alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority        Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco

# Actions under delegated authority

## Actions taken during the week ending January 22, 2011

----

Bank Branches, DomesticSt. Louis          Evolve Bank & Trust, West Memphis, Arkansas -- to establish a branch at 5860 Ridgeway Center Parkway, Suite 100, Memphis, Tennessee.            -Approved, January 19, 2011            Bank Holding CompaniesNew York          Chemung Financial Corporation, Elmira, New York -- to acquire Fort Orange Financial Corp., Albany, and thereby acquire its subsidiary bank, Capital Bank & Trust Company.            -Approved, January 21, 2011            Kansas City          Citizens National Corporation, Wisner, Nebraska -- to acquire additional shares of Republic Corporation, Omaha, and United Republic Bank.            -Approved, January 19, 2011            Dallas          Grupo Financiero Banorte, S.A.B. de C.V., Monterrey, Mexico -- to acquire Ixe Grupo Financiero, S.A.B. de C.V., Cuauhtemoc, and indirectly acquire Ixe Securities, LLC, New York, New York, and thereby continue to engage in securities brokerage activities.            -Approved, January 20, 2011            Bank MergersNew York          Chemung Canal Trust Company, Elmira, New York -- to merge with Capital Bank & Trust Company, Albany.            -Approved, January 21, 2011            Banks, State MemberKansas City          The F & M Bank and Trust Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma -- relief from certain commitments.            -Granted, January 18, 2011            Change in Bank ControlMinneapolis          Flathead Lake Bancorporation, Inc., Polson, Montana -- change in bank control of Flathead Lake and its subsidiary bank, First Citizens Bank of Polson, National Association, Polson.            -Permitted, January 21, 2011            Extensions of TimeCleveland          First Southern Bancorp, Inc., Stanford, Kentucky -- extension to April 16, 2011, to acquire shares of CKF Bancorp, Inc., Danville, and thereby indirectly acquire an interest in Central Kentucky Federal Savings Bank.            -Granted, January 18, 2011            Chicago          Minier Financial, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan with 401(k) Provisions, Minier, Illinois -- extension to April 22, 2011, to increase its ownership of Minier Financial, Inc., Minier, and thereby increase its indirect ownership of First Farmers State Bank.            -Granted, January 18, 2011            Financial Holding Companies Chicago          Market Place Bancshares, Inc., Champaign, Illinois -- election to become a financial holding company.            -Effective, January 20, 2011            
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority    Applications and reports received:
§ 403.110 Accounting entities. ( a ) Each Association shall be a separate accounting entity. However, the records shall be maintained with sufficient particularity to allocate items to each pilotage pool operation or nonpool operation and to support the equitable proration of items that are common to two or more pilotage pools.
( b ) Each Association will maintain a separate account called the “Working Capital Fund.” Each Association will deposit into the working capital fund an amount each year at least equal to the amount calculated in Step 5, 46 CFR 404.105. Working capital funds may only be used for infrastructure improvements and infrastructure maintenance necessary to provide safe, efficient, and reliable pilot service such as pilot boat replacements, major repairs to pilot boats, non-recurring technology purchases necessary for providing pilot services, or for the acquisition of real property for use as a dispatch center, office space, or pilot lodging. The Director may grant exceptions to the requirements of this paragraph (403.110(b)) upon request by an Association.
[60 FR 18369, Apr. 11, 1995, as amended by USCG-2019-0736, 85 FR 20120, Apr. 9, 2020]
§ 78.17-10 Loudspeaker system. ( a ) Where fitted, the complete loudspeaker system shall be tested at least once every week. This test shall be made by an officer of the vessel.
( b ) The date of the test and the condition of the equipment shall be noted in the official logbook.

Cross Reference:
See subchapter J (Electrical Engineering) of this chapter for details. [CGFR 65-50, 30 FR 16955, Dec. 30, 1965, as amended by CGD 74-125A, 47 FR 15231, Apr. 8, 1982]
p. 1



# OAR Box 1384 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



### Document

Number: 

# 71 ) ll-E-3 1
Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:05 AM

Sheet 71 of 264 i'+ OC

T 2 4 '95 , 0^:243 1 ©JSlfiMeWT&rJOUE T GENERA L P. 2
Post-it " Pa

x Not e 767 1

From :
Dat e o f Contact : Contact : Company : To V)ti»»(Tf taoftsro j CoJDep. . v^f ^ PhOM 4 ¥5 T 

### <\v e - s^-io v CONTAC T Wanit a Dunston , U S Envir^ Madelein e Strum , U S Environmenta l Protectio n Septembe r5,199 5 PaulMargherio , CHM

M Cran e Kemlit e (fcrmeriy B PChemicals , Ihc ' Pooo s Fax * 

### Xt-tOl

Vs-SlT-lfeS t

Telephon e Number : (815 ) 467*865 6 CONTAC T SUMMAR Y Note s prepared b y Wanit

a Dunsto n

• Additiona l informaiio n (requeste d from th e Augus t8,199 5 Contac tReport ) wa s obtained .

• Stac k test s wer e conducte d o n thre e differen toccasions : Ma y 30,1991 ; Januat y 2 5,1991 , sa d o n Novembe r15,1990 .

• Fro m th e Ma y 199 1 testing , i twa s determined thatth e inle tconcentratio n wa s ofth e rang e from 528-53 8 ppm . QUESTION : I S TH S O F STYREN E ONLY ? No , thi s i s styren e and n-buty l acrylate . Th o outle tconcentratio n i s 14-1 9 ppm . Th e destructio n efficienc y wa s 96-97% . O n th e Novembe r199 0 test , inle tconcentratiotF 1 250-36 5 pp m outle tconcentration - 11-15 pp m destructio n efficiencj~94-9$.7 %

• TH E CHANG E I N INLE T AN D OUTLE T CONCENTRATION S BETWEE N IHE . TW O TEST S MENTIONE D I S NOTICEABLE . Pau l note d thato n tiie earlie rtest, ther e ma y hav e bee n jus ton e lin e runnin g an d vente d t o tb e incinerator . Durin g th e Ma y 199 1 test , bot h line s wer e running . Thi s show s typical concentrations . S O WHA T I S TH E CAPTUR E EFFICIENCY ? W e di d no td o a specifi c capture efficiency , I tappear s t o be . a permanenttota l enclosure . (Paul wen tt o an incineratio n seminar . Draf t(si rflow) i s adjustable . I tdoe s spee d and da w dow n th e fen t o tii e incinerator . Ther e ar e neura l draf topening s an d w e ca n adjustth e incinerator' s opening s base d upo n tiiat.

• That4.6 9 tp y figure, som e o f i ti s fugitiv e emissions ; aa d som e indude s styren e presen t afterincineration - Probably , mos to f thatfigure i s proces s fiigjtives an d no tmdasrated . Informatio n i s accurate :
### RE: language Insert for Section III Laity, James A.

to: Lydia Wegman

06/01/2010 07:51 PM

Cc: "Mancini, Dominic J.", Scott Mathias, Richar d Wayland, Kevin McLean, Tricia Crabtree

Show Details

Lydia: We will need a little time to go over everything in the morning and discuss internally. We have a staff
meeting at 11 AM. Can we say noon for a call? ‐‐ jim

From: Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov [ma ilto:Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 7:50 PM

To: Laity, James A.

Cc: Mancini, Dominic J.; Mathias.Scott@epamail. epa.gov; Wayland.Rich ard@epamail.epa.gov; Mclean.Kevin@epamail.epa.gov; Cr abtree.Tricia@epamail.epa.gov Subject: Re: language Insert for Section III

Great--thanks Jim. We'll fix that typo. I'm about to send you a couple of other things. -----"Laity, James A." <James_A._ Laity@omb.eop.gov> wrote: -----

To: Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA From: "Laity, James A." <Jam es_A._Laity@omb.eop.gov>

Date: 06/01/2010 07:46PM
cc: "Mancini, Dominic J." <Dom inic_J._Mancini@omb.eop.gov> Subject: language Insert for Section III

Lydia, This language looks good to us. (Note that the last sentence has a typo, should say, “...as it develops its implementation guidance.”)
‐‐ jim

From: Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov [ma ilto:Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 6:04 PM

To: Laity, James A.; Mancini, Dominic J.

Cc: Mathias.Scott@epamail.ep a.gov; Wayland.Richard@epamail.epa. gov; Hemby.James@epamail.epa.gov; schneeberg.sara@epamail.epa.gov; Mclean.Kevin@e pamail.epa.gov; thrift.m ike@epamail.epa.gov; Wallace.Larry@epamail.epa.gov; Cr abtree.Tricia@epamail.epa.gov Subject:

Jim and Dom,

Below is an edited version of the par agraph Jim sent us on the use of moni toring and modeling. Based on our discussion, we believe it addresses your concerns. If yo u agree with this language, we w ould plan to place it at the end of the Section III. Let us know what you think.



