alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 28.2

                        [ERNST & YOUNG LLP LETTERHEAD]


                        Independent Accountants' Report



CoreStates Bank, N.A.
The First National Bank of Chicago
Moody's Investor Service
Standard & Poor's Corporation
Fitch Investor Services, L.P.

We have examined management's assertion included in the accompanying report
titled Report of Management that, during the year ended December 31, 1996,
CoreStates Bank, N.A. ("CoreStates") complied with the minimum servicing
standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform
Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers (USAP) that are applicable to
home equity loans serviced by CoreStates pursuant to the respective Pooling and
Servicing Agreements for the CoreStates Home Equity Trust Series 1993-1, 1993-2,
1994-1, 1994-2, 1995-1, and 1996-1.  Management has represented to us that the
minimum servicing standards related to mortgagor escrow accounts and adjustable
rate mortgages, including: I.4., III.3., III.4., V.2., V.3., V.4. are not
applicable to home equity loans.  Management is responsible for the company's
compliance with those requirements.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion
on management's assertion about CoreStates' compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about CoreStates' compliance with those
requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in
the circumstances.  We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legal determination on
CoreStates' compliance with specified requirements.

In our opinion, management's assertion that CoreStates complied with the
aforementioned requirements during the year ended December 31, 1996 is fairly
stated, in all material respects.


                                        ERNST & YOUNG LLP



January 22, 1997
#### Liberty Frock Company, Inc., Appellant, vs. Robbins and another, Respondents.

For the appellant: *W. G. Haddow*of Ellsworth.

For the respondents: *Knowles Sr Doolittle*of River Falls.

*By the Court.*

— Judgment affirmed.
#### Tegen, Appellant, vs. Wiley, Respondent.

For the appellant: *L. J.*Fellens'of Fond du Lac.

For the respondent: *Bouck, Hilton, Kluwin & Dempsey*of Oshkosh.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
Responses to AEPCO's Questions

Colleen McKaughan to: mfreeark 08/20/2012 08:37 AM

Cc: Thomas Webb, Francisco Donez, Margaret Alkon, Larry Sorrels

Hi, Michelle,

Here are the responses to the questions that you submitted last week (August 14).

1. Annual Reports – What type of annual reports is EPA looking for – Arizona Corporation Commission 

Filings, Financials or our Companies Annual Report?

At a minimum, the most recent annual report for AEPCO, if this includes 

financial data for the last fiscal year and operating data.

2. Internal projections as to future performance – Can EPA please clarify what this is referring to? Financial 

forecasts, load forecasts?

This question pertains to financial projections for AEPCO, prepared by or for 

the company. These projections can include those that have been filed with the 

Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC). 

3. Other internal records that document available equity and debt for AEPCO’s operations. – Again 

clarification requested as to what other documents EPA might be considering in this request. Balance 

Sheet, most Recent Financial Statement?

For our analysis, EPA is seeking the most recent financial statement that has 

current and projected estimates of available equity and debt to the firm for 

capital investment. This financial statement may be part of a filing with the 

ACC.

Please let us know if you need further clarification. Thanks for coming out to the public hearing last week.

Colleen W. McKaughan

Associate Director, Air Division

USEPA, Region 9

(520) 498-0118
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 123 

To prevent a taxpayer bailout of health insurance issuers. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 8, 2015 

Mr. RUBIO (for himself, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. LEE, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. 

PAUL, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. ROUNDS, and Mr. VITTER) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To prevent a taxpayer bailout of health insurance issuers. 

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 ‘‘Obamacare Taxpayer 

5 Bailout Prevention Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PREVENTION OF BAILOUT OF HEALTH INSURANCE 

7 ISSUERS. 

8 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is 

9 amended by striking section 1342 (42 U.S.C. 18062). 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2235 

To improve air travel for passengers, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 28, 2017 

Ms. JUDY CHU of California introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To improve air travel for passengers, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Saving All Flyers from 

5 Ejection and Securing Everyone’s Access to Travel Act’’ 

6 or the ‘‘SAFE SEAT Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. AIR TRAVEL IMPROVEMENTS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Transportation 

9 shall issue or revise regulations to ensure that— 

10 (1) a passenger, after boarding an aircraft for 

11 a flight, is not subjected to the use of force or involVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:32 May 04, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2235.IH H2235

lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2235 IH

1 untary removal unless directly necessary for safety 

2 or security; 

3 (2) air carriers resolve all issues relating to 

4 overbooking of a flight prior to beginning boarding 

5 for that flight; and 

6 (3) air carriers, before an individual is denied 

7 boarding involuntarily with respect to a flight, make 

8 a compensation offer— 

9 (A) to any individual willing to voluntarily 

10 forgo boarding for that flight; and 

11 (B) in an amount that is at least the max12 imum compensation amount required under 

13 Federal regulations for passengers denied 

14 boarding involuntarily. 

