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

Received: October 25, 2017

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1k1-8zfb-4txu

Comments Due: December 11, 2017

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2015-0017

Claims Procedure for Plans Providing Disability Benefits; Extension of Applicability 

Date

Comment On: EBSA-2015-0017-0291

Claims Procedure: Plans Providing Disability Benefits

Document: EBSA-2015-0017-DRAFT-0391

Comment on FR Doc # 2017-22082

Submitter Information

Name: Douglas Robinson

Address: 3490 Piedmont Road, N.E., Suite 1200

Atlanta, GA, 30305

Email: drobinson@esww-law.com

Phone: 678-904-6868

General Comment

I am writing to comment in opposition to the proposal for a 90 day delay in applying 

the Department's Final Rule amending the ERISA claims procedures for employee 

welfare benefits plans covering disability benefits. The benefits under these plans are 

typically funded through insurance policies where the insurance companies who are 

responsible for paying claims also make the decisions as to whether to pay the 

benefits. As such these have a structural conflict of interest that they are now 

attempting to protect by circumventing the normal rule-making process with the 

support of certain Congressional members whose campaigns rely on financial support 

from that industry.

The insurance industry and its advocates (referred to in RIN 1210-AB39 as 

"stakeholders") had ample opportunity to address their concerns over these regulatory 

changes, including their disingenuous claim that the new procedural rules will 
increase costs and "in doing so impair workers' access to disability insurance 

benefits." The Department evaluated those concerns along with the competing 

concerns of employee/consumers for information necessary to understand and protect 

the rights they already have under the ERISA regulations. The resulting regulatory 

changes simply clarify and give more meaning to the existing procedures through a 

well-reasoned compromise that ensures plan participants are provided with basic 

information necessary for them to understand why their claims are denied and have a 

reasonable opportunity to respond with information a plan administrator may not have 

but should have in order to perform the type of "full and fair" review the ERISA 

regulations were intended to provide. The rule-making process was closed and these 

self-interested stakeholders should not be permitted to reopen the process or delay 

implementation of the new procedures. The Department correctly determined that the 

changes scheduled to go into effect January 1, 2018, will have minimal impact on plan 

costs and serve a greater purpose in balancing the consumers' right to a full and fair 

review. By contributing to more informed and accurate decisions at the claim level 

through an improved collaborative process, these procedural changes will only 

increase the number of claims decided correctly the first time and hence reduce 

unnecessary litigation and litigation expenses for all plan participants.
Leslie H. Cox (Docket No. FAA-2015-0847)

Describe the aircraft makes, models, and types (i.e., fixed-wing, 

rotorcraft, lighter-than-air) for the proposed UAS operation. The 

descriptions should include the maximum weight (including 

payload).

Aircraft Used by Leslie H. Cox

Aircraft # 1 – Rotorcraft- DJI Phantom 3 with Sony EXMOR Camera 

See attached Operators Manual for full details
Aircraft #2 – Rotorcraft - DJI Phantom 2 with GoPro Hero 3 camera

See attached Operators Manual for full details
###### Editorial Note on Part 587

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 587 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

#### § 587.4 Definitions.

All terms defined in section 102 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1391) are used in their statutory meaning.
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1176.html[7/22/2015 3:12:15 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvd-yahg

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-1176

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Stephen Bassett

General Comment

I have worked all of my adult life, served 3 years, 11 months and 4 days in active military service for my

 country. In all my woking years, I drew one (1) week of unemployment. I invested in a 401K as soon as they

 became available. I never withdrew a cent from my 401K until I became 72-1/2. I therefore see no reason why

 the federal government or any other agency should concerned about my savings and how I choose to use them.

 As I see it, this is just another political scheme to redestrubt my savings to someone who has been less than

 prudent with their own work and financial choices. I do no feel I have spent all of my working life so someone

 else can harvest the fruits of my labors.
§ 661.18 Intentional violations. A person shall be ineligible to receive any contract or subcontract made with funds authorized under the Federal Public Transportation Act of 2005 pursuant to part 29 of this title if it has been determined by a court or Federal agency that the person intentionally— ( a ) Affixed a label bearing a “Made in America” inscription, or an inscription with the same meaning, to a product not made in the United States, but sold in or shipped to the United States and used in projects to which this section applies, or
( b ) Otherwise represented that any such product was produced in the United States.
[61 FR 6303, Feb. 16, 1996, as amended at 72 FR 53698, Sept. 20, 2007]
From: Gary Santoro [mailto:gary.s@phoenixinternet.net] 

Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 12:26 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: Attn: Lifetime Income RFI

U.S. Department of Labor 

Office of Regulations and Interpretations, Employee Benefits Security Administration 

N-5655, 200 Constitution Ave. NW 

Washington, DC 20210 

Attn: Lifetime Income RFI 

Dear Sir or Madam, 

At a recent conference organized by National Institute of Retirement Security, Robert L. 

