alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 522

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

October 1, 2002.

Whereas because of a labor shortage resulting from the entry

of the United States into World War II, the Federal Government issued contracts to Mexican, Canadian, Jamaican, and Puerto Rican citizens willing to cross into the

United States to accept temporary employment;

Whereas hundreds of thousands of these men and women,

known as Braceros, labored in the Nation’s agricultural,

transportation, and other industries during the period

from 1942 to 1964;

Whereas the first 1,500 Braceros arrived in California from

Mexico City, Mexico, on September 29, 1942, to work in

the sugar beet fields until December 24 of that year;

Whereas thousands of Braceros labored on the Nation’s railroads, maintaining and expanding critical infrastructure

for the transportation of food, equipment, and other valuable supplies during and after World War II;

Whereas the heroic work effort of the Braceros has been recognized by many State and local governments around the

Nation, but has not been recognized by the Federal Government;
2

•HRES 522 EH

Whereas the Nation and the world owe a debt of gratitude

for the contribution the Braceros made to the war effort

that defeated fascism in Europe and Asia;

Whereas more than 1,000,000 Braceros and their families or

descendants are still United States residents or citizens;

and

Whereas September 29, 2002, is the 60th anniversary of the

first arrival of Bracero guest workers in the United

States: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) expresses gratitude for the foreign guest laborers, known as Braceros, who worked in the United

States during the period from 1942 to 1964; and

(2) recognizes the Braceros for their contributions

to the war effort and for their hard work, which helped

to keep the United States strong and prosperous during

this challenging period.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*Santa Zanza, Appellant.

(Argued May 7, 1912;

decided May 21, 1912.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, rendered December 1, 1911, at a Trial Term for the *602county of Westchester, upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime óf murder in the first degree.

*William F. BleaMey*for appellant.

*Francis A. Winslow, District Attorney {Lee Parsons Davis*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment of conviction affirmed; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Cray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     Financial Data Schedule for Sunburst Acquisitions I, Inc.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001035039
<NAME>                        Sunburst Acquisitions I, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    U.S.Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                  MAY-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    JUL-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                 1.00
<CASH>                          46
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   0
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                46
<PP&E>                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  271
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           331
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     8000
<COMMON>                        2220
<OTHER-SE>                      (10280)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    271
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                0
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   692
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (692)
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (692)
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    (692)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   0
<EPS-DILUTED>                   0
        


</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                Arthur Andersen



                  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants of Ampal-American Israel Corporation, we
hereby consent to the incorporation of our report included in this Form 10-K,
into the Company's previously filed Registration Statement File No. 333-61895
and No. 333-55970.



Arthur Andersen LLP


New York, New York
March 27, 2002
<PAGE>
                                 ARTHUR ANDERSEN
                               LUBOSHITZ KASIERER



                    Consent of independent public accountants

As independent public accountants of Ampal-American Israel Corporation, we
hereby consent to the incorporation of our report included in this Form 10-K,
into the company's previously filed Registration Statement File No. 333-61895
and File No. 333-55970.

Luboshitz Kasierer
Arthur Andersen

Tel-Aviv
March 27,2002
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.3


                                         1996
                           SENIOR MANAGEMENT INCENTIVE PLAN


For Fiscal 1996, incentive will be determined by Corporate Earnings per Share as
follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                        BONUS AWARD AS A PERCENT OF
     EARNING PER SHARE                           BASE SALARY
     -----------------                  ---------------------------
     <S>                                <C>

       $ .85 - .99                                   20
         .90 - .99                                   30
        1.00+                                        40


</TABLE>

If unusual major factors significantly change Fiscal 1996 Earnings, decisions
regarding any adjustments will be made by the Compensation Committee of the
Board of Directors.

The Company's 1996 Senior Management Incentive Plan shall be governed by the
following rules:

A.   The incentive compensation for the 1996 fiscal year computed as provided
     for in the Plan, shall be divided into two (2) equal installments, one
     payable on the first day of February 1997, and the other on the first day
     of February 1998 (the "Payment Dates").

B.   A participant shall become entitled to the installment payable on each
     Payment Date, on that date, if and only if, he then continues to be in the
     employ of the company, or if not, that the termination of his employment by
     the Company was caused by death, complete disability, retirement after age
     sixty (60) or discharged by the Company without cause.

C.   Should any installment be payable to a Participant who is not entitled
     thereto on any Payment Date as provided for above, such installment shall
     not revert to the Company but shall be reallocated and paid to the other
     Participants proportionate to the amounts to which they are otherwise
     entitled to receive under the plan.

