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

# District: 10
Federal Reserve Bank of: Kansas City

## Filings received during the week ending December 31, 2011

|Filer                         | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                 | End of Comment Period                                
|----------------------------- | ------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------
|CENTRAL FINANCIAL CORPORATION | * 3A3         | Central Financial Corporation, Hutchinson, Kansas, to acquire .25 percent, for a total of 7.05 percent, of the voting shares of TTAC Corp., parent of Community First National Bank, both in Manhattan, Kansas. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:01/23/2012   
|Newspaper:                    | Not available
|Federal Register:             | 01/23/2012   
|TETON FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC | * 3A1         | Teton Financial Services, LLC, Wilson, Wyoming, to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of 100 percent of the voting shares of Rocky Mountain Bank, Wilson, Wyoming.                           | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:Not available
|Newspaper:                    | Not available
|Federal Register:             | Not available

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
EXHIBIT 10.32









EXHIBIT A1







ELIGIBILITY TO PARTICIPATE

IN THE

 SEVERANCE POLICY







From and as of April 6, 2012:


 


John R. D. Dickson

 John Houston


 


From and as of July 30, 2012:


 


Alan H. Benjamin






From and as of November 6, 2013


 


Michael C. Bond


 


________________________________________



	
1

	
As adopted by the Compensation Committee on April 6, 2012, and as amended as of October 11, 2013.
Editorial Note on Part 107
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 107 appear at 67 FR 61011, Sept. 27, 2002, 70 FR 56089, Sept. 23, 2005, and 70 FR 73159, Dec. 9, 2005.

§ 107.321 Hearing. ( a ) To the extent practicable, the hearing is held in the general vicinity of the place where the alleged violation occurred or at a place convenient to the respondent. Testimony by witnesses shall be given under oath and the hearing shall be recorded verbatim.
( b ) Hearings are conducted in accordance with the Federal Rules of Evidence and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; however, the ALJ may modify them as he determines necessary in the interest of a full development of the facts. In addition, the ALJ may: ( 1 ) Administer oaths and affirmations;
( 2 ) Issue subpoenas as provided by § 105.45;
( 3 ) Adopt procedures for the submission of motions, evidence, and other documents pertinent to the proceeding;
( 4 ) Take or cause depositions to be taken;
( 5 ) Rule on offers of proof and receive relevant evidence;
( 6 ) Examine witnesses at the hearing;
( 7 ) Convene, recess, reconvene, adjourn and otherwise regulate the course of the hearing;
( 8 ) Hold conferences for settlement, simplification of the issues, or any other proper purpose; and
( 9 ) Take any other action authorized by, or consistent with, the provisions of this subpart and permitted by law which may expedite the hearing or aid in the disposition of an issue raised therein.
( c ) The official who issued the notice of probable violation, or his representative, has the burden of proving the facts alleged therein.
( d ) The respondent may appear and be heard on his own behalf or through counsel of his choice. The respondent or his counsel may offer relevant information including testimony which he believes should be considered in opposition to the allegations or which may bear on the sanction being sought and conduct such cross-examination as may be required for a full disclosure of the facts.
[Amdt. 107-11, 48 FR 2651, Jan. 20, 1983, as amended at 67 FR 61011, Sept. 27, 2002]
###### Editorial Note on Part 8

#### Editorial Note:

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

#### § 8.565 Appeal.

A company may appeal any decision or action taken under this subpart in accordance with 46 CFR part 1, subpart 1.03 of this chapter.
Opinion filed May 21, 2009

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals

____________

No. 11-07-00300-CR

__________

 ANTHONY COLE FONTANA, Appellant

V.

 STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1

 Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1044837D

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The trial court convicted Anthony Cole Fontana, upon his plea of guilty, of aggravated

robbery with a knife and found that a deadly weapon was used or exhibited. A plea bargain

agreement was reached, and the trial court originally assessed his punishment at confinement for six

years in accordance with the plea agreement. However, the trial court granted appellant’s motion

for new trial as to punishment only. After a new punishment hearing, the trial court assessed

punishment at confinement for five years. We affirm.
2

In his sole issue on appeal, appellant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in

assessing his punishment. Appellant argues that the trial court only “gave passing notice to [his]

significant brain injury problems.” Appellant asserts that he was, therefore, denied a fair trial and

should have been placed on deferred adjudication and asks that this court remand for new

punishment. Appellant does not challenge his conviction or his plea of guilty.

TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 29.03 (Vernon 2003) defines the offense of aggravated robbery

and declares it to be a first degree felony. TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.32 (Vernon 2003) provides

that a person convicted of a first degree felony offense shall be confined for life or for a term of not

more than ninety-nine years but not less than five years. An optional $10,000 fine is also authorized.

The trial court assessed appellant’s punishment at the minimum authorized under the

applicable law and less than the terms to which he had originally agreed. A penalty assessed within

the range of punishment established by the legislature will not be disturbed on appeal. Jackson v.

State, 680 S.W.2d 809 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 354 (Tex.

App.—Eastland 2001, pet. ref’d).

The record before this court does not support appellant’s contentions that he was denied a

fair trial. The issue is overruled.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

May 21, 2009

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Strange, J.
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS 

DIVISION I 

No. CR-13-1011

ROY MARTIN BARBER

APPELLANT

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

APPELLEE

Opinion Delivered: May 14, 2014

APPEAL FROM THE CRITTENDEN

COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

[NO. CR-2010-1532]

HONORABLE RANDY F. 

PHILHOURS, JUDGE

AFFIRMED

RHONDA K. WOOD, Judge

This is an appeal from a probation revocation. Roy Barber argues that the circuit 

court improperly revoked his probation when it admitted testimony at the revocation 

hearing that violated his confrontation rights. Because the court revoked on multiple, 

independent grounds, and Barber attacks only one on appeal, we affirm the revocation. 

 Barber pleaded guilty to possession of marijuana in 2011 and was sentenced to 

three years’ probation. In 2013, the State filed a petition to revoke Barber’s probation 

based on allegations that Barber had committed two new crimes: possession of marijuana 

and battery in the third degree. At the hearing, Barber made a confrontation-clause 

objection when the State asked a police officer if the battery victim had made any 

statements. The circuit court overruled the objection and allowed the testimony. The 

2014 Ark. App. 311
2

court revoked Barber’s probation after finding that he had committed battery and 

possessed marijuana in violation of his probation conditions. 

 When a circuit court expressly bases its decision on multiple, independent grounds, 

and an appellant challenges only one of those grounds on appeal, we affirm without 

addressing the merits of the argument. Morgan v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 357. Here, the 

circuit court revoked Barber’s probation on two independent grounds: possessing 

marijuana and committing battery in the third degree. Barber’s sole argument on appeal 

concerns an objection that affected only the battery charge. The objection was irrelevant 

to the possession-of-marijuana charge, and Barber does not challenge the finding that he 

was in possession of marijuana in violation of his probation. Because Barber failed to 

challenge both of the independent grounds relied on by the circuit court in revoking his 

probation, we affirm the revocation. 

 Affirmed. 

 WALMSLEY and BROWN, JJ., agree. 

C. Brian Williams, for appellant. 

Dustin McDaniel, Att’y Gen., by: Jake H. Jones, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.

2014 Ark. App. 311
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:
Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 1
Federal Reserve Bank of: Boston

## Filings received during the week ending December 3, 2011

|Filer                  | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                    | End of Comment Period                                  
|---------------------- | -------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------
|PATRIOT COMMUNITY BANK | Member         | Application by Patriot Community Bank, Woburn, Massachusetts, to become a member of the Federal Reserve System pursuant to section 9 of the Federal Reserve Act and section 208.3 of Regulation H. | Newspaper:Not applicableFederal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:             | Not applicable
|Federal Register:      | Not applicable

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:
Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
<PAGE>


                                  Exhibit 12.1
                                  ------------

    Statement of Computation of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock
   Dividend Requirements for the three month periods ended March 31, 1999 and
                                 March 31, 1998

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                       For the three months ended
                                                  March 31, 1999        March 31, 1998
                                                  --------------        --------------
<S>                                                 <C>                   <C>
     Net income                                      $ 29,032              $ 22,754
     Interest expense                                  34,358                15,915
     Amortization of capitalized interest                  23                    --
                                                     --------              --------
     Earnings before interest                          63,413                38,669

     Interest expense                                  34,358                15,915
     Interest capitalized                                 311                    --
     Interest portion of rentals                           88                    --
     Preferred dividends                                  875                   875
                                                     --------              --------
     Fixed charges                                     35,632                16,790

     Earnings to fixed charges and preferred
       stock dividend requirements                       1.78                  2.30
                                                     ========              ========

</TABLE>
1 

### Kelly, Shaheerah

From: Kelly, Shaheerah

Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 7:14 AM

To: Shane Young; Dave Brown; 'Eric Albr ight (ealbright@environcorp.com)'

Cc: Rios, Gerardo; Christenson, Kara

Subject: RE: PSD

Good morning,

Thanks again for the previous submittal sent to EPA on September 13. We need a bit more information to assist us in our

analysis. Below is the additional information needed.

1. The approximate cost of a cost of a new lumber mill and cogeneration facility. This would be helpful for

comparison to the cost of the post

‐ combustion CCS system.

2. The GHG BACT analysis identifies the following control as an available method for reducing N2O emissions:

Addition of a N2O

‐ abating SCR system. Please provide cost information, including cost effectiveness data in

$/ton, for the assessment of this control option in Step 4 of the GHG analysis.

