alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2013-0943 Directorate ID: 2013-SW-001-AD

Helicopter Model: AgustaWestland S.p.A. (Type Certificate formerly held by Agusta S.p.A.) 

Model A109C, A109E, A109K2, and A119 helicopters

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 132 Helicopters in the US Registry.

Reason: The actions of this AD are intended to detect an unairworthy bolt and prevent failure of 

a bolt, release of a tail rotor blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Costs:

Parts per Helicopter $1,067 for a replacement bolt

Labor per Helicopter

(2 work-hours x $85/workhour for the initial 

inspection)

(1 work-hour x $85/workhour for each recurring 

inspection)

$170

$85

Other (Explain)

Total Cost per Helicopter $170 for the initial inspection

$85 for each recurring inspection

$1,067 for a replacement bolt

Total US Fleet Cost $22,440 for the initial inspection

$11,220 for each recurring inspection cycle

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No ()

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No ()

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

Yes ( ) No ()

Project Engineer: Robert Grant
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 143 (Monday, July 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40100-40101]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19902]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


University of California, Berkeley; Notice of Decision on 
Application for Duty-Free Entry of Scientific Instrument

    This decision is made pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, 
Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-
651, 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). Related records can be viewed 
between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. in Room 4211, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
    Docket Number: 98-025. Applicant: University of California, 
Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720. Instrument: Electron Detector. 
Manufacturer: Gammadata/Scienta AB, Sweden.

[[Page 40101]]

Intended Use: See notice at 63 FR 27562, May 19, 1998.
    Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of 
equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such 
purposes as it is intended to be used, is being manufactured in the 
United States. Reasons: The foreign instrument provides angular 
resolution of 0.02 degree with significant throughput. The Brookhaven 
National Laboratory advised July 2, 1998 that (1) this capability is 
pertinent to the applicant's intended purpose and (2) it knows of no 
domestic instrument or apparatus of equivalent scientific value to the 
foreign instrument for the applicant's intended use.
    We know of no other instrument or apparatus of equivalent 
scientific value to the foreign instrument which is being manufactured 
in the United States.
Frank W. Creel,
Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff.
[FR Doc. 98-19902 Filed 7-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
Fw: Region 8 Lab Pesticides Detection Frequencies for 2009 Samples. 

better summary

Jack Faulk 

t

o

:

Jordan Page 02/18/2010 10:56 AM

jordan,

Here is more monitoring data for our consideration.

Jack

Water Permits Division

US Environmental Protection Agency

EPA East (4203M)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Telephone (202) 564-0768

Fax (202) 564-6431

----- Forwarded by Jack Faulk/DC/USEPA/US on 02/18/2010 10:56 AM -----

From: Judy Bloom/R8/USEPA/US

To: Kenneth Dahlin/R8/USEPA/US@EPA, Mark Murphy/R8/USEPA/US@EPA, Mark 

Burkhardt/R8/USEPA/US@EPA, Kristen Keteles/R8/USEPA/US@EPA, 

patrick.snyder@state.sd.us, fryckman@nd.gov, rmulder@mt.gov, robert.griffith@state.co.us, 

williek@cskt.org, jasmineb@cskt.org, daniel.beley@state.co.us, Karl 

Hermann/R8/USEPA/US@EPA, Tom Johnson/R8/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Jack Faulk/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 02/17/2010 02:49 PM

Subject: Fw: Region 8 Lab Pesticides Detection Frequencies for 2009 Samples. better summary

Sorry folks, look like I jumped the gun there....use this latest and greatest!

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8

1595 Wynkoop Street, 8P-P3T

Denver, Co 80202-1129

phone: 303.312.6395

or toll free in R8 1.800.227.8917

fax: 303.312.6044

email: bloom.judy@epa.gov

-----Forwarded by Judy Bloom/R8/USEPA/US on 02/17/2010 12:48PM -----

To: Judy Bloom/R8/USEPA/US@EPA

From: Kenneth Dahlin/R8/USEPA/US

Date: 02/17/2010 12:29PM

cc: Mark Murphy/R8/USEPA/US@EPA, Kristen Keteles/R8/USEPA/US@EPA, Mark 

Burkhardt/R8/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject: Region 8 Lab Pesticides Detection Frequencies for 2009 Samples.
Hi Judy,

The attached Excel file summarizes target analyte detections from LCMS analyses performed by Mark 

Murphy and I for all samples received during 2009. Mark has augmented the presentation of data by 

adding graphs to the data summaries in each section. This can help the viewer better understand what 

the numbers are saying. Please distribute this to all interested parties.

Regards,

Kenneth Dahlin

EPA Region 8 Laboratory

16194 W. 45th Drive

Golden, CO 80403-1790

(Phone) 303/312-7774

(FAX) 303/312-7800

Dahlin.Kenneth@epa.gov
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002,**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350 (adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002), I, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Dakota Growers PastaCompany, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify that the Quarterly Report on Form10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended October 31, 2004 (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operation of the Company.

 

Date:  December 15,2004

 
|   | /s/  Thomas P. Friezen    |   |
|--------|---------------------------|--------|
|   |                      |
|   | Thomas  P. Friezen        |
|   | *Chief Financial Officer* |

 

----
No. 09-8983.

#### Deandre Lewis, Petitioner v. Derral G. Adams, Warden.

559 U.S. 1072, 130 S. Ct. 2098,

176 L. Ed. 2d 731,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3372.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
| **** |
|------|

**Exhibit 32.2**

 

 

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of ING Life Insurance and Annuity Company (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the officer’s knowledge, the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

| March 28, 2006

  | By:    | /s/    Brian D. Comer                                                             |   |
|------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| (Date)

          |   |         Brian D. Comer

 President

  

  |   |

 

 

----
No. 09-9082.

#### Marek A. Kwasnik, Petitioner v. Maine.

559 U.S. 1053, 130 S. Ct. 2351,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3068.

176 L. Ed. 2d 568,

April 5, 2010.

Petition for writ of certio-rari to the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine denied.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 5013

_____________________________
M ATTHEW D UNCAN , Appellant,

v.

S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Marianne L. Aho , Judge

. October 17, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. R OBERTS , B ILBREY , and W INOKUR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Megan Long, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4984 

To amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to enhance the protection 

of credit ratings of active duty military personnel who are activated 

for military service. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 16, 2006 

Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to enhance 

the protection of credit ratings of active duty military 

personnel who are activated for military service. 

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 Heroes Credit 

5 Protection Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROTECTION OF CREDIT RATINGS OF PERSONS AC7 TIVATED FOR MILITARY SERVICE. 

8 (a) CREDIT RATING PROTECTION.— 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4984 IH 

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Servicemembers Civil 

2 Relief Act (50 U.S.C. App. 501 et seq.) is amended 

3 by inserting at the end of title I the following new 

4 section: 

5 ‘‘SEC. 110. PROTECTION OF CREDIT RATINGS OF PERSONS 

6 ACTIVATED FOR MILITARY SERVICE. 

7 ‘‘(a) REQUIREMENTS OF NOTATION OF DELINQUENT

8 OR SLOW PAYMENT DUE TO MILITARY SERVICE.—Any 

9 person or entity engaged in the practice of assembling or 

10 evaluating consumer credit information that receives from 

11 a creditor a negative report of nonpayment or late pay12 ment with respect to a qualifying account of a person in 

13 military service shall enter with that negative report a no14 tation that the account is delinquent or paid slowly due 

15 to military service. 

16 ‘‘(b) NEGATIVE INFORMATION TO BE DIS17 REGARDED.—Any future potential creditor of such person 

18 who receives a credit report that includes a notation re19 quired by subsection (a) shall disregard any negative in20 formation so noted in the credit report. 

21 ‘‘(c) QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS.—For purposes of this 

22 section, a qualifying account is an account that was 

23 opened by a person in military service before the date on 

24 which that person entered that period of military service, 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
3 

•HR 4984 IH 

1 but only with respect to obligations incurred before such 

2 date.’’. 

3 (2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of con4 tents in section 1(b) of such Act is amended by in5 serting after the item relating to section 109 the fol6 lowing new item: 

‘‘Sec. 110. Protection of credit ratings of persons activated for military service’’. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Section 110 of the 

8 Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, as added by subsection 

9 (a), shall apply with respect to a period of military service 

10 (as defined in such Act) that is being performed by a per11 son on the date of the enactment of this Act or to which 

12 a person is ordered on or after such date. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
Lader v. Warden, 121 Nev. 682, 686, 120 P.3d 1164, 1166 (2005). Here,

the district court conducted an evidentiary hearing and heard testimony from Draw's trial counsel. Draw did not testify at the evidentiary hearing and he did not call his appellate counsel to testify. The district court found that Draw failed to demonstrate that trial counsel's representation was deficient or prejudice. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694 (1984); Kirksey v. State, 112 Nev. 980, 987, 923 P.2d 1102, 1107 (1996); see also Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. , 131 S. Ct. 1388, 1408 (2011) ("Surmounting Strickland's high bar is never an easy task." (quotation marks omitted) (alteration omitted)). The district court also determined that appellate counsel was not ineffective. See Kirksey, 112 Nev. at 998, 923 P.2d at 1113-14. We conclude that the district court's findings are supported by substantial evidence, see Riley v. State, 110 Nev. 638, 647, 878 P.2d 272, 278 (1994), and the district court did not err by rejecting Draw's ineffective-assistance claims.

Draw also contends that the district court erred by denying the claims raised in his initial pro se petitions. Draw claims that his due process rights were violated (1) by missing transcripts and the alleged destruction of preliminary hearing and calendar call transcripts by a court reporter, (2) by counsel's failure to investigate and prepare for trial, and (3) because he is actually innocent. Draw, however, offers no argument with the requisite factual specificity or citation to any relevant legal authority in support of these claims, therefore, we need not address them. See Maresca v. State, 103 Nev. 669, 673, 748 P.2d 3, 6 (1987).

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2
(0) 1947AGibbons Pickering J.

Nevertheless, based on our review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not err by rejecting these claims. See Lader, 121 Nev. at 686, 120 P.3d at 1166; see also Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687-88; Kirksey, 112 Nev. at 987, 998, 923 P.2d at 1107, 1113-14. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

J. Saitta

cc: Hon. Elissa F. Cadish, District Judge Christopher R. Oram Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 3

(0) 1947A 

### e
Exhibit 21
 Subsidiaries of Registrant
 Name of Company
    
    Jurisdiction of IncorporationSynergetics, Inc.
    
    MissouriSynergetics IP, Inc.
    
    DelawareSynergetics Delaware, Inc.
    
    DelawareSynergetics Development Company, L.L.C.
(Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Synergetics, Inc.)
    
    MissouriSynergetics Germany GmbH
    
    GermanySynergetics Italia, Srl
    
    ItalySynergetics Surgical Australia PTY, Ltd.
    
    AustraliaSynergetics France, SARL
    
    France
# C_2016342EN.01001001.xml

| 17.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 342/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 342/10

---

Commission communication pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Modification of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 342/10)

| Member State | UK |
| --- | --- |
| Route concerned | Tingwall/Sumburgh-Fair Isle
  Tingwall-Foula
  Tingwall-Papa Stour
  Tingwall-Out Skerries |
| Original date of entry into force of the public service obligations | 30 December 1997 |
| Date of entry into force of modifications | 1 April 2017 |
| Address where the text and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public service obligation can be obtained | Shetland Islands Council |
| Transport Planning Service |
| Development Services Department |
| 8 North Ness Business Park |
| Lerwick |
| Shetland |
| Scotland |
| ZE1 0LZ |
| UNITED KINGDOM |
| Tel. +44 1595744868 |
| Email: transport@shetland.gov.uk |
| Internet: www.shetland.gov.uk |

Member State

UK

Route concerned

Tingwall/Sumburgh-Fair Isle

Tingwall-Foula

Tingwall-Papa Stour

Tingwall-Out Skerries

Original date of entry into force of the public service obligations

30 December 1997

Date of entry into force of modifications

1 April 2017

Address where the text and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public service obligation can be obtained

Shetland Islands Council

Transport Planning Service

Development Services Department

8 North Ness Business Park

Lerwick

Shetland

Scotland

ZE1 0LZ

UNITED KINGDOM

Tel. +44 1595744868

Email: transport@shetland.gov.uk

Internet: www.shetland.gov.uk

---
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Joint Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comment, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Wednesday, April 22, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Susan Gilbert at 1-888-912-1227 or 404-338-7185.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Joint Committee will be held Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 3 p.m. Eastern Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Susan Gilbert. For more information please contact Ms. Gilbert at 1-888-912-1227 or 404-338-7185 or write TAP Office, Stop 211-D, 401 West Peachtree Street, NW., Atlanta, GA, 30308-3520, or contact us at the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org*.                

The agenda will include various IRS issues.

Dated: February 26, 2009.

Shawn F. Collins,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

 [FR Doc. E9-4663 Filed 3-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
June 26, 2015

Mr. Marc Wierioch

27326 Belmont Court Valencia, CA 91354

Dear Mr. Wierioch:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your March 10, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015- 0587), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
No. 09-9154.

#### Preston Tyrone Smith, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1042, 130 S. Ct. 2074,

176 L. Ed. 2d 423,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2901.

March 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of *424Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 343 Fed. Appx. 441.
************************* 

 * MONOGRAPH NO: 1A1L 

 ************************* 

ITEM: Pork Sausage in Cream Gravy, Shelf Stable (PSC) PRIMARY 

NSN: 8940 01 470 3204 ITEM SPECIFICATION: PCR-P-014 Poly Tray 

 8940 01 470 3244 PCR-P-013 Tray Can 

APPROXIMATE CALORIC VALUE PER SERVING: 232 Kcals 

 

CHARACTERISTICS OF ITEM: 

 APPEARANCE: moderately thick cream gravy; light tan/gray cream gravy; light 

brown/tan pork; moist pork; specks of spice; glossy surface 

 ODOR: breakfast pork sausage spice 

 FLAVOR: peppery aftertaste; breakfast sausage spice; moderately salty; cream 

gravy 

 TEXTURE: moderately thick and smooth gravy; medium grind sausage; moist 

ground pork; slightly grainy chew down of pork 

 ESTIMATED SHELF-LIFE AT: 80 DEGREES F: 36 months 

 100 DEGREES F: 6 months 

POSSIBLE DETERIORATIVE CHANGES: 

 Appearance: darkening/graying of gravy; oiling out; stringiness of gravy; thickening 

or thinning of gravy 

 Odor: metallic; loss of odor; thermally processed odor; sour 

 Flavor: metallic; loss of spice flavor; sourness; thermally processed flavor 

 Texture: thinning or thickening of gravy; drier crumbly pork; lumpy or stringy 

gravy
No. 09-8140.

#### Mark Rene Flores, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

559 U.S. 976, 130 S. Ct. 1693,

176 L. Ed. 2d 188,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2016.

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.