D.   All determinations arising under the Plan shall be determined by
     theCompensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company,
     whosedecision thereon shall be final, conclusive and binding.

E.   Employees participating in a commission override program will participate
     at the rate of one half of the amount of scheduled amount called for.

F.   Any senior management employees participating in any other division/local
     incentive plans, shall not participate in the foregoing plan.
.. \ : 

08-10-10 

Office ofConswner Information and Insurance Oversight 


Depa.rtIt1ent of Health and Hwnan Services 


Attention: OCll0-9991-IFC 


P.O. Box 8Ol6 


Baltimore, MD 21244-1850 


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 Coverage Relating to Status as a Qrandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient -- Protection mid Afforoa61e Care Act (PPACA): . .. ~ - -- - ~-

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

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

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

The average conswner has a broad definition of"benefits." Conswners 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. For example, ifan employer raised the copayment level beyond the maximum in one 

area (Le. outpatient services) but retained the copayment level for primary care doctor visits, 

""doesthat mean a loss ofgrandfather 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 PPACA as ofJanuary 2014 based on the current rules. While I understand the 

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

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

legislation. 

- . - ~. -~The Rule ileeds/to-be-clear, reasonable: anUWitli no ambiguities involved.in determining whether 

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

determine 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 . 

.", 

--. : I/' .. , 

~~ ~1r.:1· ..• I.'
United States Office of Water EPA-821-F-02-024

Environmental Protection (4303T) October 2002 

Agency

Fact Sheet

Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the

Analysis of Pollutants; Whole Effluent Toxicity Test

Methods; Final Rule

Summary

EPA is approving revisions to several whole effluent toxicity (WET) test methods that are

currently approved at 40 CFR Part 136. These methods are for use in Clean Water Act (CWA)

data gathering and compliance monitoring programs. In addition, this final rule ratifies EPA’s

previous approval of ten WET methods at 40 CFR Part 136 for nationwide use and removes two

other methods from the Part 136 listing. 

Background

In 1995, EPA amended the “Guidelines

Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of

Pollutants” to add a series of standardized

whole effluent toxicity (WET) test methods to the

list of methods approved at 40 CFR Part 136

(WET final rule). The WET final rule approved

17 methods for measuring the acute and shortterm chronic toxicity of effluents and receiving

waters to freshwater, marine, and estuarine

organisms.

Several parties filed suit challenging the 1995

rulemaking. To resolve that litigation, EPA

entered into settlement agreements with them. 

This final rule partially fulfills the requirements of

two settlement agreements between EPA and

stakeholders (Edison Electric Institute et al. v.

EPA, Settlement Agreement, July 24, 1998, and

Lone Star Steel v. EPA, Settlement Agreement,

March 4, 1998). 

Final Rule

This final rule updates WET test methods, to

makes minor corrections and clarifications, and

addresses specific stakeholder concerns.

Updates include revised method precision

statements that reflect recent variability studies,

incorporation of all previous addenda and errata,

and corrections for additional technical errors

not noted in previous errata.

Revisions also address the following specific

stakeholder concerns: 

• blocking by known parentage

• pH drift

• concentration-response relationships

• confidence intervals

• dilution series selection

• dilution water acceptability

• pathogen interference 

Lastly, this final rule ratifies ten methods that are

approved at 40 CFR Part 136 for nationwide use

and removes two other methods from the Part

136 listing.

Additional Information and Copies

For further information concerning this final rule,

please contact Marion Kelly at the U.S. EPA

Office of Water, Engineering and Analysis

Division (4303), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue,

Washington, D.C. 20460; (Email:

kelly.marion@epa.gov) or Debra Denton at U.S.

EPA Region 9, c/o SWRCB, 1001 I Street,

Sacramento, CA 95814 (E-mail:

denton.debra@epa.gov). 

You may view or download the complete text of

the Federal Register notice and the revised

editions of the three supporting WET method

manuals on the Internet at

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/WET. You

can find all references cited in the preamble

through the Water Docket, EPA West Building,

Room B135, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW,

Washington, D.C. 20004; (e-mail: OWdocket@epa.gov).
# April 8 USCENTCOM Conducts Humanitarian Airdrop into Gaza

/ Published April 8, 2024

April 8, 2024Release Number 20240408 - 01FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

**TAMPA, Fla. –**United States Central Command conducted an airdrop of humanitarian assistance into Northern Gaza on April 8, 2024, at 12:12 p.m. (Gaza time) to provide essential relief to civilians affected by the ongoing conflict.  The joint operation included one C-130 U.S. Air Force aircraft and U.S. Army Soldiers specialized in aerial delivery of U.S humanitarian assistance supplies. 

