alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 850.5 Definitions. As used in this part: ( a ) *Act* means Title III of Pub. L. 93-633, the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 (49 U.S.C. 1901, *et seq.*).
( b ) *Board* means the National Transportation Safety Board.
( c ) *Chairman* means the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board.
( d ) *Commandant* means the Commandant of the Coast Guard.
( e ) *Major marine casualty* means a casualty involving a vessel, other than a public vessel, that results in— ( 1 ) The loss of six or more lives;
( 2 ) The loss of a mechanically propelled vessel of 100 or more gross tons;
( 3 ) Property damage initially estimated as $500,000 or more; or
( 4 ) Serious threat, as determined by the Commandant and concurred in by the Chairman, to life, property, or the environment by hazardous materials.
( f ) *Public vessel* means a vessel owned by the United States, except a vessel to which the Act of October 25, 1919, c. 82 (41 Stat. 305, 46 U.S.C. 363) applies.
( g ) *Vessel of the United States* means a vessel— ( 1 ) Documented, or required to be documented, under the laws of the United States;
( 2 ) Owned in the United States; or
( 3 ) Owned by a citizen or resident of the United States and not registered under a foreign flag.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Friday, October 6, 1995 (124), Para 124.14 Memorials]
[Page 1495]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.124.14  memorials

