alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.10 AGREEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH PERSONAL USE



 






Exhibit 10.10




Effective February 28, 2006




SYNOVUS FINANCIAL CORP./TOTAL SYSTEM SERVICES, INC.

Personal Use of Company Aircraft



Key Executives are each allowed a maximum number of hours of personal use of company aircraft each
calendar year as set forth below.



Personal use of company aircraft by Key Executives includes non-business flights upon which the Key
Executive and his or her non-business guests are the only passengers aboard the aircraft and also
includes non-business flights upon which the Key Executive is not aboard the aircraft but his or
her non-business guests are the only passengers aboard the aircraft. Personal use must be
scheduled when aircraft are not scheduled for business use.



Personal use of company aircraft is calculated using “block hours,” as opposed to “flight hours,”
and includes “deadhead legs.”



For purposes of calculating the number of hours of personal use of company aircraft, each block
hour of turbo-prop usage shall equal “one hour of personal usage” and each block hour of jet usage
shall equal “five hours of personal usage.” Usage of less than whole hours shall be recorded
proportionately. De minimis overages may be approved by Sanders Griffith to reflect unforeseen
delays (such as traffic and weather delays) and other scheduling issues.



Personal use of company aircraft by Key Executives and their non-business guests is tracked and the
value reported for tax purposes for the Key Executive.



The following Executives are designated as eligible for the indicated number of hours of personal
use of company aircraft:




Synovus



Jim Blanchard—Synovus Chairman—30 hours of turbo-prop use/6 hours of jet use



Richard Anthony—Synovus President and CEO-30 hours of turbo-prop use/6 hours of jet use



Sanders Griffith—Synovus General Counsel—20 hours of turbo-prop use/4 hours of jet use



Lee Lee James—Synovus Vice Chairman—20 hours of turbo-prop use/ 4 hours of jet use



Fred Green—Synovus Vice Chairman—20 hours of turbo-prop use/4 hours of jet use



Tommy
Prescott—Synovus CFO—20 hours of turbo-prop use/4 hours of jet use




 









 








TSYS



Phil Tomlinson—TSYS Chairman and CEO—30 hours of turbo-prop use/6 hours of jet use



Rick Ussery—Consulting Agreement (expires on 6/30/06)—20 hours of turbo-prop use/4 hours of jet use



Troy Woods—TSYS President and COO—30 hours of turbo-prop use/6 hours of jet use



Bill
Pruett—Senior Executive Vice President—20 hours of turbo-prop use/4 hours of jet use



Ken
Tye—Senior Executive Vice President and CIO—20 hours of turbo-prop use/4 hours of jet use



Jim
Lipham—Senior Executive Vice President and CFO—20 hours of turbo-prop use/4 hours of jet use
#### Jess BELL, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Nov. 5, 1954.

Fritz Krueger, Somerset, for appellant.

J. D. Buckman, Jr., Atty. Gen.,.Wm. F. Simpson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM. .

We are affirming the judgment in this case for a fine of $100 and 30 days in jail because we think there was ample evidence to submit the case to the jury on the offense charged against the appellant. • ■

The motion ‘for an appeal is overruled and the judgment is affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP01-41-000]

Take notice that on October 11, 2000, Young Gas Storage Company, Ltd., (Young) filed in compliance with Order No. 587-L.

Young states that it is a natural gas storage facility and has no imbalance provisions. Young states that pursuant to Order Granting Clarification, issued September 28, 2000 in Docket No. RM96-1-016, Young is not required to implement imbalance trading on its system.

                    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance                           ( print page 63243)                        with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).                

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-27099  Filed 10-20-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### EAKINS v. STATE.

No. 23330.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 10, 1946.

*692Temple Dickson, of Sweetwater, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

. The appeal is from a conviction for the offense of possessing whisky in a dry area for the purpose of sale. The punishment was fixed at a fine of $200 and thirty days in jail.

The record is brought forward without bills of exceptions or a statement of facts. The transcript does not contain any notice of appeal, consequently we have no jurisdiction of the case.

The appeal is dismissed.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3138 

To provide that certain emission limits for hydrogen chloride and sulfur 

dioxide shall not apply to certain existing electric utility steam generating 

units that use circulating fluidized bed technology to convert coal refuse 

into energy. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 19, 2013 

Mr. ROTHFUS (for himself, Mr. DENT, Mr. BARLETTA, and Mr. THOMPSON

of Pennsylvania) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide that certain emission limits for hydrogen chloride 

and sulfur dioxide shall not apply to certain existing 

electric utility steam generating units that use circulating 

fluidized bed technology to convert coal refuse into energy. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Satisfying Energy 

5 Needs and Saving the Environment Act of 2013’’ or the 

6 ‘‘SENSE Act of 2013’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3138 IH