3. Please provide the actual cost calculations (e.g., spreadsheets) for the cost estimates previously provided for

post

‐ combustion CCS and catalytic destruction, as well as for the addition of a N2O

‐ abating SCR system.

I look forward to your response. Feel free to contact me for questions.

************************************

Shaheerah Kelly

U.S. Environmental Protec tion Agency, Region 9

Permits Office, Air Division

San Francisco, CA 94105

Phone: 415-947-4156

Fax: 415-947-3579

Email: kelly.shaheerah@epa.gov

From: Shane Young [ mailto:SWyoung@spi-ind.com ]

Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 9:34 AM

To: Kelly, Shaheerah

Cc: 'Eric Albright ( ealbright@environcorp.com )'

Subject: PSD

Good morning Shaheerah,

I wanted to follow up on our conversation Monday regarding the responses to EPA’s questions pertaining to SPI

Anderson PSD permit. You had mentioned a couple of questions that you had and were going to send an e

‐ mail to Eric

and myself. How is this coming? As I mentioned, given the urgency of this permit anything you need please get it to us as

soon as possible so we can address and get back to you.

Regards

Shane Young

Sierra Pacific Industries

19758 Riverside Ave

Anderson Ca. 96007

P 530

‐ 378

‐ 8356

C 530

‐ 604

‐ 00252 swyoung@spi

‐ ind.com
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 01-1022 

________________________________________________________________________ 

WEAPONS 

Proliferation 

 Agreement Between 

the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and UKRAINE 

Signed at Kiev October 22, 2001 

and 

Agreements Amending the Agreement 

Signed at Kiev and Washington March 15 and 26, 2004 

Signed at Washington June 27, 2005 

Signed at Kiev and Washington August 31 and 

September 12, 2006 

Signed at Kiev and Washington July 30 and 

August 17, 2007 

Signed at Kiev and Washington April 4 and 16, 2008 

Signed at Kiev and Washington April 9 and 29, 2009 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
 UKRAINE 

 

 Weapons: Proliferation 

 Agreement signed at Kiev October 22, 2001; 

 Entered into force October 22, 2001. 

 And agreements amending the agreement. 

 Signed at Kiev and Washington March 15 and 26, 2004; 

 Entered into force March 26, 2004. 

 Signed at Washington June 27, 2005; 

 Entered into force June 27, 2005. 

 Signed at Kiev and Washington August 31 and 

 September 12, 2006; 

 Entered into force September 12, 2006. 

 Signed at Kiev and Washington July 30 and August 17, 2007; 

 Entered into force August 17, 2007. 

 Signed at Kiev and Washington April 4 and 16, 2008; 

 Entered into force April 16, 2008. 

 Signed at Kiev and Washington April 9 and 29, 2009; 

 Entered into force April 29, 2009. 


Note: At the present time, the Treaty Office does not have the Ukrainian text of this Agreement. If the Ukrainian text becomes available, it will be added to this publication.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1571 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1571

 To amend the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 to protect 
   elected and appointed judges against discrimination based on age.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 3, 1995

 Ms. Molinari introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
          Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 to protect 
   elected and appointed judges against discrimination based on age.

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

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT.

    The last sentence of section 11(f) of the Age Discrimination in 
Employment Act of 1967 (29 U.S.C. 630(f)) is amended in the penultimate 
sentence by inserting ``or persons elected or appointed to a judicial 
office'' before the period.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION OF AMENDMENT.

    (a) Effective Date.--Except as provided in subsection (b), this Act 
shall take effect 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Application of Amendment.--The amendment made by section 1 
shall not apply with respect to conduct occurring before the effective 
date of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
§ 71.10-10 Conditions of permit. ( a ) The permit will state upon its face the conditions under which it is issued, the number of extra passengers the vessel may carry, any additional lifesaving or safety equipment which will be required, the route for which the permit is granted, and the dates on which the permit will be valid.
( b ) [Reserved]
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1804 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 356
104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 1804

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 6, 1995

 Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

                             March 28, 1996

               Reported by Mr. Chafee, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the United States Post Office-Courthouse located at South 
 6th and Rogers Avenue, Fort Smith, Arkansas, as the ``Judge Isaac C. 
                       Parker Federal Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States Post Office-Courthouse located at South 6th and 
Rogers Avenue, Fort Smith, Arkansas, 
shall be known and designated as the ``Judge Isaac C. Parker Federal 
Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the United States Post Office-Courthouse 
referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
``Judge Isaac C. Parker Federal Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 5, 1995.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.

                              By Linda Nave,

                                                          Deputy Clerk.
                                     

                                                       Calendar No. 356

104th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 1804

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To designate the United States Post Office-Courthouse located at South 
 6th and Rogers Avenue, Fort Smith, Arkansas, as the ``Judge Isaac C. 
                       Parker Federal Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 28, 1996

                       Reported without amendment
```