15 (b) AIR CARRIER DEFINED.—In this section, the 

16 term ‘‘air carrier’’ has the meaning given that term in sec17 tion 40102(a) of title 49, United States Code. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
## TOW N O FWES T YELLOWSTON E 

# MONTAN A

Marc h 6 , 201 2 ARTMEN T O F iSPQRTATlO M

- 1 OpFPATiO^i R 

### H t b 

### P h 2 1 Denni s J . DeVany , Chie f Essential Ai r

Servic e Division , X-5 3 Offic e o f Aviatio n Analysi s 120 0 New Jerse y Ave . S E Washingto n D C 2059 0 Subject : Wes t

Yellowstone , Montan aEssentia l Ai r Servic e recommendation s Dea r Mr . DeVany , Than k yo u for th e opportunity t o revie w th e proposal s submitte db y SkyWes t Airline s an dSilve r

Airway s t o provid e essentia l ai r servic e a t Wes t Yellowstone . Th e Tow n o f Wes t Yellowston e support s th e proposa l submitte db y SkyWes t Airline s for

th e month s o f June , July , Augus t

an dSeptembe r

i n 2012 . Th e Tow n ha s enjoye darelationshi p with SkyWes t Airline s sinc e 198 7 an dappreciate s th e dependabl e an dimportan t servic e th e airlin e ha s provide dt o Wes t Yellowston e an d th e surroundin g area . SkyWes t ha s demonstrate dit s willingnes s t o wor k wit h ou r community b y alterin g it s flight schedul e to bette r

serv e visitor s t o Wes t

Yellowstone . In addition , SkyWes t

i s well-establishe di n th e market , provide s goo dconnectivity t o citie s acros s th e country , an dflies large r aircraf t than thei r

competitio n propose s to fly. Th e Tow n o f Wes t Yellowston e i s lookin g forwardt o th e opportunity t o fiirther develo p it s relationshi p with SkyWest . Thank yo u for th e opportunity to commen t o n thes e proposal s an dfo r you r consideratio n whe n makin g arecommendatio n t o th e Assistan t Secretary . Sincerely , 

# -j-^ ' Jerry Johnso n Mayo r 

## D , ci^i-—- -

copies : Debbi e Alke , MD T Aeronautic s Divisio n Do n DeGraw , Wes t

Yellowston e Airport ^^t5TY«t ^ ---==-^0 .

P.O . Bo x 157 0 Wes t

Yellowstone , Montan a5975 8 (406)646-779 5 Fa x (406 ) 646-751 1
,Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05112227 

I tJI" ;)tbltt I 

_.i.s-r--NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

I 11111111111111111111111111Hllll\1111111111111 lllll\11\II IIUII\ 14 000236170 

March 6, 1969 

MEMORANDUM FOR DIAXX 

SUBJECT: Administrative Practices 

This responds to your TCS-657124-69, dated March 4, 1969. 

We certainly want to respect your desire to have communications addressed to DIAXX, rather than an individual within DIAXX, 

when communications deal with a "new field of endeavor." If you 

have any mail on hand now,~-~ which you would like readdressed, please send it over and we'll make the change right 

away. 

Oav-ePAULE. WORTHMAN 

Colonel, USAF 

Deputy Director 

NRG Staff 

lflr If Tlr 11111111 II f 1111111111111111111111111111111111111 

s 

I HANDLE VIA 

'TAlENT -KEYHOLE CONTROL NO T £S 3 7 5 7 3 - 6 9 

coPv V or_-,---_coPtEs 

CONTROL SYSTEM 

TOP SECRET EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING 

DOD DIRECTIVE 5200,tO DOES NOT APPLY 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05112227 
~ -------- NANUL.t::. VIA ' '' ,,_ 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05112227 TALENT-KEYHOLE (,..AA-/,tA,'\ 

--uLVI \II-•~ 

SUBJECT: 

TO: 

DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20301 

Administrative Practices 

Brigadier General Russell A. Berg, USAF 

Director, NRO ,?5 Staff 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY 

4 MAR 1969 

1. It has been noted recently that on occasion correspondence 

intended for this office is addressed to specific individuals 

rather than the organization. This may be an accepted and 

expeditious approach when pursuing details of an on-going effort 

(program, study, etc.). If, on the other hand, a new field of 

endeavor is broached, which may require collaboration from 

agencies within DIAXX as well as outside it (but still in DIA), 

a more convenient manner of addressing the subject would be to 

the office -- DIAXX. 

2. Your assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated. 

If further amplification is desired, I shall be available for 

discussion at your convenience. 

FOR THE DIR.ECTOR 

Colonel, USAF 

Chief, Special Activities Office 

Tinr rff 1mn 11111111 11111r11111111111111111111111111J111_11_ __ 

s 

SECRET 

HANDLE v,A -11 9 o 3-o.l/-o x3 

TALENT-KEYHOLE 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONLY 

TCS-eH'i11L2, 4 ..m6 9 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05112227
# C_2005106EN.01004001.xml

| 30.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 106/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/40

---

Action brought on 21 February 2005 by GAEC SALAT against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-89/05)

(2005/C 106/79)

Language of the case: French

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 21 February 2005 by GAEC SALAT, with its registered office in Cussac (France), represented by F. Delpeuch, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| 1. | Hold that the refusal of the European Commission to rule on the complaint lodged by GAEC SALAT on 15 October 2004 and registered on 26 October 2004 under No 0411325 was unlawful. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Hold that the refusal of the European Commission to rule on the complaint lodged by GAEC SALAT on 15 October 2004 and registered on 26 October 2004 under No 0411325 was unlawful.

| 2. | draw the legal consequences following therefrom. |
| --- | --- |

2.

draw the legal consequences following therefrom.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In this case, the applicant lodged a complaint with the Commission concerning the amendment of the specification of the designation of origin ‘SALERS’ by Commission Regulation (EC) No 828/2003 of 14 May 2003 amending the specification of 16 names appearing in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 on the registration of geographical indications and designations of origin under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92. That designation of origin had already been registered as such by virtue of Regulation (EC) No 1107/96.

The applicant argues that such amendment of the specification constitutes an infringement of general legal principles, and in particular of the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination in relation to the designations of origin Salers cheese and Laguiole cheese.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

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

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           7,632
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,293
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,606
<PP&E>                                         546,707
<DEPRECIATION>                                (17,139)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 551,256
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,022
<BONDS>                                        155,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           217
<OTHER-SE>                                     331,760
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   551,256
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                19,572
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,146
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,280
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,672)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (13,105)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,672)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.26)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 11

                                    KSW, INC.

                        STATEMENTS REGARDING COMPUTATION
                           OF INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                            Three Months      Three Months       Six Months        Six Months
                                               Ended             Ended              Ended             Ended
                                            June 30, 2005     June 30, 2004      June 30, 2005     June 30, 2004
                                            -------------     -------------      -------------     -------------
<S>                                     <C>                 <C>               <C>               <C>
Net income (loss)                            $  298,000        $  (51,000)        $  453,000       $ (695,000)
                                             ===========       ===========        ===========      ===========

Income (loss) Per Share - Basic
-------------------------------
Weighted average shares outstanding
during the period                             5,470,311         5,470,311          5,470,311        5,470,311
                                             ===========       ===========        ===========      ===========


Income (Loss) per common share -
Basic                                        $      .05        $     (.01)        $      .08        $    (.13)
                                             ===========       ===========        ===========      ===========

Loss Per Share - Diluted
------------------------
Weighted average shares outstanding
during the period                             5,470,311         5,470,311          5,470,311        5,470,311


Effect of stock options dilution                      0                 0                  0                0
                                             -----------       -----------        -----------      -----------


Total shares outstanding for
purposes of calculating diluted
earnings                                      5,470,311         5,470,311          5,470,311        5,470,311
                                             ===========       ===========        ===========      ===========


Income (loss) per common and common
equivalent share-Diluted                     $      .05        $     (.01)        $      .08       $     (.13)
                                             ===========       ===========        ===========      ===========
</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors
Onyx Software Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in registration statements (Nos.
333-72235, 333-55414, 333-63214, and 333-115854) on Form S-8 and registration
statements (Nos. 333-50428, 333-103230, 333-105769 and 333-115853) on Form S-3
of Onyx Software Corporation of our reports dated March 23, 2005, with respect
to the consolidated balance sheets of Onyx Software Corporation and subsidiaries
as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, shareholders' equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each
of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004 and the related
financial statement schedule, management's assessment of the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004 and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2004 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2004, which reports appear in the December 31, 2004 annual report
on Form 10-K of Onyx Software Corporation.


/s/ KPMG LLP

Seattle, Washington
March 23, 2005
#### Davis and another, Executors, Respondents, vs. Joyce, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Frawley & Stolts,*attorneys, and *W. H. Frawley, Jr.,*of counsel, all of Eau Claire.

For the respondents: *Bundy, Beach & Holland*of Eau Claire.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
#### Andersen, as Special Administrator, Respondent, vs. Beck, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Bttndy, Beach & Holland*of Eau Claire.

For the respondent: *Varnum & Varnum*of Hudson and *Edwin C. Brown*of Minneapolis, Minnesota.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
MANAGEMENT'S REPORT ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERNAL
CONTROL STRUCTURE RELATIVE TO THE SERVICING OF
AUTOMOBILE LOAN RECEIVABLES


The management of the Bank is responsible for establishing and maintaining 
the internal control structure.  In fulfilling this responsibility, 
estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected 
benefits and related costs of control procedures.  The objectives of an 
internal control structure are to provide management with reasonable, but 
not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from 
unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in 
accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit 
the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally 
accepted accounting principles.

We have performed an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Bank's 
internal control structure based on the criteria established in Internal 
Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring 
Organizations of the Treadway Commission ("COSO") relative to the servicing 
of automobile loan receivables owned by Chevy Chase Auto Receivables Trusts
Series 1995-1, 1995-2, 1996-1, 1996-2, 1997-1, 1997-2, 1997-3 and 1997-4 
(collectively referred to as the "Trusts" herein) as of September 30, 1998, 
and we have determined that the Bank maintained an effective internal 
control structure over financial reporting relative to the servicing of 
automobile loan receivables owned by the Trusts as of September 30, 1998.

However, there are inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any internal
control structure, including the possibility of human error and the 
circumvention or overriding of controls.  Accordingly, even an effective 
internal control structure can provide only reasonable assurance with 
respect to reliability of financial statements and safeguarding and 
management of assets.  Furthermore, the effectiveness of any internal 
control structure can change with changes in circumstances.



                                     					                                    
Kevin B. Cashen			    				Larry C. Cain	
Senior Vice President					Senior Vice President



                                     					                                    
George P. Clancy, Jr.	  			Stephen R. Halpin, Jr.
Executive Vice President			Executive Vice President and
                          	Chief Financial Officer

November 18, 1998
# C_2005019EN.01000901.xml

| 22.1.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/9

---

ORDER OF THE COURT

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 29 October 2004

in Case C-360/02 P: Carlo Ripa di Meana v European Parliament (1)

1

(Appeal - Former member of the European Parliament - Provisional retirement pension scheme - Suspension of payment of the pension following the election of that member as a regional councillor - Action for annulment - Confirmatory act - Inadmissibility - Appeal manifestly unfounded)

(2005/C 19/17)

Language of the case: Italian

In Case C-360/02 P: appeal under Article 49 of the EC Statute of the Court of Justice, brought on 2 October 2002, Carlo Ripa di Meana, former member of the European Parliament, residing in Montecastello di Vibio (Italy) (lawyers: W. Viscardini and G. Donà), the other party to the proceedings being: European Parliament (Agents: A. Caiola and G. Ricci), defendant at first instance – the Court (Second Chamber), composed of: C. W. A. Timmermans (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, J. Makarczyk, P. Kūris and J. Klučka, Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has made an order on 29 October 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr Ripa di Meana shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Ripa di Meana shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 305 of 7.12.2002.

1

---