alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 178 (Friday, September 15, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63564-63565]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19992]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RC11-6-015]


North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Notice of Staff 
Review of Enforcement Programs

    Commission staff coordinated with the staff of the North American 
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) to conduct the annual oversight 
of the Find, Fix, Track and Report (FFT) program, as outlined in the 
March 15, 2012 Order,\1\ and the Compliance Exception (CE) Program, as 
proposed by NERC's September 18, 2015 annual Compliance Filing and 
accepted by delegated letter order.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 138 FERC ] 
61,193, at P 73 (2012) (discussing Commission plans to survey a 
random sample of FFTs submitted each year to gather information on 
how the FFT program is working).
    \2\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., Docket No. RC11-
6-004, at 1 (Nov. 13, 2015) (delegated letter order) (accepting 
NERC's proposal to combine the evaluation of CEs with the annual 
sampling of FFTs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commission staff reviewed a sample of 34 of 223 FFTs and 31 of 946 
CEs posted by NERC between October 2021 and September 2022.
    Commission staff found that the FFT and CE programs are meeting 
expectations, with limited exceptions. All 65 FFTs and CEs have been 
adequately remediated and the root cause of each noncompliance was

[[Page 63565]]

clearly identified. Commission staff also reviewed the supporting 
information for these FFTs or CEs and agreed with the final risk 
determinations for all 65 noncompliances, which clearly identified the 
factors affecting the risk prior to mitigation (such as potential and 
actual risk) and actual harm. Further, no FFTs or CEs sampled contained 
any material misrepresentations by the registered entities. Commission 
staff found that the Regional Entities appropriately identified 64 of 
the 65 noncompliances as appropriate to be processed as FFTs and CEs. 
Nevertheless, there was one identified instance where an FFT would have 
been more appropriately processed as a spreadsheet notice of penalty. 
Staff also noted in three instances that the posted description of the 
noncompliances were incomplete or had minor errors.

    Dated: September 11, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-19992 Filed 9-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Before the Third Division,

July 13, 1966

No. P66/154. —

#### Malt Diastase Co. *v.*United States, protest 64/17643 (New York).

DoNLON, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of dehydrated leek powder similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Corn Products Co.*v. *United States*(55 Cust. Ct. 152, C.D. 2567), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 62182.

#### Aeolian Shipping Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 141191-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of olives in brine similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Moscahlades Bros., Inc.*v *United States*(39 Cust. Ct. 127, C. D. 1917), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Before the First Division,

October 14, 1968

No. P68/430.

protests 58/7806-S, etc. (Philadelphia).

#### Morris Friedman *v.*United States,

Watson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of corn husk or maize baskets similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Carson M. Simon & Co.*v. *United, States*(55 Cust. Ct. 103, C.D. 2558) and *Morris Friedman*v. *United States*(58 Cust. Ct. 456, C.D. 3019), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: kaystari@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:48:07 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Steven Young

Potsdam, NY 13676
From: wabrown777@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:51:39 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

William Brown

Chanhassen, MN 55317
Case No. 13,470.

#### STODDARD v. READ.

[2 Dall. 40.] 1

Circuit Court, D. Pennsylvania.

May Term, 1783.

Prize — Perishing Condition of Vessel — Sale.

[This was an appeal in admiralty by Stod-dard against Read and the schooner Squirrel and cargo.]

On motion of the appellant’s counsel, before an appearance filed on behalf of the ap-pellee, stating that the prize schooner was in a perishing condition, it was ordered:

BY THE COURT.

That the schooner, her tackle, apparel, and furniture, be sold at public auction, to the highest bidder, for the use of those to whom the same shall be finally decreed.
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1325 

Honoring the life of Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., distinguished former Senator 

from North Carolina. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 9, 2008 

Mr. MCHENRY (for himself, Mr. COBLE, Mr. PRICE of North Carolina, Mr. 

WATT, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. 

ETHERIDGE, Mr. HAYES, Mr. MILLER of North Carolina, Mr. 

BUTTERFIELD, Ms. FOXX, Mr. SHULER, Mr. ISSA, Mr. FEENEY, Mr. 

CULBERSON, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. 

ADERHOLT, Mr. GINGREY, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. GOODE, and Mr. BURTON

of Indiana) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring the life of Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., 

distinguished former Senator from North Carolina. 

Whereas Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., born in Monroe, North 

Carolina on October 18, 1921, spent a 52-year public career dedicating himself to his country, his family, and his 

home State, representing North Carolina in the United 

States Senate for 30 years; 

Whereas Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., served in the United 

States Navy from 1942 until 1945; 

Whereas Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., was educated in the 

public schools of Monroe, North Carolina, and at 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1325 IH 

Wingate Junior College and Wake Forest College, and 

served as a city editor of the Raleigh Times, an administrative assistant to United States Senators Willis Smith 

and Alton Lennon, an executive director of the North 

Carolina Bankers Association, a member of the Raleigh 

City Council, and a television and radio executive; 

Whereas Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., was elected to the 

United States Senate in 1972, and served as Chairman 

of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Agriculture Committee, ultimately serving five terms, 

equal to the longest service of any Senator from North 

Carolina; 

Whereas Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., was a leader against 

Communism and became the first legislator of any nation 

to address the United Nations Security Council; 

Whereas Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., was married for 65 

years to Dorothy ‘‘Dot’’ Coble Helms, whom he termed 

his ‘‘best friend’’, and Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., is the 

father of three children; and 

Whereas Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., made valuable contributions to his community, State, Nation, and the World: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) honors the life, achievements, and distin3 guished career of Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr., public 

