alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### U.S. 

### D.EPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASIDNGTON, D.C. •. ·•**i~**



### IN THE MATfER 

### OF: JAMES KEARNS Respondent. 

### DocketNo. FAA-2014-0683 

### Judge J.E. Sullivan
FAA Case No. 201280275132



### JOINT MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE
The parties, by and through undersigned counsel, pursuant to section 13.218 ofthe Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty Actions, requests that the law judge continue the Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling ConJerence set for January 13, 2015, in the above-captioned matter. In support thereof, theparties statethe following: On Friday, January 

### 9, 2015, the parties reached a settlement 

### in principle and are currently working on drafting settlement documents to memorialize the settlement terms. Upon execution of a settlement agreement in the matter, the Complainant intends to withdraw the Complaint pursuant to 

### 14 C.P.R. 

### 13.215 

### byJanuary 

### 30, 20'15.In light ofthe settlement ofthis matter, the parties respectfully request that the lawjudge enter an order continuing the Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling c.onference ctu:rently set for January 13, 

### 2015, to a later date to give the parties an opportunity to finalize the settlement documents. Respectfully submitted this 

### 9th day of

### January 2015.

RA (!AWN RICH GEORGE Senior Attorney Office ofthe Regional Counsel JOHN 0.
.MOSS, Esq. Attorney for Respondent

### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Joint Motion for Continuance was mailed via facsimile and Federal Express to: The Honorable J.E. Sullivan DOT, Administrative Law Judge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200

### New Jersey A venue, 

### S.E. East Building Ground Floor Room**El2~320** Washington, D.C. 20590 (FAX) (202) 366-7536 and via Federal 

### Express to: JohnO.C. Moss, Esq. 

### Moss & 

### Moss, LLP 220 Fifth**Avenue~** Suite 900 

### New York, New York 1 0001 and James Kearns 270 Union Street, Apt. 2 Brooklyn, NY 11231 and the original and one copy via Federal Express to: Hearing

### Docket U.S. Department ofTransportation Docket Operations,**M~**30 WestBuilding GroundFloor Room 

### Wl2-140 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590



# ,1

# ~{MA};f/Ja}dr**vv~** TIFFANY M. McDOWELL 

### Legal Assistant Office ofthe Regional Cow1sel 

## -JAN - 9 2015 Dated
<PAGE>
 
                                                            EXHIBIT 21


                          MORRISON KNUDSEN CORPORATION
                 (FORMERLY WASHINGTON CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC.)

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

Consolidated subsidiaries of the registrant,
Morrison Knudsen Corporation (Delaware)

                                    STATE OR COUNTRY OF INCORPORATION
                                    ---------------------------------
Atascosa Mining Co.                        Nevada
Blue Diamond Materials, Inc.               Nevada
Centennial Engineering, Inc.               Colorado
CF Systems Corporation                     Massachusetts
Conda Mining, Inc.                         Idaho
Industrial Contractors Corporation         Montana
Kasler Corporation                         California
MK Ferguson of Oak Ridge Company           Tennessee
Morrison Knudsen Corporation               Ohio
Morrison Knudsen Deutschland GmbH          Germany
National Projects, Inc.                    Nevada
Pomeroy Corporation                        California
Washington Construction Company            Montana
Washington Contractors Group, Inc.         Montana

The names of particular subsidiaries have been excluded because when considered
in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, as of November 30, 1997, they would not
constitute a significant subsidiary under Rule 1-02 of Regulation S-X.
NIHSeniorHealth: Transcript "Memory Issues and Cancer Treatment"

file:///C|/Users/mames/Downloads/Memory_Issues_and_Cancer_Treatmen_transcript.htm[2/25/2014 8:21:42 AM]

Transcript: "Memory Issues and Cancer Treatment"

Another common problem that survivors tell us persists after cancer treatment are memory problems. Sometimes these

may have begun during an active cancer treatment, or they may occur after treatment has ended. Not being able to

remember dates or times or appointments, can't keep a lot of ideas in your head simultaneously--this is very common

with cancer treatments. It usually goes away over time but can be very frustrating. Some tips that people use are jotting

down notes to yourself, putting them around the house, making sure you have an appointment book. When you are

going to do activities, telling yourself steps along the way to do these, and talking to yourself about what reminders

are--or asking other people to help you remember things until this improves for you over time.

