alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

Tyler Simmons, 

 

 Plaintiff, Case No. 14-cv-14522 

 Hon. Judith E. Levy 

v. Mag. R. Steven Whalen 

Merchants & Medical Credit 

Corporation, Inc., 

 Defendant. 

___________________________________/ 

STIPULATED ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

 Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure, the parties, through their undersigned counsel, stipulate 

and agree, that the above-captioned action be dismissed with prejudice. 

The parties further agree that each side shall bear their own attorney’s 

fees and costs. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 22, 2015 s/Judith E. Levy 

Ann Arbor, Michigan JUDITH E. LEVY 

 United States District Judge 

Case 5:14-cv-14522-JEL-RSW ECF No. 9 filed 06/22/15 PageID.25 Page 1 of 2
 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served 

upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s 

ECF System to their respective email or First Class U.S. mail addresses 

disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on June 22, 2015. 

 s/Holly Monda 

HOLLY MONDA, in the absence 

of FELICIA M. MOSES 

 Case Manager 

Case 5:14-cv-14522-JEL-RSW ECF No. 9 filed 06/22/15 PageID.26 Page 2 of 2
#### § 174.300 Specific applicability.

This subpart applies to each self-propelled hopper dredge for which a working freeboard assignment is being sought under part 44, subpart C, of this chapter.
#### Charles Stebbins, *Appellant, v.*Albert P. Bennett, *Respondent, Impleaded,*with others.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Mem. by

Dwight, J.
###### Editorial Note on Part 154

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 154 appear part 154 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50466, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 154.180 Contiguous hull structure: Welding procedure.

Welding procedure tests for contiguous hull structure designed for a temperature colder than −18 °C (0 °F) must meet § 54.05-15 and subpart 57.03 of this chapter.
§ 112.05-1 Purpose; preemptive effect. ( a ) The purpose of this part is to ensure a dependable, independent, and dedicated emergency power source with sufficient capacity to supply those services that are necessary for the safety of the passengers, crew, and other persons in an emergency and those additional loads that may be authorized under paragraph (c) of this section.
( b ) No load may be powered from an emergency power source, except: ( 1 ) A load required by this part to be powered from the emergency power source;
( 2 ) A bus-tie to the main switchboard that meets § 112.05-3; and
( 3 ) Emergency loads that may be necessary to maintain or restore the propulsion plant, such as control systems, controllable pitch propellers, hydraulic pumps, control air compressors, and machinery necessary for dead-ship start-up.
( c ) Other loads may be authorized by the Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Center (MSC), to be connected to the emergency source of power to provide an increased level of safety in recognition of a unique vessel mission or configuration. When these loads are authorized, the emergency power source must— ( 1 ) Be sized to supply these loads using a unity (1.0) service factor; or
( 2 ) Be provided with automatic load shedding that removes these loads and operates before the emergency generator trips due to overload. The automatic load shedding circuit breakers must be manually reset.
( d ) The regulations in this part have preemptive effect over State or local regulations in the same field.
[CGD 74-125A, 47 FR 15267, Apr. 8, 1982, as amended by CGD 94-108, 61 FR 28286, June 4, 1996; 61 FR 36787, July 12, 1996; USCG-2006-24797, 77 FR 33882, June 7, 2012]
§ 136.215 Period of validity. ( a ) A COI for a towing vessel is valid for 5 years from the date of issue.
( b ) For a towing vessel utilizing the TSMS option, the COI is invalid upon the expiration or revocation of the owner or managing operator TSMS certificate or the ISM Code Certificate.
( c ) A COI may be suspended and withdrawn or revoked by the cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection at any time for noncompliance with the requirements of this subchapter.
1 

### Whalen, Marilyn

From: Poentis, Aaron Y CIV NAVFAC HI, EV <aaron.poentis@navy.mil>

Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 5:14 PM

To: roxanne.kwan@doh.hawaii.gov; Richard Ta kaba (richard.takaba@doh.hawaii.gov)

Cc: stuart.yamada@doh.hawaii.gov; st even.chang@doh.hawaii.gov; Li nder, Steven; Pallarino,

Bob; Lovgren, Andrew C LCDR, NAVSUP FLCP H C700; Shimabuku, June T. CIV NAVFAC

HI, EV4; Kishaba, Raelynn I CIV NAVFAC H I, EV4; Mizuno, Arleen M CIV NAVFAC HI,

PRJ412; Tsutsui, Bruce O CIV NAVFAC HI, OPHE3

Subject: RED HILL STATUS REPORT - April 14, 2015

Signed By: aaron.poentis@navy.mil

Importance: High

Hi Richard/Roxanne:

Attached are the updated information for the weekly progress report from Navy Region Hawaii, and the Fleet Logistic

Center Pearl Harbor for the week of April 14, 2015. In a process to ease reading, only sections with changes will be

annotated.

1. Preliminary Work Plan

Action complete.

2. Release Response Action Items (initiate immediately, complete as soon as practicable)

a. Action 1

‐ Provide a schedule for the ventilation of Tank 5 and an estimated date to commence the investigation

of release point(s) within Tank 5.

Action complete.

b. Action 2

‐ The rate of vertical migration for the released JP

‐ 8 free product is unknown. Information from the

previously collected basalt cores could be used for initial modeling of vertical migration. This information is necessary to

protect drinking water resources from petroleum contamination. Prepare models for petroleum JP

‐ 8 releases of 10,000,

20,000 and 30,000 gallons from points at 25% intervals from the bottom to the top of Tank 5.

No change.

c. Action 3

‐ Removal of petroleum free product from the area outside the tank will reduce downward migration of

the released JP

‐ 8 free product. Characterization of the free product plume and recovery of free product with increased

monitoring are required to address this plume.

No change.

d. Action 4

‐ Additional studies and procedures are required to address the potential and impact of any future

releases from the USTs within the Complex. This will require new financial and personnel resources to complete.

Funding for the preliminary work plan and all necessary following work is critical.

d.(1) Groundwater Monitoring Wells

No change.

d.(2) Site Characterization2 No change.

d.(3) AOC/SOW

Discussions are ongoing.

d.(4) Request for Additional Information

No change.

d.(5) BWS/USGS Groundwater Flow Study

No change.

Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions.

v/r,

Aaron
#### § 1.01-35 OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act.

(a) *Purpose.* This section collects and displays the control numbers assigned to information collection and record keeping requirements in this subchapter by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 ([44 U.S.C. 3501](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/44/3501) *et seq.*). The Coast Guard intends that this section comply with the requirements of [44 U.S.C. 3507(f)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/44/3507) which requires agencies display a current control number assigned by the Director of the OMB for each approved agency information collection requirement.

(b) *Display.*

| 46 CFR part or section where identified or described | Current OMB control No. |
| --- | --- |
| § 2.01 | 1625-0002 |
| § 2.95-10 | 1625-0035 |
| § 3.10 | 1625-0014 |
| Part 4 | 1625-0001 |
| Part 6 | 1625-0002 |
| Part 10 | 1625-0040 |

[CGD 88-033, [54 FR 50376](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/54-FR-50376), Dec. 6, 1989, as amended by USCG-2004-18884, [69 FR 58341](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/69-FR-58341), Sept. 30, 2004; USCG-2016-0315, [81 FR 43954](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/81-FR-43954), July 6, 2016]
**Exhibit 23.1**

**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’CONSENT**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement numbers 333-52460 and 333-37790 of Patina Oil & Gas Corporation and its subsidiaries onForm S-8 of our report dated February 21, 2003, (which expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133, “Accounting for DerivativeInstruments and Hedging Activities”) appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Patina Oil & Gas Corporation and its subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2002.

|                          |   |   |                      |
|-------------------------------|--------|--------|---------------------------|
|                               |   |   | DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP |
| Denver, ColoradoMarch 3, 2003 |   |   |                      |
#### Teunis P. Osterhout, *Respondent, v.*Thomas Hyland and others, *Appellants.*Same *v.*Owen Trodden and others, *Appellants.*Same *v.*Cornelius Brackett and others, *Appellants*.

Motions granted and causes sent to the Court of Appeals.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 8, 2011 

jam 

Order 

 

March 8, 2011 

142709 (11) 

IN RE PAROLE OF PHILIP JOSEPH PAQUETTE 

__________________________________________ 

 SC: 142709 

 COA: 301140 

 

 On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to waive fees is considered and it 

is DENIED because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be 

liable for filing fees. 

 Within 21 days of the certification of this order, plaintiff shall pay to the 

Clerk of the Court the initial partial filing fee of $24.00, shall submit a copy of this order 

with the payment, and shall refile the copy of the pleadings which is being returned 

with this order. Failure to comply with this order shall result in the appeal not being 

filed in this Court. 

 If plaintiff timely files the partial fee and refiles the pleadings, monthly 

payments shall be made to the Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of 

the deposits made to plaintiff’s account until the payments equal the balance due of 

$351.00. This amount shall then be remitted to this Court. 

 Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in this 

Court until the entry fee in this case is paid in full. 

 The Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff and 

return plaintiff’s pleadings with this order.
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, CASE NO. 13-CR-20892 

 HON: GEORGE CARAM STEEH 

v. 

D-14 KUTUB MESIWALA, M.D., 

 Defendant. 

______________________________/ 

PRELIMINARY ORDER OF FORFEITURE

 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2, Defendant Kutub 

Mesiwala’s (“Defendant”) guilty plea to Count One of the Second Superseding 

Indictment, Defendant’s agreement to forfeiture in his Rule 11 Plea Agreement, the 

Plaintiff’s Application for Entry of Preliminary Order of Forfeiture, and all 

information contained in the record, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Court shall GRANT and ENTER a 

money judgment against Defendant and in favor of the United States of America in 

the amount of $1,031,302.97. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the money judgment may be satisfied, to 

whatever extent possible, from any property owned or under the control of 

Defendant. To satisfy the money judgment, any assets that Defendant has now, or 

2:13-cr-20892-GCS-RSW Doc # 342 Filed 05/05/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 2043
2 

may later acquire, may be forfeited as substitute assets under Title 21, United 

States Code, Section 853(p)(2). 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 32.2, this Preliminary Order of Forfeiture shall become the Final Order 

of Forfeiture at the time of Defendant’s sentencing, shall be made part of the 

sentence and included in the Judgment, and shall not be the subject of ancillary 

proceedings given that the forfeiture consists entirely of a money judgment. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to 

enforce the Preliminary Order of Forfeiture and to amend it as necessary, pursuant 

to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(e). 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 5, 2015 s/George Caram Steeh 

 HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH 

 United States District Court Judge 

2:13-cr-20892-GCS-RSW Doc # 342 Filed 05/05/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 2044
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 11354 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
COLBY JONES , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:16

- CR

- 58

- 1

Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Colby Jones appeals the 151

- month within

- guidelines sentence imposed following his conviction for conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine. Jones contends that the district court erred in calculating his crim inal history score. Citing to U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(c) , he asserts that the one criminal history point for his 2011 five

- day sentence for the Texas offense evading ar rest was erroneously assessed.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should 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 

### FILED May 30, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-11354 Document: 00514492169 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/30/2018No. 16

- 11354

2 Because Jones did not object in the district court to his crim inal history

score , we review for plain error

. See United States v. Mondragon

- Santiago , 564 F.3d 357, 361 (5th Cir. 2009). In calculating criminal history, sentences for misdemeanor and petty offenses are c ounted, except as provided in § 4A1.2(c)(1) and (2). § 4A1.2(c). Sentences for offenses listed un der § 4A1.2(c)(1) and “offenses similar to them, by whatever name they are known” are counted only when the sentence imposed “was a term of probation of more than one year or a term of imprisonment of at l east [30] days” or when “the prior offense was similar to an instant offense.” § 4A1.2(c)(1)(A), (B). One of the offenses listed in § 4A1.2(c)(1) is resisting arrest. § 4A1.2(c)(1).
Jones received one criminal history point for the five

- day sentence imp osed for his 2011 conviction of the Texas misdemeanor offense of evading
arrest . The Texas offense of evading arrest is similar to the crime of resisting

arre st as set forth in § 4A1.2(c), and the district court committed clear or obvious error by assessi ng the criminal history point. See United States v.
Moore , 997 F.2d 30, 34

- 35 (5th Cir. 1993). Without that criminal history point, Jones would have had seven criminal history points, and his Category IV criminal history score and guidelines range would have remained unchanged. Because he was sentenced withi n the correct guidelines range and because the district court indicated that a sentence at the top of that range was appropriate, Jones fails to make a showing that the error affected his
substantial rights. See United States v. Davis , 602 F.3d 643, 647 (5th Cir. 2010).
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Case: 16-11354 Document: 00514492169 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/30/2018
Editorial Note on Part 160
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 160 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, 59786, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 160.052-2 Size and model. ( a ) A standard buoyant vest is manufactured in accordance with a plan specified in § 160.052-1(b) and is a: ( 1 ) Model AP, adult (for persons over 90 pounds);
( 2 ) Model CPM, child, medium (for persons weighing from 50 to 90 pounds); or
( 3 ) Model CPS, child, small (for persons weighing less than 50 pounds).
( b ) A nonstandard buoyant vest is: ( 1 ) Manufactured in accordance with the manufacturer's approved plan;
( 2 ) Equivalent in performance to the standard buoyant vest; and
( 3 ) Assigned a model designation by the manufacturer for the following sizes: ( i ) Adult (for persons weighing over 90 pounds);
( ii ) Child, medium (for persons weighing from 50 to 90 pounds);
( iii ) Child, small (for persons weighing less than 50 pounds).
[CGD 72-163R, 38 FR 8120, Mar. 28, 1973]
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT

TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Achillion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Mary Kay Fenton, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, that:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |  |  |                        
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Dated: August 14, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Mary Kay Fenton    
|                       |  |  |  | Mary Kay Fenton        
|                       |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will
be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Editorial Note on Part 148
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 148 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59783, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 148.320 Tankage; garbage tankage; rough ammonia tankage; or tankage fertilizer. ( a ) This part applies to rough ammonia tankage in bulk that contains 7 percent or more moisture by weight, and garbage tankage and tankage fertilizer that contains 8 percent or more moisture by weight.
( b ) Tankage to which this part applies may not be loaded in bulk if its temperature exceeds 38 °C (100 °F).
( c ) During the voyage, the temperature of the tankage must be monitored often enough to detect spontaneous heating.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

PEGGY MALLOY SOLACK,

MICHAEL SOLACK, and 

JONATHAN MATHIS,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 2:15-cv-10084-MOB-RSW

Hon. Marianne O. Battani

OAKWOOD HEALTHCARE, INC.,

BEAUMONT HEALTH, and

MORRIS COTTON,

Defendants.

/

Maia E. Johnson (P40533)

David A. Hardesty (P38609)

Gold Star Law, P.C.

2701 Troy Center Drive

Suite 400

Troy, MI 48084

mjohnson@goldstarlaw.com

dhardesty@goldstarlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Rebecca S. Davies (P52728)

Butzel Long, a professional corporation

150 W. Jefferson Avenue

Suite 100

Detroit, MI 48226

313.225.7028 / 313.225.7080

davies@butzel.com

Attorneys for Defendant

/

Exhibit 1 Deposition of Morris Cotton 

AMENDED INDEX OF EXHIBITS

Exhibit 2 Deposition of Tina Alexander

Exhibit 3 Rest and Meal Periods Policy (Oakwood 000908-09)

Exhibit 4 Payroll Adjustment Authorization Form (Oakwood 000910-914)

Case 2:15-cv-10084-MOB-RSW ECF No. 19-1 filed 07/07/16 PageID.208 Page 1 of 2
Exhibit 5 Alexander Deposition Exhibit 1

Exhibit 6 Cotton Deposition Exhibit No. 3, 4/11/12 E-Mail Communications

Exhibit 7 Time Detail – Peggy Malloy Solack 

Exhibit 8 Time Detail – Jonathan Mathis 

Exhibit 9 Time Detail – Michael Solack 

Exhibit 10 Cotton Deposition Exhibit 7

Exhibit 11 Statement of Michael Wroblewski

Exhibit 12 Statement of Dominic Brazelton

Case 2:15-cv-10084-MOB-RSW ECF No. 19-1 filed 07/07/16 PageID.209 Page 2 of 2
# C_2012138EN.01004008.xml

| 12.5.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/40

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 12 January 2012 — Schreiber v Commission

(Case F-68/11) (1)

(2012/C 138/106)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 282, 24.9.2011, p. 52.

---
AFS-10-309-E

Jul 09 2010

Exemp tion No. 130H Regul atory Docket No. FAA-2001-9409

Lt. Colonel Timothy M. Kersey Chief, Flight Standards Division Department of the Air Force

6500 South MacArthur Boulevard Oklahoma City, OK 73169

Dear Lt. Col. Kersey:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted y our petition to extend Exemption No. 130, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

On June 10, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviati on Administration (FAA) on behalf of the U.S. Air Force (USAF) for an extension of Exemption No. 130, as amended. That exemption from § 91.159 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulati ons allows the USAF to operate its U-2 aircraft under visual flight rules at or above flig ht level 600 without maintaining the appropriate cruising altitudes as prescribed by § 9 1.159(c).

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were th e basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for n ot publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register

because the requested extension of the exemption w ould not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the USAF.

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for t he issuance of Exemption No. 130, as amended, remains valid with respect to this exempti on and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. § 40109, which the FAA Administrator has2

delegated to me, I grant your petition. Notwithsta nding the provisions of the exemption, the pilot of an aircraft engaged in the above operation s is not relieved of the responsibility to see and avoid other aircraft as required by other provi sions of the regulations.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exempt ion No. 130, as amended, to September 30, 2013, unless sooner superseded or res cinded.

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 130 , as amended, remain the same. This letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemp tion No. 130.

Sincerely,

/s/ Elizabeth Ray Director, Airspace and Aeronautical Information Man agement3

Project No.: ATA-10-309-E

Project Officer: _______________

ARM-105:TTHOMAS:06/21/10:Doc# 30211 ARM-1/100/105:AJR-33

Statistics: AirForce-311.doc, 431 words
Original, 22 Jun 2010 14:21
Style Index 9 Excellent for a Regulation
Average Sentence Length 18 Excellent

Passive Index 6 Excellent

LT COLONEL TIMOTHY M KERSEY

CHIEF FLIGHT STANDARDS DIVISION

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

6500 SOUTH MACARTHUR BOULEVARD

OKLAHOMA CITY OK 73169
###### Editorial Note on Subpart 113.25 of Part 113

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subpart 113.25 of part 113 appear by CGD-94-108, 61 FR 28288, June 4, 1996.

#### § 113.25-3 Requirements.

Each vessel must have a general emergency alarm system that meets the requirements of this subpart.