alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: Ben Stavis <benstavis@verizon.net>

To: Michael Samulski/AA/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 11/08/2010 08:19 PM Subject: Re: Comment to Docket EPA - HQ
- OAR
- 2010 - 0270 

### Dear Mr. Samulski, Thank you for calling me today and helping me understand the many issues involved in fuel tanks and containers. You are correct that m y views relate onl y to small portable gasoline cans that have spouts that are used to pour fuel into the small integral tanks of small gasoline engines, such as small outboard motors, lawn mowers, etc. My comments do not refer to portable marine fuel tanks that transfer fuel to engines by way of plug

- in hoses. I do not use such equipment and have no special insights about them. I apologize that I did not understand the important distinc tion between a "portable gas can" (with a spout) and a "portable marine fuel tank" (with a hose). So you are correct that my comments are outside the scope of your discussions concerning rules for portable marine fuel tanks. I have redirected m y comments to L amar Mitchell, who is associated with the California Air Resources Board, which I think is the regulatory agency that is impacting the manufacture of the small gasoline cans. Most Sincerely , Ben Stavis

### On 11/8/2010 5:03 PM, Samulski.Michael@epamail.epa.gov wrote: Mr Stavis, It was good to speak with you today regarding your comments to Docket EPA - HQ
- OAR
- 2010 - 0270. I ver y m uch appreciate the time you took to so clearly share your thoughts. It is m y understanding that the concerns expressed in your letter are related to fill spouts and other aspects of new portable gas can designs. These portable gas cans are used to transfer fuel and to refuel gas tanks on marine engines, boats, and other equipment. As we discussed today, while this is an important issue, portable gas cans are outside the scope of the recent Direct Final Rule regarding portable marine fuel tanks. Although there are some similarities in these products, the type of fuel tanks specifically addressed in the Direct Final Rule do not have fill spouts and are designed to be connected with a hose directly to an outboard ma rine engine. I am sending this email simply to clarify that your comments are outside the scope of the Direct Final Rule for portable marine fuel tanks and were not intended to be adverse comments on the portable marine fuel tanks rule. Thank you, Mike

********* ***************************************** Michael Samulski U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory 2000 Traverwood Drive Ann Arbor, MI 48105 (734) 214 - 4532 **************************************************
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2012-0222 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2011-SW-007-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

 Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
No. 46401.

#### Protest 7964-K of Strauss-Eckardt Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 45502 the manger sets in question were held dutiable at 25 percent under paragraph 1403 as claimed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          20,696                  20,740
<SECURITIES>                                         0                   8,092
<RECEIVABLES>                                  131,010                 113,249
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,312                   5,870
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               155,575                 142,594
<PP&E>                                          70,241                  59,495
<DEPRECIATION>                                  37,131                  33,028
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 273,610                 257,653
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          114,988                 113,343
<BONDS>                                         35,220                  55,130
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           363                     363
<OTHER-SE>                                     123,039                  88,817
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   274,277                 257,653
<SALES>                                        233,745                 216,451
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               467,950                 403,571
<CGS>                                           71,184                  90,026
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  167,251                 163,925
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               240,738                 242,191
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,767                   2,384
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,803                   4,482
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 65,233                   7,491
<INCOME-TAX>                                    23,484                   1,253
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             41,749                   6,238
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    41,749                   6,238
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.15                    0.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.14                    0.18


</TABLE>
1155 15th Street, NW, Suite 1111

Washington, DC 20005

T 202.347.7722

F 202.347.7727

November 29, 2012

Appraisal Subcommittee

Attn: Ms. Lori Schuster

1401 H Street NW, Suite 760

Washington, DC 20005

RE: Docket # AS12-16

Via Electronic Mail: webmaster@asc.gov

Dear Ms. Schuster:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Appraisal Subcommittee’s proposed revisions 

to its Policy Statements. 

The Appraisal Foundation would like to offer a brief comment with respect to Policy Statement 

2, Temporary Practice, and Policy Statement 5, Reciprocity. 