4 servant and former Member of the United States 

5 Senate; and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 1325 IH 

1 (2) expresses its condolences to his wife, ‘‘Dot’’, 

2 and his three children on his passing. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
From: michaelkoeth@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:02:41 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Michael Koeth

Weimar, TX 78962
From: ginterjane@toast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:04:56 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Jane Ginter

Toledo, OH 43615
Thi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

The pane l unani m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a) (2). NOT F OR P UB L I CA T I ON UN I TE D STATE S COURT OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CI RCUI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i f

f - A pp el l ee , v. J U LI O I SRA EL CA RD EN A S- PO RR A S, D e fe n d an t - A p p e llan t. N o. 10- 50190 D. C . No . 3 : 1 0 - c r - 0 7 0 0 8 - GT M E M OR AN DU M *

A p p eal fr o m th e U n i t edS t at es D i stri ctC o u rt fo r th e S o u th e rn D is tric t o f C a lifo rn ia G or don Thom ps on, D i s tr i c tJudge , Pr e s i di ng Subm i tt e d D e c e m be r14, 2010 ** B efore: G O O D W IN , W A L L A C E , an dW . F L E T C H E R , C i rcuitJu d g es. Jul i o Is r ae l C ar denas- P orr as appeal s f r om the 15 - m on th sent ence i m po se d up o n r e v o c a t i o n o f

s up e rv i s e dr e l e a s e . W e h av e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U. S. C. § 1 2 9 1 , an dwe a f

f i rm. 

# FI L ED DEC 27 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U . S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS10- 50190 2 C ar denas- P orr as cont ends thatthe di str i ctcourtproce du r al l y err ed at s e n te n c in g b y : 1 ) tr e a tin g th e g u id e lin e s a s p re s u m p tiv e ly re a s o n ab le ; 2 ) f a ilin g to c o n s id e r a ll o f th e 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 (a ) s e n te n c in g fa c to rs ; an d3 ) f a ilin g to a d e qu a te ly e x p la in th e s e n te n c e o ra d d r e s s h is m it ig a ti o n ar g u m e n ts . C ard e n a s -P o rr a s fu rth e r c o n te n d s th a t th e re s u ltin g s e n te n c e is s ub s tan tiv e ly u n reason ab l e. T h e recordref l ect s th atth e d i stri ctco u rtd i dn o tp roced u ral l y err , an dth a t, inlig h t o f th e to ta lity o f th e c irc u m s tan c e s , th e s e n te n c e is s ub s tan tiv e ly r e a s o n ab le . Se e U

n ite dSta tes v . Ca r ty , 52 0 F . 3d 98 4, 99 1-93 (9th C i r . 20 08 ) ( en b an c). AFFI RM ED .
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

DEONTAE THOMAS )

DOC #R12198, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-021

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed August 22, 2018. 

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for 

Pinellas County; Philip J. Federico, Judge.

Deontae Thomas, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, Tampa, for Appellee. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

MORRIS, BLACK, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
Case *No.*10,178.

#### The NEW ORLEANS.

District Court, S. D. New York.

May 25, 1877.

Demurrage — Interest.

[Cited in Johanssen v. The Eloína, 4 Eed. 575, to the point that interest will not be allowed on demurrage. Nowhere reported. Decision on the merits reported sub nom. The New Orleans, Case No. 10,179. The decree filed May 25. 1S77, merely disposed of certain of •complainant’s exceptions. The court records •contain no opinion other than that reported in The New Orleans, supra. See Case No. 17,-354.]
Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement with Jeffrey Ajer



 Exhibit 10.3 
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO 
 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 

THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) made as of December 17, 2012 (“Effective
Date”) by and between BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) and Jeffrey R. Ajer (“Employee”). 
  

	1.	This Amendment No. 1 is intended to amend and modify that certain Employment Agreement by and between the Company and Employee dated September 5, 2012 (the
“Agreement”). The Agreement, together with this Amendment, shall constitute a single agreement. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this Amendment shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Agreement. Except as
expressly modified by this Amendment, the Agreement shall remaining full force and effect according to its terms. 

  

	2.	The defined term “Termination Compensation,” as provided in Section 7(c) of the Agreement, is hereby deleted and replaced in its entirety by the
following definition: 

 Termination Compensation. For purposes of this Agreement, the term
“Termination Compensation” shall mean: (i) one hundred forty percent (140%) of the Employee’s then current annual base salary which shall be payable in a lump sum within forty-five (45) days after separation of employment, conditioned
on Employee executing the Company’s standard form severance and release agreement within twenty (20) days of the Employee’s termination, and shall be subject to customary withholding and other applicable payroll processes. If Employee
fails to execute and deliver the Company’s standard form severance and release agreement within twenty (20) days after the Employee’s termination, Employee will have no right to any Termination Compensation under this Agreement.

  

	3.	This Amendment No. 1 may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the
same instrument. 

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Amendment have executed this Amendment as of the date
first written above. 
  

									
	BIOMARIN PHARMACEUTICAL INC.	 		 	EMPLOYEE
					
	By:	 	 /s/ Jean-Jacques Bienaimé
	 		 	By:	 	 /s/ Jeffrey R. Ajer

	Name: Jean-Jacques Bienaimé	 		 		 	Jeffrey R. Ajer
	Its:      Chief Executive Officer
|  | 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      Corporation as of and for the period covered by the  Report. |
|--|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:          March 12, 2010 | /s/ Diane C.A. Rosler        |
|---------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|
|                                              |                         |
|                                              | Diane      C.A. Rosler       |
|                                              | Chief      Financial Officer |

----