The U.S. C-130 dropped more than 6,000 pounds of Jordanian food supplies which included dry goods into Northern Gaza, an area of great need, allowing for civilian access to the critical aid. To date the U.S. has dropped 742 tons of humanitarian assistance.

The DoD humanitarian airdrops contribute to ongoing U.S. and partner-nation government efforts to alleviate human suffering. These airdrops are part of a sustained effort, and we continue to plan follow-on aerial deliveries.
# CJTF-OIR Strike Summary Feb. 10 - 23, 2019

/ Published Feb. 28, 2019

February 27, 2019

Release # 20190227-01

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

**SOUTHWEST ASIA –** Combined Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve and its partners continue to target and pursue the enduring defeat of Daesh.

CJTF-OIR and its partner forces' operations are exerting pressure on Daesh senior leaders and associates, as well as degrading, disrupting and dismantling Daesh organizational structures throughout Iraq and Syria.

CJTF-OIR remains committed to the enduring defeat of Daesh to improve conditions for peace and stability in the region, and to protect all our homelands from Daesh's terrorist threat.

Strike Summary

Between Feb. 10 - 23, 2019, CJTF-OIR conducted 211 strikes consisting of 451 engagements against Daesh targets in Syria and Iraq.

In Syria, CJTF-OIR conducted 186 strikes consisting of 426 engagements, engaged 285 Daesh tactical units, and destroyed 189 fighting positions, 50 supply routes, 22 staging areas, 16 boats, 15 vehicles, six tankers for petroleum oil and lubricants, six aircraft operations areas, six vehicle borne improvised explosive devices, four command and control nodes, three weapons caches, three heavy machine guns, three pieces of engineering equipment, two buildings, two tunnels, one cave, one improvised explosive devices facility and one petroleum oil and lubricant storage facility.

In Iraq, CJTF-OIR conducted 25 strikes consisting of 25 engagements, engaged 19 Daesh tactical units, and destroyed 18 tunnels and caves. 

Between Feb. 10 - 23, 2019, CJTF-OIR detected 342 strikes from other actors that crossed the Euphrates River Valley. CJTF-OIR is committed to avoiding and in every case minimizing civilian casualties; CJTF-OIR calls on all other actors in the area to observe the same precautions.

This Coalition strike release contains all strikes conducted by fighter, attack, bomber, rotary-wing, or remotely piloted aircraft, rocket propelled artillery and ground-based tactical artillery.

A strike, as defined in the Coalition release, refers to one or more kinetic engagements that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative effect in that location. For example, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone Daesh vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against a group of Daesh-held buildings and weapon systems in a compound, having the cumulative effect of making that facility harder or impossible to use. Strike assessments are based on initial reports and may be refined.

CJTF-OIR does not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target. The information used to compile the daily strike releases is based on 'Z' or Greenwich Mean Time. 

#DefeatDaesh
# Úradný vestník C 153A/10.

| | ISSN 1725-5236 |
| --- | --- |
| Úradný vestník
  Európskej únie | C 153A |
| | |
| Slovenské vydanie | Informácie a oznámenia | Zväzok 4710. júna 2004 |

ISSN 1725-5236

Úradný vestník

Európskej únie

C 153A

Slovenské vydanie

Informácie a oznámenia

Zväzok 4710. júna 2004

---

| Číslo oznamu | Obsah | Strana |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Oznámenia |
| | Rada |
| 2004/C 153A/1 | Oznámenie o voľnom pracovnom mieste (ref. A/013) | 1 |

Číslo oznamu

Obsah

Strana

III   Oznámenia

Rada

2004/C 153A/1

Oznámenie o voľnom pracovnom mieste (ref. A/013)

1

| SK | |
| --- | --- |

SK

---

III Oznámenia

Rada

| 10.6.2004 | SK | Úradný vestník Európskej únie | CA 153/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.6.2004

SK

Úradný vestník Európskej únie

CA 153/1

---

OZNÁMENIE O VOĽNOM PRACOVNOM MIESTE

(ref. A/013)

ADMINISTRATÍVNY PRACOVNÍK

(2004/C 153 A/01)

V rámci Spoločnej európskej bezpečnostnej a obrannej politiky (SEBOP) Generálny sekretariát Rady má v úmysle obsadiť miesto administratívneho pracovníka v platovej triede A*9 na generálnom riaditeľstve E — vonkajšie vzťahy — riaditeľstvo VIII, ktoré je zodpovedné za otázky obrany.