In both cases, we believe it is critical for the Policy Statements to clearly reflect the obligation 

for the appraiser to comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice

(USPAP), with particular emphasis on geographic competency.

We are all aware of widely-reported accounts of appraisers performing assignments that are 

clearly outside the geographic marketplace in which an appraiser typically operates. Although 

there are some assignments that do not necessarily require geographic competence, there are a 

great number that do require it in order to produce credible assignment results.

While we note that both Policy Statements 2 and 5 mandate compliance with state requirements, 

neither appears to specifically refer to compliance with USPAP. Furthermore, we believe it is 

equally important to emphasize the geographic competence obligations within USPAP that are 

referenced above.

Sincerely,

John S. Brenan

Director of Appraisal Issues
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Excess item gives a lift to Guam police officers

By Tim Hoyle  DLA Disposition Services

A piece of material handling equipment no longer needed by military forces on Guam is now giving a helping hand to police officers there.
The Guam Police Department was among the customers to visit the DLA Disposition Services site there recently. Property Disposal Specialist Julie Rivera said officers used the 1033 program to acquire a forklift to support their operations.

“They needed this forklift to lift barriers and damaged patrol cars onto their flatbed for transport to their repair yard, among their other needs,” Rivera said.   

A screener from the Forestry Division of Guam Department of Agriculture also visited the site under the Fire Fighter Program, but Rivera said nothing was requested from the visit. 

 

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 90 (Thursday, May 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 26620]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8967]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-45-004]


Northwest Pipeline Corporation; Notice of Compliance Filing

May 4, 2007.
    Take notice that on April 26, 2007, Northwest Pipeline Corporation 
(Northwest) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to be effective as 
of the date Northwest's Parachute Lateral facilities are placed into 
service:

Substitute Tenth Revised Sheet No. 1
2nd Substitute Thirty-Second Revised Sheet No. 5
Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 5-B
2nd Substitute Seventh Revised Sheet No. 5-C
2nd Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 5-D

    Northwest states that the purpose of this filing is to submit 
substitute tariff sheets in Docket No. CP06-45 reflecting rates filed 
by Northwest in Docket No. RP06-416-002.
    Northwest states that copies of the filing were served on parties 
on the official service list in the above-captioned proceeding.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance 
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the 
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will 
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests 
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a 
protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the 
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu 
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons 
unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies 
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First 
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3b7d7e697874555752555e684e4b4b54494f7b5d5e4958155c544d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c3858691808cadafaaada690b6b3b3acb1b783a5a6b1a0eda4acb5">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 11, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-8967 Filed 5-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit 10.2**

 

**VeecoInstruments Inc.**

**Performance-BasedRestricted Stock**

**2010**

 

**Performance Criteria**

 

Definitions:

 

“EBITA” means Veeco’scumulative earnings before interest, taxes and amortization.

 

“Primary PerformancePeriod” means Veeco’s four fiscal quarters ending June 30, 2011.

 

“Secondary PerformancePeriod” means Veeco’s four fiscal quarters ending September 30, 2011.

 

The Primary PerformanceCriteria will be met if Veeco’s cumulative EBITA for the Primary PerformancePeriod equals or exceeds the EBITA target established by the CompensationCommittee prior to the start of the Primary Performance Period.

 

The Secondary PerformanceCriteria will be met if Veeco’s cumulative EBITA for the Secondary PerformancePeriod equals or exceeds the EBITA target established by the CompensationCommittee prior to the start of the Primary Performance Period.

 

The performance criteriawill be measured on the date of filing with the SEC of Veeco’s quarterly reporton Form 10-Q for the final quarter of the relevant performanceperiod.  The Compensation Committee shallmake all determinations and interpretations regarding the performance criteria,including any adjustments as may be deemed appropriate by the Committee inlight of acquisitions or divestitures.

 

**Vesting**

 

Subject to the recipient’scontinued service, the performance-based RSU will vest upon achievement of thePrimary Performance Criteria or the Secondary Performance Criteria. In thatevent, the restrictions with respect to one-third of the award shall lapse onthe first trading day following the measurement date on which achievement ofthe performance criteria is determined (the “Vesting Date”).  Thereafter, restrictions with respect to anadditional one third of the award shall lapse, and the related shares shall beissued, on each of the next two anniversaries of the Vesting Date.

 

**Forfeiture**

 

In the event that neitherthe Primary Performance Criteria or the Secondary Performance Criteria are met,the performance-based restricted stock unit award will be forfeited.

 

----
No. 74-952.

#### Blanton, Governor of Tennessee, et al. *v.*Americans United for the Separation of Church and State et al.

Appeal from D. C. M. D. Tenn. Probable jurisdiction noted and case set for oral argument with No. 74-730, *Roemer*v. *Board of Public Works of Maryland*[probable jurisdiction noted, *ante,*p. 922],
Exhibit 23.1




CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Forms S-3 (Nos. 333-70870, 333-47288, 333-108573, 333-111878, 333-111880 and 333-118234) and on Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-89369, 333-37400, 333-40430, 333-42974, 333-43996, 333-111543, 333-117068, 333-127989, 333-137314, 333-141245 and 333-153766) of Internap Network
Services Corporation of our report dated March 2, 2010 relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.




/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Atlanta, Georgia


March 2, 2010
Order entered December 21, 2012

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-01162-CR

JOHANAN JOHN FOLSOM, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F11-58786-P

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES this appeal.

On October 11, 2012, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why the 

reporter’s record had not been filed. We ADOPT the findings that: (1) appellant desires to 

pursue the appeal; (2) appellant is indigent and represented by court-appointed counsel Allen 

Fishburn; (3) Karren Jones and Yolanda Atkins are the court reporter who recorded the 

proceedings; (4) Ms. Jones has finished her portion of the record; and (5) Ms. Atkins required ten 

days from the December 14, 2012 hearing to finish her portion of the record. 

We note that on December 17, 2012, Ms. Jones tendered the record of the February 2, 

2012 suppression hearing. That volume is labeled volume 3 of 3. We ORDER this volume of 

the reporter’s record filed as of the date of this order.
We ORDER court reporter Yolanda Atkins to file, by JANUARY 2, 2013 her portion of 

the reporter’s record, including a Master Index that includes the suppression hearing. Because 

the record is already more than four months overdue, no further extensions will be granted. If 

the reporter’s record is not filed by the date specified, we will order that Yolanda Atkins not sit 

as a court reporter until the record is filed.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to the 

Honorable Teresa Hawthorne, Presiding Judge, 203rd Judicial District Court; court reporter 

Karren Jones; court reporter Yolanda Atkins; and to counsel for all parties.

/s/ DAVID L. BRIDGES

 JUSTICE
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 95 (Thursday, May 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 27896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9486]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>10859]


Maine Disaster Number ME-00007

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 2.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Maine (FEMA-
1693-DR), dated 04/25/2007.
    Incident: Severe Storms and Inland and Coastal Flooding.
    Incident Period: 04/15/2007 through 04/23/2007.
    Effective Date: 05/04/2007.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/25/2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Maine, 
dated 04/25/2007, is hereby amended to establish the incident period 
for this disaster as beginning 04/15/2007 and continuing through 04/23/
2007.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell,
Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7-9486 Filed 5-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### United States *v.*Chemco Photoproducts, Inc.

No. 6075.

Invoice dated Woburn Green, England, November 14, 1939.

Certified November 21, 1939.

Entered at New York, N. Y., December 21, 1939.

Entry No. 767405.

(Decided November 28, 1944)

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General *(Daniel I. Auster,*special attorney), for the plaintiff.

*Powers, Kaplan & Berger*for the defendant.

Kincheloe, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> It is hereby stipulated and agreed, subject to the approval of the court, that the market value or price at the time of exportation of the merchandise involved herein, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States is $147.19 per thousand meters, net packed, and that there was no higher export value.

> *414It is further stipulated and agreed that this case may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value is $147.19 per thousand meters, net, packed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.