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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-8121

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

MAURICE GREGORY, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert E. Payne, Senior 

District Judge. (2:92-cr-00163-2; 2:08-cv-00393-REP) 

Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 27, 2009 

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Maurice Gregory, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
PER CURIAM: 

Maurice Gregory seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order treating his self-styled Fed. R. Crim. P. 36 motion as a 

successive and unauthorized 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2008) 

motion and dismissing it on that basis. The order is not 

appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); 

Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). A 

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this 

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find 

that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district 

court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural 

ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El 

v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 

U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th 

Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and 

conclude that Gregory has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

2 
3 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. 

DISMISSED
Doc ID: 6684949
Doc ID: 6684949
Doc ID: 6684949
REF ID:A58070 

• SEC REF • J 

24 

USCIB: 9.2/17 

886REl'f 

29 November 1954 

MEMORANDUU FOR THE MEMBERS OF USCIB: 

Subject: USCIB 9.2/16 dated 26 November 1954. 

1. It is requested that the notation "APPENDED DOCUMENT 

CONTAINS COIJE11VORD MATERIAL" be stamped on the cover memorandum 

of the subject doownent. 

' 

2. It is further requested that the enclosure with the 

subject document be stamped with the current special intelligence 

code\'lord. 

USCIB: 9.2/17 

eclassified and a roved for release b NSA on 03-20-2014 ursuant to E. 0. 1352 

SECRET
- - .... 

USOIB: 13. 7 /37 

'f'OF ffi?IOR:l!H' 

'FOP SfffCR:ET 

APPENDED DOCUV.Jl:NT CONTAINS 

CODEWORD MATERIAL 

5 November 1954 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE MEMBERS OF USCIB: 

Subject: 

References: 

Delineation of Categories of COMINT. 

(a) USCIB 13.7/35 dated 20 September 1954. 

(p) USCIB 13.7/36 dated 25 October 1954. 

1. The enclosure is forwarded for information. It contains 

notification of Canadian approval of proposed implementation of 

categorization under Appendix B, and introduction of a complete change 

in codewords, both with an effective date of l January 1955. 

2. This, therefore, completes action required to obtain approval 

of all concerned for the actions indicated above. U.K. authorities 

are being so informed. 

Enclosure 

Director OOMSEC Canada 

Memo dtd 27 Oct 1954 

USCIB: 13. 7 /37 

APPENDED DOCUMENT CONTAINS 

CODEWORD MATERIAL 

TOl1 SECRET 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 08-05-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 
EO 3 . 3 lhl I 2 I 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 
~3 

USCIB: 13. 7/36 

25 October 1954 

'f'eP Ml~ - t:J.8. lf!E9 OHfiY 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE Ml!MBERS OF USCIB: 

Subject: 

Reference: 

Implementation of Appendix "B" (Categorization). 

USCIB 13.7/35, dated 20 September 1954. 

;j: 24 

l. In reply to the reference, this office has been informed 

via SUKLO that ISIB (l) agrees that the categorization lists enclosed 

with the re.t'erence form a suitable starting point for implementation 

of categories under new Appendix 11B11 ; (2) accepts the U.S. proposal 

for a general change of codewords coincident with the introduction or 

categories, subject to postponement or the effective date until 

1 January 1955 (this delay is occasioned by a U.K. error in the selection of codewords); (3) concurs in the USCIB view that the introduction 

of categories will be the final step in the full implementation of 

revised Appendix "B". 

2. As a matter of information, no reply tou~~e reference has yet been receive~ lu u Eo 3.31hl 121 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

3. In view or the circumstances described, this office has 

informed U.K. authorities of U.S. acceptance of their proposal for a 

postponement in effective date of introduction of categories and new 

codewords until 1 January 1955. Any objection to this action on the 

part of USCIB members should be notified to this office immediately. 

4. Information pertaining to the introduction of new codewords is 

being published separately. 

5. THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS COMMUNICATIONS INTELLIDENCE INFORMATION 

AND SHALL BE HANDLED ONLY IN CHANNELS RESSL PRO ED FOR COMINT. 

USCIB: 1.3. 7/.36 

TOP SECRET
# CE2004084EN.01063501.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/635 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/635

---

(2004/C 84 E/0713)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0592/04

by Helle Thorning-Schmidt (PSE) to the Commission

(26 February 2004)

Subject:   Aid to stud farms

Subject:

What is the Commission's position on Irish state aid to stud farms? In Ireland, there is no tax on ‘nomination fees’ which a stud farm owner receives when a stallion impregnates a mare. The opposite is the case in Denmark, which gives Irish stud farms a competitive advantage over the other Member States.