1 SEC. 2. INAPPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN EMISSION LIMITS 

2 FOR ELECTRIC UTILITY STEAM GENERATING 

3 UNITS THAT CONVERT COAL REFUSE INTO 

4 ENERGY. 

5 (a) INAPPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN EMISSION LIMITS

6 FOR CERTAIN EGUS.—The emission limits for hydrogen 

7 chloride and sulfur dioxide in table 2 to subpart UUUUU 

8 of part 63 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, enti9 tled ‘‘Emission Limits for Existing EGUs’’, shall not 

10 apply to an electric utility steam generating unit in the 

11 subcategory ‘‘Coal-fired unit not low rank virgin coal’’ if 

12 such electric utility steam generating unit— 

13 (1) is in operation as of the date of enactment 

14 of this Act; 

15 (2) utilizes circulating fluidized bed technology 

16 to convert coal refuse into energy; and 

17 (3)(A) derives at least 75 percent of its heat 

18 input from coal refuse; or 

19 (B) is a qualifying facility. 

20 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

21 (1) COAL REFUSE.—The term ‘‘coal refuse’’ 

22 means any byproduct of coal mining, physical coal 

23 cleaning, or coal preparation operations, that con24 tains coal, matrix material, clay, and other organic 

25 and inorganic material. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3138 IH

1 (2) QUALIFYING COGENERATION FACILITY.— 

2 The term ‘‘qualifying cogeneration facility’’ has the 

3 meaning given such term in section 3 of the Federal 

4 Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796). 

5 (3) QUALIFYING FACILITY.—The term ‘‘quali6 fying facility’’ means— 

7 (A) a qualifying small power production fa8 cility; or 

9 (B) a qualifying cogeneration facility. 

10 (4) QUALIFYING SMALL POWER PRODUCTION

11 FACILITY.—The term ‘‘qualifying small power pro12 duction facility’’ has the meaning given such term in 

13 section 3 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796). 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
10QSB REPORT FOR THE QUARTER AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH 10QSB.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000095898
<NAME> SWISS CHALET , INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                       1,525,662
<SECURITIES>                                   869,906
<RECEIVABLES>                                  547,307
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     48,894
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,024,938
<PP&E>                                       6,315,946
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,923,107
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,527,129
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          579,882
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       700,581
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,143,566
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,527,129
<SALES>                                      1,939,854
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,218,980
<CGS>                                           35,122
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   35,122
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,754,703
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                429,155
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            429,155
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   429,155
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.31
        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP01-57-000]

Take notice that on October 17, 2000, MIGC, Inc. (MIGC) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheets which are proposed to be made effective as of November 1, 2000:

Fifth Revised Sheet No. 89

First Revised Title Sheet

MIGC states that this filing is being submitted for general “housekeeping” purposes, specifically, to include in its tariff references to MIGC's Internet website for the name of a contact person familiar with the MIGC tariff and for current information concerning operating personnel and facilities shared by the pipeline and its marketing affiliate. The filing also includes a copy of MIGC's current tariff provisions permitting shipper imbalance trading and netting, to evidence the company's compliance with FERC Order No. 587-L.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-27492  Filed 10-25-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

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 Annual Report of CSK Auto Corporation (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the year ending February 2, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Don W. Watson, hereby
certify, in my capacity as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, for purposes
of 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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 result of operations of the Company.

/s/ Don W. Watson

Don W. Watson
Chief Financial Officer
May 5, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to CSK Auto Corporation and will be retained by CSK Auto Corporation
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Kevin_Bromberg_to_Melanie_King_4-19-12.txt From: "Bromberg, Kevin L." <kevin.bromberg@sba.gov> To: Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>, JohnB

Chamberlin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 04/19/2012 04:48 PM Subject: RE: RICE Reconsideration

I didn’t want to bother Cortney with this type of question. Now everyone can have these handy

tables. Thx

Hi Cortney!

From: Melanie King [mailto:King.Melanie@epamail.epa.gov] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 4:44 PM To: Bromberg, Kevin L. Cc: RobertJ Wayland; Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov; JohnB Chamberlin Subject: Re: RICE Reconsideration

Hi, EPA Region 1 has a good website that has some handy tables, which are taken from a presentation I

did. Links to both are below. Also, I believe since the rule it at OMB now for interagency review, it would be a good idea if you could route questions through Cortney.

http://www.epa.gov/region1/rice/

http://www.epa.gov/apti/video/pdfs/RICENESHAP-NETIwebinar12-7-11.pdf

Melanie King Energy Strategies Group Sector Policies and Programs Division Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Mail Code D243-01

RTP, NC 27711 Phone: (919) 541-2469 Fax: (919) 541-5450 king.melanie@epa.gov

"Bromberg, Kevin L." ---04/19/2012 04:26:16 PM---Hi Melanie - Is there a good table

on the EPA website listing the current SI and CI

From: "Bromberg, Kevin L." <kevin.bromberg@sba.gov> To: Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 04/19/2012 04:26 PM Subject: RICE Reconsideration

Hi Melanie - Is there a good table on the EPA website listing the current SI and CI RICE requirements by engine size, and status (existing, new)? I’m reviewing the new proposal. Hope all is

well.

Kevin
Page 1Kevin_Bromberg_to_Melanie_King_4-19-12.txt Kevin Bromberg | Assistant Chief Counsel for Environmental Policy | SBA Office of Advocacy | 409 3rd St. SW, Washington, DC 20416 | p 202/205-6964 | f 202/481-2963 | kevin.bromberg@sba.gov | website | listserv | blog | Facebook | twitter |

Page 2
AFS

- 13

- 073

- E January 11, 2013

Exemption No. 4298N Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2003

- 14245

Mr. Paul W. Railsback Director of Operations

Air lines for America, Inc. 1301 Pennsyl vania Avenue, NW. , Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004

- 1707

Dear Mr. Railsback :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 4298

, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and list s the conditions

and limitations

.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated November 13 , 20 1 2 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Air Transport Association of America, Inc. (ATA A ) dba Airlines for America (A4A)

, for an extension of Exemption No. 4298

, as amended. Th e exemption from §§ 121.311(f) and 121.391(d) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows A 4 A member airlines and similarly situated certificate holders operating under part 121 to continue to locate a required flight attendant at the mid

- cabin flight attendant station during takeoff and landing on Boeing 767 airplanes.

In your petition, you indicate there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting th e original exemption.

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

in the Federal Register beca use the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition w ould be detrimental to A 4 A

.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 4298 , as amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition. All conditions and limitations of Exemption

No. 4298, as amended, remain the same.

Conditions and Limitations

1. If operations with four required flight attendants are conducted, one flight attendant must be located adjacent to a forward Type A exit, two flight attendants must be located adjacent to the two aft Type A exits, and one flight attendant may be located in

the mid

- cabin cross aisle area between the two non

- floor level Type III exits.

2. If operations with five required flight attendants are conducted, two flight attendants must be located adjacent to the two forward Type A exits, two flight attendants must be located adjacent to the two aft Type A exits, and one flight attendant may be located

in the mid

- cabin cross aisle between the two non

- floor level Type III exits.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 4298, as amended, to
March 31, 20 1 5

, unless so oner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John M. Allen Director, Flight Standards Service
----

|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant as of and for the periods presented in the Report. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/    | Lynda J. Nahra                                       |   |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Lynda J. Nahra                                       |
|   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer                |
|   |   |                                                 |
|   | /s/    | Charles G. Baltuskonis                               |   |
|   |   | Charles G. Baltuskonis                               |
|   |   | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

----
#### INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS et al., Appellants, v. RED BALL MOTOR FREIGHT, Inc., et al., Appellees.

No. 4971.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.

Nov. 25, 1953.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 27, 1954.

Second Rehearing Denied Feb. 17, 1954.

L. N. D. Wells, Jr., and Mullinax & Wells, Dallas, for appellants.

Sam R. Sayers and' Rawlins, Sayers, Scurlock & Eidsori, Ft. Worth, John B. Stigall, Jr., Dallas, for appellees.

McGILL, Justice.

This is a companion case to cause No. 4969, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Red Arrow Freight Lines, Inc., Tex.Civ.App., 264 S.W.2d 787. Our disposition of cause No. 4969 is controlling in this case and for this reason the order of the trial court is affirmed.

On Appellants’ Motion for Rehearing.

This is a companion case to cause No. 4969, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Red Arrow Freight Lines, Inc., Tex.Civ.App., 264 S.W.2d 787. Our disposition of the motion for a rehearing in cause No. *4969,*with opinion, is controlling, hence appellants’ motion for a.rehearing in this case is likewise overruled.
Unassociated Document


    EXHIBIT
      10.23(b)

    


    Salary
      and Bonus Information for Executive Officers

    


    
      	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
              Name:

            	
              Jan
                W. Clark

            	 	
              John
                G. Warner

            	 	
              Michael
                T. Storm

            	 	
              Michael
                L. Derr

            
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
              Salary
                Effective January1, 2005

            	
              $178,500

            	 	
              $161,700

            	 	
              $117,600

            	 	
              $100,800

            
	
              Bonus
                paid in 2005:

            	
              $7,500

            	 	
              $7,500

            	 	
              $7,500

            	 	
              $7,500

            
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 


    

    


    Note:
      Salary amounts above do not include potential payments in lieu of allowed
      paid-days-off (vacation, sick and personal days off) not utilized.