alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 110.01-1 General. ( a ) This subchapter applies to all electrical installations on vessels subject to subchapters D, H, I, I-A, K, L, O, Q, R, T, U, and W of this chapter whenever those subchapters require an electrical installation to be in accordance with this subchapter.
( b ) This subchapter applies only to electrical installations contracted for after April 17, 2023.
( c ) Installations and equipment accepted by the Coast Guard as meeting the applicable requirements in this subchapter in effect on the date the installation was contracted for and which are maintained in good and serviceable condition to the satisfaction of the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, may be continued in use until replacement is ordered by the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, or as specified in the regulations.
( d ) [Reserved]
( e ) Electrical systems internal to a pressure vessel for human occupancy (PVHO) need not meet the requirements of this subchapter, but must meet the requirements of Subpart B (Commercial Diving Operations) of part 197 of this chapter.
[CGD 74-125A, 47 FR 15232, Apr. 8, 1982, as amended by CGD 94-108, 61 FR 28271, June 4, 1996; USCG-2020-0075, 88 FR 16354, Mar. 16, 2023]
#### § 129.100 General.

This part contains requirements for the design, construction, and installation of electrical equipment and systems including power sources, lighting, motors, miscellaneous equipment, and safety systems.
# C_2008250EN.01004801.xml

| 2.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 250/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 250/48

---

Notice concerning a request under Article 30 of Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council — Deadline extension

Request made by a Member State

(2008/C 250/12)

On 3 July 2008, the Commission received a request under Article 30(4) of Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors (1).

1

This request, made by the Czech Republic, concerns electricity production in that country. The request was published in OJ C 178, 15.7.2008, p. 29. The initial deadline was 4 October 2008.

Since the Commission needs to obtain and examine additional information, the period within which the Commission must take a decision on this request has been extended by three months, in accordance with the second sentence of Article 30(6).

The final deadline is therefore 4 January 2009.

---

(1)  OJ L 134, 30.4.2004, p. 1.

1

---
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-09-00392-CV

DANIEL JAMES PARKER, DUSTI 

LAWLER PARKER, AND DANIEL 

JAMES PARKER, AS NEXT FRIEND 

OF JACKSON JAMES PARKER,

Appellants

v.

TERRY BROWN AND WIFE JULIE BROWN,

Appellees

From the 413th District Court

Johnson County, Texas

Trial Court No. C200800492

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellants, Daniel James Parker, Dusti Lawler Parker, and Daniel James Parker 

as Next Friend of Jackson James Parker, filed a notice of appeal on November 19, 2009 

from an order of the trial court that granted a motion for summary judgment filed by 

appellees, Terry Brown and Julie Brown. 

Appellants now seek a dismissal of their appeal because the parties have settled 

their dispute in mediation and no longer wish to pursue the appeal. 
Parker v. Brown Page 2

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1).

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed March 24, 2010

[CV06]
§ 119.530 Bilge high level alarms. ( a ) Each vessel must be provided with a visual and audible alarm at the operating station to indicate a high water level in each of the following normally unmanned spaces: ( 1 ) A space with a through-hull fitting below the deepest load waterline, such as a lazarette;
( 2 ) A machinery space bilge, bilge well, shaft alley bilge, or other spaces subject to flooding from sea water piping within the space; and
( 3 ) A space with a non-watertight closure , such as a space with a non-watertight hatch on the main deck.
( b ) A visual indicator must be provided at the operating station to indicate when any automatic bilge pump is operating.
[CGD 85-080, 61 FR 922, Jan. 10, 1996; 61 FR 20556, May 7, 1996, as amended by USCG-2014-0688, 79 FR 58283, Sept. 29, 2014]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

 

 ) 

PUBLIC CITIZEN, et al., ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiffs, ) Civ. No. 14-148 (RJL) 

 ) 

 v. ) 

 ) 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, ) NOTICE OF FILING 

 ) 

 Defendant. ) 

 ) 

DEFENDANT FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION’S NOTICE OF FILING OF ITS 

CERTIFIED LIST OF CONTENTS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD 

The Federal Election Commission hereby provides notice, pursuant to Local Rule 

7(n)(1), of its filing of the attached Certified List of Contents of the Administrative Record.