Will the Commission say whether Irish practice in this respect is consistent with EU competition and state aid rules?

---
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

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

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                           6,699                  10,613
<SECURITIES>                                     5,857                   8,575
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,737                  26,922
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,095                   7,168
<INVENTORY>                                      1,203                   2,863
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,282                  43,753
<PP&E>                                          42,998                  45,619
<DEPRECIATION>                                  35,073                  32,054
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  42,159                  69,352
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           37,699                  45,266
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           192                     190
<OTHER-SE>                                         678                  20,132
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    42,159                  69,532
<SALES>                                         30,235                  51,769
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                37,104                  60,133
<CGS>                                            4,129                   5,601
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   57,185                  59,649
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (235)                   (420)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  50                      38
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (19,896)                     866
<INCOME-TAX>                                       161                     311
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (20,057)                     555
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (20,057)                     555
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.16)                    0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.16)                    0.03



</TABLE>
~ ID:A61009 

• 

SUB.JEC'l's Proposal. tor Peraemel. Dnelopment Board, study ot 

Management. Tt'ain1ng of ~ctti1Yea 1at Outaide 

Institutions 

TOI Executive SeOl'GtU7, Perl1Clme1 Devel~ Board 

I. QM!.~'\)"!! 

To ~ to the Dh"eotor a plm tor uao of cutside 

taciliti•B tor Ml'J&gemmlt tra.in1ng of IiSA exaoutives. 

II. ~CSR!. OfJ~ 

A. R'Y'liew ot NS.l aatidties :1n this field to date. 

B. llGOCt!fialda.tion ot A progft?l ffW' FY-1956. 

III. 9nl!!\,_st,l&1!9J; 

A. DatEml.rl&ticn ot NSA nenda in m.-ea ot tun-t.hia aauag._ 

1.Wlt. tl\1d.n:blg tor axecmtiYo pveonnel. 

a. Dot6m.inat1on of awn.able w'ltvemt;y co-..n~ses which N83 

meot this need. 

C. Rmw ot NS.A a.ot1dt1cte :ln tbie tield to datt). 

D. Reocnnmation of a prcsrm f~ PT-1956. 

/s/ SM-lby L. l?&tt.Grson 

SH&LBY L. PA.'1'11.ERSOM 

ChiGflJ 'lrairl,ng Division 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 01-31-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 
l 

I 

• 

• 

'Zl:J.1''!'1 ' "[_))·• ',\\ [." 0 0 ~·1 

THE PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT BOARD FLOW OF PROJECTS 

SOURCES OF PROPOSALS ffl..\ ;. 

FOR BOARD ACTION v.c;; 

l ~CCUPRl~G RECOMMENDATIONS REQUIRED I 

FROM BOARD t.,. i 

2. IDEA FOR PROGRAM GENERATED BY BOARD f~~ 

MEMBER ~ 

3 NECESSITY FOR EVALUATION STUDY OF 

PROGRAM RECOGNIZED BY BOARD MEM· 

BER 

OBJECTIVES, SCOPE AND OUTLINE OF PROJECT 

SUBMITTED IN WRITING 

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY @ 

1 CONSIDERATION OF COMPLETED COMMIT· 

TEE REPORT INCLUDED ON AGEMDA FOR 

NEXT MEETING 

2. COPLES OF COMPLETED COMMITTEE RE· 

PORT DISTRIBUTED TO MEMBERS IN AD· 

VANCE OF MEETING, 

MEETING OF BOARD 

1. RESPONSIBLE COMMITTEE PRESENTS RE· 

PORT ANO RECOMMENDATIONS 

2. BOARD DISCUSSES REPORT MAKING AMEND 

MENTSORRECOMMENDSFURTHERSTUDY 

OR DEVELOPMENT 

3 BOARD ACCEPTS OR REJECTS REPORT 

WITH AMENDMENTS. 

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY(@ 

l PROPOSAL INCLUDED IN AGENDA FOR 

PRESENTATION AT NEXT MEETING 

2. COPIES OF PROJECT OUTLINE DISTRI 

BUTED TO MEMBERS IN ADVANCE OF 

MEETING 

COMMITTEE 

1 CONDUCTS REQUIRED STUDY, DEVELOP• 

MENT, OR EVALUATION 

2. PREPARES REPORT, RECOMMENDATIONS 

AND PRESENTATION MATERIAL. 

