alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AAM-11-355-E 

June 24, 2011 

 Exemption No. 10297 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0637 

Ms. Catherine Weber 

Owner 

Silverhawk Aviation Academy 

4505 Aviation Way 

Caldwell, ID 83605 

Dear Ms. Weber: 

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 submission dated June 1, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

on behalf of Silverhawk Aviation Academy (Silverhawk) for an exemption from part 120 of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to allow Silverhawk, which is operating 

under separate parts of 14 CFR, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one drug testing 

program. 

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 Silverhawk. 

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 Silverhawk Aviation Academy an exemption from part 

120 to the extent necessary to allow Silverhawk, 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 Silverhawk 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 Silverhawk 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 Federal Air Surgeon 

Enclosure
Exhibit 10.1

(LOGO)                                                 Dah Sing Financial Centre
Dah Sing Bank                                          108 Gloucester Road,
                                                       Hong Kong

29th October, 2007

Private & Confidential
----------------------

Concord Camera HK Ltd.
14/F ADP Pentagon Centre
98 Texaco Road
Tsuen Wan
N.T.

For kind attention of
Mr. Wong Kim Fai Paul
---------------------

Dear Sirs,

Re:   Banking Facilities
------------------------

We have the pleasure to inform you that we will extend your banking facilities
for another one-month time with expiry date amended to 30th November, 2007. Your
existing facilities will be unchanged for this period. In the meantime, your
facilities are under review and detailed facility letter will be issued
immediately to you upon approval of our review.

Yours faithfully,
For and on behalf of
Dah Sing Bank, Limited

Henry P.H. Lau
---------------------------
Authority Signature
Commercial Banking Division
VT/(3916)/hh

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Telephone: 2507 8866          Cable: Dahsingbank             Telex: 74063 DSB HX
               Fax: 2598 5052                  Website: www.dahsing.com
No. 48916

#### Protest 95982-K of S. Lisk & Bro. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that the wooden paddle sticks in question are similar in all material respects to those involved in Abstract 44028. The claim at 33% percent under paragraph 412 was therefore sustained.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 151 (Wednesday, August 6, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42221-42222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20666]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 141 and 142

[FRL-5870-9]
RIN 2040 AA 94


Withdrawal of the Proposed National Primary Drinking Water 
Regulation for Radon-222

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of withdrawal of proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Environmental Protection Agency's 
(EPA) withdrawal of drinking water regulations proposed for radon-222 
(56 FR 33050, July 18, 1991). EPA is withdrawing the proposed Maximum 
Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG), Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL), 
monitoring, reporting, and public notification requirements for radon-
222 as required by section 1412(b)(13)(A) of Safe Drinking Water Act 
(SDWA), as amended. No other provision of the July 18, 1991 proposal is 
affected by today's action.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sylvia Malm, (202) 260-0417. For 
information on radon in drinking water and other EPA activities under 
the Safe Drinking Water Act, please contact the Safe Drinking Water 
Hotline at 1-800-426-4791. For information on radon in indoor air, 
please contact the National Safety Council's National Radon Hotline at 
1-800-SOS-RADON.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 18, 1991 (56 FR 33050), EPA proposed 
a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG), a maximum contaminant level 
(MCL), monitoring, reporting, and public notification requirements for 
radon and a number of other radionuclides in public water supplies 
(systems serving over 25 individuals or with greater than 15 
connections). EPA proposed to regulate radon at 300 pCi/L.
    On August 6, 1996, Congress passed amendments to the SDWA. Section 
1412(b)(13)(A) of the SDWA, as amended, directs EPA to withdraw the 
proposed national primary drinking water regulation for radon. With 
this Federal Register document, EPA withdraws the proposed MCLG, MCL, 
monitoring, reporting, and public notification requirements for radon-
222. No other provision of the July 18, 1991 proposal is affected by 
this action.
    Congress has directed EPA to propose an MCLG and National Primary 
Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) for

[[Page 42222]]

radon-222 by August, 1999 and promulgate a final regulation by August, 
2000 [section 1412 (b)(13)(D-E)]. EPA has committed to take final 
action on the other radionuclides included in the July 18, 1991 
proposal by December, 2000. On a related matter, EPA published on March 
5, 1997 (62 FR 10168) a final rule on the analytical methods for gross 
alpha, gross beta, tritium, uranium, radium-226, radium-228, gamma 
emitters, and radioactive cesium, iodine and strontium.

    Dated: July 30, 1997.
Carol Browner,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-20666 Filed 8-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
#### Meadows Wye *&*Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States

No. 6208.

Invoices dated Hawick, Scotland, October 1943, etc.

Certified October 1943, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., January 12, 1944, etc.

Entry No. 720852, etc.

(Decided August 21, 1945)

*J ordan & Klingaman (Edward F. Jordan*of counsel) for the plantiffs.

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

Cole, Judge:

The issues involved in these appeals for reappraisement of wool wearing apparel are concededly the same as those decided in *United States*v. *Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc.,*32 C. C. P. A. 187, C. A. D. 305, the record in which case has been incorporated herein by consent of the parties.

