alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2004343EN.01002101.xml

| 19.11.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 343/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 343/21

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1984/2004

of 18 November 2004

fixing the maximum export refund on oats in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 7 thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (2), and in particular Article 4 thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004 of 3 September 2004 on a special intervention measure for oats in Finland and Sweden for the 2004/2005 marketing year (3),

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from Finland or Sweden to all third countries with the exception of Bulgaria, Norway, Romania and Switzerland was opened pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from Finland or Sweden to all third countries with the exception of Bulgaria, Norway, Romania and Switzerland was opened pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004.

| (2) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should be fixed.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 12 to 18 November 2004, pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004, the maximum refund on exportation of oats shall be 29,99/EUR t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 19 November 2004.

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

Done at Brussels, 18 November 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1431/2003 (OJ L 203, 12.8.2003, p. 16).

2

(3)  
  OJ L 285, 4.9.2004, p. 3.

3

---
EXHIBIT 31.1
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, George Tsafalas, Chief Executive Officer of Fairchild International Corporation, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Fairchild International Corporation;

2.	Based on my knowledge, this  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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.	The registrant's other certifying officers 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

1. 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
2. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant'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
3. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

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

1. 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 registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
2. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: May 19, 2004

/s/ George Tsafalas

_____________________________
George Tsafalas, President
and Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT
      21.01




**SUBSIDIARIES**




The
      Company has two wholly-owned subsidiaries: iSt Services, Inc. and Tracking
      Systems Corporation. iSt Services, Inc. was incorporated on September 25, 2002,
      in the State of Nebraska and is in good standing. The address of the iSt
      Services, Inc. is 5078 South 111 th Street,
      Omaha, Nebraska 68137. Tracking Systems Corporation was incorporated on February
      14, 1991, in the State of Pennsylvania and is in good standing. The address
      of
      Tracking Systems Corporation is 5078 S. 111 th Street,
      Omaha, NE 68137.
Case 19-01298-MAM Doc 472-16 Filed 10/22/20 Page 1 of 2
Case 19-01298-MAM Doc 472-16 Filed 10/22/20 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 18, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 19347]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X95-10418]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# Time and Date:

2 p.m., Wednesday, May 20, 2009.

# Place:

1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference Room.

# Status:

Closed.

# Matters To Be Considered:

Enforcement Matters.

# Contact Person for More Information:

Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield, 

Assistant Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9-9702 Filed 4-24-09; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
Transport Airplane Directorate 1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. Renton, Washington 98057-3356

September 28, 2010

Mr. Yves Regis Vice President, Product Integrity Airbus SAS 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte 31707 Blagnac Cedex France

Dear Mr. Regis:

This letter summarizes communication betw een Steve Happenny of the FAA and Airbus, requesting more information from Airbus afte r our initial acknowledge ment of receipt of your petition for exemption, and describes the ti meframe within which we must receive your response before we close the docket. In an e-mail dated September 23, 2010, to Mi chael Koenig, of Airbus, Steve Happenny requested clarification of the following: (1) Does the A350-900 airplane design include a pair of spoilers that will have an electrical back-up actuation? Please provide a referen ce number for documentation.
(2) Is it correct that in case of total loss of all hydraulic power in combination with a significant damage of the pressurized fuselage, the aircraft will still be able to deploy a pair of spoilers in order to descend qui ckly to a safe altit ude? Please provide a reference number for documentation.

The full content of this communication ma y be viewed in docket no. FAA-2010-0766 at regulations.gov. We will advise you of our final decision on your petition as soon as possible. We will hold the docket open for 30 days awaiting this information. If we do not receive a response in 30 days we will close the dock et. If you have questions in the meantime, you may call Steve Happenny at (425) 227-2147, e-mail stephen.happenny@faa.gov.

Sincerely,

/s/

Mark Forseth Standardization Branch Transport Airplane Directorate Federal Aviation Administration
Guideline for Determining the Applicability of Nitrogen 1

Oxide Requirements under Section 182(f) , Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, Air Quality Strategies & Standards

Division, December 1993, Chapter 4, "Contribute to

Attainment."