COMMITTEE 

1 CONSOLIDATES REPORT Al\D RE:COM· 

MENDATIOHS WITH APPROVED AMEND· 

MEN TS 

2 PREPARES FINAL REPORT AND FOR 

WARDS TO CHAIRMAN THROUGH EXEC· 

UTIVE SECRETARY 

MEETING OF BOARD © 

1 °RESENTATION OF PROPOSAL BY SOURCE 

MEMBER. 

2. DISCUSSION AND AMENDMENT OF PROJECT 

OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE 

3. BOARD ACCEPTS OR REJECTS PROPOSAL 

.AND AMENDMENTS 

CHAIRMAN 

@ 

1 ASSIGNS PROJECT AND DUE DATES TO AP· 

PROPRIATE COMMITTEE. 

2. MAY ESTABLISH A JOINT OR AD HOC COM• 

MITTEE IF NECESSARY 

CHAIRMAN 

PRESENTS RECOMMENDATlONS OF BOARD 

TO DIRECTOR
EXHIBIT
31.2








PSI
CORPORATION


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 302








I, Eric
Kash, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of PSI Corporation;





2. Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;





3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the issuer as of, and for,
the periods presented in this report;





4. The
issuer's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the issuer and have:





a)
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the issuer including its consolidated
subsidiary, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared; and





b)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer's disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and





c)
Disclosed in this report any change in the issuer's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the issuer's most recent fiscal quarter
(the issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuer's
internal control over financial reporting;





5. The
issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuer's
auditors and the audit committee of the issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions);





a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; and





b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the issuer's internal controls over financial
reporting.








Date: October
      28, 2008
              By:
              /s/ Eric KashEric KashChief Financial
      Officer
# CE2004084EN.01053301.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/533 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/533

---

(2004/C 84 E/0610)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0102/04

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(22 January 2004)

Subject:   Paying for water

Subject:

In light of current Community legislation and the ‘polluter pays’ principle, does the Commission believe that water consumption should be paid for, whether totally or partly, in proportion to the amount consumed?

If so, can the Commission find a basis for this in the current legal framework?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 2004)

(4 March 2004)

The Community has, through the Water Framework Directive (1), thoroughly restructured its water policy. One of the key elements of the Directive is the principle of supporting environmental objectives by economic instruments, in particular water pricing reflecting the costs.

1

By 2010, based on economic analysis and participation of citizens and stakeholders, Member States will have to ensure adequate pricing of water-related services, reflecting the principle of recovery of costs.

To this purpose, Member States have to ensure by that date:

| — | that water pricing policies provide adequate incentives for the users to use water resources efficiently, and thereby contribute to the environmental objectives of the Directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

that water pricing policies provide adequate incentives for the users to use water resources efficiently, and thereby contribute to the environmental objectives of the Directive;

| — | that an adequate contribution of the different water uses, disaggregated into at least industry, households and agriculture, is made to the recovery of the costs of water services, based on an economic analysis due by the end of 2004 and taking into account the polluter pays principle. |
| --- | --- |

—

that an adequate contribution of the different water uses, disaggregated into at least industry, households and agriculture, is made to the recovery of the costs of water services, based on an economic analysis due by the end of 2004 and taking into account the polluter pays principle.

Details of how to charge for water use are, within the above framework, the responsibility of Member States. In this context Member States will have some discretion to apply the principle of cost recovery, having regard to the social, environmental and economic effects of the recovery as well as the geographic and climatic conditions of the region or regions concerned. At the same time, the principle of cost recovery does not prevent the funding of particular measures such as preventive or remedial measures.

---

(1)  Directive 2000/60/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000.

1

---
Exhibit 23.4





Consent of Laila Sedore (Potvin)





I consent to the inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F of North American Palladium Ltd., which is being filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, of references to my name and references to my involvement in the preparation of technical information relating to the Shebandowan West Property, Ontario, included in the 2010 Annual Information Form of North American Palladium Ltd., dated March 31, 2011 (the “AIF”).





I also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-13766) and in the Registration Statements on Form F-10 and amendments thereto (File Nos. 333-158082 and 333-164512) of the references to my name and the above-mentioned information in the AIF.





Dated this 31st day of March, 2011.