*United States*v. *Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc., supra,*found cost of production, section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. 1940 ed. § 1402 (f)), to be the proper basis for appraisement, and held that the so-called British purchase tax described in the law of the United Kingdom entitled, “Finance (No. 2) Act. 1940 3 & 4. Geo. 6 Ch. 48.”, was not an item to be included in the “usual general expenses” contemplated within subdivision (2) of section 402 (f), *supra,*and therefore not to be calculated in determining such statutory value.

*415On the agreement of counsel — set forth in the stipulation of submission filed August 6, 1945 — that the several elements entering into the statutory cost of production of the items in question is equal to the appraised value thereof, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases, 1 hold such values to be the cost of production, section 402 (f), *supra,*which I find to be the proper basis for appraisement, of the instant merchandise.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 00-6642.

#### Odoms *v.*Johnson, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 10.16
**SUMMARY SHEET OF DIRECTOR FEES AND OFFICER COMPENSATION**
**I. Director Compensation**
     As compensation for their service as directors of Halifax Corporation (the “Company”), eachnon-employee member of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) receives a $1,000 annual fee. Paymentof the annual fee is made at the annual meeting. Additionally, each non-employee member of theBoard receives $2,000 for each regular Board meeting attended in person, $1,000 for each regularBoard meeting attended telephonically and $1,000 for each special Board meeting. Directors do notreceive any compensation for attendance of meetings of the committees of the Board. Non-employeedirectors are reimburse for reasonable expenses incurred in connection with attending meetings ofthe Board and committees of the Board.
     In addition, under the Non-employee Directors Stock Option Plan, each non-employee member wasgranted options to purchase 5,000 shares of the Company’s common stock on the first of the monthfollowing the date of the annual meeting of shareholders on which the director was initiallyelected and was granted options to purchase up to 2,000 shares of common stock on each annualre-election by the shareholders as a director of the Company. Such options were granted at anexercise price equal to or greater than the fair market value of the common stock on the date ofgrant. No further options may be granted under the Non-employee Directors Stock Option Plan.
**II. Executive Compensation**
**Base Salaries**
     The following table sets forth current base salaries of the Company’s CEO and each of theexecutive officers who were named in the Summary Compensation Table incorporated by reference intothe Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2004 and who are expected tobe named in the Summary Compensation Table in the Company’s incorporated by reference into theannual report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2005 (the “Named Executive Officers”).     **Name** **Base Salary** Charles L. McNew $240,000 Hugh M. Foley  145,000 Joseph Sciacca  160,000 James L. Sherwood, IV*  125,052 Jonathan L. Scott  171,538 
* On June 30, 2005, Mr. Sherwood ceased to be employed by the Company.
**Participation in Employee Benefit and Other Arrangements**
     The Named Executive Officers are also eligible to:
 **•** Participate in the 1994 Key Employee Stock Option Plan;  **•** Participate in an incentive compensation program for bonuses which are awarded based onachievement of certain objectives set by the Board of Directors by the executive officer and theCompany;  **•** Participate in certain group life, health, medical and other non-cash benefits generallyavailable to all salaried employees.
No. 99-916.

#### Enron Power Marketing, Inc. *v.*Northern States Power Co. et al.

C. A. 8th Cir. Motion of Electricity Consumers Resource Council et al. for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae*granted. Petitioner’s memorandum suggesting mootness and motion to vacate denied. Certiorari denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21 - 0646 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. NELS JERRY PETERSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including December 21, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 14 2022

11/14/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0646
No. 99-1065.

#### Sutton *v.*BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                               EXHIBIT 10-Z (iv)


          (a) For ELIGIBILITY purposes, the first Year of Service shall
              be computed using the 12 month period commencing on the
              Employee's date of hire and ending on the first annual
              anniversary of the Employee's date of hire (the "Initial
              Computation Period").  In the event an employee does not complete
              an eligibility Year of Service during this initial computation
              period, the computation period shall be (select only one):
             
              (1) [ ]   the period commencing on each annual anniversary of the 
                        Employee's date of hire and ending on the next annual
                        anniversary of the Employee's date of hire. 

              (2) [X]   the Plan Year, commencing with the Plan Year in
                        which the Initial Computation Period ends.
             
          (b) For VESTING purposes, Years of Service shall be computed on the
              basis of:
             
              (1) [ ]   the period commencing on each annual
                        anniversary of the Employee's date of hire and ending
                        on the next annual anniversary of the Employee's date
                        of hire.
             
              (2) [ ]   the Plan Year, commencing with the first Plan
                        Year an Employee completes an Hour of Service.
             
         (c)  For ALLOCATION accrual purposes, Year of Service shall be
              computed on the basis of the Plan Year.

       v  [X]     For ELIGIBILITY purposes, Years of Service with the
                  following Predecessor Employers shall count in fulfilling the
                  eligibility requirements for this Plan:       
                  Kendall Drug Company; 3-C Medical, Inc,; IV-I, Inc;
                  IV-One Services, Inc,; National Pharmacy Providers, Inc,;
                  National Infusion Services, Inc.
      vi  [ ]     For VESTING purposes, Years of Service with the
                  following Predecessor Employers shall count for purposes of
                  determining the nonforfeitable amount of a Participant's
                  account: 
                  -----

5.  COVERAGE:

    This Plan is extended by the Employer to the following Employees who
    have met the eligibility requirements (select as many as appropriate):


                                    Page 6
Exhibit 32.2

Certification  Pursuant  to Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. ss.1350)

I,  Thomas W.  Martin,  Chief  Operating  Officer  and Chief  Financial  Officer
(Principal  Financial and Accounting Officer) of ICON Capital Corp., the General
Partner of the Registrant in connection with the Quarterly Report of ICON Income
Fund  Eight B L.P.  (the  "Partnership")  on Form  10-Q  for  the  period  ended
September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the
date hereof (the  "Quarterly  Report")  certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

1.   The Quarterly  Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
     or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. ss.78m); and

2.   The information  contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents,  in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Partnership.


Dated: November 17, 2006

/s/ Thomas W. Martin
--------------------
Thomas W. Martin
Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
ICON Capital Corp.
General Partner of ICON Income Fund Eight B L.P.
#### LOUISIANA CONSUMER’S LEAGUE, INC. v. LOUISIANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION.

No. 59819.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 1977.

In re Louisiana Consumer’s League, Inc. applying for supervisory writs and a stay order.

Writ granted. As provisional relief, the Louisiana Public Service Commission is ordered to permit the relator, Louisiana Consumer’s League, Inc. to intervene in the pending rate proceeding. This case will be assigned for argument on this court’s docket without staying the hearing by the Louisiana Public Service Commission.

SUMMERS, J.,

is of the opinion a stay order should be issued and a writ should be granted to hear the issues presented by this application. The provisional relief granted by the court is neither authorized or permitted by any law. Such a procedure can only result in confusion and impairment of the rights of the parties involved.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Third Century Bancorp on Form 10-QSB
      for
      the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission (the “Report”), I, Robert D. Heuchan, Chief Executive Officer of
      Third Century Bancorp, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that




(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 operation of Third
                Century Bancorp.













/s/
      Robert D.
      Heuchan


Robert
      D.
      Heuchan


President,
      Chief Executive Officer


(Principal
      Executive Officer)





August
      10, 2007








The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350
      and is not being filed for any other purpose.
Exhibit 31.4



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER



I, Binfeng Gu, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on
Form 10-K/A of China Recycling Energy Corporation; and



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



|Date: April 29, 2019          | 
|----------------------------- | 
|                              | 
|/s/ Binfeng Gu                | 
|Binfeng Gu                    | 
|Chief Financial Officer       | 
|(Principal Financial Officer) |
(Reap. Dec. 9132)

#### Bruce Duncan, a/c N. Katen Company *v.*United States

Entry No. 28915.

(Decided April 18, 1958)

*Stein & Shostak (Richard M. Kozinn*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General *(Mollie*Strum,, trial attorney), for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement involves the proper value of certain linen articles, so-called Madeira luncheon sets, exported from Portugal on April 12, 1956, and entered at the port of Los Angeles. The involved items are designated as 203L and 204L in cases numbered 188, 189, and 190. The merchandise in question was appraised on the basis of cost of production (section 402 (f), Tariff Act of 1930).

It appears that, while these luncheon sets were invoiced as 8-piece sets, the values stated on the invoice for the involved items were based upon a set of 16 pieces.

There was received in evidence a cost sheet, showing the unit cost for 16-piece Madeira luncheon sets (plaintiff's exhibit 1) as follows:

> Case Item Unit Unit

> No. No. labor material

> 188 203L 91. 40 53. 00

> 204L 90. 10 53. 00

> 189 204L 90. 10 53. 00

> 190 203L 91. 40 53. 00

> 204L 90.10 53. 00

*797It was stipulated between counsel for the respective parties that the unit costs set forth above represent unit cost for 16-piece Madeira luncheon sets (R. 2).

A cost sheet showing the unit cost for 8-piece Madeira luncheon sets (plaintiff’s exhibit 2) indicates the following:

> Case Item Unit Unit

> No. No. labor material

> 188 203L 45. 70 26. 60

> 204L 45. 05 26. 60

> 189 204L 45. 05 26. 60

> 190 203L 45.70 26. 60

> 204L 45.05 26. 60

It was stipulated between counsel for the respective parties that plaintiff’s exhibit 2 represents the unit cost for an 8-piece Madeira luncheon set covered by the involved items (R. 3).

On the agreed facts, I find the proper value of item No. 203L in package Nos. 188 and 190 to be 117.485 Portuguese escudos per set of 8 pieces, plus gremio tax, plus packing; and that the value of item No. 204L in package Nos. 188, 189, and 190 is 116.482 Portuguese escudos per set of 8 pieces, plus gremio tax, plus packing.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.