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

•

•

•

•

•

•.*

•

•

•

•

Dear Dick:

-4.. 6 OC. T1965

a •

•

•

•

•

n•••

Ccpy- __Copias

Paso - --P.bps.

Centrolt3.1

•

- f CONTROL raCT.CM3 1E= 4:.:74.:1::; -.1.;;; 1

DOD DIR. 5200.10 DODS EDT APPLY

• HAOIOLM V.

•

•

••••••••••••••n•••••• •••••••n•••••••••••n•n•

.••••••••••

•

Thank you for your letter of 1 October outlining the " • ,

manner in which the Central Intelligence Agency has organized

to assure adequate support of the National Reconnaissance

Program. These arrangsments will be appropriately reflected

in the near future in NW documentation implementing the new • •

1322 Agreement. • •

I will be pleased to work directly with lam. Sheldon in ••

his capacity as Director of the CIA Reconnaissance Programs.

agree that formal program approvals and instructions,

budget matters, as well as any request or direction which has .

a significant effect on the total or relative allocation of

CIA personnel and resources to the 112P, should go through 

this single authoritative point of contact. At the same •

tine, we =at also recognize the need for a close day-to-day

relationship between various working levels of the CIA, DOD,

and the NRO Staff. In particular, the exchange of detailed

program lafo=ation and technical direction necessary in the

discharge of the ICIO's responsibilities to ensure system

engineering and system integration, as outlined in the new

/MP Agreement, can be effectively accomplished only through

frequent and direct contacts with people at the project

management level.

It is my intention to znaintain overall project directors •

for systems in the IMP, and to also identify subsystem directors

when the latter are part of an organization other than the one •

charged with overall project management. Where systems or

major subsystems are assigned to the CIA, the system or major

subsystem director•must have free and direct access to me and

the MO Staff, and vice versa.- Obviously, we will have to

make specific arrangements for those cases wherein the CIA •

serves in a support relationship to an /OP project whose

director is not located in the CIA.•

•

•

•
•

•

•

2

Control

HAK=LC

CONTROis

:

Pvios

Fage..-2.iarz --- • •

f.544.5

:., 

/,•

;

.•

..-.

.

I feel cure that the necessary guidelines for these „.

•••

working relationships can be evolved with Mr. Sheldon, as

appropriate to each 12P activity in which the CIA participates. .

' I will make every effort with b to develop the most effective • . • •

end harmonious arrangements possible. -

.1-

' •

. • • • :

% .

. ..

Sincerely', • : •

• •• . • .

•

, •

.

•

sites-^

^a

 - • Alezander 8. Flax •

Director • . .

National Reconnaissance Office •

•

•

•

1-2. Mr. Helms, CIA

3. SS-1

/4. IF-1

/

Mr. Richard Reims ittet.. %

Deputy Director . •

. • Central Intelligence Agency Washington, D. C.

•

•

..
q •41,

, -

7e • •••nt:•k•i*

4.: •

Da 1'e L e.

: ••• •

•

' • ".•'`

'

• * -1:2 • 41 • .4.; • ! . • ..:t.:.•••• • . • .,

•••• ••••

• 

;ohm. • r.,• • L., 4•,:. 4 •

4.. • • Pia ' IV. 4.4/

•

•

S ICNATURE

APPROVAL

COMMENTS

COORDINATION

INFORMATION

RETURN TO

FILE

TICKLER

FOR YOUR:

MAIN•=1 •

..r..PS .4.:

• '• • . -,... 2 AVM re NAIn

• ....t. , '4'

4 •

.i.;

.

'.%; ha .j..: . •n•

.. • .1.‘

.....h4;P.

.. . .F...-•••• n•••• .••n••n

.. ._ .• .... :,, •I •

. -• • 0 ••••

•

. . .• • .

•

•

• • ..

•.•

".s r.,i• • . t •A

•

• •

•

•• . • •••

• • • • ••••• t• •

r •

. ••

:r.;

•

INFAIN-S141-11MIllttt:0-fMti--

IA •••

2.1

P. YOUR COMMENTS DIRECTION:

44(4%t h1S

•••,::

•

+.% „71:.

r.

•

• • 5A7araLe110

.4

t:

•

• :,-;;:e4

. a Mer A4404443 A SALT

- • 4...

• .••

•

Cd•Ode; OS OVO4410f 400400+

P4 41. .4•• W Ohs A..4shes,..

. • .

.

„

ft7. :

e• st

:17444

•

MO 14084% AG, S AI daSenifig
•

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

 

• • a

4. trOtaras+41

.Cre wt.

9( rit Luvbs

44us AL"— Nis..

•

• iii

dre Rrti 6,,e•

f 0"

Mahe'

UM

Ha

MEM

Je-A4 11,- /77,1

•

S.

. • ::•• ;;•...i.;/'

.; •• ..•••
')

THE NRO STAFF

September 27, 1971

VOL

der SOL

abir a We %"‘

•

-TOP-SECRET-- •

:440111111.101

-1St NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON, D.C.

J+ 9¥re

MEMRANDUM FOR THE RECORD

SUBJECT: NSAM 156 SALT Ratification

I spoke with Mr. Gathright, of State, ehis morning.

He informed me that there would be a meeting of the

SAM 156 WorkingGr called for probably next week.

The group wil a ess the SALT ratification impact on

the NRP in terms of open Congressional discuss ion of the

wfratro"nalb means of verification." Three weeks ago we

requested Ambassador Johnson's consideration of this

problem.

ROM --TOVSECRET--

ascaum teen agrasane errohnow

moo ISSICIIMS SIN Is Ion INIS/IPPW

cnna.a.. Intern

tom 0 awes

wow
LD S. COYLE, JR.

Lt Colonel, USAF

Deputy Director for

Plans and Folic

pri".4.414.114

IS) NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

• WASHINGTON. D C

THE NHO STAFF 5 September 1974

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. PLUMMER

SUBJECT: Congressional Briefing

At Mr. Reed's request, on 13 September we are planning

to brief Congressman Robert H. Mollohan, (D), West Virginia,

Chairman of the Special Subcommittee on Defense Communications

of the House Armed Services Committee. The Subcommittee will

receive testimony on defense communications satellites,

including the We are also making arrangements to brief

Mr. John F. La y, the Counsel to the Subcommittee if Mr. Mollohan

and Mr. Slatinshek, the Chief Counsel to the Armed Services

Committee deem it desirable. This note is for your information.

efivs..soso-•••••b....

egs"*".-4- C7000 ,doo

0 #6°.

'Met/6°111 •

iIIIIII

cc: Co 

iII

DTACCS

CO soar an Dem mais,PY sr OE r.

\ Cl AMMO 1010r011 raw

OCOLOAL OCC POOOLIt

sucurovr moot 11•17 MINVI1016 CATI

IAN/Ji r

LLB.

ha.. .4s VI

(e.s•Ve,„

11.111.lirs "ip IP

....worn 4. "8

k• 4"A4

40 "j31%-i›- i gb •

4.4

ct ifs

P: 1

ro

L1 1)6—

covr,

ra_ pAnt s

op342743.1
State of California

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Executive Order R-10-009

Relating to the Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Dies el-Fueled Fleets

WHEREAS, the Air Resources Board (Board or ARB) ado pted the Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets on April 4, 20 08, and it became operative on June 15, 2008, and the Board subsequently approved amendments to the regulation on December 12, 2008, and January 22, 2009;

WHEREAS, the legislature adopted and the Governor s igned on February 20, 2009, Assembly Bill 8 2X (AB 8 2X or ABX2 8), legislation intended to provide economic relief and to preserve jobs in the construction industry;

WHEREAS, on July 23, 2009, the Board conducted a he aring to consider proposed amendments to sections 2449 through 2449.2, title 1 3, California Code of Regulations, including those directed by AB 8 2X as well as othe r amendments not directed by AB 8 2X but intended to spur early actions by fleet s to reduce emissions and to provide clarification to the regulation;

WHEREAS, the Board approved the proposed amendments of sections 2449 through 2449.2, title 13, California Code of Regulations, o n July 23, 2009 in Resolution 09-50, as set forth in the Attachment 1 to this Order;

WHEREAS, the California Legislature in AB 8 2X, Hea lth and Safety Code section 43018.2(b), exempted the AB 8 2X amendments from th e Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Par t 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code);

WHEREAS, the Executive Officer deemed it necessary to bifurcate the AB 8 2Xdirected amendments to sections 2449 through 2449.2 , title 13, California Code of Regulations, from the other amendments approved on July 23, 2009, to expedite the adoption of the AB 8 2X amendments, so that they be came operative as soon as possible and to provide as much certainty as possib le to affected fleets;

WHEREAS, on December 3, 2009, the AB 8 2X-directed amendments to sections 2449 through 2449.2, title 13, California Code of Regula tions, were filed with the Office of

Administrative Law and became effective on that dat e;

WHEREAS, on April 15, 2010, the non-AB 8 2X amendme nts were made available for public comment for a period of 15 days, with the ch anges to the previously proposed text clearly indicated, in accordance with the prov isions of title 1, California Code of Regulations, section 44; andExecutive Order R-10-009 -2-

IN-USE OFF-ROAD DIESEL FUELED FLEETS AMENDMENTS – R -10-009 WHEREAS, one comment was received during the 15 day comment period and that comment has been considered by the Executive Office r.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the recitals and findings contained in Resolution 09-50 are incorporated by reference here in.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the non-AB 8 2X-directed amendments to sections 2449 through 2449.2, title 13, California Code of R egulations, are adopted as set forth

in Attachment 2 to this Order.

Executed this 3 rd day of June 2010, at Sacramento, California.

/s/

James N. Goldstene

Executive Officer

Attachments

1- Resolution 09-50 2- Final Regulation Order
Deputy Director

(Research)

,,.... •,• ...c.

CENTRAL. INT LICENCE AGENCY

WASHINGTON ?3, D. C.

IIANII YIA 26 E'f 1962

CONb Ot Si

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director, National Reconnaissance Office

SUBJECT: Procedure for Initiation of

Overflight Reconnaissance

1. Pursuant to our recent telephone conversation on the

above subject, there is submitted below for your concurrence s statement

of the procedure which should clarify the relationships involved in

initiation of overflight reconnaissance.

Z. The Committee on Overhead Reconnaissance submits its

recommendations on reconnaissancs for U.S. intelligence needs to the

United States Intelligence Board in those cases where new programs are

involved or where special considerations obtain in the proposed use of

on-going programs. Such considerations ars normally limited to

political sensitivity or the emergence of new operational hazards.

In the above instances the USIB will forward its

recommendation to the NRO for submission to the Special Group.

In the case of on-going programs which have already been

subject to the foregoing procsdures and no new considerations obtain,

COMOR will forward its recommendations for additional reconnaissance

directly to the Special Group with information to the USiB members and

to the D/NRO.

S. The Chairman of COMOR will keep the DDR advised so

that the latter may, when in doubt on which procedure should apply,

consult the Chairman. USIB, and the Director, NRO, for guidance.
<PAGE>

                                                                EXHIBIT 12

               NEXTLINK Communications, L.L.C. and Subsidiaries
                   Statement Regarding Computation of Ratio
                          of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                                ($ in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                              Year ended December 31,
                                               -------------------------------------------------
                                                   1996                1995                 1994
                                               -------------------------------------------------
<S>                                              <C>                  <C>                 <C>
Income (loss)                                  $ (71,101)            $(12,731)          $   (349)
Add:
    Interest                                   $  31,729             $    499           $      -
    Portion of rents representative
     of the interest factor                          742                  194                  6
                                               -------------------------------------------------
                 Income (loss) as adjusted     $ (38,630)            $(12,038)          $   (343)
                                               -------------------------------------------------
Fixed Charges:
    Interest                                   $  31,729             $    499           $      -
    Portion of rents representative
     of the interest factor                          742                  194                  6
                                               -------------------------------------------------
Fixed Charges                                  $  32,471             $    693           $      6

<CAPTION>

                                               Earnings are        Earnings are      Earnings are
                                                Inadequate          Inadequate        Inadequate
                                                -------------------------------------------------
<S>                                              <C>                  <C>                 <C> 
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
Deficiency of:                                 $  71,101             $ 12,731           $    349
                                               -------------------------------------------------

</TABLE>
-

Approved for Release: 2019/05/02 C051 07396 _ .. ..i .. _ 

;, 

BT 

Z CZ CFT C4 90/2 1203 OZ 

xxxxx 

GUARQ 1:35 

SEC RET ;~ 12013Z rEP 63 CITE CH A~:GE 06('1 'r'HIG 

SAFSS 

1

'-. DlSl'Bllm,!=_I9H 

sAFsi A I 

,-ss.l ' IT 

l SS•

2 1_-L~ 

-~ 1_'_. 

sS..t 11 __ ---IJ\_ 

-~-r\ S8,6 __ i -' ·~7--1 

-SS"--o-- i ! t.'· FOR 'i/ YOST mov ;/'.1. RANSON .., , 

THE rOLLO'iil!\IG IS ,tel GENERAL OUTLI\iE OF THE PREPARED STATEVLi'!T OF SS-9 I 

,1lDOLPH THIEL, TRv!, TO BE GIVUJ TO THE CONGHESSICN"L CO~r.f;/nEE I EX·~~,qtH,I\JG THE EARTH HESOU,l~SfS SURVEILLM!CE PPOGF<N,A: 

I. CURaENT SPACECRA.FT TECHNOLOGY IS ADEOUATE TO SUPPORT THE \I,IS SA!1'D-2 S ION. 

I I. SE~SORS AR[ NOT ADEQUATE. 

COl\{P t. I'WqOVED TECH\jOLOGY h1fEO[U 1\':: 

1. MULTISPECTRAL IVAGERY 

2. n 6,H HM~:Jl! NG 

"' • . ~ SUGGESTED PROGRAM DEFINITION :VOULO INVOLVE SIX ~!.~,- m FAC,,..::::RF:..--_ TORS: 

,~.'~E ASU,QE 

1. SE A Sf ATE 

2. SUR FACE rn,lF'Er< ATlP.ES 

.• EXTi-"\'T ;'J.\iD !-iftLTiJ,)F VfcFTATf'::~! 

~. JENSITY OF TREE TYPES 

PAGE 2 CHARGE 0697 SEC RET 

5. A I H POL L vr ION 

H,tV' I 

<. SNC\,:J CCVF:R 

7. LOCAr'O~! OF~/I:;liATO.-'?Y I~NI\/AlS 4V) FISt . ..; 

8. CONCENTRATION OF Y/NERAL DEPOS!TS p. SEI'-!SORS 

1. ~I[V[U)F' Hlef-iEF !~ESOLUTION /lND LARGEr! FIELD OF V/E"'. 

U CYART DfF I::;rs f.. CUCiR[\,'TLY PU,Slelf SYSTf'" SEUsnF< 

,3JO FT. FE)DLUTI[l'~ faR '1ULTISPECTRAL IV/IGERY.) c. vr ~ I CL E 0 E S I G~: 

1. SELECTION BASEO ON COST EFFECTIVE EVALUATION. 

f. 0 AT /I, F1RHf\T I NG 

1. 1'.1PPOVr: i)AT/~ 1/M.if\(~E'Jn!T 

1. E Ci-n..:J f· UE S F (If' TT I Ii'r' , ji T I ,~', T:- T H-,;, • 

IV. ,1'.1 P;'E 1'7, ,'~": fCC, IUiL F'AT r ',' r,A'·<!CVrL. "I_'ST 

;.,T /'JOV[ SlAE'WNT r!ICH' lIS [h~;::En "Y UW.l tREIJ 

H:r T' CUPIT'/ ']rr/c i.: T~L'J T" 'TTT" T, I:.... 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/02 C051 07396 

/\ ( \ 

I 

i I 

I I I_J 

-

-

-
E 3 (';HAU,E oen , E Approved for Release: 2019/05/02 C051 07396 

~i F HIS ,3E":URiTY RESP () ,I Slb lll lt 21 )pn.;t Ht. I;) etl ltl LlJ UN cOVERT lCTI\lITt:~S . IH :.J fl.!~T CU !J'p, \,IF!. -i -J l l,L '!, ILL PE f f':JO I\!U1 f ') l? E [SPEC,.. 

/\ I ,~LL 'f c/\PEFUL V' Hf'\! A NSiI!EF( I \:G QUE ST f (mS }~,FT Eli DEL f vrp I NG HIS SH TE-

( '1 '1[:" ~i T ! I '. '. f • i I ~IO CHM,!GES T0 THE pf;( EPAr<ED STATEvDn Hft.I/E PEp! RECOI"':'H-},IDEC . 

I j:--r--rfi FT i t 6 . 

i iPT 

I I 

1 __ J 

\1 ~J 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/02 C051 07396 

! 

--~ 

/\ 

I I 

I i J I 

l I 

/ I 

LJ 

-

-
**Exhibit 23.1**
**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT**
We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.333-78843 on Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 333-36977, 333-47370,333-75264, 333-99799 on Form S-8 of The Houston Exploration Company of ourreport dated February 17, 2004, which report expresses an unqualified opinionand includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption ofStatement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 143,“Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations,” and SFAS No. 148, “Accountingfor Stock-Based Compensation – Transition and Disclosure,” on January 1, 2003,appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Houston Exploration Companyfor the year ended December 31, 2003.
/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
WASHINGTON. O.C.

Admiral I. C. Kidd

Chief of Naval 'taterial

Room 218, Crystal Plazi S

Washington, D. C. 20360

Dear Ike:

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR May 14, 197

. FELE

•

of. —kg

"--hl

sinqiiirommt 1St NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE OISIMIMON

As you know, the National Reconnaissance Program (NRP)

is conducted and controlled within the Department of Defense

under a management arrangement which serves not only to

assure that the sensitive nature of the Program is protected,

but also to assure that, as the Director of the National

Reconnaissance Office (NRO), I am supported in a manner commensurate with the responsibilities assigned to me.

Rear Admiral (scl) Geiger has informed me of your intentions to reor a nd and that

4

I would request that as this change takes place, the

functions and responsibilities that Rear Admiral (sel) Geiger,.

holds under my appointment of him as Director, NRO Program C.

be preserved. Fundamentally, these functions and responsibilities flow from the relationship under which he is directly

and completely responsible to me, as DNRO, for central management of Program C within the Navy and to you and Admiral Zumwalt

for interaction between the Navy and the NRO on all material

matters affecting the National Reconnaissance Program or NRO

operations.

I -

I would greatly appreciate any comments or recommendations

you might wish to offer, and I suggest that we discuss at

an early date any problem you foresee.

Sincere{ EA D,•z

G NOTICE — SENSITIVE

INTELLIGE. URCES AND

METHODS INVOt

GOICIALOK

gral TovsEGREF

MAI OF

1.21CuTAit CMS DHAFTION CATt•

COI, $53 CICALSW, ON IMP DIT.

De 796-7

vonfog

gem

...f 1 • ikfrow

TOP-''sECRET
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 615/2006

of 20 April 2006         

fixing the representative prices and the additional import duties for molasses in the sugar sector applicable from 21 April 2006         

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the market in sugar (1), and in particular Article 24(4) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The representative prices and the additional duties applying to imports of the products referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95 are fixed in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 21 April 2006.

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

Done at Brussels, 20 April 2006.

For the Commission

J. L. DEMARTY            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 178, 30.6.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 39/2004 (OJ L 6, 10.1.2004, p. 16).

