alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 385
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 385 appear at 66 FR 49872, Oct. 1, 2001.

§ 385.333 What happens at the end of the 18-month safety monitoring period? ( a ) If a safety audit has been performed within the 18-month period, and the new entrant is not currently subject to an order placing its operations out-of-service under § 385.325(b) or under a notice ordering it to take specified actions to remedy its safety management controls under § 385.319(c), the FMCSA will remove the new entrant designation and notify the new entrant in writing that its registration has become permanent. Thereafter, the FMCSA will evaluate the motor carrier on the same basis as any other carrier.
( b ) If a new entrant is determined to be “unfit” after a compliance review its new entrant registration will be revoked. (See § 385.13)
( c ) A new entrant that has reached the conclusion of the 18-month period but is under an order to correct its safety management practices under § 385.319(c) will have its new entrant registration removed following FMCSA's determination that the specified actions have been taken to remedy its safety management practices. The motor carrier will be notified in writing that its new entrant designation is removed and that its registration has become permanent. Thereafter, the FMCSA will evaluate the motor carrier on the same basis as any other carrier.
( d ) If a safety audit or compliance review has not been performed by the end of the 18-month monitoring period through no fault of the motor carrier, the carrier will be permitted to continue operating as a new entrant until a safety audit or compliance review is performed and a final determination is made regarding the adequacy of its safety management controls. Based on the results of the safety audit or compliance review, the FMCSA will either: ( 1 ) Remove the new entrant designation and notify the new entrant in writing that its registration has become permanent; or
( 2 ) Revoke the new entrant registration in accordance with § 385.319(c).
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1247.html[7/22/2015 9:14:26 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jve-ezg5

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-1247

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: arnold smith

General Comment

i can plan my retirement without government control .you do not have the power to overrule anything i do.
From: Susan Miller [ mailto:SMiller@bia.org ]

Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:07 PM

To: McCabe, Janet

Cc: Person

Subject: Request for a meeting on Brick MACT

While we continue to work with the technical level within EPA, my senior Task Force members and

I would like to meet with you and perhaps Peter Tsirigotis, to discuss other options for the Brick

MACT. As we have reviewed this rule, we have found several times w here we believe EPA has

grossly overestimated the number of sources that could attain this rule and underestimated the

costs associated with the rule. We will be detailing these in our comments on the proposed rule,

but would also like to discuss some of these issues directly with you.

We commend EPA on taking the steps to go with a health

- based approach for the acid gases and

believe the data completely support this approach. None of our concerns should be read to take

away from that decision. Howeve r, we need to take you up on your commitment to continue to

work with us towards a reasonable solution that meets the requirements of the CAA, but allows our

industry to not install unwarranted and expensive controls. We believe that EPA’s assertion that

the proposed rule essentially reduces the cost of the proposed rule by more than 90% from their

estimates during the SBREFA panel has no basis in the data. In fact, despite the health

- based

approach being applied to over 99 percent of the emissions from o ur industry, the remaining

impacts for mercury and non

- mercury metal HAPs could still cripple us. We would like to discuss

options and share this information directly with you.

We would like to meet with you

- and propose April 7 in the afternoon for that meeting. We would

discuss the technical concerns raised by the proposed rule and discuss approaches that we

believe would fully comply with the CAA but provide us the ability to continue to operate. Please

let us know if this date would be acceptable to you.

Thank You!

Susan

Susan J Miller

Vice President, Environment, Health & Safety

Brick Industry Association

311 South Academy Street

Cary, North Carolina 27511

919 380

- 2191

smiller@bia.org

When you talk, you are only repeating what you already know; but when you listen, you may learn

something new.

- Dalai Lama
§ 1113.4 Prehearing conferences. ( a ) *Purposes.* Upon written notice by the Board in any proceeding, or upon written or oral instruction of an officer, parties or their representatives may be directed to appear before an officer at a specified time and place for a conference, prior to or during the course of a hearing, or in lieu of personally appearing, to submit suggestions in writing, for the purpose of formulating issues and considering: ( 1 ) The simplification of issues;
( 2 ) The necessity or desirability of amending the pleadings either for the purpose of clarification, amplification, or limitation;
( 3 ) The possibility of making admissions of certain averments of fact or stipulations concerning the use by any or all parties of matters of public record, such as annual reports and the like, to avoid the unnecessary introduction of proof;
( 4 ) The procedure at the hearing;
( 5 ) The limitation of the number of witnesses;
( 6 ) The propriety of prior mutual exchange between or among the parties of prepared testimony and exhibits; and
( 7 ) Such other matters, including disposition of requests for discovery, as may aid in the simplification of the evidence and disposition of the proceeding. Parties may request a prehearing conference.
( b ) *Facts disclosed privileged.* Facts disclosed in the course of the prehearing conference are privileged and, except by agreement, will not be used against participating parties either before the Board or elsewhere unless fully corroborated by other evidence.
( c ) *Recordation and decision.* Action taken at the conference, including a recitation of the amendments allowed to the pleadings, the agreements made by the parties as to any of the matters considered, and defining the issues, will be recorded in an appropriate decision unless the parties enter into a written stipulation as to such matters, or agree to a statement thereof made on the record by the officer.
( d ) *Objection to the decision; subsequent proceedings.* If a decision is entered, the parties may, within 20 days of the date of service, or within such lesser time as is set by the officer, present objections on the grounds that the decision does not fully or correctly embody the agreements reached at the conference. Thereafter the terms of the written stipulation or statement of the officer, as the case may be, will determine the subsequent course of the proceedings, unless modified to prevent manifest injustice.
[47 FR 49559, Nov. 1, 1982, as amended at 61 FR 52712, Oct. 8, 1996]
EXHIBIT 21.1


                         OHIO EDISON COMPANY

               LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT








                       AT DECEMBER 31, 1998



Pennsylvania Power Company - Incorporated in Pennsylvania
OES Fuel, Incorporated - Incorporated in Ohio
OES Ventures, Incorporated - Incorporated in Ohio
OES Capital, Incorporated - Incorporated in Ohio
OES Finance, Incorporated - Incorporated in Ohio
OES Nuclear, Incorporated - Incorporated in Ohio
Ohio Edison Financing Trust - Incorporated in Delaware
Ohio Edison Financing Trust II - Incorporated in Delaware





                  Statement of Differences
                ----------------------------


Exhibit Number 21, List of Subsidiaries of the Registrant at
December 31, 1998, is not included in the printed document.
IB

House Calendar No. 158

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2415

[Report No. 104–415]

To designate the United States Customs Administrative Building at the

Ysleta/Zaragosa Port of Entry located at 797 South Ysleta in El Paso,

Texas, as the ‘‘Timothy C. McCaghren Customs Administrative Building’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 28, 1995

Mr. COLEMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

DECEMBER 12, 1995

The Committee on Ways and Means discharged

DECEMBER 12, 1995

Rereferred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

DECEMBER 18 (legislative day, DECEMBER 15), 1995

Reported with amendments, referred to the House Calendar, and ordered to

be printed

[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic]

A BILL

To designate the United States Customs Administrative

Building at the Ysleta/Zaragosa Port of Entry located

at 797 South Ysleta in El Paso, Texas, as the ‘‘Timothy

C. McCaghren Customs Administrative Building’’.
2

•HR 2415 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The United States Customs Administrative Building

5 at the Ysleta/Zaragosa Port of Entry located at 797 South

6 Ysleta in El Paso, Texas, shall be known and designated

7 as the ‘‘Timothy C. McCaghren Customs Administrative

8 Building’’.

9 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

10 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

11 paper, or other record of the United States to the building

12 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

13 to the ‘‘Timothy C. McCaghren Customs Administrative

14 Building’’.

15 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

16 The United States Customs Administrative Building

17 at the Ysleta/Zaragosa Port of Entry located at 797 South

18 Zaragosa Road in El Paso, Texas, shall be known and des19 ignated as the ‘‘Timothy C. McCaghren Customs Adminis20 trative Building’’.

21 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

22 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

23 paper, or other record of the United States to the building

24 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference
3

•HR 2415 RH

1 to the ‘‘Timothy C. McCaghren Customs Administrative

2 Building’’.

Amend the title so as to read: ‘‘A bill to designate

the United States Customs Administrative Building at

the Ysleta/Zaragosa Port of Entry located at 797 South

Zaragosa Road in El Paso, Texas, as the ‘Timothy C.