### For the reasons discussed above, EPA has determined that it is appropriate and efficient to principally use modeling to assess compliance for medium to larger sources, and to rely more on monitoring for groups of

smaller sources and sources not as conducive to modeling. EPA’s revised monitoring network requirements have been developed to be consistent with th is approach. However, EPA is still considering how monitoring and modeling data would be used together in specific situations to define attainment and

nonattainment boundaries and under what circumstances it may be appropriate to rely on monitoring data

alone to make attainment determinations. EPA int ends to address these iss ues as it develops in implementation guidance. 

### Page 1 of 2

6/2/2010 file://C:\Documents and Settin g s\tcrabtre\Local Settin g s\Tem p \notesFCBCEE\~web4286.htm

### Page 2 of 2

6/2/2010 file://C:\Documents and Settin g s\tcrabtre\Local Settin g s\Tem p \notesFCBCEE\~web4286.htm
98-2041.

#### Reed v. Kinkela.

In Habeas Corpus. On motion to dismiss and on motions for leave to supplement the record. Motions granted and cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1681 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1681

   To provide that certain regulations shall not take effect unless 
  published in final form not later than 18 months after the date of 
         publication of general notice of proposed rulemaking.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 18, 1995

  Mr. Tate (for himself and Mr. Nethercutt) introduced the following 
       bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide that certain regulations shall not take effect unless 
  published in final form not later than 18 months after the date of 
         publication of general notice of proposed rulemaking.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Regulatory Efficiency Act''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT FOR NEW REGULATIONS.

    (a) Requirement.--A covered regulation shall not take effect unless 
it is published in final form not later than 18 months after the date 
of publication of a general notice of proposed rulemaking for the 
regulation under section 553(b) of title 5, United States Code.
    (b) Covered Regulation Defined.--In this section the term ``covered 
regulation'' means the whole or a part of an agency statement of 
general or particular applicability and future effect designed to 
implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy, other than such a 
statement to carry out a routine administrative function of an agency, 
for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking is required to be 
published under section 553(b) of title 5, United States Code, after 
the first day of the 18-month period ending on the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1538 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1538

To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to limit acquisition of land on 
 the 39-mile segment of the Missouri River, Nebraska and South Dakota, 
    designated as a recreational river, to acquisition from willing 
                    sellers, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 2, 1995

 Mr. Johnson of South Dakota introduced the following bill; which was 
                 referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to limit acquisition of land on 
 the 39-mile segment of the Missouri River, Nebraska and South Dakota, 
    designated as a recreational river, to acquisition from willing 
                    sellers, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. LIMITATION OF ACQUISITION OF LAND ON PORTION OF THE MISSOURI 
              RIVER DESIGNATED AS A RECREATIONAL RIVER.

    Section 3(a)(22) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 
1274(a)(22)) is amended in the ninth sentence by striking ``owner:'' 
and all that follows through the end of the sentence and inserting 
``owner.''
                                 <all>
```
ex10_14.htm


AMENDMENT NO. 4, dated as of October 14, 2013 (the “Amendment”), to EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN KINGSTONE INSURANCE COMPANY (AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO COMMERCIAL MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY) (the “Company”) AND JOHN D. REIERSEN (the “Executive”), dated as of September 13, 2006, as amended (the “Agreement”).


 


RECITALS


 


WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive have entered into the Agreement which sets forth the terms and conditions upon which the Executive is employed by the Company and upon which the Company compensates the Executive.


 


WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive desire to amend the Agreement.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree that, notwithstanding anything in the Agreement to the contrary:


 


1. The term of the Agreement shall expire on December 31, 2016, subject to earlier termination as provided for in Paragraph 2 of Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement (the “Term”).


 


2. Effective January 1, 2015 and during the Term, in consideration of the Executive’s Services as provided for in the Agreement and subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, the Executive shall be entitled to receive (a) a minimum annual salary of $105,000 (the “Minimum Annual Salary”) and (b) in the event that the Executive is required by the Company to provide, and does provide, Services to the Company in excess of 500 hours during any particular year commencing January 1, 2015, an amount equal to $210 for each hour of Services performed in excess of 500 hours.


 


3. Except as amended hereby, the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company and the Executive have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.


 




	 	KINGSTONE INSURANCE COMPANY	 
	 	 	 	 
	
 

	
By: 

	/s/ Barry Goldstein	 
	 	 	Barry Goldstein	 
	 	 	President	 
	 	 	 	 







 




	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	
 

	 /s/ John D. Reiersen	 
	 	 John D. Reiersen
## EMBRY.fiiDDLEAeronautical University DAYTONA BEACH . FLORIDA August 30, 2016 U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Operations, M-30 West Building ground floor Room W12-140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Charles Taylor Department of Aviation Maintenance Science
T: 386.226.6779 F: 386.226

. 6778 Subject: Extension of exemption from 14 CFR, Part 65.75(a) allowing the Aviation Mechanic General
(AMG) written tests to be administered after completing the corresponding portion of the curriculum. Exemption No. 1 0384A. Dear Sir or Madam, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU) operates an FAA approved Aviation Maintenance Technician School (AMTS), in Daytona Beach, FL under Air Agency Certificate NX4T. PETITION: ERAU is requesting an extension to exemption 1 0384A from 14 CFR, Part 65.75(a) that expires on November 30, 2016. The exemption allows the Aviation Mechanic General written tests (AMG) to be administered after completing the corresponding portion of the curriculum, prior to meeting experience requirements of §65.77. Person(s) to be covered by the exemption : ERAU, Air Agency NX4T and students enrolled in its
AMTS program in the Airframe, Powerplant, or Airframe and Powerplant curricula. Information, views, or arguments to support the action sought: There has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption

. The requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to ERAU and the students served by it. 

# s;cxz**~** Charles E. Horning Department Chairman -Aviation Maintenance Science Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University 600 S. Clyde Morris Blvd Daytona Beach, FL 32114 cc: Joseph Gramzinski, PMI, Orlando FSDO 600 S

. Clyde Morris Blvd

. Daytona

Beach

, FL 32114-3900Toll

Free: 877.904.3746 embryriddle.edu
#### Charles Kelley v. The State.

*No. 229.*

*Decided February 17.*

1. Adultery—Fornication.—On a trial under an indictment for adultery, if the carnal intercourse proved by the evidence would be sufficient to establish adultery in connection with a further proof of marriage, it would also be amply sufficient to prove and sustain a conviction for fornication where a marriage is not proved.

2. Same.—A party may be convicted of fornication under an indictment for adultery, though he could not be convicted of adultery on an indictment for fornication, because marriage is not an element of the latter, while it is essential to the former offense.

3. Same—Charge—Harmless Error.—On a trial for adultery, where the evidence establishes adultery, it is harmless error for the court to charge upon fornication.

. Appeal from the County Court of Scurry. Tried below before Hon. Branch Isbel, County Judge.

Appellant was prosecuted for adultery with one Mary Caruthers, he being a married man. At his trial he was convicted, with the punishment assessed at a fine of $1000.

No statement of the case is necessary.

*Looney & Crockett*and *C. C.*Johnson, for appellant.

*R. L.*Henry, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

HURT, Presiding Judge.

Conviction for adultery; fine $1000. Some of the acts of carnal knowledge occurring while defendant was a married man, and some after he had been divorced, a question arose as to whether he was guilty of habitual intercourse while married or after the divorce. The court below instructed on adultery and fornication. Appellant assigns this for error. The question: If under an indictment for adultery, *580the carnal intercourse is established *by*proof of one act and that the parties lived together, or by proof of habitual intercourse, whether they lived together or not, the State should fail to prove the marriage as alleged, could the accused be legally convicted of fornication ? We must answer this question in the affirmative. Why ? Because every element of fornication is charged. This the test. But it does not follow that the accused upon a charge of fornication can be convicted of adultery. Why ? The marriage is not alleged, and the punishment for adultery is greater; and where the punishment is greater or increased because of a certain fact, that fact must be alleged; and being alleged, the State must prove it. It would be an issue in the case, and the accused would have the right to be heard on such an issue, to contest by evidence the truth of the fact upon which his punishment is to be increased. Appellant being convicted on the charge of adultery, if error, the charge on fornication was harmless.

Does the evidence sustain the charge of adultery by habitual intercourse ? We are of opinion that it does. Mary, the accomplice, is very strongly corroborated by the testimony of her mother. The venue is sufficiently shown.

The judgment is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*

Judges all present and concurring.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           36758
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   224845
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1946
<INVENTORY>                                      12456
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                320014
<PP&E>                                          165305
<DEPRECIATION>                                   47842
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  744954
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           179584
<BONDS>                                         292172
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           247
<OTHER-SE>                                      222670
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    744954
<SALES>                                        1082505
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1082505
<CGS>                                           866264
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   866234
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               30156
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  66120
<INCOME-TAX>                                     29506
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              36614
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     36614
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.47
        


</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 8

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 8 appear by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49224, Sept. 25, 2009.

#### § 8.260 Revocation of classification society recognition.

A recognized classification society which fails to maintain the minimum standards established in this part will be reevaluated and its recognized status revoked if warranted.