February 8, 1995

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Sec tion 182(f) Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Exemptions- -

Revised Process and Criteria

FROM: John S. Seitz, Director

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (MD-10)

TO: Director, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management

 Division, Regions I and IV

Director, Air & Waste Management Division, Region I I

Director, Air, Radiation and Toxics Division, 

 Region III

Director, Air & Radiation Division, Region V

Director, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Division, 

 Region VI

Director, Air & Toxics Division, 

 Regions VII, VIII, IX, and X

This memorandum clarifies guidance previously issue d

concerning NOx exemptions under section 182(f) of the Clean Air

Act (A ct) and interstate transport of emissions under sectio n

110(a)(2)(D) of the A ct. First, the EPA believes that these two 1

secti ons must be considered independently. Under sectio n

182(f ), an exemption from the NOx requirements may be grante d

for nonattainmen t areas outside an ozone transport region if EPA

deter mines that "additional reductions of [NOx] would no t

contribute to attainment of the national ambient air qualit y

standard for ozo ne in the area." The EPA believes that the term

"area" means the "nonattainment area" and that EPA' s

determination is limited, as a legal matter, to consideration of
the effe cts in the nonattainment area due to NOx emission s

reductions from sources in the same nonattainment area. The EPA

has separate authority under section 110(a)(2)(D) to require a

State to reduce emissions from stationary and/or mobile sources

where there is evidence showing that such emissions woul d

cont ribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere wit h

maintenance in o ther States. In some cases, then, EPA may grant

an exemption from across-the-board NOx reasonably availabl e

control technology (RACT) controls under section 182(f) and, in

a separate action, require NOx controls from stationary and/or

mobile sources under section 110(a)(2)(D). The guidanc e

contained in this memorandum replaces the last paragraph o f

section 4.4 and supplements section 4.3 of the December 16, 1993

guidance.

Secondly, where EPA grants a NOx exemption under sectio n

182(f), the exemption applies to RACT, nonattainment new source

revi ew, conformity, and inspection/maintenance. Furthe r

discussion of this issue may be found in a January 12, 199 5

memorandum from G. T. Helms to the Regional Air Branch Chiefs.

cc: Rich Ossias
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Major ground-water flow systems in the Great Basin region of Nevada, Utah, and adjacent states      

      January 1, 1988    

View Sheet 1

View Sheet 2

This atlas is one of several reports that are products of an analysis of regional aquifer systems in the Great Basin of Nevada, Utah, and adjacent States.  The Geological Survey program of regional aquifer-system analyses is a nationwide study of ground-water systems on a regional scale.  The program is intended to establish a framework of geologic, hydrologic, and geochemical information for each regional aquifer system studied.  As of 1985, studies have been started or completed in 19 areas.  The scope of the Great Basin Regional Aquifer-System Analysis is outlined by Harrill and others (1983).  The purpose of this report is to bring the findings of several studies together into a map report that discusses regional aspects of ground-water flow in the Great Basin, delineates the major ground-water flow systems, and briefly describes some of their characteristics.

This atlas is Chapter C of a three-part series. Chapter A delineates and describes hydrogeologic units in the Great Basin region, and Chapter B shows the generalized distribution of hydraulic potential.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Contact

####               Salt Lake City Main Office          

2329 West Orton CircleWest Valley City, UT84119-2047United States

doleary@usgs.gov

(801) 908-5014

(801) 908-5001

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Great Basin Region
                  - nevada
                  -  Utah

View All **
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>James Montgomery, Defendant-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Kate Paek, J.), rendered October 20, 2017, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree, and imposing sentence.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Judgment of conviction (Kate Paek, J.), rendered October 20, 2017, affirmed.</p><p>The accusatory instrument was not jurisdictionally defective. It charged all the elements of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree (<i>see</i> Penal Law ยง 195.05). The instrument alleges, inter alia, that a police officer observed defendant and a group of 24 other people engaged in a fist fight inside the Staten Island Ferry Terminal; that the officer gave a "lawful order to disperse and leave ... multiple times as part of [his] official duty to keep the peace" but defendant repeatedly "refuse[d] to leave ... and instead continu[ed] running into the ... group of people" which made it difficult for the officer to "complete [his] official duty" and that defendant used "his hand to strike [the officer's] arm away from him and then r[a]n back into the ... group of people." These allegations were sufficient at the pleading stage to support an inference that, by attempting to maintain order in the terminal, the officer was performing an official function within the meaning of Penal Law ยง 195.05, and that defendant intentionally obstructed that function through physical force or interference (see <i>Matter of Eric A.</i>, 66 AD3d 603 [2009]; <i>Matter of Quaniqua W.</i>, 25 AD3d 380, 380-381 [2006]).</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur<br>Decision Date: January 18, 2019<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
# C_2004173EN.01000301.xml