Respectfully submitted, 

Lisa J. Stevenson (D.C. Bar No. 457628) 

Deputy General Counsel 

Kevin Deeley 

Acting Associate General Counsel 

 

Erin Chlopak (D.C. Bar No. 496370) 

Acting Assistant General Counsel 

/s/ Greg J. Mueller 

 Greg J. Mueller (D.C. Bar No. 462840) 

Charles Kitcher (D.C. Bar No. 986226) 

Attorneys 

 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT 

 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

 999 E Street NW 

 Washington, DC 20463 

May 8, 2014 (202) 694-1650 

Case 1:14-cv-00148-RJL Document 17 Filed 05/08/14 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:14-cv-00148-RJL Document 17-1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:14-cv-00148-RJL Document 17-1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 2 of 6
Case 1:14-cv-00148-RJL Document 17-1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 3 of 6
Case 1:14-cv-00148-RJL Document 17-1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 4 of 6
Case 1:14-cv-00148-RJL Document 17-1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 5 of 6
Case 1:14-cv-00148-RJL Document 17-1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 6 of 6
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 09454**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  x 09454\09454_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

09454\09454_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 09454\09454_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted x 09454\09454_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file x 09454\09454_PartB.xls Plant submitted survey file x 09454\09454_PartC.xls Plant submitted survey file x 09454\09454_PartD.xls Plant submitted survey file x 09454\09454_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file

09454\Certification Statement_09454.pdf Plant certification statement x 09454\Follow-up\Follow-up_1st_reviewer_02-01-11.pdf Draft Questions for Follow Up x 09454\Supporting Documentation\09454_PartA_A5-2_map-1_Avon Lake.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 09454\Supporting Documentation\09454_PartA_A5-3_Avon Lake.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 09454\Supporting Documentation\09454_PartD_D3-1_Avon Lake.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

09454\09454_Cover Letter.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

THOMAS AMATO AND JEAN AMATO, 

HIS WIFE 

 v. 

BELL & GOSSETT, CLARK-RELIANCE 

CORP., COPES-VULCAN, INC., CRANE 

CO., DEZURIK/COPES-VULCAN, 

ELECTROLUX HOME PRODUCTS, INC., 

GOODYEAR CANADA, 

INC.,GREENE,TWEED & COMPANY, 

INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS CORP. F/K/A 

CARBORUNDUM COMPANY, INC.,J.A. 

SEXAUER, INC., JOHN CRANE, INC., 

LINCOLN ELECTRIC CO., NIBCO, INC, 

PARKER-HANNIFIN COP., SAINTGOBAIN ABRASIVES, INC., SEPCO 

CORP., SPX CORP., VELAN 

VALVECORP., WILLIAM POWELL 

COMPANY, INGERSOLL RAND 

COMPANY,TRANE US, INC., 

INDIVIDUALLY AND F/K/A AMERICAN 

STANDARD, INC., SUCCESSOR TO THE 

TRANE CO., AMERICAN RADIATOR & 

STANDARDSANITARY CORP., 

KEWANEE BOILER, CO., AND/OR 

KEWANEE BOILER DIV. OF AMERICAN 

STANDARD, UNION CARBIDE CORP. 

AND WARREN PUMPS, LLC 

PETITION OF: CRANE CO. 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 448 EAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 
[448 EAL 2015] - 2 

AND NOW, this 1st day of February, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all 

remaining issues. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is: 

Whether, under the Court’s recent decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 

104 A.3d 328 (Pa. 2014), a defendant in a strict-liability claim based on a 

failure-to-warn theory has the right to have a jury determine whether its 

product was “unreasonably dangerous[?]” 

Mr. Justice Eakin did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF 

GOJET AIRLINES, LLC 

(VD GEAR PINS) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

FAA Docket No. CP10CE0003 

DMS No. FAA-2010-0025 

NOTICE OF APPEAL 

NOTICE OF APPEAL 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.233 of the Rules of Practice Respondent 

GoJet Airlines LLC, by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby submits this 

Notice of its intent to appeal the Initial Decision of Administrative Law Judge 

Richard C. Goodwin served May 20, 2011. 

Dated: May ~2011 

, III Esq. 

Vice Preside & General Cotmsel 

Trans States Holdings, Inc. 

11495 Navaid Rd., Ste. 340 

Bridgeton, MO 63044 

Phone: 314-222-4316 

Fax: 314-222-4311 

dhayes@transstates.net 

Attorney for Respondent 

GoJet Airlines LLC 

1 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Appeal was sent 

this ~ay of May, 2011, as indicated below, to the following: 

Original & One Copy: via certified mail/return receipt requested. 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

One Copy: 

Via certified mail/return receipt requested 

David B. Kessler 

Office of Regional Counsel 

Central Region, ACE-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

901 Locust, Room 506 

Kansas City, MO 64106-2641 

Via certified mail/return receipt requested 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, ALJ 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room E12-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

MICHAEL THREET,

Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 14-cv-13345

vs. HON. BERNARD A. FRIEDMAN

D. PHILLIPS, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________/

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR 

LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

and

ORDER REJECTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AS MOOT

This matter is presently before the Court on defendants’ motion for summary

judgment [docket entry 21] and plaintiff’s motions for leave to file an amended complaint [docket

entries 27 & 31]. 

Plaintiff seeks leave to file an amended complaint to “correct errors in his research,

writing, and calculations.” Pl.’s Mot. Defendants have not responded to these motions and the time

for them to do so has expired. As leave to amend must be freely granted, see, e.g., Shell v. Marks

Oil Co., 830 F.2d 68 (6th Cir. 1987), and defendants apparently do not oppose it, the Court shall

grant plaintiff’s motions and deem the proposed amended complaint [docket entry 30] to be filed

as of the date of this order.

As to defendants’ motion for summary judgment, Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen

has submitted a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) in which he recommends that defendants’

motion, which he construes as an unenumerated motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12, be denied. Neither

2:14-cv-13345-BAF-RSW Doc # 37 Filed 05/22/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 343
party has objected to the R&R and the objection period has expired. 

The Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s application of Boyd v. Corrs. Corp. of

Am., 380 F.3d 989, 994 (6th Cir. 2006), to refute defendants’ argument that plaintiff failed to

properly exhaust his administrative remedies because he filed his complaint before receiving a Step

III grievance response. However, defendants’ motion relates to a complaint that has now been

superseded by an amended complaint. The Court therefore rejects the R&R on the basis that the

underlying motion is moot.

SO ORDERED.

_s/ Bernard A. Friedman________________

BERNARD A. FRIEDMAN

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: May 22, 2015

Detroit, Michigan

2

2:14-cv-13345-BAF-RSW Doc # 37 Filed 05/22/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 344
§ 96.44 Community services. ( a ) This section applies to direct funding of Indian tribes and tribal organizations under the community services block grant.
( b ) The terms *Indian tribe* and *tribal organization* as used in the Reconciliation Act have the same meaning given such terms in section 4(b) and 4(c) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b). The terms also include organized groups of Indians that the State in which they reside has determined are Indian tribes. An organized group of Indians is eligible for direct funding based on State recognition if the State has expressly determined that the group is an Indian tribe. In addition, the statement of the State's chief executive officer verifying that a tribe is recognized by that State will also be sufficient to verify State recognition for the purpose of direct funding.
( c ) For purposes of section 674(c)(2) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9903(c)(2)) an *eligible Indian* means a member of an Indian tribe whose income is at or below the poverty line defined in section 673(2) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9902(2)). An *eligible individual* under section 674(c)(2) of the Reconciliation Act (42 U.S.C. 9903(c)(2)) means a resident of the State whose income is at or below the poverty line.
( d ) An Indian tribe or tribal organization will meet the requirements of section 675(c)(1) (42 U.S.C. 9904(c)(1)) if it certifies that it agrees to use the funds to provide at least one of the services or activities listed in that section.
( e ) An Indian tribe or tribal organization is not required to comply with section 675(b) (42 U.S.C. 9904(b)) or to provide the certifications required by the following other provisions of the Reconciliation Act. ( 1 ) Section 675(c)(2)(A) (42 U.S.C. 9904(c)(2)(A));
( 2 ) Section 675(c)(3) (42 U.S.C. 9904(c)(3)); and
( 3 ) Section 675(c)(4) (42 U.S.C. 9904(c)(4)).
( 4 ) Section 675(c)(11) (42 U.S.C. 9904(c)(11)).
( f ) In each fiscal year, Indian tribes and tribal organizations may expend for administrative expenses—comparable to the administrative expenses incurred by State at the State level—an amount not to exceed the greater of the amounts determined by: ( 1 ) Multiplying their allotment under section 674 of the Reconciliation Act (42 U.S.C. 9903) by five percent; or
( 2 ) Multiplying the allotment by the percentage represented by the ratio of $55,000 to the smallest State allotment (excluding territorial allotments) for that fiscal year.
[47 FR 29486, July 6, 1982, as amended at 52 FR 37967, Oct. 13, 1987]
# C_2008050EN.01000501.xml

| 23.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 50/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 50/5

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 50/03)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 12.12.2007 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of the aid | N 500/07 |
| Member State | Germany |
| Region | Berlin |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | VC-Fonds Technologie Berlin |
| Legal basis | Beteiligungsgrundsätze des VC-Fonds Technologie Berlin |
| Type of measure | Aid scheme |
| Objective | — |
| Form of aid | Provision of risk capital |
| Budget | Overall budget: EUR 52 million |
| Intensity | Measure does not constitute aid |
| Duration | Until 31.12.2018 |
| Economic sectors | All sectors |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Senatsverwaltung für Wirtschaft, Technologie und Frauen, Berlin |
| Martin Luther-Straße 105 |
| D-10825 Berlin |

Date of adoption of the decision

12.12.2007

Reference number of the aid

N 500/07

Member State

Germany

Region

Berlin

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

VC-Fonds Technologie Berlin

Legal basis

Beteiligungsgrundsätze des VC-Fonds Technologie Berlin

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Objective

—

Form of aid

Provision of risk capital

Budget

Overall budget: EUR 52 million

Intensity

Measure does not constitute aid

Duration

Until 31.12.2018

Economic sectors

All sectors

Name and address of the granting authority

Senatsverwaltung für Wirtschaft, Technologie und Frauen, Berlin

Martin Luther-Straße 105

D-10825 Berlin

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-4217

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

BILLY JOE GARNER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief

District Judge. (1:06-cr-00332-JAB)

Submitted: July 18, 2007 Decided: August 16, 2007

Before WILKINSON and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, William C. Ingram, First

Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Michael F.

Joseph, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
*Garner urges us to reexamine Harp in light of the Supreme

Court’s recent decision in Cunningham v. California, 127 S. Ct.

856, 860 (2007) (holding that California’s determinate sentencing

law violated the Sixth Amendment by “assign[ing] to the trial

judge, not to the jury, authority to find the facts that expose a

defendant to an elevated ‘upper term’ sentence”). Nothing in

Cunningham affects the analysis in Harp. Moreover, “a panel of

this court cannot overrule, explicitly or implicitly, the precedent

set by a prior panel of this court. Only the Supreme Court or this

court sitting en banc can do that.” Scotts Co. v. United Indus.

Corp., 315 F.3d 264, 272 n.2 (4th Cir. 2002) (internal quotation

marks and citation omitted).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Billy Joe Garner entered a conditional guilty plea to one

count of possessing ammunition after having been convicted of a

felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) (2000),

reserving the right to challenge the district court’s denial of his

motion to dismiss the indictment. Garner appeals, contending that

his predicate state conviction for conspiracy to sell and deliver

methamphetamine was not a “crime punishable by imprisonment for a

term exceeding one year” under § 922(g)(1). We affirm.

Garner asserts that the maximum sentence for the crime

based on his individual criminal history and North Carolina’s

structured sentencing scheme was less than twelve months. However,

as Garner concedes, his argument is foreclosed by United States v.

Harp, 406 F.3d 242, 246-47 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 297

(2005).* Because it is undisputed that a sentence of over twelve

months could be imposed on a defendant convicted of conspiracy to

sell and deliver methamphetamine in North Carolina, the district
- 3 -

court properly considered Garner’s prior conviction as a predicate

felony for purposes of § 922(g)(1).

Accordingly, we affirm Garner’s conviction and sentence.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### § 14.209 Preparation of shipping articles at beginning of voyage.

