alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AAM-11-344-E June 24, 2011

Exemption No. 10298 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0616

Mr. William Leppert

Chief Pilot/DER Long Bay Aviation, LLC

538 Wild Horse Ct. Myrtle Beach, SC 29579

Dear Mr. Leppert:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated June 6, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Long Bay Aviation, LLC (Long Bay) for an exemption to allow Long Bay, which is operating under separate parts of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one drug testing program. The FAA finds that you require relief from part 120 of 14 CFR.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Long Bay.

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135 operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two testing programs into one would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level of safety to that provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs.2

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703;

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby grant Long Bay Aviation, LLC an exemption from part 120 to the extent necessary to allow Long Bay, which is operating under separate parts of the regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program, subject to the

conditions and limitations described below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. Employees of Long Bay are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of the Long Bay part 135 operation, not under part 91.

This exemption terminates on June 30, 2013 unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/
James R. Fraser, M.D. Deputy Flight Surgeon

Enclosure
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                       6,409,171
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  835,066
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     24,347
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,312,730
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,014,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          493,060
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  5,526,530
<COMMON>                                     5,816,631
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,822,221)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,014,000
<SALES>                                        598,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               598,000
<CGS>                                          239,007
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  690,012
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (51,134)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,750
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (281,635)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.24)





</TABLE>
# Official Journal C 226A/10 J

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 226A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6510 June 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 226A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6510 June 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Parliament |
| 2022/C 226 A/01 | Recruitment notice PE/270/S – Director-General (Function group AD, grade 15) – Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services | 1 |
| 2022/C 226 A/02 | Recruitment notice PE/271/S – Director-General (Function group AD, grade 15) – Directorate-General for Internal Policies of the Union | 13 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Parliament

2022/C 226 A/01

Recruitment notice PE/270/S – Director-General (Function group AD, grade 15) – Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services

1

2022/C 226 A/02

Recruitment notice PE/271/S – Director-General (Function group AD, grade 15) – Directorate-General for Internal Policies of the Union

13

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 301

A resolution relative to rule XXXIX.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 15 (legislative day, OCTOBER 2), 1998

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

to

RESOLUTION

A resolution relative to rule XXXIX.

1 Resolved, That if a Member who is precluded from

2 foreign travel by the provisions of rule 39 is appointed

3 as a delegate to an official conference to be attended by

4 Members of the Senate, then the appointment of that indi5 vidual shall constitute an authorization by the Senate and

6 the individual will not be deemed in violation of rule 39.

7 SEC. 2. This resolution shall be applicable only until

8 November 21, 1998.

Æ
Befoi?e Judge Oliver,

June 28, 1966

No. R66/7.

No. R66/8.

No. R66/9.

#### Continental Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States, reappraisements R60/8939, etc. (New York). Continental Mdse. Co., Inc. *v.*United States, reappraisements R62/1055, etc. (New York). Continental Mdse. Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States, reappraisements R62/11266, etc. (New York).

OliveR, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issues of fact and law are the same in all material respects as those in *Panation Trade Co.*v. *United*States, 54 Cust. Ct. 758, A.R.D. 181, the court found and held that export value, as that value is defined in section 402(h) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the cigarette lighters here in question and that such value is equal to the appraised values, less inspection fees in the sum of $0.05 per dozen.
No. 57501.

#### Hess, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 187905-K (Bridgeport).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fuel oil derived from petroleum exported from Venezuela and that the facts and issue herein are the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 57178, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 53507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21456]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; 
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: AVIATOR 
Customer Satisfaction Survey

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA 
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) approval for to renew an information 
collection. This collection of information is necessary to determine 
how satisfied applicants are with the automated staffing solution. The 
information enables the FAA to improve and enhance its automated 
staffing process.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by November 10, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy DePaepe at (405) 954-9362, or by 
email at: Kathy.DePaepe@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0699.
    Title: AVIATOR Customer Satisfaction Survey.
    Form Numbers: There are no FAA Forms associated with this 
collection.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The information will be collected via an online form. 
It is part of an automated staffing tool. The data collected will be 
analyzed by Human Resources, the AVIATOR Program Manager, and the 
Enterprise Service Center (ESC) to determine the quality of our service 
to our users and customers, to address any problems or issues found as 
a result of the data analysis.
    Respondents: Approximately 131,000 applicants.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 7 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 4,585 hours.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Ms. Kathy 
DePaepe, Room 126B, Federal Aviation Administration, ASP-110, 6500 S. 
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of 
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed 
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the 
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the 
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d) 
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of 
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include 
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information 
collection.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 3, 2014.
Albert R. Spence,
FAA Assistant Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises 
Business Services Division, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2014-21456 Filed 9-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
No. 52409.

