alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Goodrich Corporation 

Aerostructures Group Ken Bryan 

850 Lagoon Drive Director of Sales - Asia 

Chula Vista, CA 91910 Aftermarket Services 

Tel: 619-691-2409 

Fax: 619-691-6195 

Ken.bryan@goodrich.com 

www.goodrich.com

March 13, 2012 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Alaska Airlines’ application for SAN-DCA, Docket No. DOT-OST-2012-0029. 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

Goodrich Aerostructures fully supports the application of Alaska Airlines for air service between San Diego 

and Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA). San Diego is the largest region without announced 

service to DCA. Additionally, due to the profound community of interest between San Diego and the 

nation’s capital, the region generates the largest passenger market demand without nonstop 

service to the convenient and close-in airport serving our nation’s capital. 

San Diego’s sheer market size to Washington coupled with the fact that San Diego – Dulles average 

airfares are the highest of west coast cities should qualify it for a pair of the limited slots available. The high 

airfare is exacerbated when factoring in taxi fares from Dulles to Washington’s city center that average 

about $60 each way. This means travelers between Washington’s city center and San Diego via Dulles 

can pay on average close to $400 one-way. 

There are also countless other San Diego-based and Washington-based businesses that are engaged in 

health science, telecommunications, and national defense that need quick and convenient access to 

Reagan National Airport. Goodrich Aerostructures has an immediate need for additional nonstop air 

service to our nation’s capital. Alaska Airlines service would add a needed nonstop option to a primary 

gateway to Washington, DC. Goodrich Aerostructures joins with the San Diego County Regional Airport 

Authority, the San Diego Regional Economic Development Corporation, the World Trade Center San 

Diego, and the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce in support of Alaska Airlines’ application for 

San Diego – Washington Reagan National slots. 

We thank the Department of Transportation for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced docket 

and we hope to hear of a favorable review of Alaska Airlines’ San Diego – DCA proposal soon. 

Yours sincerely, 

Ken Bryan 

Director of Sales 

Goodrich Aerostructures
From: "Eugene M. Trisko" <emtrisko@earthlink.net> 

To: Ellen Kurlansky/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Sam Napolitano/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, 

Peter Tsirigotis/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Rob Brenner/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: bbaugh@aflcio.org, bbanig@umwa.org, "Jerry O'Leary" 

<jerryo@uanet.org>, "Hunter, James L." <Jim_Hunter@IBEW.org>, 

bruce_burton@ibew.org, david_mullen@ibew.org, taylorm@tcunion.org, 

"Kloos, Ron" <kloosr@TCUnion.org>, smcbride@teamster.org, 

lfenhaus@bmwewash.org, ajacobs@boilermakers.org, 

cconroy@boilermakers.org, "Gary Ruffner" <gruffner@aflcio.org>, 

dkolbe@iwintl.org 

Date: 06/10/2011 02:21 PM 

Subject: PM Sample Analysis from June 8 Labor Meeting 

Ellen and all: 

Here is the memo handed out on behalf of the UMWA at the June 8 meeting 

with labor reps, with the detailed supporting tables. The memo is 

slightly revised to include the PM2.5 condensable findings for the 

sample groups. One unit in the sample of spray dryer units was 

removed because it did not have a spray dryer. 

The findings are basically the same as discussed at the meeting. 

Hope you will find this information helpful. We appreciate your timely 

and comprehensive responses to the five questions we posed previously. 

Best, 

Gene Trisko 

301 639 5238 cell 

This e-mail and any attachment(s) may contain confidential information 

subject to the attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine, and 

is not intended for the use of any party other than those addressed 

above. If you believe you have received this message by error, please 

destroy any copies and return the original by reply to 

emtrisko@earthlink.net.
# L_2005039EN.01003001.xml

| 11.2.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 39/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.2.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 39/30

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 226/2005

of 10 February 2005

fixing the maximum export refund for skimmed milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 582/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 31(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 582/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds for skimmed milk powder (2) provides for a permanent tender. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 582/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds for skimmed milk powder (2) provides for a permanent tender.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 8 February 2005. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 8 February 2005.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the permanent tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 582/2004, for the tendering period ending on 8 February 2005, the maximum amount of refund for the product and destinations referred to in Article 1(1) of that Regulation shall be 31,00 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 11 February 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 10 February 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 186/2004 (OJ L 29, 3.2.2004, p. 6).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 67.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 58.

3

---
#### In re ESTATE of John Henry ASHLEY, Deceased. Dorothy Ashley BRYANT, Appellant, v. Sharon Anita ASHLEY and Ann Ava Ashley, and Johnnie Mae Ashley, Appellees.