Each master or individual in charge of a vessel when shipping articles are required must prepare an original and two copies of the articles. The original and one copy must be signed by the master or individual in charge and by each merchant mariner; but the second copy must not be signed by any of them.

[CGD 94-004, 61 FR 56637, Nov. 4, 1996, as amended by USCG-2004-17914, 78 FR 77999, Dec. 24, 2013]
JULIA BROWNLEY

26tli DISlmeT. CAuFORHIA MEM!lER

01'Co~ns hup:JJjulll1brOWl'llD'l'.hOUle.gov 

# ~ongrefSfSoftbeWntteb ~tatefS T!?oUl:ie of~epre~entati\)e~ ~a~Jlnatoll, 1il1lC

20515-0526 July 16,2013 COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS RANl(INQ MIIMI!l!"F1. SUeCOMMITTEe ON HtA.l. TH SUtlCOMMITTEE ON ECOtlOMte OfofoOflTUMTV COMMmEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE. ANO "lECHNOLOGY SUDCOMM1TT'Et! ON ENYlAONMEK'f SU8COMMlTTU ON SPACE



## , 

# ,

N U1 _ I

I~ •••

### _:t. -lcn"'""T""l 

# -J-- °O=? --c ::::o::! -- r '--Irn -n -.0>2 v 

## ~=,-t -'-"'0

~ ,O:r:"

7J:..- W CD I amwritiilg to express my support for the application ofVentura County/Oxnarcl AIrport for a grant in the 2013 Small Community Air Service Development Program, The grant provides an incentive for new air service from Oxnard Airport to Las Vegas and other destinations, such as Phoenix and the Bay Area. Ms, Brooke Chapman Associate Director SiiJall.Community Air Service Development Program U,S. Department ofTransporiation 1200New Jersey Avenue, SE W86-310 Washington, DC 20590 Dear 

## M~.

Ch~.man:

Oxnard Airport had continuous passenger air service since 1946. However, United Express terminated their Oxnard passenger fli~~tsin June 20.1 O,l~aving the Airport without Essential Air Service (E~S), Ventura Coun~ has a:p~py]atip~}~ ~x,ces~ of80?,OOO and is now the largest unserved au passenger market IIIthe country.'VentUra County AIrports' management has been ' actively seeking new air service and has met and discussed the market potential with several airlines, all ofwhom have requested some form ofrevenue guarantee to offset the initial start-up cost. . , ~ ... This grant will enhance the ability ofVentura County/Oxnard Airpqrt.tobringpassenger,!\ir;" service back to out'corrllTIunitY. '
. . , ,.. ,-',.. These'ro~ies\viirbev,;ell"received 

# b'y'our c~mm;uniiy~s a whole. The business, recreational, and military travelers inVentura County will greatly benefit from the service and it will also keep Oxnard Airport' connected to the National Transportation System, , Iurge you t()~iv~ fuHan;?,ra+,c~nsider~ti.on.to tiley.e~!l!raCpunty/Ox.n!lTg,A.itP.ort application, Sincerely,

, ;: .:'~! I ;. 

### ... : .' 

### .

... \...... 

### . ','

# .. -, 

### ': '-" . . ..~ '. '. ..' '.' ~

I' , . '.' ;'

" " ;:" '(.~'

',::! 

# "., .'. ,.. .... . ..•" ( :;,; " ~LiA BROWN~EY'.'.' ',' : "
. <,:;" ','
. " ' Meinber ofCorigress .:';' " ,,' '
. WASHtmTrOH.;OC OFFICE: • ~ • \1 : '; '•• ': •. : .' (.. 1019 LONGWOImi HouSll ~ 8U1lDlNQ

WASHINGTON, DC 20515 PHON~: 202-225-5811
. F.o..x; 207-215-1100 OXNARD. CA Ornc~: 300EAST

Es~AOt; DnM. Surre: 470 OmlloAo, CA 93036 PloIom;:805~79-1779 FAX:805-379-1799 .THOUSNlO OAKS, CA OFFICE: m EAsT THOtISAHO OAASBoUlfYARO. Surte 411

THOU$AN'P OAKS, CA 91360 PHONE: 80s.Jl1)-1779 FA.lI'.:805-379--1799
.,to ••

• I" ....- ,.' I :' I '. ~