Podrobnejšie informácie (v anglickom a francúzskom jazyku) a tlačivá žiadosti môžete získať tak, že sa obrátite na oddelenie výberu a náboru pracovníkov, ktorého e-mailová adresa je service.recrutement@consilium.eu.int, alebo na internetovej stránke Rady http://ue.eu.int/concours.

Termín: 9. júl 2004 (rozhoduje dátum na poštovej pečiatke).

---
#### Erwin S. Plumb, as Trustee in Bankruptcy of William J. Young, Appellant, *v.*Lyell Avenue Lumber Company, Respondent.

*Plumb*v. *Lyell Ave. Lumber Co.,*145 App. Div. —, affirmed.

(Argued June 1, 1911;

decided June 16, 1911.)

Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial *618department, entered May 10, 1911, which affirmed an order of an Equity Term striking the above-entitled action from its calendar and directing its trial by a jury in an action to. set aside an alleged fraudulent transfer of property from the bankrupt to the defendant.

The following question was certified: £'Is this action triable by a jury as a matter of right upon the demand of the defendant?”

*Nelson E. Spencer*for appellant.

*William N. Cogswell*for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the affirmative; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Chase and Collin, JJ.
N. Y. SUPERIOR COURT.

#### Gustave Ludewig agt. Eva Pariser, &c.

*Examination of panties before*t/Hal— *Code of Ciml*Procedure, *sections*872, 878, 880.

The examination of .a party to an action before trial, at the instance of an adverse party, under section 870, *et seq.,*of the Code of Civil Procedure, is a matter of absolute right, and no longer rests in discretion.

*Special Term,*March, 1878.

Motion by defendants to vacate an order heretofore made, requiring them to appear and be examined and make depositions in the above action.

*Goff & Pollock,*for defendants.

*Robert H. Pollock,*for plaintiff.

Sandford, *J.*

The affidavit upon which the order for the examination of the defendants was made sets forth the names and residences of all the parties to the action, and that the defendants have not appeared; the nature of the action, the substance of the cause of action, the names and residences of the persons to be examined; that the testimony of such persons is material and necessary to the prosecution of the action, and that the persons to be examined are parties to the action. These are all the requisites to the affidavit which, under the provisions of section 872 of the Code of Civil Procedure, must be presented to the judge by a person desiring *499to take the deposition of his adversary in a pending action. By section 873 the judge to whom such an affidavit is presented must grant an order for the examination if an action is pending; and by section 880 the judge or referee taking the deposition must insert therein every answer or declaration of the person examined which either party requires to be inserted. I am of opinion that these broad and sweeping provisions of law deprive the court of any discretion in regard to the examination of parties to suits by them, as parties, and make such examination a matter of absolute right. The argument *áb inoonvenienii*is most forcible against allowing such an invasion of long-established rights and usages; but the inconvenience, the impolicy, the hardship and injustice of a law affords no warrant for its abrogation by the judiciary. The remedy is in the legislature, and not in the courts. The motion to vacate the order must be denied, and the examination must proceed.
Editorial Note on Part 397
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 397 appear at 66 FR 49874, Oct. 1, 2001.

§ 397.223 Petition for reconsideration. ( a ) Any person aggrieved by an order issued under § 397.211 or § 397.219 may file a petition for reconsideration with the Administrator. The petition must be filed within 20 days of service of the determination or order issued under the above sections.
( b ) The petition must contain a concise statement of the basis for seeking reconsideration, including any specific factual or legal errors, or material information not previously available.
( c ) The petitioner shall mail a copy of the petition to each person who participated, either as an applicant or routing, in the waiver of preemption proceeding, accompanied by a statement that the person may submit comments concerning the petition to the Administrator within 20 days. The petition filed with the Administrator must contain a certification that the petitioner has complied with this paragraph and include the names and addresses of all persons to whom a copy of the petition was sent.
( d ) The Administrator's decision under this section constitutes the final agency decision. If no petition for reconsideration is filed under this section, then the determination issued under § 397.211 or § 397.219 becomes the final agency decision at the end of the 20 day period.