No. 71-56.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 30, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
# L_2005184EN.01004001.xml

| 15.7.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 184/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.7.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 184/40

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1128/2005

of 14 July 2005

laying down the reduction coefficient to be applied under the tariff quota for corn opened by Regulation (EC) No 958/2003

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 958/2003 of 3 June 2003, laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Decision 2003/286/EC as regards the concessions in the form of Community tariff quotas on certain cereal products originating in the Republic of Bulgaria and amending Regulation (EC) No 2809/2000 (2), and in particular Article 2(3),

Whereas:

| (1) | Regulation (EC) No 958/2003 opens an annual tariff quota of 96 000 t of corn for the 2005/2006 marketing year. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 958/2003 opens an annual tariff quota of 96 000 t of corn for the 2005/2006 marketing year.

| (2) | The quantities applied for on 11 July 2005, in accordance with Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 958/2003, exceed the quantities available. The extent to which licences may be issued should therefore be determined and a reduction coefficient laid down to be applied to the quantities applied for, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The quantities applied for on 11 July 2005, in accordance with Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 958/2003, exceed the quantities available. The extent to which licences may be issued should therefore be determined and a reduction coefficient laid down to be applied to the quantities applied for,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Each application for an import licence for quota ‘Bulgaria’ for corn lodged and forwarded to the Commission on 11 July 2005 in accordance with Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 958/2003 shall be accepted at a rate of 1,58507 % of the quantity applied for.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 15 July 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 14 July 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 136, 4.6.2003, p. 3. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1046/2005 (OJ L 172, 5.7.2005, p. 79).

2

---
CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Charles K. Barbo, President and Chief Executive Officer of Shurgard Storage Centers, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

- the Quarterly Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
- the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  March 13, 2003

/s/ Charles K. Barbo

Charles K. Barbo

President, Chief Executive Officer
SUPPLEMENT TO THE CURRENTLY EFFECTIVE PROSPECTUSES

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

                          DWS Latin America Equity Fund

The following information replaces similar disclosure in "The portfolio
managers" section of the prospectuses:

The following person handles the day-to-day management of the fund.



Terrence S. Gray, CFA
Managing Director of Deutsche Asset
Management and Lead Portfolio Manager of
the fund.
  o Joined Deutsche Asset Management in 1993 and the fund in 2006.
  o Portfolio manager for Global Emerging Markets Fund and other international
    products.
  o Previously, head of the Pacific Basin portfolio selection team and served
    as an Asian country and sector analyst before joining the Emerging Markets
    team.
  o BS, Boston College.








               Please Retain This Supplement for Future Reference



January 16, 2008
st-LAE


                                                                     [Logo]DWS
                                                                       SCUDDER
                                                           Deutsche Bank Group
#### William RUTHERFORD, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-960.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 9, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 13, 1977.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Karen Gottlieb, Asst. Public Defender, and Richard Levitt, Legal Intern, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Arthur Joel Berger, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Paul Mendelson, and Jose R. Rodriguez, Legal Interns, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See *Parkin v. State,*238 So.2d 817 (Fla.1970); *Greenfield v. State,*337 So.2d 1021 (Fla.2d DCA 1976), and *Johnson v. State,*338 So.2d 556 (Fla.Sd DCA 1976).
Disaster Closeout Checklist

Provide the following information for each DSR selected for an in depth review and organize as follows.

1)	Financial Records

a) 	Summarize final expenditures by fiscal year and Budget Object Code (BOC)	

b) 	Provide a print out from the financial system and show the details for each BOC shown

		i) 	Travel (dates)

		ii) 	Salary/Payroll (names, dates)

		iii) 	Vehicles/Equipment (type, size, dates)

		iv) 	Contracts (vendor, dates)

		v) 	Materials/Supplies (description, dates)

2)	Preconstruction	

	a)	NEPA

		i)	Documentation showing coordination with FLH

		ii)	CE determination and Checklist for Permanent Repairs

		iii)	EA and Decision Notice or EIS and Record of Decision

	b)	Design

		i)	Hydraulic, Geotechnical, structural, pavement recommendations

		ii)	Quantity and unit price justification

		iii)	Permits

3)	Contracts - Preconstruction and Construction

	a)	Solicitation - Pre-award documents, Bids, Negotiations, Quotes

	b)	Award Documents - Amount, Date, Vendor, Accounting information

c)	Bid Schedule/Plans/Specifications	

d)	Contract Administration

	i)	Notice to proceed, Work Orders, Final Inspection

	ii)	Daily Diaries 

	iii)	Invoices/Payments 

	iv)	Quantity measurements and/or truck/weigh tickets 

e)	Contract Modifications - 

	i)	Supporting documentation, and	price determination 

	ii)	Accounting information

f)	Contract Closeout	

	i)	Final Acceptance and Payment

	ii)	Contract Release

4)	Photos of completed project and during construction if available.
# L_2005165EN.01000701.xml

| 25.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 165/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 165/7

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 975/2005

of 24 June 2005

determining the extent to which applications lodged in June 2005 for import licences under the regime provided for by tariff quotas for certain products in the pigmeat sector for the period 1 July to 30 September 2005 can be accepted

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1458/2003 of 18 August 2003 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas for certain products in the pigmeat sector (1), and in particular Article 5(6) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | The applications for import licences lodged for the third quarter of 2005 are for quantities less than the quantities available and can therefore be met in full. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The applications for import licences lodged for the third quarter of 2005 are for quantities less than the quantities available and can therefore be met in full.

| (2) | The surplus to be added to the quantity available for the following period should be determined, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The surplus to be added to the quantity available for the following period should be determined,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   Applications for import licences for the period 1 July to 30 September 2005 submitted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1458/2003 shall be met as referred to in Annex I.