  Under clause 4 of rule XXII,

       164. The SPEAKER presented a memorial of the Senate of the 
     State of Washington, relative to postratification of 
     amendment XXVII to the U.S. Constitution; to the Committee on 
     the Judiciary.
```
Editorial Note on Part 385
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 385 appear at 66 FR 49872, Oct. 1, 2001.

§ 385.603 Application. ( a ) Each applicant applying under this subpart must submit an application that consists of: ( 1 ) Form MCSA-1, the URS online application; and
( 2 ) A notification of the means used to designate process agents, either by submission in the application package of Form BOC-3, Designation of Agents—Motor Carriers, Brokers and Freight Forwarders, or a letter stating that the applicant will use a process agent service that will submit the Form BOC-3 electronically.
( b ) The FMCSA will process an application only if it meets the following conditions: ( 1 ) The application must be completed in English.
( 2 ) The information supplied must be accurate, complete, and include all required supporting documents and applicable certifications in accordance with the instructions to Form MCSA-1 and Form BOC-3.
( 3 ) The application must include the filing fee payable to the FMCSA in the amount set forth at 49 CFR 360.3(f)(1).
( 4 ) The application must be signed by the applicant.
( c ) An applicant must electronically file Form MCSA-1.
( d ) Form MCSA-1 is the URS online application and is available, including complete instructions, at *http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/urs*.
[80 FR 63708, Oct. 21, 2015] Effective Date Note
Effective Date Note: At 82 FR 5305, Jan. 17, 2017, § 385.603 was suspended, effective Jan. 14, 2017.
08/09/2010 

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight 

Department of Health and Human Services 

Attention: OCIIO-9991-IFC 

P.O. Box 8016 

Baltimore, MD 2]244-1850 

Re: Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Relating to 

Status as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

Below are my comments regarding the Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health 

Insurance C;:oyerage Relating to Status as a Qr:a~dfathered li~alth,PlanJJndS':rJbe :e.atient 

Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). 

I believe that every effort should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by 

PPACA, especially as of January 1,2014 when most of the reform components (Insurance 

Exchanges, Subsidies, Tax Credits, etc.) come into play. 

The average consumer has a broad definition of "benefits." Consumers view their health plan 

beyond the covered benefits, cost sharing, and the contribution levels associated with the plan. 

It is my opinion that the Rule may still result in some confusion to the marketplace in its • 

application. Eor,e;xample, if an employer raised the copayment level beyond the maximum in one 

~rea «(e:'~utpati~nt"services) but retained the copayment level for primary care doctor visits, " ~ 

does thfl! mean<a,'Jo~s:<!f~'andfather status? Clarity will be critical both for the employer and the 

employee. ' 

Even by the most optimistic estimates, a substantial portion ofthe employee population will 

remain outside the PP A CA as of January 2014 based on the current rules. While I understand the 

difficulty involved in making change, creating another large sub-population of excluded 

individuals will only add to costs, increase confusion, and mitigate the potential impact ofthe 

legislation. 

The Rule needs to be clear, reasonable, and with no ambiguities involved in determining whether 

a group health plan is "in or out." The decisions the federal government makes today will 

detem1ine the outcomes for tomorrow. We may need to make some difficult decisions to create 

a sustainable health care system that will support a growing economy in the future. That means 

getting as many citizens across the country participating at the beginning to make it work and 

delivering on its promises to retain their support. 

Thank you for 9.PP9},,,\tmity to comment on this regulation; I,

',. '" :~ -'3 " 'J. ~.,". 

~ l .'" I ~' . \·t.. • ,; ; ;.,:; :,:.1.": '. .. " ,"l.MF;~ ~ ~.) ';1.!:~: 

( 1.(;~;," ~~{I:.;~\~t:.. !'1 lr(~
REG-148681-09 Page | of

war 1 2016

As of: March 01, 2010
Received: February 28, 2010
Status: Posted
PUBLIC SUBMISSION Prostes: narcr 01,2010
Comments Due: May 03, 2010)
Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0006
Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants & Beneficiaries in
Retirement Plans

Comment On: IRS-2010-0006-0001
Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants and Beneficiaries in
Retirement Plans

Document: IRS-2010-0006-0048
Comment on FR Doc # 2010-02028

Submitter Information

Name: DM

General Comment

Annuities are an excellent option. They provide lifetime income and allow individuals to determine
how much they need to save to achieve a desired monthly income. States also provide
protection, within limits, for this type of insurance. Consequently, this may require the use of
multiple insurance companies to achieve an individual's goal and, at the same time, protect the
money invested in the policy.

The downside is the lack of reasonably priced inflation protection. Although available, it is too
expensive to be practical. If more individuals were involved in the purchasing pool and the price
came down, this would make a lifetime annuity even more attractive.

Once the monthly income goal is achieved, it would provide piece of mind and limit the
temptation to choose a risky alternative.

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 3/1/2010
EXHIBIT
23.1

CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements
  No. 333-105180, No. 333-51990, No. 333-44333, No. 33-62087, No. 33-57060, No.
  33-20880 and No. 33-34619 on Form S-8 of our report dated September 12, 2006,
  (which expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph
  concerning the change in the Companys method of accounting for stock options),
  relating to the financial statements of Zygo Corporation and subsidiaries, and
  managements report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial
  reporting appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Zygo Corporation and
  subsidiaries for the year ended June 30, 2006.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Hartford, Connecticut
September 12, 2006

---
April 1, 2015

Mr. Cody Villalobos

Rise Optics

8 Pebble Beach Drive

Yerington, NV 89447

Dear Mr. Villalobos:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It 

explains why we cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your February 7, 2015 exemption request on behalf of Rise Optics into the public 

docket (No. FAA-2015-0328), but we are unable to process your request any further. The 

information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For 

us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

• The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief and the extent of 

the relief you seek.

• The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

• Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9521.

Sincerely,

/s/

Jake Troutman

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 37 Agreed to House (ATH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 37

 Designating minority membership on certain standing committees of the 
                                 House.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2001

Mr. Frost submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Designating minority membership on certain standing committees of the 
                                 House.

    Resolved, That the following named Member be, and he is hereby, 
elected to the following standing committees of the House of 
Representatives:
    Committee on Financial Services: Mr. Sanders.
    Committee on Government Reform: Mr. Sanders.
                                 <all>
```
# NATO and ISAF leadership join President Karzai in condemning murder of High Peace Council Chairman

/ Published Sept. 20, 2011

The commander of the International Security Assistance Force and the NATO Senior Civilian Representative join President Karzai in condemning the murder of High Peace Council Chairman Prof. Burhanuddin Rabbani, and the wounding of Secretary to the High Peace Council Mohammad Massoom Stanekzai, in an attack at Prof. Rabbani’s home on the afternoon of September 20, 2011.

Prof. Rabbani and Minister Stanekzai were in Prof. Rabbani’s residence when two suicide bombers, feigning a desire to conduct reconciliation talks, detonated themselves.

“The face of the peace initiative has been attacked,” said Gen John R. Allen, Commander of the International Security Assistance Force. “This is another outrageous indicator that, regardless of what Taliban leadership outside the country say, they do not want peace, but rather war. Their only goal with this completely immoral act is to turn the clock back to the darkness synonymous with the Taliban movement. Our condolences go out to the families of Prof. Rabbani and Minister Stanekzai. We will continue to work closely with our Afghan partners in our march toward peace, and to hold those responsible for this heinous act accountable for their crimes against the people of Afghanistan.”

Ambassador Simon Gass, the NATO Senior Civilian Representative in Afghanistan, said, “Professor Rabbani was leading efforts towards peace in Afghanistan. He was a brave man, who did not hesitate to risk his own life in the search for a better future for all Afghans. Minister Stanekzai, too, is an outstanding Afghan patriot who has worked tirelessly for reconciliation. It is clear that the organisers attacked what they feared most - peace. For they know that the creed of hatred and oppression which they represent will always be contrary to the free will of the Afghan people. My condolences go to the victims, family and friends of all those killed and wounded in this attack.”
#### Julia Turner, Respondent, v. The City of Newburgh, Appellant.

Judgment and order denying new trial reversed, and new trial granted, cosis to abide event. Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.
#### § 552.11 Application.

This subpart establishes procedures for the submission and disposition of petitions filed by interested parties to initiate rulemaking to add a test procedure to 49 CFR 571.208, S28.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION**

 

I, William W. Krippaehne, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of Fisher Communications, Inc., certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Fisher Communications, Inc.;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: September 12, 2003
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10.48


May 26, 2003


Dave Hooker


Dear David,

RE:      EMPLOYEE SHARE INCENTIVE PLAN AND EMPLOYEE SHARE OPTION PLAN

In accordance with the Employee Share Incentive Plan ("the Preference Share
Plan"), you are hereby advised that the Grant Date is June 4, 2003 for benefits
you have accrued during the year ended 31 December 2002.

Accordingly you are granted 146 Preference Shares in the Company. You have the
option to purchase an equal number of Preference Shares at a price of CI$7.46
each, which has been calculated in accordance to the terms of the Preference
Share Plan. If you intend to exercise this option, then payment must be received
in full no later than the close of business on July 4, 2003.

As a member of the Employee Share Option Plan ("the Option Plan"), you will also
be granted, as of June 30, 2003, the option to purchase 730 Ordinary Shares in
the Company. These options are exercisable in accordance to the terms of the
Option Plan. You furthermore have the opportunity to obtain an equal amount of
options to purchase Ordinary Shares of the Company, in accordance to the terms
of the Option Plan, if you exercise your right to purchase the above additional
Preference Shares before June 30, 2003.

Your continued dedication and hard work have contributed to another successful
year for Consolidated Water, and I look forward to a very bright future.

Yours sincerely,



/s/ Frederick McTaggart
Frederick W. McTaggart
President and COO
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (3.53 MB)
 
 Enlisted Pilots RQ-4 Global Hawk
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 98-4460 WAYNE KEITH BARNES, a/k/a John Wayne Vanparys, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CR-97-337) Submitted: May 4, 1999 Decided: May 18, 1999 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL James T. McBratney, Jr., Florence, South Carolina, for Appellant. J. Rene Josey, United States Attorney, Alfred W. Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION PER CURIAM: Wayne Keith Barnes was convicted for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (1994), possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(c) (West Supp. 1999), maintaining a place for the purpose of manufacturing methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 856 (1994), and causing a substantial risk to human life by manufacturing methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 858 (1994). On appeal he argues that the district court violated theSpeedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (1994), by granting the Government a continuance to indict him, that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements made by him to police duringquestioning, and that the court erred by failing to exclude the testimony of two Government witnesses under the terms of his proffer agreement. Finding no error, we affirm.We find that the district court did not err in granting the Government a continuance to indict Barnes. See United States v. Keith , 42 F.3d 234, 237 (4th Cir. 1994). We find that Barnes did not clearlyarticulate a desire to remain silent and cease talking to law enforcement agents, and therefore any statements made by Barnes during the continued interrogation were admissible. See Davis v. United States , 512 U.S. 452, 459 (1994). Finally, we find that the district court did not err in admitting the testimony of Pierce and Whitlow because the Government was able to derive the information the witnesses testifiedto from an independent source and therefore immunity was not implicated. See United States v. McHan , 101 F.3d 1027, 1036 (4th Cir. 1996), cert. denied , 520 U.S. 1281 (1997).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.
AFFIRMED
2