(2)OJ L 141, 24.6.1995, p. 12. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 79/2003 (OJ L 13, 18.1.2003, p. 4).

(3)OJ L 145, 27.6.1968, p. 12. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1422/95.

----

ANNEX

Representative prices and additional duties for imports of molasses in the sugar sector applicable from 21 April 2006

----

(1)  This amount replaces, in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95, the rate of the Common Customs Tariff duty fixed for these products.

(2)  For the standard quality as defined in Article 1 of amended Regulation (EEC) No 785/68.

----
October 1, 1964

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

0 SUBJECT:

&Ai

The subject visit took place during t

1 October. The situation described by the ple

is: During the past summer, they have been un to

CIA studying a number of alternative camera designs. This work

is about to be completed and they have been approached by CIA

to extend the contract, pursuing in more depth a design study

or preliminary design of one particular preferred configuration.

At almost the same time as this latest approach by CIA,

General Greer had approached them for a proposal on certain

studies. These latter were sufficiently like the work requested

by CIA that they feared they could not undertake both without

danger of criticism for carrying on duplicative work. In

conveying ion to Greer, they sensed that his people

felt that ad "let them down" in favor of a CIA

contract.

I tried to explain the general rationale for conducting

studies of the kind in question. I noted that there was intense

enthusiasm in the CIA for a particular approach to the general

search problem. I stated it as my desire that a basis of study

be established broad enough to insure that any decision by the

Government of a new general search/surveillance system be taken

rationally rather than emotionally.

We agreed that they would consider what they might accomplish

in this study area but would not be duplicating work that the

CIA contract covers. They agreed to consider proposing on the

following items, not to the exclusion of other possibilities:

1. Taking the camera design information developed under the

CIA contract to investigate, application of this camera to a

search-surveillance system which achieved broad coverage by flying

at high altitude and higher resolution by flying at a lower altitude.

•••••• woo • meow... OM, n•••• •nn•n ••••••
00

2. Exploration, of design possibilities for a relay lens

. Lk or re-imaging system of adequate fidelity to be used to bring

a high resolution image out of a folded optical system into a

place more convenient for the mechanical design of film transport

and IMC arrangements.

I telephoned General Greer the substance of these discussions.

r:.

2
On respondent’s reconsideration of decision awarding attorney fees filed August 5, order on fees filed August 3, opinion filed June 15, 1983 (63 Or App 521, 664 P2d 1151),

reconsideration allowed October 5, 1983, award of attorney fees vacated, order awarding costs affirmed

#### EDWARDS, *Petitioner, v.*EMPLOYMENT DIVISION, *Respondent.*

(82-AB-514; CA A24724)

669 P2d 1187

Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, James E. Mountain, Jr., Solicitor General, and Michael D. Reynolds, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, for petition.

Before Warden, Presiding Judge, and Van Hoomissen and Young, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*846PER CURIAM

Respondent Employment Division (Division) petitions for review of the decision of this court awarding petitioner attorney fees of $2,000. The petition for review serves as a petition for reconsideration by this court. ORAP 10.10. We grant the petition and vacate the order awarding attorney fees.1

The Division did not appear either before EAB or this court. In *Johnson v. Employment Division,*64 Or App 276, 668 P2d 416 (1983), we held that no fee can be awarded when the agency from which the fee is sought did not appear in opposition to petitioner in this court and did not issue the order in question. That holding determines the availability of an award of attorney fees in this case.

The award of attorney fees is vacated; the order awarding costs is affirmed.

1

 Our decision in *Edwards v. Emp. Div.,*63 Or App 521, 664 P2d 1151 (1983), reversed the decision of the Employment Appeals Board (EAB), which had denied claimant unemployment compensation, and remanded the case to EAB for reconsideration.
#### Schmidt, Respondent, vs. Marty, Appellant.

For the appellant: *R. L. Grover*of Junction City.

For the respondent: *W. E. Atwell*of Stevens Point.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.