2.   For the period 1 October to 31 December 2005, applications may be lodged pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1458/2003 for import licences for a total quantity as referred to in Annex II.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 24 June 2005.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 208, 19.8.2003, p. 3. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 341/2005 (OJ L 53, 26.2.2005, p. 28).

1

---

ANNEX I

| Group | Percentage of acceptance of import licences submitted for the period 1 July to 30 September 2005 |
| --- | --- |
| G2 | 100 |
| G3 | 100 |
| G4 | 100 |
| G5 | 100 |
| G6 | 100 |
| G7 | 100 |

Group

Percentage of acceptance of import licences submitted for the period 1 July to 30 September 2005

G2

100

G3

100

G4

100

G5

100

G6

100

G7

100

---

ANNEX II

| (t) |
| --- |
| Group No | Total quantity available for the period 1 October to 31 December 2005 |
| G2 | 15 875,0 |
| G3 | 2 500,0 |
| G4 | 1 500,0 |
| G5 | 3 050,0 |
| G6 | 7 500,0 |
| G7 | 2 750,0 |

(t)

Group No

Total quantity available for the period 1 October to 31 December 2005

G2

15 875,0

G3

2 500,0

G4

1 500,0

G5

3 050,0

G6

7 500,0

G7

2 750,0

---
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 11-601 

________________________________________________________________________ 

CRISIS MANAGEMENT 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and the EUROPEAN UNION 

Signed at Washington May 17, 2011 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
EUROPEAN UNION 

Crisis Management 

 Agreement signed at Washington May 17, 2011; 

 Entered into force June 1, 2011.
**Exhibit 31.1**

** **

**Certification Pursuant to Section 240.13a-14 or240.15d-14of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended**
| I, Henry E. Blair,  certify that: |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
|-----------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                              |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
| 1.                                | I have reviewed this  Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Dyax Corp.; 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:       May 6,  2005 |   |               |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------|--------|
|                                                   |   | /s/ Henry E. Blair |   |
|                                                   |   |               |   | Henry E. Blair |
|                                                   |   |               |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
**Transcript: "Risk Factors for P.A.D."**

Narrator: Certain conditions and habits increase your risk of developing P.A.D. 

Andrew: I smoked like a house afire for many years.

Rita: I did not know that my blood pressure being high could be a contributing factor to P.A.D.

Mike: I have a heart condition and the doctor says I might have had a mild heart attack at one point.

Narrator: Andrew, Mike, and Rita all had risk factors that made P.A.D. more likely. And your chances of getting P.A.D. may be increased if you are over the age of 50, especially if you're African American; if you smoke or you used to smoke; if you have diabetes, high blood pressure, or high cholesterol; if you have vascular disease or you've had a heart attack or stroke; or if you have a history of these in your family. If all this is starting to make you think "that could be me or someone I love," talk to your health care provider, even if you don't have symptoms.
#### AIR COMPONENTS CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, and Warren A. Bishop, individually, Appellants, v. POWER FLO PRODUCTS, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 70-1157.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 17, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
255 La. 483

#### Katie N. BORDELON, Provisional Curatrix, for and on Behalf of Joseph C. (J. C.) Bordelon v. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY et al.

No. 50377.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 27, 1970.

In re: Katie N. Bordelon, Provisional Curatrix, for and on behalf of Joseph C. (J. C.) Bordelon, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of St. Landry. 229 So.2d 761.

Writ refused. Under the facts found by the Court of Appeal the result is correct.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3570 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 500 West Pike Street 

in Clarksburg, West Virginia, as the ‘‘Irene M. Keeley United States 

Courthouse’’, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 10, 2024 

Mrs. CAPITO (for herself and Mr. MANCHIN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

A BILL 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 500 

West Pike Street in Clarksburg, West Virginia, as the 

‘‘Irene M. Keeley United States Courthouse’’, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. IRENE M. KEELEY UNITED STATES COURT4 HOUSE. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The United States courthouse 

6 located at 500 West Pike Street in Clarksburg, West Vir7 ginia, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Irene M. 

8 Keeley United States Courthouse’’. 

2 

•S 3570 IS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the United States courthouse referred to in sub4 section (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Irene 

5 M. Keeley United States Courthouse’’. 

Æ
#### John BLANKSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-813.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 18, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.