McCaghren Customs Administrative Building’.’’.
House Calendar No. 158

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2415

[Report No. 104–415]

A BILL

To designate the United States Customs AdminisDAdministrative Building’’. Texas, as the ‘‘Timothy C. McCaghren Customs Entry located at 797 South Ysleta in El Paso, trative Building at the Ysleta/Zaragosa Port of ECEMBER 18 (legislative day, DECEMBER 15), 1995

Reported with amendments, referred to the House

Calendar, and ordered to be printed
#### § 390.16 [Reserved]
#### § 32.115 Does this part affect the Federal contracts that I receive?

It will affect future contract awards indirectly if you are debarred or suspended for a violation of the requirements of this part, as described in § 32.510(c). However, this part does not apply directly to procurement contracts. The portion of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 that applies to Federal procurement contracts is carried out through the Federal Acquisition Regulation in chapter 1 of Title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations (the drug-free workplace coverage currently is in 48 CFR part 23, subpart 23.5).
EXHIBIT
      32.2





**Certification
      Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.** § **1350)**




The
      undersigned, as the chief financial officer of PAB Bankshares, Inc., certifies,
      to the best of my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
      period ended March 31, 2007, which accompanies this certification fully complies
      with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
      and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PAB
      Bankshares, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.  The foregoing
      certification is made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
      (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other
      purpose.





Dated
      this 10th day of May, 2007.







*/s/
                Donald J. Torbert, Jr.*Donald
                J. Torbert, Jr.Executive
                Vice President and Chief Financial Officer








A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      PAB Bankshares, Inc. and will be retained by PAB Bankshares, Inc. and furnished
      to the SEC or its staff upon request.
§ 229.93 Safety cut-off device. The fuel line shall have a safety cut-off device that— ( a ) Is located adjacent to the fuel supply tank or in another safe location;
( b ) Closes automatically when tripped and can be reset without hazard; and
( c ) Can be hand operated from clearly marked locations, one inside the cab and one on each exterior side of the locomotive.
June
15, 2005

John W. Henry & Company, Inc.

301 Yamato Road, Suite 2200
 Boca Raton, Fl. 33431-4931

Attn: Mr. Ken Webster

Re:    Management Agreement Renewals

Dear Mr. Webster:

We are writing with respect
to your management agreements concerning the commodity pools to which
reference is made below (the "Management
Agreements"). We are extending the term of the Management
Agreements through June 30, 2006 and all other provisions of the
Management Agreements will remain
unchanged.

			
		• 	Shearson Mid-West
Futures Fund


			
		• 	Shearson Lehman
Select Advisors Futures Fund
L.P.


			
		• 	Smith Barney Mid-West
Futures Fund L.P. II


			
		• 	Smith
Barney Westport Futures Fund L.P.


			
		• 	Hutton Investors Futures Fund,
L.P. II (HIFF II)


			
		• 	AURORA
2001


			
		• 	AURORA
III


			
		• 	Salomon Smith Barney
Diversified 2000 Futures Fund
L.P.


			
		• 	Alera
100


			
		• 	JWH Strategic Allocation
Master Fund LLC









Page 2

June
15, 2005

			
		• 	Citigroup
Diversified Futures Fund


Please acknowledge receipt of this
modification by signing one copy of this letter and returning it to the
attention of Mr. Daniel McAuliffe at the address above or fax to
212-793-1986. If you have any questions I can be reached at
212-559-5043.

Very truly yours,

CITIGROUP MANAGED FUTURES
LLC





							
	By:		/s/
Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.

Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.
 Chief
Financial Officer & Director
	JOHN W. HENRY & COMPANY, INC.
	By:		/s/ Ken Webster
	Print Name:   Ken
Webster
	






DRMcA/sr
From: Barbara Silvey [mailto:barbsilvey@gmail.com] 

Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 10:51 AM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB32

Policy action concerning RIN 1210-AB32; leave oversight as it is now with the State Department 

of Insurance and the Insurance Carriers- it works! The numbers of individuals that can be helped 

with their retirement using annuities, which protects principal, gives long term gains, and 

lifetime income would be diminished with the new policy. 