| 3.7.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 173/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 173/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case No COMP/M.3422 - BBVA / BNL / JV)

(2004/C 173/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 7 June 2004, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/ ) free of charge. This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes. |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/ ) free of charge. This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes.

| — | in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document number 304M3422. CELEX is the computerized documentation system of European Community law. For more information on how to access Celex, see ‘subscriber information’ links below: |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document number 304M3422. CELEX is the computerized documentation system of European Community law. For more information on how to access Celex, see ‘subscriber information’ links below:

CELEX: subscriber information

http://publications.eu.int/general/en/eulaw_en.htm

---
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 82 (Thursday, April 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 19959]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-9851]


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

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE U.S.

[Public Notice 112]


Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; 
Comment Request

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the U.S.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank, as a part of its continuing effort to 
reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and 
other Federal Agencies to comment on the proposed information 
collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The 
form will be used by customers who originally applied for a multibuyer 
policy using EIB 92-50. Our customers will be able to submit this form 
on paper or electronically.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before June 29, 2009 
to be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Direct all comments and requests for additional information 
to Walter Kosciow, Export-Import Bank of the U.S., 811 Vermont Avenue, 
NW., Washington, DC 20571, (202) 565-3649.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Title and Form Number: Application for Special Buyer Credit Limit 
(SBCL) Under Multi-Buyer Export Credit Insurance Policies, EIB 92-51.
    OMB Number: 3048-0015.
    Type of Review: Regular.
    Need and Use: The information requested enables the applicant to 
provide Ex-Im Bank with the information necessary to obtain 
legislatively required assurance of repayment and fulfills other 
statutory requirements.
    Affected Public: The form affects entities involved in the export 
of U.S. goods and Services.
    Estimated Annual Respondents: 1778.
    Estimated Time per Respondent: \1/2\ hour.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 889.
    Frequency of Reporting or Use: 2-3 times per year.

Solomon Bush,
Agency Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-9851 Filed 4-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           A king-sized theropod coprolite      

      January 1, 1998    

Fossil faeces (coprolites) provide unique trophic perspectives on ancient ecosystems. Yet, although thousands of coprolites have been discovered, specimens that can be unequivocally attributed to carnivorous dinosaurs are almost unknown. A few fossil faeces have been ascribed to herbivorous dinosaurs, but it is more difficult to identify coprolites produced by theropods because other carnivorous taxa coexisted with dinosaurs and most faeces are taxonomically ambiguous. Thus sizeable (up to 20 cm long and 10 cm wide) phosphatic coprolites from Belgium and India that have been attributed to dinosaurs might have been produced by contemporaneous crocodylians or fish. But there is no ambiguity about the theropod origin of the Cretaceous coprolite we report here. This specimen is more than twice as large as any previously reported carnivore coprolite, and its great size and temporal and geographic context indicate that it was produced by a tyrannosaur, most likely Tyrannosaurus rex. The specimen contains a high proportion (30-50%) of bone fragments, an it rare tangible evidence of theropod diet and digestive processes.

## Citation Information
Exhibit 32


                       EYE CATCHING MARKETING CORPORATION
                              A Nevada Corporation
                             CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Eye Catching Marketing Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), we, Robert Hemmerling,
President and Chief Executive Officer, and Devinder Randhawa, Chief Financial
Officer and Secretary, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss.ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated December 18, 2003                     /s/Robert Hemmerling
                                            ---------------------------
                                            Robert Hemmerling,
                                            President, C.E.O. and C.F.O.


                                            /s/Devinder Randhawa
                                            ---------------------------
                                            Devinder Randhawa,
                                            C.F.O. and Secretary


<PAGE>