply to his petition because he

filed his motion on April 2, 1996, some 22 days before the

President signed AEDPA into law on April 24, 1996. We agree. S ee-2-

United States v. Carter
, 117 F.3d 262, 264 (5th Cir. 1997) (“§ 2255

appellants are not subject to this COA requirement unless their §

2255 petitions were filed in the district court after the AEDPA’s

effective date of April 24, 1996") (citing Lindh v. Murphy

,

___
U.S. ___, ___, 117 S.Ct. 2059, 2068, 138 L.Ed.2d 481 (1997)).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.
#### § 32.6564 Amortization expense—intangible.

This account shall include the amortization of costs included in Account 2690, Intangibles.

[69 FR 44607, July 27, 2004]
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"20-2099: DUNCAN v. WILKIE [OPINION], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"f2DoqgyG82\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/1-13-2021-20-2099-duncan-v-wilkie-opinion-20-2099-opinion-1-13-2021_1716849\/\">20-2099: DUNCAN v. WILKIE [OPINION], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/1-13-2021-20-2099-duncan-v-wilkie-opinion-20-2099-opinion-1-13-2021_1716849\/embed\/#?secret=f2DoqgyG82\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“20-2099: DUNCAN v. WILKIE [OPINION], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"f2DoqgyG82\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Opinions\/Orders posted: DUNCAN v. WILKIE [OPINION](pdf) Appeal Number: 20-2099 Origin: CAVC Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
No. 11-9764.

#### Espinoza-Castillo *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# Certificate Graduates and Hall of Fame Inductees Honored

/ Published April 20, 2015

Hall of Fame Inductees - Sonny Bhagowalia & Joyce FranceThe National Defense University’s Information Resources Management College (NDU iCollege) held a combined Hall of Fame Ceremony and Certificate Program Graduation on Friday, April 17, 2015 at Fort Lesley J. McNair.  Chancellor Jan Hamby, RADM (Ret.), USN, welcomed graduates, faculty members, and guests to the iCollege.  Nearly 180 students graduated from the college’s various certificate programs, including Chief Information Officer (CIO), Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Cyber Security, Cyber Leadership, Enterprise Architecture (EA), IT Program Management (ITPM), and the Advanced Management Program (AMP).
#### § 5.211 Frequency monitors and measurements.

The licensee of a broadcast experimental radio station shall provide the necessary means for determining that the frequency of the station is within the allowed tolerance. The date and time of each frequency check, the frequency as measured, and a description or identification of the method employed shall be entered in the station log. Sufficient observations shall be made to insure that the assigned carrier frequency is maintained within the prescribed tolerance.
No. 11-9809.

#### Smith *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
#### § 30.407 Antenna polarization.

In the 27,500-28,350 MHz band, system operators are permitted to use any polarization within its service area, but only vertical and/or horizontal polarization for antennas located within 20 kilometers of the outermost edge of their service area.