alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0853.html[7/21/2015 4:45:04 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvb-q97z

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0853

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Caleb Williams

General Comment

The government has no business dictating how I spend MY money which I earned and invested into a retirement

 account. I am intelligent enough to plan for my own retirement without any assistance from the government. I

 strongly oppose the implementation of these proposed regulations as I feel they are illegal and an infringement

 upon my rights and property.
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0825.html[7/21/2015 3:30:53 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvb-pik8

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0825

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: JAN Rolland

General Comment

I am smart enough to plan for my retirement.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2481 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2481

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
  the fourth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five

                                 An Act

 
  To designate the Federal Triangle Project under construction at 14th 
Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest, in the District of Columbia, 
    as the ``Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal Triangle Project under construction at 14th Street and 
Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest, in the District of Columbia, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Ronald Reagan Building and International 
Trade Center''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the building referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Ronald Reagan Building and 
International Trade Center''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
|Exhibit 32.1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
|Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
|The undersigned officer certifies that this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 

|Date: | August 22, 2005                                                  
|----- | -----------------------------------------------------------------
|      |                                                                  
|By:   | /s/ F. Lynn Blystone                                             
|      | F. Lynn Blystone, Chief Executive Officer, Tri-Valley Corporation
Editorial Note on Part 384
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 384 appear at 66 FR 49872, Oct. 1, 2001.

§ 384.101 Purpose and scope. ( a ) *Purpose.* The purpose of this part is to ensure that the States comply with the provisions of section 12009(a) of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (49 U.S.C. 31311(a)).
( b ) *Scope.* This part: ( 1 ) Includes the minimum standards for the actions States must take to be in substantial compliance with each of the 22 requirements of 49 U.S.C. 31311(a);
( 2 ) Establishes procedures for determinations to be made of such compliance by States; and
( 3 ) Specifies the consequences of State noncompliance.
[62 FR 37152, July 11, 1997]
119 STAT. 2104 PUBLIC LAW 109–93—OCT. 26, 2005

Public Law 109–93

109th Congress

An Act

To adjust the boundary of Rocky Mountain National Park in the State of Colorado.

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 ‘‘Rocky Mountain National Park

Boundary Adjustment Act of 2005’’.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:

(1) FEDERAL PARCEL.—The term ‘‘Federal parcel’’ means

the parcel of approximately 70 acres of Federal land near

MacGregor Ranch, Larimer County, Colorado, as depicted on

the map.

(2) MAP.—The term ‘‘map’’ means the map numbered 121/

80,154, dated June 2004.

(3) NON-FEDERAL PARCELS.—The term ‘‘non-Federal parcels’’ means the 3 parcels of non-Federal land comprising

approximately 5.9 acres that are located near MacGregor

Ranch, Larimer County, Colorado, as depicted on the map.

(4) PARK.—The term ‘‘Park’’ means Rocky Mountain

National Park in the State of Colorado.

SEC. 3. ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT.

(a) EXCHANGE OF LAND.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall accept an offer to

convey all right, title, and interest in and to the non-Federal

parcels to the United States in exchange for the Federal parcel.

(2) CONVEYANCE.—Not later than 60 days after the date

on which the Secretary receives an offer under paragraph (1),

the Secretary shall convey the Federal parcel in exchange for

the non-Federal parcels.

(3) CONSERVATION EASEMENT.—As a condition of the

exchange of land under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall

reserve a perpetual easement to the Federal parcel for the

purposes of protecting, preserving, and enhancing the conservation values of the Federal parcel.

(b) BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT; MANAGEMENT OF LAND.—On

acquisition of the non-Federal parcels under subsection (a)(2), the

Secretary shall—

(1) adjust the boundary of the Park to reflect the acquisition

of the non-Federal parcels; and

Deadline.

Rocky Mountain

National Park

Boundary

Adjustment Act

of 2005.

16 USC 191 note.

Oct. 26, 2005

[S. 55]

PUBLIC LAW 109–93—OCT. 26, 2005 119 STAT. 2105

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 55 (H.R. 774):

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 109–108 accompanying H.R. 774 (Comm. on Resources).

SENATE REPORTS: No. 109–19 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 151 (2005):

July 26, considered and passed Senate.

Oct. 18, considered and passed House.

Æ

(2) manage the non-Federal parcels as part of the Park,

in accordance with any laws (including regulations) applicable

to the Park.