Reynolds, President and Chief Executive of Putnam Investments, according to a release 

called for the following: 

• The creation of an optional national insurance charter and a new regulatory body 

empowered to approve, or deny approval to, qualified lifetime income products 

including annuity and non-annuity products. 

• The creation of a new lifetime income security fund, comparable to the FDIC in 

banking, to back up lifetime income guarantees from insurers whether offered "inplan" or as choices people make when rolling over from a workplace savings plan 

to individual accounts. 

• The requirement that all workplace savings plan providers offer such options to 

all employees, but leave employees free to choose or reject lifetime income 

options. 

• Strong tax incentives to employees who invest in insured lifetime income 

products, since converting life savings into lifelong income is even more 

challenging than accumulating a nest egg. 

• Strong legal protection to employers who offer automatic enrollment, as well as 

access to advice, guidance and lifetime income guarantee products in their savings 

plans. 

It is encouraged to consider these recommendations by Robert L. Reynolds. 

 
Sincerely, 

 

Gary Santoro

Business Development Executive

Phoenix Internet

Phone: 602-234-0917 ext. 122

 877-269-7886 ext. 122

Fax: 602-234-0699

http://www.phoenixinternet.net
(June 20, 1913.)

#### H. A. PARTRIDGE, Appellant, v. TWIN FALLS LAND & WATER CO. and TWIN FALLS CANAL CO., Respondents.

[133 Pac. 677.]

APPEAL from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District for Lincoln County. Hon. Edward A. Walters, Judge.

Action for damages. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appealed.

*Affirmed.*

*276Longley & Hazel and Taylor Cummins, for Appellant.

Sweeley & Sweeley and Bowen & Porter, for Respondents.

Counsel cite same authorities on points decided as in *Brose v. Twin Falls Land & Water Go. et al., ante,*p. 266.

AILSHIE, C. J.

This action involves the same question of law that has just been passed on in the case of *Brose v. Twin Falls Land & Water Co.*The only difference between the two cases is that the Brose ease was prosecuted for damages caused on account of seepage and percolation, and in the present ease the action is prosecuted against the defendants for allowing a considerable volume of water to overflow and escape from the company’s canals and flow over and upon the plaintiff’s land, cutting out and washing away the soil in places and washing gravel and debris upon the soil in other places, thus damaging and injuring the plaintiff’s lands.

The action was commenced against both the Twin Falls Land & Water Co. and the Twin Falls Canal Co. The same facts were pleaded in this case as in the Brose case with reference to the ownership of the two companies and the interest and control that each had in- and to this canal and water system. The district court held that the plaintiff had improperly united a cause of action against the Twin Falls Land & Water Co. with an action against the Twin Falls Canal Co., and that the facts pleaded did not show a joint liability against both the defendants.

The judgment in this case must be affirmed for the same reasons stated in *Brose v. Twin Falls Land & Water Co. and Twin Falls Canal Co.*Judgment is affirmed, and it is so ordered. Costs awarded in favor of respondents.

Sullivan and Stewart, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 57178]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17972]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Foreign Assets Control


Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets 
Control (``OFAC'') is publishing updated information for one person 
that has been placed on OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and 
Blocked Persons List (SDN List) based on OFAC's determination that one 
or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and 
interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of this person is 
blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in 
transactions with this person.

DATES: See Supplementary Information section for effective date(s).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OFAC: Andrea Gacki, Director, tel.: 
202-622-2490; Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202-622-
2420; Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; Assistant 
Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202-622-4855; or the Assistant 
Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Availability

    The SDN List and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions 
programs are available on OFAC's website (https://www.treasury.gov/ofac).

Notice of OFAC Action(s)

    On August 15, 2023, OFAC published updated information for the name 
of one person on OFAC's SDN List, who remains blocked under the 
relevant sanctions authorities listed below.

Individual

    1. SHAHRIYARI, Behnam (a.k.a. HAMID, Huseyini; a.k.a. MARALLU, 
Behnam Shahriyari; a.k.a. MIR VAKILI, Seyed Ali Akbar; a.k.a. 
MIRVAKILI, Seyed Aliakbar; a.k.a. MIRVAKILI, Seyedaliakbar; a.k.a. 
SHAHCHERAGHI, Seyed Hamid Reza; a.k.a. SHAHRIARI, Behnam; a.k.a. 
SHAHRYARI, Behnam), Iran; DOB 1968; alt. DOB 22 Sep 1967; alt. DOB 
30 Sep 1965; nationality Iran; Additional Sanctions Information--
Subject to Secondary Sanctions; Gender Male; Passport K47248790 
(Iran) expires 20 Oct 2023; alt. Passport D10007350 (Iran) expires 
13 Oct 2025 (individual) [SDGT] [IFSR].