Name:
/s/ Laila Sedore (Potvin)Laila Sedore (Potvin)
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1671 

To reauthorize the National Forest Foundation Act, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 24, 2015 

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

to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the National Forest Foundation Act, 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 ‘‘National Forest Foun5 dation Reauthorization Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION ACT REAUTHOR7 IZATION. 

8 (a) EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE MATCH9 ING FUNDS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROJECT EX10 PENSES.—Section 405(b) of the National Forest Founda11 tion Act (16 U.S.C. 583j–3(b)) is amended by striking 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1671 IS

1 ‘‘for a period of five years beginning October 1, 1992’’ 

2 and inserting ‘‘for each of fiscal years 2016 through 

3 2018’’. 

4 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

5 410(b) of the National Forest Foundation Act (16 U.S.C. 

6 583j–8(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘during the five-year 

7 period’’ and all that follows through ‘‘$1,000,000 annu8 ally’’ and inserting ‘‘there are authorized to be appro9 priated $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2016 through 

10 2018’’. 

11 (c) TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.— 

12 (1) AGENT.—Section 404(b) of the National 

13 Forest Foundation Act (16 U.S.C. 583j–2(b)) is 

14 amended by striking ‘‘by this paragraph’’ and insert15 ing ‘‘by subsection (a)(4)’’. 

16 (2) ANNUAL REPORT.—Section 407(b) of the 

17 National Forest Foundation Act (16 U.S.C. 583j– 

18 5(b)) is amended by striking the comma after ‘‘The 

19 Foundation shall’’. 

Æ 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           11438
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      674
<ALLOWANCES>                                       500
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 12434
<PP&E>                                           22406
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   34961
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              510
<BONDS>                                          12009
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       22442
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     34961
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 10121
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   515
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   267
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   9338
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               9338
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      9338
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   111.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   111.42
        

</TABLE>
., 

;...-... .... 

--

-----------~-------

.. REF ID:A68108 

~8P if_6RET -eANt1-E SEGURITY INFORMATION 

m @!!!:!¥!! -: .. &M!He DM!A:sm 

EO 3.3(h)(2) 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

MDtORAlmUM FOR ADMIRAL WERG:m 

- -11 Jul.J 19)2 

SVBJEGT1 Bel.ease ot the COM to Turkey tor D1pl.matio ec.nmtcat.t.ans 

1~ In ~Jlll§O.t.ion Wit.b tb.o D11Wtor• • etr&.Wllmt at the Staff aeottng ~-1 ~ul;T 19S2 to the ~~feo~ that he does not in~ to brpig t.he aubjeot !tea batore USOIB1 I wish to call ,our attention 1D the foll.ovin&1 

a. On 1 terns of 1ntallil9'J0e der1:red tram COMIRT mU1 tary 

•tters, OOMIN1' consumer Departments and Aacic1as outside the Dapartmmt 

ot neten• haft an interest, The prim.r;r orpn tor eurc1&1ng con~l 

over COKDIT or interest to those Departments ard Apncies outside 

art.met ot Defense 1• USCIB. e t s on 

EO 3.3(h)(2) 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

~ 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 06-13-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a 

I 

i ... ..... ! 
-- . -

·. ... 

---_, ... 

... -

.-. 

-- -

--

~ --

-

~--- .. 

-

~ .... ... :r 

~---

---- L 

-... 

... -- ~F-ID:A68108 •• 1• 

.. -- ... -;: . -- , --- .- """"iiiit_, - -

-~-·- .. 

-11 .11113 l.9S2 

H-orand \Ill for ld.Dd.ral VtQger N>Jecta Release of the CCM to Turka7 tor Dipl.oaaat.1.o Comun1cat1ona 

•w••••••~·-·~·J~~------------•-•w••-• . . .:: ; .. _ ·-

intcres\11 'li:lihout, at. least, consul.l.ation~ !be vah!eie tor such consultation 

la 1 ot courae,. USCIB. 

t. M7 recommdat.ion is that the attachat paper be forwarded to 

uscm. 

lnclosure ... l 

M.a> to't' tbe 'llM$lbers or 

USCIB (Draft) 

- •• - .. c.~ - .... ~~ 

,- -~ .;:. -~ -.~;S.-c-.:---· :jj 

.. 

. . . 

wn.tJ'.AM p • FRIEDlW1 

Consultant 

.. 

I 

• l 

.. 

I - 1 

-.... 

- I