--

www.solutions4business.us

for Ohio small business & self-employed

Life, Health, & Retirement Income

3803 Troon Dr., Uniontown, OH 44685

Ph/Fax: 330-699-9225
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                           5


<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   Nov-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        May-31-1999
<CASH>                              1,715,304
<SECURITIES>                        000
<RECEIVABLES>                       304,319
<ALLOWANCES>                        000
<INVENTORY>                         000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    000
<PP&E>                              000
<DEPRECIATION>                      000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      9,463,766
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               254,925
<BONDS>                             000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               000
<PREFERRED>                         000
<COMMON>                            000
<OTHER-SE>                          9,106,769
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        9,463,766
<SALES>                             891,820
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    950,162
<CGS>                               000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    459,853
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     459,309
<INCOME-TAX>                        000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 459,309
<DISCONTINUED>                      000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                     000
<CHANGES>                           000
<NET-INCOME>                        459,309
<EPS-BASIC>                       4.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                       4.55


</TABLE>
PETITION TO: SECRETARY THOMAS E. PEREZ, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Millions of Americans like me are counting on our 401(k) plans and individual retirement accounts for a secure
financial future — and we've worked hard to build and grow our savings. These plans often involve complex
financial decisions, so many of us have to use investment professionals for guidance. Loopholes in the current
law make it easy for some on Wall Street to take advantage of hardworking Americans and line their own
pockets with our retirement savings. Last year alone, hidden fees, unfair risk, and bad investment advice
reduced Americans’ reticement savings by as much as $17 billion. It's time to-close this loophole and ensure a
high standard that bolds anyone who gives financial advice genuinely accountable for helping us choose the best
investments. As one of your constituents, [’m counting on you to work to close the foophole now.

s bird ef
Sincefely; GA ©

Akiko Kotani
Slippery Rock, PA 16057-2904

HLOLSSXXXB 1471097509
#### § 372.101 Casual, occasional, or reciprocal transportation of passengers for compensation when such transportation is sold or arranged by anyone for compensation.

The partial exemption from regulation under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. subtitle IV, part B of the casual, occasional, and reciprocal transportation of passengers by motor vehicle in interstate or foreign commerce for compensation as provided in 49 U.S.C. 13506(b) be, and it is hereby, removed to the extent necessary to make applicable all provisions of 49 U.S.C. subtitle IV, part B to such transportation when sold or offered for sale, or provided or procured or furnished or arranged for, by any person who sells, offers for sale, provides, furnishes, contracts, or arranges for such transportation for compensation or as a regular occupation or business.

[32 FR 20036, Dec. 20, 1967. Redesignated at 61 FR 54708, Oct. 21, 1996, as amended at 62 FR 15421, Apr. 1, 1997]
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

November 21, 2011 

h1114 

Order 

 

November 21, 2011 

143052 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 143052 

 COA: 298827 

ROBERT KING, Wayne CC: 06-003811 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 18, 2011 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

April 28, 2014

d0421 

# Order

Clerk April 28, 2014

148285

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148285

COA: 316280

Wayne CC: 07

- 010617

- FC

JOSEPH MICHAEL GREEN,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 25, 2013

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, becau se the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
§ 243.1 Purpose and scope. ( a ) The purpose of this part is to ensure that any person employed by a railroad or a contractor of a railroad as a safety-related railroad employee is trained and qualified to comply with any relevant Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders, as well as any relevant railroad rules and procedures promulgated to implement those Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders.
( b ) This part contains the general minimum training and qualification requirements for each category and subcategory of safety-related railroad employee, regardless of whether the employee is employed by a railroad or a contractor of a railroad. Contractors shall coordinate with railroads and comply with the contents of this part, including those aspects of training that are specific to the contracting railroad's rules and procedures.
( c ) The requirements in this part do not exempt any other requirement in this chapter.
( d ) Unless otherwise noted, this part augments other training and qualification requirements contained in this chapter.
( e ) The requirements in this part do not address hazardous materials training of “hazmat employees” as defined in 49 CFR 171.8 as such training is required pursuant to 49 CFR part 172, subpart H.
§ 31.32 Location of hearing. ( a ) The hearing may be held— ( 1 ) In any judicial district of the United States in which the defendant resides or transacts business;
( 2 ) In any judicial district of the United States in which the claim or statement in issue was made; or
( 3 ) In such other place as may be agreed upon by the defendant and the ALJ.
( b ) Each party shall have the opportunity to present written and oral argument with respect to the location of the hearing.
( c ) The hearing shall be held at the place and at the time ordered by the ALJ.