Approved October 26, 2005.
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2264

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that civilian employees

of the National Guard may not be required to wear military uniforms

while performing civilian service.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 6, 1995

Mr. EVANS (for himself, Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas, Mr. WILLIAMS, and Mrs.

SCHROEDER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, and in addition to the

Committee on National Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that civilian

employees of the National Guard may not be required

to wear military uniforms while performing civilian

service.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 2264 IH

1 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION AGAINST REQUIRING CIVILIAN

2 EMPLOYEES OF THE NATIONAL GUARD TO

3 WEAR MILITARY UNIFORMS WHILE PER4 FORMING CIVILIAN SERVICE.

5 (a) PROHIBITION.—(1) Subchapter I of chapter 59

6 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at

7 the end the following:

8 ‘‘§ 5904. Prohibition against requiring civilian em9 ployees of the National Guard to wear

10 military uniforms while performing civil11 ian service

12 ‘‘(a) A civilian employee of the National Guard may

13 not be required, by regulation or otherwise, to wear a mili14 tary uniform while performing civilian service.

15 ‘‘(b) For the purpose of this section—

16 ‘‘(1) the term ‘civilian employee of the National

17 Guard’ means an employee appointed by an adjutant

18 general designated by the Secretary concerned under

19 section 709(c) of title 32;

20 ‘‘(2) the term ‘military uniform’ means the uni21 form, or a distinctive part of the uniform, of the

22 Army or Air Force (as defined under regulations

23 prescribed by the Secretary of Defense); and

24 ‘‘(3) the term ‘civilian service’ means service

25 other than service compensable under chapter 3 of

26 title 37.’’.
3

•HR 2264 IH

1 (2) The table of sections for chapter 59 of title 5,

2 United States Code, is amended by inserting after the

3 item relating to section 5903 the following:

‘‘5904. Prohibition against requiring civilian employees of the National Guard

to wear military uniforms while performing civilian service.’’.

4 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 5903 of

5 title 5, United States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘this

6 subchapter.’’ and inserting ‘‘sections 5901 and 5902.’’.

7 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

8 this Act shall take effect at the end of the 60-day period

9 beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1189.html[7/22/2015 3:27:01 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvd-3e9q

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1189

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Kimberly Christmas

Address:

2430 Birkhall Way

Lawrenceville, GA, 30043

Email: Kgchrist2001@yahoo.com

General Comment

I am US citizen and I have been saving for retirement. It is my right to be able to use my retirement for my own

 purposes. The government should not be taking this right away
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: 5/1/15 9:26 AM

Received: April 29, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8ikd-doa1

Comments Due: July 06, 2015

Submission Type: API

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; 

Notice of proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0204

Definition of the Term Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0251

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-08831

Submitter Information

Name: James Reim

Address: 

5709 Brewster Lane

Erie, 16505

Email: jrmlreim@gmail.com

Phone: 8148330440

Organization: The Investment Center of Erie

General Comment

Proposing a Fiduciary Rule is in direct opposition to reality. Financial Advisors who are honest 

and caring will only be made less available and more vulnerable. This proposal is nothing more 

than an attempt to let lawyers into the world of investing to pursue law suits. Furthermore, it is 

another opening for more inapppropriate regulation. The answers to problems lies not with 

regulation and enforcement, but with education of advisors and the public. Please scrap this 

poor strategy and push back the lawyers. Instead promote education, civility and morality. 

James Reim, CFA

Senior Financial Advisor with 30 years of experience as an investment professional taking care 

of people.

Page 1 of 1

https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006481ac1a0b&format=xml&showor... 5/1/2015
EXHIBIT 23.3





CONSENT OF


BROWN ARMSTRONG


ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION



























To the Board of Directors and


Shareholders of Tri-Valley Corporation








We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (No. 333-163442) on Form S-3 of Tri-Valley Corporation (the “Company”) of the reference to Brown Armstrong Accountancy Corporation, and the inclusion of our report dated March 22, 2011 (except for Note 2 and our audit report on Tri-Valley Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting, as to which the date is November 3, 2011), in the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2010, of the Company, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.







We also consent to the reference to our firm under the captions “Experts” in the Prospectus, which is part of the Registration Statement.