    Dated: August 15, 2023.
Andrea M. Gacki,
Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of the 
Treasury.
[FR Doc. 2023-17972 Filed 8-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-AL-P
From: Dan Amoss [mailto:damoss02@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 3:44 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: RIN 1210-AB33

This proposal is nothing short of theft. 

Bernie Madoff would be proud. 

So would Hugo Chavez and Lenin. 

See the history of banana republics for a preview of what this would lead to, if passed. 

Guaranteeing a fixed stream of payments in dollars is NOT the same as guaranteeing the 

purchasing power of those dollars 10, 20 or 30 years down the road. 

The public is waking up to this threat, and will revolt once they understand that this is theft of 

the purchasing power of their hard-earned retirement savings. 

Even worse, the reserve currency status of the U.S. dollar would evaporate at frightening speed if 

this measure passes. 

We're already coming dangerously close to a worldwide repudiation of confidence in the integrity 

of the U.S. dollar. 

Rather than raid retirement assets to fund an out-of-control government budget, here's a novel 

idea: the government should live within its means, just like every family or business that 

overextended itself on easy credit. 

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (TX) could probably provide more insight into the folly of this proposal.
1210-AB32-2-1564.html[7/26/2015 7:41:12 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 11, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jxb-rfvh

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-2061

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Robert Montoya

General Comment

To Whom It May Concern,

Did you know that under current regulations, if the average American invests around $100 a month in good

 growth mutual funds from their early 20's until retirement age that they will retire millionaires? Source:

 http://www.daveramsey.com/blog/how-to-create-your-retirement-plan

Also, under the current plan, what makes these options more affordable for average Americans is that because

 investment advisers take fees from other companies in exchange for hawking their products, they can spread this

 wealth around by charging far less to customers. This makes investment opportunities more affordable for the

 average American, as opposed to it being exclusively for the rich and powerful.

Under the proposed rule here, such benefits will be removed, thus pricing out many of these wonderful

 investment options out of the reach of the average American. Thus making us more dependent on Social

 Security, which is a political football always talked about every election. Not to mention that Social Security

 was only designed to be a supplemental income option. If that is your only retirement option, one should prepare

 by buying "1,000 new fun recipes for Alpo!" 

Current rules already require brokers to reveal such arrangements they have made with other mutual companies. 

I ask you not to remove this wonderful option that allows many Americans not of the wealthy class to take

 control of their own future and retire with dignity. Which is important when one considers the over $200 trillion

 U.S. Dollars of unfunded liabilities. 

Thank you for your time.
----

Removal from the register of Case C-54/02 (1)

(2004/C 94/82)

By order of 10 December 2003 the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities ordered the removal from the register of Case C-54/02: Italian Republic v Commission of the European Communities.

----

(1)OJ C 97 of 20.04.2002.

----
§ 830.10 Preservation of aircraft wreckage, mail, cargo, and records. ( a ) The operator of an aircraft involved in an accident or incident for which notification must be given is responsible for preserving to the extent possible any aircraft wreckage, cargo, and mail aboard the aircraft, and all records, including all recording mediums of flight, maintenance, and voice recorders, pertaining to the operation and maintenance of the aircraft and to the airmen until the Board takes custody thereof or a release is granted pursuant to § 831.12(b) of this chapter.
( b ) Prior to the time the Board or its authorized representative takes custody of aircraft wreckage, mail, or cargo, such wreckage, mail, or cargo may not be disturbed or moved except to the extent necessary: ( 1 ) To remove persons injured or trapped;
( 2 ) To protect the wreckage from further damage; or
( 3 ) To protect the public from injury.
( c ) Where it is necessary to move aircraft wreckage, mail or cargo, sketches, descriptive notes, and photographs shall be made, if possible, of the original positions and condition of the wreckage and any significant impact marks.
( d ) The operator of an aircraft involved in an accident or incident shall retain all records, reports, internal documents, and memoranda dealing with the accident or incident, until authorized by the Board to the contrary.
Exhibit 32.1

         CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED
          PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Union Bankshares, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. [SECTION]1350, as adopted pursuant to
[SECTION]906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that: 1) the Report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and 2) the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the Report.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Union Bankshares, Inc. and will be retained by Union
Bankshares, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.