The kind of problems that we see in memory for survivors after treatment is often called chemo-brain or chemo-fog,

so that's sort of one of the tags for it. But it may be due to radiation that somebody has received to the head area, so it's

not just limited to chemotherapy. The other thing for older adults is that it is hard sometimes to distinguish between

what may be cancer treatment-related and what may be simply a process of aging.

So there again, a dialogue may be important to have with your healthcare provider to say "Is this treatment related and

will it go away, or do I need to be concerned that there is something else going on?" That's an important conversation

to have, particularly if you are finding that memory problems are disturbing your ability to function in day-to-day life.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 206 (Friday, October 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 55431]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28241]


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

NATIONAL SKILL STANDARDS BOARD


Notice of Open Meeting

AGENCY: National Skill Standards Board.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The National Skill Standards Board was established by an Act 
of Congress, the National Skill Standards Act, Title V, Pub. L. 103-
227. The 27-member National Skill Standards Board will serve as a 
catalyst and be responsible for the development and implementation of a 
national system of voluntary skill standards and certification through 
voluntary partnerships which have the full and balanced participation 
of business, industry, labor, education and other key groups.

TIME AND PLACE: The meeting will be held from 8:30 a.m. to 
approximately 3:30 p.m. on Friday, November 14, 1997 in Hall B (first 
floor) at the INFOMART located at 1950 Stemmons Freeway, Dallas, Texas 
75207.

AGENDA: The agenda for the Board Meeting will include: an update from 
the Board's committees; reports from national and state representatives 
from industry, government, and the education community; and a progress 
report from the Convening Body Representatives.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: The meeting, from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., is open 
to the public. Seating is limited and will be available on a first-
come, first-served basis. Seats will be reserved for the media. 
Individuals with disabilities should contact Pat Warfield at (202) 254-
8628, if special accommodations are needed.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracy Marshall, Manager of Program 
Operations at (202) 254-8628.

    Signed at Washington, D.C., this 17th day of October, 1997.
Edie West,
Executive Director, National Skill Standards Board.
[FR Doc. 97-28241 Filed 10-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-23-M
No. 00-7079.

#### Spencer *v.*Senkowski, Superintendent, Clinton Correctional Facility.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk January 29, 2010

p0129 

# Order

January 29, 2010

139870

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139870 COA: 293113 Genesee CC: 08-022946-FC DAVID STANLEY STEWART, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the September 30, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM

Application 

No. Project/Facility Name Project Type Federal Land Accessed Applicant County Fiscal Year*

MN 63 Gunflint Trail & Bridge 

Replacement

Roadway Resurfacing & 

Bridge Replacement

U.S. Forest Service - 

Superior National Forest

Cook Co. 

Highway 

Department

Cook 2024

MN 65 MN River Headwaters Trail Bicycle/Pedestrian 

Facility

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 

- Big Stone National 

Wildlife Refuge

Big Stone 

County Big Stone 2023

MN 66 MISS Gateway Crossing Grade separated Trail 

Crossing

National Park Service - 

Mississippi National River 

& Recreation Area

Three Rivers 

Park District Hennepin 2026

MN 69 Bridge 7909 Replacement Bridge Replacement U.S. Forest Service - 

Superior National Forest Lake County Lake 2025

MN 74

Weaver Bottoms Observation 

Area Parking Lot & Overlook

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 

- Upper MISS River 

National Wildlife Refuge

MN DOT Wabasha 2023

MN 75

Cross Lake Recreation Area 

Improvements

Intersection 

Improvements

U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers- Cross Lake

Crow Wing 

County Crow Wing 2023

The Programming Decisions Committee (PDC) responsible for the Minnesota Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) has selected its multiyear 

Program of Projects. The projects identified for programming for the Minnesota FLAP are listed below by application number and include:

Minnesota Program of Projects for Federal Fiscal Years 2023-2026

* Fiscal Year Programmed/Project Schedule is subject to change
EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM

The Minnesota PDC does not have a firm date for the next Call for Projects under the Access Program. Please bookmark our webpage to watch for 

future Calls for Projects in your state. https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-access

If you have any questions regarding the Call for Projects, please contact Mr. Lewis Grimm, Planning Team Leader, at 703-404-6289 or 

Lewis.Grimm@dot.gov. For questions regarding project agreements and funding, please contact Ms. Jacinda Russell, Access Program Manager, at 571-

434-1543 or Jacinda.Russell@dot.gov.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.29

                           SECOND AMENDMENT TO LEASE
                            DATED DECEMBER 23, 1996
                                 BY AND BETWEEN
                              DOUGLAS KAYE, LESSOR
                                      AND
       BIOMARIN PHARMACEUTICAL INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, SUCCESSOR IN
                        INTEREST TO GLYKO, INC., LESSEE
                            DATED DECEMBER 31, 2002

Lessor and Glyko, Inc. entered into that certain Lease dated as of December 23,
1996, as amended by that certain Addendum to Lease dated as of December 23, 1996
and that certain Amendment to Lease Agreement dated as of March 15, 2000
(collectively the "Lease").