BROWN ARMSTRONGACCOUNTANCY CORPORATIONGRAPHIC




Bakersfield, California


November 3, 2011
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, October 12, 1995 (127), Para 127.30 Adjournment Over]
[Page 1527]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.127.30  adjournment over

  On motion of Mr. ARMEY, by unanimous consent,
  Ordered, That when the House adjourns on Friday, October 13, 1995, it 
adjourn to meet at 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 17, 1995, for 
''Morning Hour Debates``.
```
#### § 382.207 Pre-duty use.

No driver shall perform safety-sensitive functions within four hours after using alcohol. No employer having actual knowledge that a driver has used alcohol within four hours shall permit a driver to perform or continue to perform safety-sensitive functions.
#### Lazarus Belfer, Respondent, *v.*Morgiana Ludlow, Appellant.

*Belfer*v. *Ludlow,*143 App. Div. 147; appeal dismissed.

(Submitted April 24, 1911;

decided May 2, 1911.)

Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered February 17, 1911, which affirmed an order of Special Term granting a motion for leave to issue an execution. .

■ The motion was made on the ground that the order appealed from was not appealable to the Court of Appeals.

*Francis A. McCloskey*for motion.

*Frank L. Holt*opposed.

Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs and ten dollars costs of motion.
#### Herbert E. WADE, Jr., Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 14436.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued Sept. 9, 1958.

Decided Sept. 19, 1958.

Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied Oct. 7, 1958.

Mr. Carl J. Morano, Washington, D. C.,. for appellant.

Mr. John W. Warner, Jr., Asst. U. S.. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., Carl W. Belcher and Victor-Caputy, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the-brief, for appellee.

*951Before Bazelon, Fahy and Bastían, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction for violation of § 22-2305, D.C.Code (1951). Appellant contends that the District Court erred in denying his pretrial motion to suppress certain evidence. No objection was made during the trial to the admission of the evidence and the proceedings with respect to the pretrial motion, other than the written motion and order denying it, are not a part of the record on appeal. We accordingly cannot sustain the contention.

We have examined other questions raised and find no error affecting substantial rights.

Affirmed.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 09**  **- 73**  **7 3** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. LESTER FLETCHER, a/k/a Big Mann , Defendant

– Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Greenbelt
. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. ( 8:05

- cr - 00179

- PJM

- 1 )

Submitted : February 18, 2010 Decided: February 24, 2010

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Lester Fletcher, Appellant Pro Se. David Ira Salem, Gina Simms, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Lester Fletcher seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2009 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (200 6 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (200 6 ). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitu tional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);
Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683

- 84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Fletcher has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Fletcher’s motion for government funds to hire a private investigator, deny a certificate of appealability , and dismiss Fletcher’s appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
§ 237.109 Bridge inspection records. ( a ) Each track owner to which this part applies shall keep a record of each inspection required to be performed on those bridges under this part.
( b ) Each record of an inspection under the bridge management program prescribed in this part shall be prepared from notes taken on the day(s) the inspection is made, supplemented with sketches and photographs as needed. Such record will be dated with the date(s) the physical inspection takes place and the date the record is created, and it will be signed or otherwise certified by the person making the inspection.
( c ) Each bridge management program shall specify that every bridge inspection report shall include, as a minimum, the following information: ( 1 ) A precise identification of the bridge inspected;
( 2 ) The date on which the physical inspection was completed;
( 3 ) The identification and written or electronic signature of the inspector;
( 4 ) The type of inspection performed, in conformance with the definitions of inspection types in the bridge management program;
( 5 ) An indication on the report as to whether any item noted thereon requires expedited or critical review by a railroad bridge engineer, and any restrictions placed at the time of the inspection;
( 6 ) The condition of components inspected, which may be in a condition reporting format prescribed in the bridge management program, together with any narrative descriptions necessary for the correct interpretation of the report; and
( 7 ) When an inspection does not encompass the entire bridge, the portions of the bridge which were inspected shall be identified in the report.
( d ) An initial report of each bridge inspection shall be placed in the location designated in the bridge management program within 30 calendar days of the completion of the inspection unless the complete inspection report is filed first. The initial report shall include the information required by paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(5) of this section.
( e ) A complete report of each bridge inspection, including as a minimum the information required in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(6) of this section, shall be placed in the location designated in the bridge management program within 120 calendar days of the completion of the inspection.
( f ) Each bridge inspection program shall specify the retention period and location for bridge inspection records. The retention period shall be no less than two years following the completion of the inspection. Records of underwater inspections shall be retained until the completion and review of the next underwater inspection of the bridge.
( g ) If a bridge inspector, supervisor, or engineer discovers a deficient condition on a bridge that affects the immediate safety of train operations, that person shall report the condition as promptly as possible to the person who controls the operation of trains on the bridge in order to protect the safety of train operations.