/s/ Kenneth D. Gibbons
_______________________
Kenneth D. Gibbons
Chief Executive Officer


November 13, 2003


<PAGE>
P.O. Box 60908 Fairbanks, AK 99706 / 5525 Airport Industrial Rd., Fairbanks AK 99709 Telephone (907) 450-2375 Fax (907) 450-2326

March 5, 2012

Federal Aviation Administration Office of Rulemaking, ARM 800 Independence Avenue, Room 810 Washington, DC 20591

Via electronic submission on web site

Re: Exemption No. 4296 for FAR 91.9(a)

Everts Air Fuel wishes to amend its presen t Exemption No. 4296, granting relief from the requirements of FAR 91.31(a).

We request this exemption based on th e ongoing requirements of our business in supplying isolated villages by th e only means of transportation available in the State of

Alaska. The reasons and facts as described in the request that result ed in the granting of Exemption No. 4296 remain unchanged. We ask that it include the following DC-6 aircraft operated by Everts: registrati on Nos. N251CE, N400UA, N444CE, N451CE N7780B, N7919C, N51599, N555SQ, N888DG, N747CE, N6586C.

In considering the forgoing, we request that amending our exemption is in the public

interest and desire that Exemption No. 4296 be granted.

Sincerely,

James A. Young Director of Operations

Everts Air Fuel
IV

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 363

Congratulating the people of Utah, the Salt Lake Organizing Committee

and the athletes of the world for a successful and inspiring 2002 Olympic

Winter Games.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 7, 2002

Mr. HANSEN (for himself, Mr. MATHESON, and Mr. CANNON) submitted the

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

RESOLUTION

Congratulating the people of Utah, the Salt Lake Organizing

Committee and the athletes of the world for a successful

and inspiring 2002 Olympic Winter Games.

Whereas the State of Utah hosted the world during the largest and most successful Olympic Winter Games ever held;

Whereas the people of Utah opened their hearts and their

homes to the athletes of the world and represented the

Nation well to the world community;

Whereas the Salt Lake Organizing Committee and its president, Mitt Romney, did a spectacular job in staging a

great Winter Olympics with class, dignity, and a proper

focus on the athletic competition;
2

•HRES 363 IH

Whereas 2,535 athletes, from a record 78 countries, prepared

with unmatched dedication, competed with unrivaled

courage, and inspired the world with their spirit of peaceful competition;

Whereas over 500 athletes from 36 nations competed in the

2002 Paralympic Winter Games, also held in Salt Lake

City, and reminded the world that physical challenges are

no limit to human achievement;

Whereas the 211 members of the United States Olympic

Team won a Winter Olympics record 34 medals, including a record 10 gold medals, and gave a grateful Nation

another new group of heroes at a time when the Nation

has rediscovered the true meaning of heroism;

Whereas the silent heroes, over 7,000 members of Federal,

State, and local law enforcement and public safety agencies, and over 5,400 brave members of the Armed Forces

continued their selfless service to ensure the Winter

Olympics were safe and secure for athletes and spectators

alike; and

Whereas over 19,500 Utahns and other United States citizens volunteered their time and talents to show the world

the best that the United States has to offer: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives con2 gratulates the people of Utah, the Salt Lake Organizing

3 Committee, the United States Olympic Team, and the ath4 letes of the world for an outstanding and inspiring 2002

5 Olympic Winter Games, and thanks the thousands of law

6 enforcement and public safety personnel, military service-
3

•HRES 363 IH

1 men and women, and volunteers who contributed so much

2 to ensure the Winter Olympics were safe, secure, and

3 friendly.

Æ
§ 39.45 May PVOs impose other restrictions on passengers with a disability that they do not impose on other passengers? ( a ) As a PVO, you must not subject passengers with a disability to restrictions that do not apply to other passengers, except as otherwise explicitly permitted in this part.
( b ) Restrictions you must not impose on passengers with a disability include, but are not limited to, the following: ( 1 ) Restricting passengers' movement within the vessel or a terminal;
( 2 ) Requiring passengers to remain in a holding area or other location in order to receive transportation or services;
( 3 ) [Reserved]
( 4 ) Requiring passengers to wear badges or other special identification; or
( 5 ) Requiring ambulatory passengers, including but not limited to blind or visually impaired passengers, to use a wheelchair or other mobility device in order to receive assistance required by this Part or otherwise offered to the passenger.
( c ) Special muster stations for disabled individuals are permissible for emergency evacuations in order to centrally locate available resources.