protests 134918-K, etc. (New York).

#### Albert Bonnier Publishing House et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.
Exhibit 32.1
 
  1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of The Bon-Ton Stores, Inc.
 DATE:  December 10, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Byron L. BergrenByron L. BergrenPresident and Chief
Executive OfficerBy:
    /s/ Keith E. PlowmanKeith E. PlowmanExecutive Vice President,
Chief Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 90 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 90

 Authorizing the printing of the publication entitled ``Dedication and 
       Unveiling of the Statue of Richard Brevard Russell, Jr.''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 23, 1997

 Mr. Byrd (for himself, Mr. Coverdell, and Mr. Cleland) submitted the 
        following resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Authorizing the printing of the publication entitled ``Dedication and 
       Unveiling of the Statue of Richard Brevard Russell, Jr.''.

    Resolved, 

SECTION 1. PRINTING OF THE PUBLICATION ENTITLED ``DEDICATION AND 
              UNVEILING OF THE STATUE OF RICHARD BREVARD RUSSELL, 
              JR.''.

    (a) In General.--There shall be printed as a Senate document the 
publication entitled ``Dedication and Unveiling of the Statue of 
Richard Brevard Russell, Jr.'', prepared by the Office of Senate 
Curator under the supervision of the Secretary of the Senate, with the 
concurrence of the United States Senate Commission on Art.
    (b) Specifications.--The Senate document described in subsection 
(a) shall include illustrations and shall be in the style, form, 
manner, and binding as directed by the Joint Committee on Printing 
after consultation with the Secretary of the Senate.
    (c) Number of Copies.--In addition to the usual number of copies, 
there shall be printed with suitable binding the lesser of--
            (1) 1,000 copies for the use of the Senate, to be allocated 
        as determined by the Secretary of the Senate; or
            (2) a number of copies that does not have a total 
        production and printing cost of more than $1,200.
                                 <all>
```
CA 15 – 10

October 21, 2015

TO THE OFFICERS AND MANAGERS IN CHARGE OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS 

SECTIONS AND TO EACH DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN BANKING 

ORGANIZATION SUPERVISED BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE:

Applicability to Community Banking Organizations: This guidance applies to 

institutions supervised by the Federal Reserve with total consolidated assets of $10 

billion or less. 

SUBJECT: Supervisory Expectations for Supervised Institutions Regarding the 

TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure Rule

This letter provides guidance on the Federal Reserve Board’s supervisory 

expectations in connection with early examinations of Board-supervised institutions for 

compliance with the TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure Rule (the Rule), which was 

effective on October 3, 2015.

The Federal Reserve expects supervised institutions to make good faith efforts to 

comply with the Rule’s requirements in a timely manner. Accordingly, during early 

examinations, examiners will evaluate an institution’s compliance management system 

and overall efforts to come into compliance, recognizing the scope and scale of changes 

necessary for each supervised institution to achieve effective compliance. Examiners will 

consider an institution’s implementation plan, including actions taken to update policies, 

procedures, and processes; its training of appropriate staff; and its handling of early 

technical problems or other implementation challenges. This supervisory approach is 

consistent with the approach taken regarding initial examinations for compliance with the 

mortgage rules that became effective at the beginning of January 2014. 
2

If mortgage loans are part of the scope of a consumer compliance examination, 

Reserve Bank examiners will apply the interagency examination procedures for 

Regulation Z and Regulation X transmitted with CA Letter 15-6 (September 22, 2015). 

If you have any questions concerning this guidance, please contact Dana Miller, 

Senior Supervisory Consumer Financial Services Analyst, at (202) 452-2751, or Amy 

Henderson, Managing Counsel, at (202) 452-3140. In addition, questions may be sent 

via the Board’s public website.1

Sincerely,

Cross-reference: CA 15-06 “Revised Interagency Examination Procedures for 

Regulation Z and Regulation X” (September 22, 2015)

 1 See http://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/contactus/feedback.aspx.
# L_2022140EN.01006001.xml

| 19.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 140/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 140/60

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/523 of 31 March 2022 amending Implementing Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/194 as regards the collection costs and models for statements of accounts for entitlements to traditional own resources and the form for reports on irrecoverable amounts

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 104 of 1 April 2022
  )

On page 158, in the Annex III table endnote callout numbers are changed as follows:

for:

‘(4)’,

read:

‘(3)’;

on page 158, in the Annex III table endnote callout numbers are changed as follows:

for:

‘(5) (6)’,

read:

‘(4) (5)’.

---
No. 64673.

#### F. E. Macartney, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 59/6613 (Duluth).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

At the trial, all of the official papers were offered in evidence, an examination of which disclosed that the merchandise was used as pickets in the manufacture of snow fencing. On the record presented, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Ex parte Julio J. Lebron

Appellate case number: 01-15-00411-CR

Trial court case number: 2020596

Trial court: County Criminal Court at Law No. 15 of Harris County

On May 11, 2015, after the record was complete, appellant filed an opening brief in this 

appeal. The Court orders that the State’s response, if any, be filed by no later than Friday, May 

29, 2015.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Jane Bland

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: May 21, 2015
Before Judge Donlon,

September 26, 1966

No. R66/49.

No. R66/50.

No. R66/51.

#### Red Line Commercial Co., Inc. *v.*United States, reappraisements R60/17381 and R60/17382 (Norfolk). Red Line Commercial Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States, reappraisements R61/2941, etc. (Boston). Red Line Commercial Co., Inc. *v.*United States, reappraisements R61/3968 and R61/3969 (Charleston).

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *International*Packers, *Limited*v. *United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 636, Reap. Dec. 11147) and *International*Packers, *Limited*v. *United States*(52 Cust. Ct. 472, Reap. Dec. 10696), the court found and held that export value, as defined in section 402 (b), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the canned meat exported from Argentina, during the period January 1,1959, through December 31, 1959, described on the invoices of the entries covered by the ajopeals for reappraisement recited in schedule “A,” and that such values per dozen tins, net packed, are the respective values shown as plaintiffs’ claimed values on schedule “B,” for the respective products and sizes of container described on the invoices and as stated in each *849entry and recited in said schedule “B,” during those periods which correspond to the time of exportation of the canned meat covered by the appeals for reappraisement recited in schedule “A,” which with schedule “B,” was attached to and made a part of the decisions.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF POWERTEL, INC. FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1999
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         152,282
<SECURITIES>                                    33,375
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,685
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (3,782)
<INVENTORY>                                     23,133
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               254,386
<PP&E>                                         764,356
<DEPRECIATION>                                (125,987)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,331,532
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           58,931
<BONDS>                                        865,939
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          152,219
<PREFERRED>                                          3
<COMMON>                                           275
<OTHER-SE>                                     (10,898)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,331,532
<SALES>                                          8,118
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                61,986
<CGS>                                           15,432
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   95,556
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (104)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,847
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (61,313)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (61,313)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (63,750)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (2.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (2.33)
        

</TABLE>
No. 67636.

#### Schick X-Ray Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 60/25843, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of injectors and parts, in chief value of metal, similar in ah material respects to those the subject of *Schick X-Ray Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(49 Cust. Ct. 38, C.D. 2358), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Tertiaryand Quaternary geology of the lower Rio Grande region, Texas**
 
Report | Plates: 07212324262829
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.3:837
Item Number:0620 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000961459
 
August 22, 2018
```

[Federal Register: March 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 57)]
[Notices]               
[Page 14429]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25mr10-48]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

 
Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE:  11 a.m., Friday April 23, 2010.

PLACE:  1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS:  Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:  Surveillance matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-
5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-6713 Filed 3-23-10; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```