Lessor and Lessee hereby agree as follows:

1.   Extension of Lease Term:
     Commencing April 1, 2003 the term of the lease shall be extended to March
     31, 2005.

2.   Rent:
     The monthly rent for the extended term shall be $14,500 per month
     commencing April 1, 2003.

3.   Right to Terminate:
     Beginning upon execution of this agreement, notwithstanding the extension
     of the term of the Lease from March 31, 2003 to March 31, 2005, Lessee
     shall have the right to terminate the lease agreement at no charge to
     Lessee by giving Lessor one hundred eighty (180) days prior written notice.

4.   Entire Agreement:
     The Lease, as amended by this Amendment, contains all of the agreements of
     the parties hereto with respect to any matter covered or mentioned in this
     Amendment. No prior agreement, understanding, or representation pertaining
     to any such matter shall be effective for any purpose.

LESSOR: Douglas Kaye, an individual

By:   /s/ DOUGLAS KAYE
      --------------------------
Date: 12/31/02
      --------------------------

LESSEE: BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc., a Delaware corporation, successor in
interest to Glyko, Inc., a California corporation

By:    /s/ JEFFREY LANDAU
       -------------------------
Title: VP, Admin.
       -------------------------
Date:  12/31/02
       -------------------------
3050

3100

3100

3100

3100

3100

3100

3100

3000

3000

3100

3100

3050

3100

3100

3100

3100

3100

3100

3100

3000

3100

3000

3100

3100

3050

3100

STATE HWY 25

CO RD 7

N RD M

N RD K

CO RD 8

CO RD 3

COUNTY LINE RD

N RD N

N RD L

CO RD L

CO RD 5

CO RD 2

N RD P

CO RD 6

CO RD 4

STATE HWY 25

CO RD 7

N RD M

N RD K

CO RD 8

CO RD 3

COUNTY LINE RD

N RD N

N RD L

CO RD L

CO RD 5

CO RD 2

N RD P

CO RD 6

CO RD 4

OP25

OP25

OP25

OP25

OP25

Bear Cr

Well

41

68

41

69

41

70

41

71

41

72

41

73

41

74

41

75

41

76

41

77

41

78

41

79

41

67

41

80000mN

41

68

41

69

41

70

41

71

41

72

41

73

41

74

41

75

41

76

41

77

41

78

41

79

41

67000mN

41

80

2

92 2

93 295 296 297 298 299 3

00 301000m

E

2

92 293 2

94 295 296 297 299 300 2

91000mE 301

480 000FEET

510 000FEET

1 680000

1 710 000

FEET

FEET

40'

42'30"

40'

42'30"

20' 17'30"

20' 17'30" LG

LG

KG

KG

101°22'30"

101°22'30"

37°45' 37°45'

101°15'

101°15'

37°37'30" 37°37'30"

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

ULYSSES NE, KS

2010

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

ULYSSES NE QUADRANGLE

KANSAS

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

Zone 14S

Imagery.......................................................NAIP, July 2008

Roads..............National Transportation Dataset, 2005 - 2006

Names...............................................................GNIS, 2008

Hydrography.................National Hydrography Dataset, 2008

Contours............................National Elevation Dataset, 2006

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator,

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: Kansas Coordinate System of 1983

(south zone)

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

This map was produced to conform with version 0.5.10 of the

draft USGS Standards for 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Maps.

A metadata file associated with this product is also draft version 0.5.10

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0 1

MILES

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

×

Ù

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2010 MAGNETIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

1° 25 ́

25 MILS

6° 54 ́

123 MILS

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

14S

KG LG

3 00

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET

Ulysses

Ulysses NW Ulysses NE Hickok NW

Lakin SE

Ulysses SW

Lakin SW Deerfield

SW

Hickok

KANSAS
**Exhibit 15.1**

 

September 5, 2013

 

Securities and Exchange Commission

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

We were previously principal accountants forFarmacias Ahumada, S.A. and its subsidiaries (“FASA”) a Chilean wholly-owned significant subsidiary acquired by GrupoCasa Saba, S.A.B de C.V. (“GCS”) on October 3, 2010 and, under the date of January 13, 2012, we reported on the consolidatedfinancial statements of FASA as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and for the periods from October 3, 2010 (the date of acquisition)to December 31, 2010 and from October 3, 2009 to December 31, 2009, before the effects of the adjustments for the correction ofthe errors described in Note 4 to such financial statements. On April 29, 2011, we were dismissed. We have read GCS's statementsincluded under Item 16-F of its Form 20-F/A (Amendment No. 2) dated September 5, 2012, and we agree with such statements, exceptthat we are not in a position to agree or disagree with GCS’s statement that the change was approved by GCS’s Boardof Directors and at the General Annual Shareholders Meeting held on April 29, 2011.

 

Very truly yours,

 

KPMG Ltda.

 

/s/ Cristián Bastián E.

Senior Partner
1

Werner, Christopher

From: Lorang, Phil

Sent: Friday, March 25, 2016 1:21 PM

To: Szabo, Aaron

Cc: Werner, Christopher; Jones, Rhea; Beaver, Melinda; Long, Pam

Subject: Review under EO12866 and 13563: EPA NPRM -- Protection of Visibility: Amendments 

to Requirements for State Plans (RIN 2060-AS55)

Attachments: EO12866_Regional Haze_2060-AS55_Proposal_FRN_20160325 RLSO vs 20160121.docx

Aaron, 

Here is the RLSO comparison of the final NPRM Federal Register notice, with the comparison being to the first version 

provided to OMB by EPA. 

Phil Lorang, Senior Policy Advisor 

Air Quality Policy Division, OAQPS 

919-541-5463
#### Harry MINSKY v. The UNITED STATES of America.

No. 5985.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Nov. 6, 1936.

John Elliott Byrne and Lewis F. Jacobson, both of Chicago, 111., for appellant.

Michael Igoe, of Chicago, 111., for the United States.

Before EVANS and SPARKS, Circuit Judges, and BRIGGLE, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, and was argued by counsel.

On consideration whereof it is now here ordered and adjudged by this court that this appeal be, and the same is hereby, dismissed.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

_____________________________

No. 12-11592

Non-Argument Calendar

_____________________________

D. C. Docket No. 1:12-cv-00216-IPJ-RRA

TERRY DONNELL WATSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

WARDEN,

STATE OF ALABAMA,

ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF ALABAMA,

COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

RONALD CAVANAUGH, Medical Review Officer, individually and

in his official capacity acting “under color of state law,” et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Alabama

_________________________________________

(January 22, 2013)

Case: 12-11592 Date Filed: 01/22/2013 Page: 1 of 2 
Before MARCUS, KRAVITCH, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Terry Watson, an inmate at the Childersburg Community Work Center in

Alabama, appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his request for a preliminary

injunction to enjoin the current procedures and practices for inmate drug testing

conducted by the Alabama Department of Corrections (“DOC”) and the

implementation of DOC Administrative Regulation #440 (“AR 440"). The district

court did not abuse its discretion in denying the injunction. For background, see

Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 94 S. Ct. 2963, 2982-83, 41 L.Ed 2d 935

(1974). The public’s interest in the administration of a safe prison system, free of

drugs, is great. Besides, Watson failed to show that he would suffer an imminent,

irreparable injury (one not compensable through monetary damages) in the

absence of a preliminary injunction.

AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 12-11592 Date Filed: 01/22/2013 Page: 2 of 2
#### Ray PHILLIPS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. N-355.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Sept. 15, 1970.

Ray Phillips, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Thomas B. Calhoun, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the order of the *116lower court hereby appealed is affirmed. See Brown v. State, (Fla.App.1970) 232 So.2d 55; Brown v. State, Fla., 237 So.2d 129, 1970.

CARROLL, DONALD K, Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 on Form 10-Q of Varian Semiconductor Equipment Associates, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended December 28, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), the undersigned Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |                                                     
|----------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|Dated: February 1, 2008 |  | /s/ ROBERT J. HALLIDAY                              
|                        |  | Robert J. Halliday                                  
|                        |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2011-XXXX Directorate Identifier: 2011-NE-13-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update 

accordingly. If they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Inspection 0.5 $ 42.50 $0 $ 42.50 60,000 $2,550,000.0

0

Remove, Repair 

and Replace 2.0 $ 170.00 $0 $ 170.00 261 $44,370.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $2,594,370

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated 

Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain

for either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements 

for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: