alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99

            WINTHROP RESIDENTIAL ASSOCIATES I, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
                           FORM 10-QSB MARCH 31, 2005

Supplementary Information Required Pursuant to Section 9.4 of the Partnership
Agreement

1.    Statement of Cash Available for Distribution for the three months ended
      March 31, 2005:

      Net loss                                                         $(31,000)
      Add: Cash from reserves                                            31,000
                                                                       --------
      Cash Available for Distribution                                  $     --
                                                                       ========

2.    Fees and other compensation paid or accrued by the Partnership to the
      General Partners, or their affiliates, during the three months ended March
      31, 2005:

      Entity Receiving          Form of
        Compensation          Compensation         Amount
      ----------------        ------------         ------

            None


                                    17 of 17
•'OP SBOR4¥'W 

USCIB: 14/21.B 

rOP MX:ft:l!l~ - B!.Ctift:'f ft BtF6.ftltk'f f eN 

MI:!MORANDUM FOR THE MEMBERS OF_!JSCIB: 

oos 

et~ 

lti'fl:l~UB£!3B BOOtJHSli'i'S seH 

'fAIN 80f)ffi weftfl Mft'fl!}ftIA:L 

28 October 1952 

Subject: AFSA Augmenta1.iai ot GCHQ. 

1. The inclosure has bem received by the Coordinator 

tran the Acting Director, AFSA, with a request that it be 

considered by vote Dheet aa a matter requiring earq action. 

2. Pla.ae indicate you:r views on the attached vote 

sheet, which should be retumed to the Secretariat not later 

than Tuesdq, i.1 .. November 1952. 

Incloaure - :L 

Actt1Dir.AFSA,. Mamo tor 

USCIB mbr.:.i, dtd 24 Oct 52. 

USCIB: :U.,/248 A:rt':J:~Ufl:hlfl B06l:JHi!!N'PS son 

'fAIN SOBS WORfJ fi:A:'t'i5IUAh 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 03-07-2014 pursuant to E. 0. 1352B 

TOP SECRET 
24 October 1952 

c.'P@U§§JB ~ 1 ~H !Nti8UA.TiiH 

Ml!MJWPUH FQ! THE ~ 9R' ... ~OIB 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

ED 3.3(h) (2) 

Subjecti AFSA A1Jgnumtat1on ot OOHQ/ 

I I \ 

lo Par:agraph 2, Appendix I, "1.1.aison and Methods ot Exchange," 

of the BRUSA Agreanent states "Upon ag?'eG'i\ent between USCIB and 

I.SIB, additional liaison personnel IIUti1 bo accredited, mid wo:dd.ng 

greups mq be assigned, to agencies of either party by the othero 

ill such additional liaiar:m. personnel shall be under the control 

and direction ot the Smior Liaison Officero" 

do The Senior UoSo Nava1 Headquart.ers in &U!'ope~ CINCNELM0 

has been rel.ocuited in Londono 

Inclosure with USCIB l.4/248 dated 28 October 19529 

ARMED FORCES SECURITY AGENCY FORM 781-ClOSC 

18 JUL 51 

COPY# __ _ 

TOP SECRET Cli:NOE 
~ . .. 

. J:10P SB0Mf ~:S w SH6l:Tlff'ff INf6RUj'i'ION 

Subjectg I.FSA Augmentation 9! GCHQ 

60 Approval or th• above pl.an by the Me:nbers ot the Board is 

requested in order that I IIJ"'1'" approach LSID mi the Director, GCHQ, 

to aecure their concurrence and &rrang.l in detail tor the operations 

or the propoeed working groupct It ehould be noted that this plan is 

in keeping vi.th the principle or combined operations at GCHQ agrged 

uoon as part, of the pl •n t'or U9Se=Brl.tish OOHINT col1abor1.tion in waro 

. ~IV? J. N. ~G~ 

Rear A.dm1ral9 u. s. Nav,y Acting Direct.or8 Armed Forcea Security Agency 

2 

COPY# __ _ 

I ARMED FORCES SECURITY AGENCY FO~~ ~~t-~iosc TOP SECRET CANOE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999             MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          31,695                       0
<SECURITIES>                                    29,071                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,712                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                85,025                       0
<PP&E>                                           5,044                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  91,156                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,611                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                         1,438                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                      69,084                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    91,156                       0
<SALES>                                         11,432                  16,354
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,249                  24,420
<CGS>                                            2,217                   3,146
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,471                   7,918
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,122                   3,104
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,998                   4,940
<INCOME-TAX>                                       299                   1,680
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,699                   3,260
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,699                   3,260
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.12                    0.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.11                    0.22
        

</TABLE>
# CE2004084EN.01017501.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/175 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/175

---

(2004/C 84 E/0215)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0200/04

by Ioannis Marinos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 January 2004)

Subject:   The ‘Bob Programme’ and road accidents

Subject:

According to the Community's Financial Report for 2002, the foreword to which was written by the Commissioner responsible for the budget, Michaele Schreyer, 40 000 people died and 1,7 million were injured in road accidents in the European Union in the year 2000 (pages 57 and 58 of the document). The Commission supports the ‘Bob Programme’, the aim of which is to encourage car users to designate a person among their group who will not consume alcoholic drinks during their outing so as to be able to drive the others back safely after the event. On page 58 of the document it is stated that the ‘Bob programme’ was first implemented in Belgium in 1995, to be copied subsequently by other Member States adopting different names (e.g. ‘Lince’ in Spain, ‘Joker’ in Portugal etc.), while in Greece and the Netherlands the programme was introduced under the name of ‘Bob’.

What data does the Commission have on the results of implementing the programme in Greece? Has there been a decrease, and by what percentage, in road accidents in Greece, the country with the most fatal accidents in proportion to its population in the whole of the Union? What funding did the Greek authorities receive to implement the programme and how was that funding used?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 2004)

(26 February 2004)

Between 2001 and 2003, the Commission supported ‘designated driver’ road-safety campaigns in Greece and several other Member States, encouraging people not to drink and drive.

The maximum grants allocated to Greece were EUR 174 000, EUR 163 000 and EUR 72 000 respectively, which is between 22 % and 7 % of total grants.

This funding was used to adapt the Belgian ‘BOB’ campaign to Greek culture. Specifically, this involved producing posters, TV and radio spots, advertising inserts in the press, and an educational video, developing a website, and, in collaboration with driving schools, organising a training course for young drivers.

One of the objectives of the Greek campaign was to reduce the number of alcohol-related road accidents by 15 % in three years. The provisional statistics for 2003 show that the total number of fatalities fell by 22 percentage points between 2000 and 2003.

On 27 May 2003, the Commission held a public seminar in Brussels to assess the effectiveness of these campaigns with all the organisers. Information on the presentations that were made, including the presentation of the Greek campaign, can be found on the website for the Directorate-General for Energy and Transport (1).

1

---

(1)  http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/road/roadsafety/behaviour/alcohol/conf_designated_drivers_en.htm

1

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: APPOINTMENT TO

CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL

RULES COMMITTEE 

:

:

:

:

:

No. 478

CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL RULES 

DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 5

th day of August, 2016, Bruce L. Castor, Jr., Esquire, 

Dauphin County, is hereby appointed as a member of the Criminal Procedural Rules 

Committee for a term expiring January 1, 2018.
NRO Successfully Launches Payload from 

Atlas IIAS

With Hurricane Frances rapidly approaching the Florida coast, a National Reconnaissance Office 

payload was successfully launched aboard an Atlas IIAS rocket from Cape Canaveral AFS, Fla. 

on Aug. 31 at 7:17 p.m. EDT.

The oncoming hurricane forced the launch team to decide between taking the payload and 

booster off the launch pad or try to launch again on Aug. 31. The launch team encountered four 

launch delays due to technical and weather concerns. A fifth launch delay might have forced the 

booster and satellite to ride out the impact of Hurricane Frances while “buttoned up” on the 

launch pad.

"It was a very difficult decision and we looked at the pros and cons of every aspect of that 

decision and it was determined that the best course of action was to try to launch again,” said Col 

Chip Zakrzewski, mission director for the launch and the director of the Office of Space Launch. 

“The entire launch team was just tremendous. We overcame a number of challenges to 

successfully accomplish this launch. I couldn't be happier.”

The Lockheed Martin Atlas IIAS launched from Cape Canaveral's Launch Complex 36A.
' 

SEC RD REF ID:A65841 

-tlOI!!. - - ':. L 

-· · -- H April 1951 

hom I 

to c 

Tta & 

.AJ'SA.-34 

Al'U.-OOB 

AJ'SA-.03 

A:ISA-00! 

lubJ•o\1 ~;r\ ot Ytu~ ot hot. Ton l'nme.nn 

- 1. - -hot. nn l'ewnann Tl•1 tad tor •• pm-po1e ot in,..1Heattnc SCJ.G 

and 4etermn1nc vhetihar he vould 'be aYatlable tor 1 t. He -creed to pazt!clpate, and took the 1ecurt'7 oa,h. It _. ta.tlat1nl.7 -creed \bat IOA.O 

lhould .... on • J'mle. 

W.J"• YaJ aoJ:ia talk about the OOllq)01iUon ot SQ&.O, ant! hov t• 

lhou1ci. h ..-an. Prof. 'YOJ1 Wtn111&DD 1n4f.cate4 tlm.t Shannon vae 4atbl!tel.7 a 

lliii fa~ '~'' croup, u4 that the be1t way \o pt hill va• to aontaot 

lbonon J)enonalq, anct to ta1k w1 th 1omeon• h1&h a.ouch 1A »ell Laba. ao' 'o be 'bound b7 OOJIU'M.>' pollq, •uch d J'Ji•-1 

8. A croup then Y11Uec1 J.ILAS. We amd to ••• a •tntaal• problem, 

ic> he wa1 told abou' the proble.m tben rmm.!nc, IOOfS1'aA.PS. Ee vu ftZ7 

t.nten1te4 in '"'• and~ t~e4 a'bqut lt tor noa:ti.T an ~ur. . - . .f. 4f_t1r l.1moll he v111t•4 .&20012. and va1 ll:own the machine and a 

4t•(;l'1puon of tu loatoal 4811.o. la •4• 801:18 aua;e1t;lon1 vhiah an ator,\llAtel.7 a llwtle late. . . .. . ,. 

'· Be ~hen V1•t'eli SORl!OHO and 1av u D?OMA. -.chine, and vat 

ct••n a Tel'J' 1hart aiio11t1on ot the Genaan clphei" proble1111. 

I. Be va1 thon the !deb tpea4 prln••r aov under clnelopaent. 

111 W. wa1 Yery ln•er•1ttt4 in our problem•, au4 e1pec1all7 ln our 

eamputer progru. !fa Tol'DDteere4 to eome clown ap!n •ome\1me betore J\11le '• 

-4 RCP•t•cl th&' t"t would ba profitable tor •omeona to eo to Pl"ln.ceton to 'alk to him. 

'. In flll' O»lnion 80.A.O t• alreaif¥ par1lall7 a IUCC911. !o haY• 

TOD. Jr•uman.n•• inter••' t• to .-rantee ~hat ot tha nma.1~ 11ember11 an4 

\o insure that ov problem• 11111 pt attention. 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 04-14-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352\3 

r,...-h8£1 

.. -~ 

.. 

. 

-

"
~ fOB IECORD 

SUllJ1iJC'.t' s COCOK 

, ., .. - .. ... ·- .... __ .-.. r •'" •-i:.= • ........ 

l 6NOV1954 

l. On 10 R'ovember it came to the attention ot 11.D/C())l)EC that 

t.be inte:rnational iyontro.1 cc:ma1ttee on m.teri&l shipments to the 

laatern CoUP.triea (COCOM), meeting in Paris, bacl raised tho question o'f im:luding commerci~ produced cr,ptograpbic equipaent on 

their liats u an embargoed item.. 

Q. tnveat1ption revealed the follov1ng1 

•· A previou.e list had included the item. 

b. Jach countey vaa aublni tting revised Uats. !he US 

•ua&e•ted :revision Qlllitted t.be cryptographic itera (although the 

l:lepirtment o~ Coaaerce eaber felt it •houl4 be included); the 

Canadian. list contained the 1tenr.; the me Clelep.tion asn't aure, 

but telt that eaae mention ot 1t should be ma.4e in •ur.:h a 118.1" that 

only c:1v111 DOn-111.litar;y item would. be af'tected. 

c. !be UJC oP1n1on vae baaed on the :tact that the embargo 

li•t pve various o:tt1o1&b, customs, cona~reign office, 

polJ.ce, etc., the right to inapect and the;y 4 the Via&:lm o:t' 

al.1oY1ng thi• on mili ta.17 cl'yptogre.ph1c 1tema1 even though commerc1a.lly produced. 

4. !be tJ8 aember at the eurrent meeting ba4 asked f'or 

guidance and through Lt Col Leibert., ot the International. security •ection,, SBCm, ISA.'e opin.1.on vae 1ought. Contact Yith Lt Col 

Leibert wu arranged thru Mr. Philip Patton. 

•· CQCOH 4oe11 ziot include Sv:ltserland. or SWeden. lt does 

1nclu4e Japan, Vest de~ and tfest Berlin, in addition to the BA.TO 

cQ'U1'1trie•. 

3. tt Col te1bert agreed to 1.nf'orm. the US delegat1on that 

tblt7 ahould abstain t'l'Olll action cm this point until turther instructions vere rece1V94, and to consult with .ICr. Friedman. turther, 1n 

01"4er that a m position might be eatablished. :tt appeared that 

action b;y both 'meSi anA USCIB m.ight. be required. 

D:ts!: s/uat (Kr. 1r1ec1man>+~~-~-9-"-~e.w~..-~ i/P 

ft\0:0 

V/DD 

riles 

0/8 

C-atm:C 

41 

,, .. !f 

10 i ,.., f. £. HERRt:u'Ls~~ Coloiel . Deputy Director . Communications Secunt1 

eclassified and approved for 

elease by NSA on 05-02-2014 

ursuant to E .0. 13526
13 July 1953 

MEMORANDUM FOR: MR. WILLIAM FRIEDMAN 

SUBJECT: 3 July 1953 Draft .Proposed NSC Directive on COMSEC 

1. The .3 July 1953 draft proposed NS:: Directive on COMSro 

has been reviewed and is concurred in, subject to the following: 

a. Reference is made to para 2c(l){i), page 11. That 

subject paragraph read as follows: "(i) The Director of NSA ••• 

departments and agencies.a! #hi rJ~ t/. #1:tl¥H~P:-Pti ''Nit~/'/" Further, that the footnote referring to para 2c(l)(i) be changed 

to read as follows: "Departments and. agencies outside the 

Department of Def'ense will be provided seryices and m,aterial on a 

reimbursable basis. 11 

REASON: It is believed that the proposed change to 

paragraph 2c{l){i) and its footnote will more clearly delineate 

the fact that the NSA will flrnish services and material. for the 

COMSEC programs or all departments and agencies, and that the 

departments and agencies outside the Department of Defense will 

get these services and materials only on a reimbursable basis. 

b. Reference is made to para 4c, page 15. Deleting the 

phrase "··· or to mislead unauthorized persons in the interpretation 

of the results or such a study." 

REASON: The phrase "••• protection resulting from~ 

measures" is all inclusive. Describing Communications Security 

from the general to the particular is considered redundant in this 

instance. 

c. Reference is ma.de to para 4d, page 15. Adding the 

word "enemy" before "imitative deception.u 

REASON: It is believed that adding the word "enemy", 

as suggested, will more clearly express the intended meaning. 

2. With the above changes, the draft is generally acceptable. 

However, this does not represent an official. Army view at this time. 

}&jor o. A. Davis, Signal Corps {Ext 53151) concurs. 

A. 

~/!~ W. SMALL rnr-.r ~ ~ ~ Army Security Agency ""- \._I JU L \.LI "' \., 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 02-06-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
# CE2004084EN.01041301.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/413 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/413

---

(2004/C 84 E/0482)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0480/04

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(23 February 2004)

Subject:   Commission open competitions

Subject:

Following a recent article in Le Figaro regarding the case of Jean-Louis Gibault, a French citizen who took the Commission's open competition in the field of external relations and management of aid to non-member countries:

| — | Could the Commission give details of why he scored 19,5 for the oral test and thus failed in his application? |
| --- | --- |

—

Could the Commission give details of why he scored 19,5 for the oral test and thus failed in his application?

| — | Why was the motivation for this mark not revealed to the applicant despite numerous requests? |
| --- | --- |

—

Why was the motivation for this mark not revealed to the applicant despite numerous requests?

| — | Is the Commission involved in legal proceedings with Mr Gibault? If so please give details of the date of the case. |
| --- | --- |

—

Is the Commission involved in legal proceedings with Mr Gibault? If so please give details of the date of the case.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2004)

(29 March 2004)

The notice of the competition referred to by the Honourable Member in his question stipulated a pass-mark of 20 points out of a total of 40 points. The applicant referred to in the Honourable Member's question achieved a mark of 19,50. Failure to reach the stipulated passmark is obviously a legitimate reason for excluding a candidate.

Mr Gibault was informed of his marks. A series of precedents from the Court of Justice confirms that the act of communicating the marks to the candidate is a sufficient explanation for the selection board's decision.

Article 6 of annex III of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities stipulates that the work of the selection board is secret. The Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance have repeatedly upheld the need to safeguard the confidentiality of the deliberations of selection boards in order to guarantee their independence, the objectivity of their work, and to protect them from any outside pressure or interference. This has been confirmed in the judgement of the Court of Justice of 4 July 1996 in case C-254/95 P, Parliament v. Innamorati and in the judgements of the Court of First Instance of 27 March 2003 in case T-33/00, Martínez Páramo and others v. Commission, of 25 June 2003 in case T-72/01 Pyres v. Commission and of 23 January 2004 in case T-53/00, Angioli v. Commission.

Mr Gibault has contested his exclusion and is seeking the annulment of the open competition, or at least the decision of the selection board, under case T/294/03. The case was lodged on 25 August 2003 and is still pending.

---
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 15 

To amend the Mineral Leasing Act to recognize the authority of States 

to regulate oil and gas operations and promote American energy security, 

development, and job creation, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 6, 2015 

Mr. HATCH introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Mineral Leasing Act to recognize the authority 

of States to regulate oil and gas operations and promote 

American energy security, development, and job creation, 

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 ‘‘Protecting States’ 

5 Rights to Promote American Energy Security Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. STATE AUTHORITY FOR HYDRAULIC FRACTURING 

7 REGULATION. 

8 The Mineral Leasing Act is amended— 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 15 IS

1 (1) by redesignating section 44 (30 U.S.C. 181 

2 note) as section 45; and 

3 (2) by inserting after section 43 (30 U.S.C. 

4 226–3) the following: 

5 ‘‘SEC. 44. STATE AUTHORITY FOR HYDRAULIC FRACTURING 

6 REGULATION. 

7 ‘‘(a) DEFINITION OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING.—In 

8 this section the term ‘hydraulic fracturing’ means the 

9 process by which fracturing fluids (or a fracturing fluid 

10 system) are pumped into an underground geologic forma11 tion at a calculated, predetermined rate and pressure to 

12 generate fractures or cracks in the target formation and, 

13 as a result, increase the permeability of the rock near the 

14 wellbore and improve production of natural gas or oil. 

15 ‘‘(b) PROHIBITION.—The Secretary of the Interior 

16 shall not enforce any Federal regulation, guidance, or per17 mit requirement regarding hydraulic fracturing, or any 

18 component of hydraulic fracturing, relating to oil, gas, or 

19 geothermal production activities on or under any land in 

20 any State that has regulations, guidance, or permit re21 quirements for hydraulic fracturing. 

22 ‘‘(c) STATE AUTHORITY.—The Secretary shall recog23 nize and defer to State regulations, guidance, and permit24 ting for all activities regarding hydraulic fracturing, or 

25 any component of hydraulic fracturing, relating to oil, gas, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 15 IS

1 or geothermal production activities on Federal land re2 gardless of whether the regulations, guidance, and permit3 ting are duplicative, more or less restrictive, have different 

4 requirements, or do not meet Federal regulations, guid5 ance, or permit requirements.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS