alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
4 

NOMINATIONS 

- REPORTED CALENDAR MESSAGE 

No. No NOMINEE, OFFICE, AND PREDECESSOR BY 

* 239 436 A. Elizabeth Jones, of Maryland, a Career Julll, 95 Reported by Mr. Helms 

Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Conunittee on Foreign Relatio~ 

Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador without printed report. ' 

Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the 

United States of America to the Republic of 

Kazakhstan. 

* 240 438 John K Menzies, of Virginia, a Career Member of Julll, 95 Reported by Mr. Helms, 

the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Counselor, Cormnittee on Foreign Relations, 

to be Ambassador Extraordinary and without printed report. 

Plenipotentiary of the United States of 

America to the Republic of Bosnia and 

Herzegovina. 

* 241 440 John Todd Stewart, of California, a Career Julll, 95 Reported by Mr. Helms, 

Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Conunittee on Foreign Relations, 

Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador without printed report. 

Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the 

United States of America to the Republic of 

Moldova. 

* 242 448 Peggy Blackford, of New Jersey, a Career Julll, 95 Reported by Mr. Helms, 

Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Conunittee on Foreign Relations, 

Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary without printed report. 

and Plenipotentiary of the United States of 

America to the Republic of Guinea-Bissau. 

* 243 449 Edward Brynn, ofVermont, a Career Member of Julll, 95 Reported by Mr. Helms, 

the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Conunittee on Foreign Relations, 

Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador without printed report. 

Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the 

United States of America to the Republic of 

Ghana. 

* 245 451 Vicki J. Huddleston, of Arizona, a Career Julll, 95 Reported by Mr. Helms, 

member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Conunittee on Foreign Relations, 

Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary without printed report. 

and Plenipotentiary of the United States of 

America to the Democratic Republic of 

Madagascar. 

* Stgmfies nommee's omm~tment to respond to requests to appear and test~fy before any duly constLtuted comm~ttee of the Senate
#### Selden, appellant, *v.*Fowler.

*Referee—decision upon conflicting evidence.*

Where the evidence is conflicting, it belongs to the referee to pass upon its weight, and upon the credibility of the witnesses; and although the evidence would have warranted a different conclusion, the court will not reverse the decision of the referee, unless it is against the clear and decided weight of the testimony. ■

Appeal from a judgment entered upon the report of" a referee. The action was brought by Gustavus W. Selden against Homer T. Fowler, upon an account for lumber.'

*C. W. White,*for appellant.

*W. E. Scripture,*for respondent.

*786E. Darwin Smith, J.

The head-note states all that is material in-the opinion.

*Judgment affirmed.*
§ 2509.22 When will guidance be published for public notice-and-comment? ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, all proposed CNCS guidance documents determined to be significant within the meaning of § 2509.20 are subject to public notice-and-comment. CNCS shall publish notification in the Federal Register of the proposed significant guidance document and invite public comments for a minimum of 30 days, then publish a response to major concerns raised in the comments when the final guidance document is published.
( b ) The requirements of paragraph (a) of this section will not apply to any significant guidance document for which CNCS finds, in consultation with OIRA, good cause that notice-and-comment procedures are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest (and incorporates the finding of good cause and a brief statement of reasons in the guidance issued).
( c ) CNCS and OIRA may establish an agreement on presumptively exempted categories of guidance; such documents will be presumptively exempt from the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section.
§ 162.1601 Health care electronic funds transfers (EFT) and remittance advice transaction. The health care electronic funds transfers (EFT) and remittance advice transaction is the transmission of either of the following for health care: ( a ) The transmission of any of the following from a health plan to a health care provider: ( 1 ) Payment.
( 2 ) Information about the transfer of funds.
( 3 ) Payment processing information.
( b ) The transmission of either of the following from a health plan to a health care provider: ( 1 ) Explanation of benefits.
( 2 ) Remittance advice.
[65 FR 50367, Aug. 17, 2000, as amended at 77 FR 1590, Jan. 10, 2012; 77 FR 48043, Aug. 10, 2012]
§ 235.61 Definition of terms. For purposes of §§ 235.60-235.66: *Act* means the Social Security Act, as amended.
*A grant to an educational institution* means payments to an educational institution for services rendered under a time limited agreement between the State agency and the eligible educational institution which provides for the training of State or local agency employees or persons preparing for employment with the State or local agency.
*A training program* is the method through which the State agency carries out a plan of educational and training activities to improve the operation of its programs. ( a ) *Initial in-service training* means a period of intensive, task-oriented training to prepare new employees to assume job responsibilities.
( b ) *Continuing training* means an on-going program of training planned to enable employees to: ( 1 ) Reinforce their basic knowledge and develop the required skills for the performance of specific functions, and
( 2 ) acquire additional knowledge and skill to meet changes such as enactment of new legislation, development of new policies, or shifts in program emphasis.
( c ) *Full-time training* means training that requires employees to be relieved of all responsibility for performance of current work to participate in a training program.
( d ) *Part-time training* means training that allows employees to continue full time in their jobs or requires only partial reduction of work activities to participate in a training program outside of the State or local agency.
( e ) *Long-term training* means training for eight consecutive work weeks or longer.
( f ) *Short-term training* means training for less than eight consecutive work weeks.
*FFP or Federal financial participation* means the Federal government's share of expenditures made by a State or local agency under a training program.
*Fringe benefits* means the employer's share of premiums for industrial compensation, employee's retirement, unemployment compensation, health insurance, and similar expenses.
*Persons preparing for employment* means individuals who are not yet employed by the State or local agency, but who have received financial assistance from the State agency for training, and have made a legally binding commitment with the State or local agency for future employment under the conditions of these regulations.
*Stipend* means the basic living allowance paid to a student.
[45 FR 29833, May 6, 1980]
J

~~ jEO sTA r

~

s UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY o ~ /J Q WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 F,

~ lq( ~ OjvG ,~~ 0 

### FEB 15 20 1 12

OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION J.R. Stroble Director, National TRU Program Carlsbad Field Office Department of Energy P.O. Box 3090 Carlsbad, NM 88221 Dear Mr. Stroble: We received your letter dated February 14, 2012, requesting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) concun:ence on the draft recertification memo the Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) plans to issue to the Central Characterization Project (CCP) at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). We concur with CBFO's draft recertification memo reflecting no changes since the previous certification memo issued in July 2011. The EPA limitations applicable to the characterization of CH and RH TRU waste are appropriately included in Attachment 4 of the draft recertification memo. The waste characterization equipment, procedures and processes included in the memo are consistent with EPA's existing approvals at the site. Thank you for providing us with an opportunity to review the draft recertification memo for INL CCP. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at (202) 343-9422 or Rajani Joglekar at (202) 343-9462. Sincerely,

Edward Feltcorn Center for Waste Management and Regulations

Intemet Address (URL) e http://www.epa.gov Recycled/Recyclable e Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Papercc: (Electronic Distribution)

Ed Ziemianski, CBFO Norma Castaneda, CBFO NTP Marcus Pinzel, CBFO NTP Court Fesmire, CBFO QA Site Documents, CBFO Tom Peake, EPA Raymond Lee, EPA
Orlando Antwonie Harris  From the County Court at Law No. 2 

 Appellant of Potter County 

v. 07-04-00505-CR  January 13, 2006 

The State of Texas  Opinion by Justice Reavis 

 Appellee 

JUDGMENT

 Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated January 13, 2006, it is ordered, 

adjudged and decreed that part of the judgment suspending payment of the $1,000 fine 

in favor of two years community supervision is reversed and judgment is hereby 

rendered that appellant’s punishment stands at a $1,000 fine; in all other respects the 

judgment is affirmed. 

 Inasmuch as this is an appeal in forma pauperis, no costs beyond those which 

may have been paid are adjudged. 

 It is further ordered that this decision be certified below for observance. 

o O o
#### § 1619.3 Referral to the Corporation.

If a person requests information, not required to be disclosed by this part, that the Corporation may be required to disclose pursuant to part 1602 of this chapter implementing the Freedom of Information Act, the recipient shall either provide the information or inform the person seeking it how to request it from the Corporation.
Good Neighbor Environmental Board

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Federal Advisory Committee Issues Report on the Environment al , Economic and Health Status of Water Resources in the U.S.

- Mexico Border Region

Washington, D.C., On December 1 2 , the Good Neighb or Environmental Board (GNEB or Board ), will issue its 1 5 th annual report to the President entitled : The Environment al , Economic and Health Status of Water Resources in the U.S.

- Mexico Border Region

. The Board is an independent federal advisory committee that develops recommendations to the President on U.S.

- Mexico border environ ment and infrastructure issues

. The report w ill be accept ed on behalf of the President by Nancy Sutley, Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

.

Given the ongoing drought conditions in the border region, CEQ requested that in its 15 th annual report the Board review the status of water resources and provide recommendations for solutions that will also help address challenges created where river systems and g round water basins span the international border and water demand continues to grow

.
Diane Austin, the Board ’s Chair, states “ Despite significant investments over the past decades, rapid population and business growth, lack of financial resources, gaps in authority and the declining quality of water resources contribute to significant water and water infrastructure needs. ”

T he report recommends a number of specific actions to be initiated by the federal governm ent that will lead to i ncrease d collaboration and coordination

, reduced discharge into border water bodies

, enhanc e d drinking and wastewater infrastructure ; and improved f inancial condition s

.

The Board i s composed of representatives from federal government departments and agencies; state, local, and tribal governments in the border region; and community development, academic, health, environmental, and other non

- governmental organizations . T he U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is responsible for managing the Board’s activities

.

T he 1 5 th Report of the GNEB can be found online at http://www.epa.gov/ocempage/gneb/

. For further information, please contact Mark Joyce , Designated Federal Officer for the Good Neighbor Environmental Board at 202

- 564

- 2130 , or joyce.mark @epa.gov

.
§ 1606.10 Final decision for a termination, debarment, or limited reduction of funding. ( a ) If neither the Corporation nor the recipient requests review by the President of a draft final decision pursuant to § 1606.7 of this part or a recommended decision pursuant to § 1606.9, as provided for in this part, within 10 business days after receipt by the recipient, then the Corporation shall issue to the recipient a final decision containing either the draft final decision or the recommended decision, as the case may be. No further appeal or review will be available under this part.
( b ) The recipient or the Corporation may seek review by the President of a draft final decision or a recommended decision. A request shall be made in writing within 10 business days after receipt of the draft final decision or recommended decision by the party seeking review and shall state in detail the reasons for seeking review.
( c ) The President's review shall be based solely on the administrative record of the proceedings, including the appeal to the President, and any additional submissions, either oral or in writing, that the President may request. A recipient shall be given a copy of, and an opportunity to respond to, any additional submissions made to the President. All submissions and responses made to the President shall become part of the administrative record. Upon request, the Corporation shall provide a copy of the administrative record to the recipient.
( d ) For an appeal of a draft final decision involving a limited reduction of funding pursuant to § 1606.7 of this part (for which there is no right to a hearing under § 1606.8 of this part) the President may not review the appeal if the President has had prior involvement in the proceedings under this part. If the President cannot review the appeal, or the President chooses not to do so, then the appeal shall be reviewed by either the individual designated to do so pursuant to § 1606.5(b) of this part, or by another senior Corporation employee designated by the President who has not had prior involvement in the proceedings under this part.
( e ) As soon as practicable after receipt of the request for review of a draft final decision or a recommended decision, but not later than 30 calendar days thereafter, the President or designee shall adopt, modify, or reverse the draft final decision or the recommended decision, or direct further consideration of the matter. In the event of modification or reversal of a recommended decision pursuant to § 1606.9 of this part, this decision shall conform to the requirements of § 1606.9(b) of this part.
( f ) The decision of the President or designee under this section shall become final upon receipt by the recipient.
Exhibit 31.2

Certification of CFO Pursuant to  Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14  as Adopted Pursuant to  Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I,
Jikun Kim, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of AeroVironment, Inc.;

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

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15(d)-15(f))
for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



Date: June 21, 2011

/s/ JIKUN KIM Jikun Kim
Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
§ 164.312 Technical safeguards. A covered entity or business associate must, in accordance with § 164.306: ( a ) ( 1 ) *Standard: Access control.* Implement technical policies and procedures for electronic information systems that maintain electronic protected health information to allow access only to those persons or software programs that have been granted access rights as specified in § 164.308(a)(4).
( 2 ) *Implementation specifications:* ( i ) *Unique user identification (Required).* Assign a unique name and/or number for identifying and tracking user identity.
( ii ) *Emergency access procedure (Required).* Establish (and implement as needed) procedures for obtaining necessary electronic protected health information during an emergency.
( iii ) *Automatic logoff (Addressable).* Implement electronic procedures that terminate an electronic session after a predetermined time of inactivity.
( iv ) *Encryption and decryption (Addressable).* Implement a mechanism to encrypt and decrypt electronic protected health information.
( b ) *Standard: Audit controls.* Implement hardware, software, and/or procedural mechanisms that record and examine activity in information systems that contain or use electronic protected health information.
( c ) ( 1 ) *Standard: Integrity.* Implement policies and procedures to protect electronic protected health information from improper alteration or destruction.
( 2 ) *Implementation specification: Mechanism to authenticate electronic protected health information (Addressable).* Implement electronic mechanisms to corroborate that electronic protected health information has not been altered or destroyed in an unauthorized manner.
( d ) *Standard: Person or entity authentication.* Implement procedures to verify that a person or entity seeking access to electronic protected health information is the one claimed.
( e ) ( 1 ) *Standard: Transmission security.* Implement technical security measures to guard against unauthorized access to electronic protected health information that is being transmitted over an electronic communications network.
( 2 ) *Implementation specifications:* ( i ) *Integrity controls (Addressable).* Implement security measures to ensure that electronically transmitted electronic protected health information is not improperly modified without detection until disposed of.
( ii ) *Encryption (Addressable).* Implement a mechanism to encrypt electronic protected health information whenever deemed appropriate.
[68 FR 8376, Feb. 20, 2003, as amended at 78 FR 5694, Jan. 25, 2013]
#### Jacoby v. Johnston *et al.,*appellants.

*Arbitration—effect of submission.*

The parties to an action submitted the matters involved to arbitration, agreeing “ that the action . . . and all proceedings therein or in relation thereto shall be stayed pending the award ” of the arbitrators. *Held,*that under the submission the cause might be stricken from the calendar, but could not be discontinued on the motion of one of the parties.

Appeal from an order at special term denying the defendants’ motion for an order to discontinue the action and strike the cause from the calendar. The action was brought by Henry Jacoby against David Johnston and John Johnston, to recover for wrongfully entering upon and taking from plaintiff’s lands certain timber, etc. The case had been submitted to arbitration, after the action was commenced, after which plaintiff put the cause upon the circuit calendar and noticed it for trial. The opinion states the other material facts.

*J. A. Thompson,*for appellants.

Davis, P. J.

The submission to arbitration of the subject-matter of this action was full and absolute. Its effect would have been a discontinuance of the action, but for the clause making special provision in relation to the action. That clause provides, “That the action in the supreme court aforesaid, and all proceedings therein or in relation thereto, *shall he stayed*pending the award of said arbitrators.”

The stay of proceedings thus provided for indicates an intention not to have the submission operate as an' absolute discontinuance, as otherwise it would have done. It does, however, operate as a perpetual stay “ pending the award,” which must be construed to mean until the award is made. The making of the award, in the absence of any stipulation for the entering of judgment upon the same in the action, would at once operate as a final discontinuance of the suit; so that, practically, while the submission remains in force, the suit in court is completely suspended. Neither party has revoked the submission. A revocation, to put an end to the *748submission, must be made with the same formality as the submission itself.

The submission being in writing and under seal, it must be revoked with like solemnity. *Van Antwerp*v. *Stewart,*8 Johns. 125; *Howard*v. *Cooper,*1 Hill, 44; *Robertson*v. *M’Niel,*12 Wend. 578, 582. The effect of the submission, while remaining in force, is to stay, absolutely, all proceedings in the suit. *Larkin*v. *Robbins,*2 Wend. 505; *Camp*v. *Root,*18. Johns. 22; *Jordan*v. *Hyatt,*3 Barb. 275; *Wells*v. *Lain,*15 Wend. 99; *Van Slyke*v. *Lettice,*6 Hill, 610; 11 How. 355. The plaintiff was not, -therefore, at liberty to take any steps in the action, after the submission. The motion to discontinue, under the circumstances, was properly denied, but the cause should have been stricken from the calendar, under the stay of proceedings. The order appealed from should be modified so as to deny the motion for discontinuance, and grant that part asking that the case be struck from the calendar, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs.

Daniels and Beady, JJ., concurred.

*Order as modified, affirmed.*
#### §§ 170.302-170.306 [Reserved]
#### § 1801.1 Annual Truman Scholarship competition.

Each year, the Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation carries out a nationwide competition to select students to be Truman Scholars.
Exhibit 35
                                  ----------


                      COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP


                             OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE
                    ANNUAL STATEMENT OF THE MASTER SERVICER


                                  CWABS, INC.
                 CWABS ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES TRUST 2006-13
                   ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-13


      The undersigned does hereby certify that the undersigned is an officer
of Countrywide GP, Inc., general partner of Countrywide Home Loans Servicing
LP (the "Master Servicer"), and does hereby further certify pursuant to
Section 3.17 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement for the above-captioned
Series (the "Agreement") that:

(i) A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding
calendar year and of the performance of the Master Servicer under the
Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

(ii) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer
has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material
respects throughout such calendar year.




/s/ Craig Baingo                                   Dated: March 14, 2007
-----------------

Craig Baingo
Executive Vice President, Finance