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

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 585 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand the availability 

of penalty-free distributions to unemployed individuals from retirement plans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 26, 2023 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN (for herself and Ms. NORTON) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand 

the availability of penalty-free distributions to unemployed individuals from retirement plans. 

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 ‘‘Expanding Penalty 

5 Free Withdrawal Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 585 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF EXCEPTION FOR PENALTY ON 

2 EARLY DISTRIBUTIONS TO UNEMPLOYED IN3 DIVIDUALS FROM RETIREMENT PLANS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 72(t)(2) of the Internal 

5 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end 

6 the following new subparagraph: 

7 ‘‘(I) LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYMENT DIS8 TRIBUTIONS.— 

9 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Distributions to 

10 an individual after separation from em11 ployment— 

12 ‘‘(I) if such individual has re13 ceived unemployment compensation 

14 for 26 consecutive weeks under any 

15 Federal or State unemployment com16 pensation law by reason of such sepa17 ration (or, if less, for the maximum 

18 period for which unemployment com19 pensation is available under State law 

20 applicable to the individual), and 

21 ‘‘(II) if such distributions are 

22 made during any taxable year during 

23 which such unemployment compensa24 tion is paid or the succeeding taxable 

25 year. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 585 IH

1 ‘‘(ii) DISTRIBUTIONS AFTER REEM2 PLOYMENT; SELF-EMPLOYED INDIVID3 UALS.—Rules similar to the rules of 

4 clauses (ii) and (iii) of subparagraph (D) 

5 shall apply for purposes of this subpara6 graph. 

7 ‘‘(iii) LIMITATION.—Clause (i) shall 

8 not apply to any distribution to the extent 

9 that such distribution exceeds the lesser 

10 of— 

11 ‘‘(I) $50,000, reduced by the ag12 gregate amount of distributions which 

13 are described in clause (i) from all 

14 plans of the individual during the 1- 

15 year period ending on the day before 

16 the date on which such distribution 

17 was made, or 

18 ‘‘(II) the greater of $10,000 or 

19 one-half of the aggregate fair market 

20 value (at the time of the distribution) 

21 of the individual’s qualified retirement 

22 plans (as defined in section 4974(c)) 

23 and the nonforfeitable portion the in24 dividual’s defined contribution plans. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
4 

•HR 585 IH

1 ‘‘(iv) COORDINATION WITH DISTRIBU2 TIONS TO UNEMPLOYED INDIVIDUALS FOR

3 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS.—Dis4 tributions shall not be taken into account 

5 under this subparagraph if such distribu6 tions are described in subparagraph (D).’’. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

8 this section shall apply to distributions made after Decem9 ber 31, 2022. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
#### Boyd R. BROWN, Petitioner/Respondent, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent/Appellant.

No. 69635.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

June 25, 1996.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., James A. Chenault, III, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Mo. Dept, of Revenue, Jefferson City, for appellant.

Carlson, Wendler & Sanderson, Craig Hellmann, Washington, for respondent.

KAROHL, Judge.

The Director of Revenue appeals order setting aside driver’s license suspension as barred by the constitutional prohibition against Double Jeopardy because defendant had previously been prosecuted for a related driving while intoxicated charge.

This case is controlled by the Missouri Supreme Court’s recent decision in *State v. Mayo,*915 S.W.2d 758 (Mo. banc 1996). There, the court concluded the sanction of a license revocation or suspension is not punishment for the purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause. It held a charge of driving while intoxicated was not barred by Double Jeopardy because the defendant’s license had been administratively suspended. Thus, it reversed the trial court’s dismissal of the charge against defendant. The facts of the present case are identical to those in a case consolidated with *Mayo*and the holdings are equally decisive.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

REINHARD, P.J., and GRIMM, J., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1  Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)   I, Ed Bailey, Chief Executive Officer, and Principal Accounting Officer, of LightTouch Vein & Laser, Inc. (the "Registrant") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge, based upon a review of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period December 31, 2009 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.  Dated: April 9, 2010 By: /s/ Ed Bailey  Ed Bailey  Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting  Officer  * A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to LightTouch Vein & Laser, Inc. and will be retained by LightTouch Vein & Laser, Inc. and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 341 

Expressing heartfelt sympathy for the victims and families of the shootings 

in Geneva and Coffee Counties in Alabama, on March 10, 2009. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 21, 2009 

Mr. BRIGHT (for himself, Mr. DAVIS of Alabama, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. ROGERS

of Alabama, Mr. GRIFFITH, Mr. BONNER, and Mr. ADERHOLT) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

Oversight and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing heartfelt sympathy for the victims and families 

of the shootings in Geneva and Coffee Counties in Alabama, on March 10, 2009. 

Whereas the communities of Geneva and Coffee Counties in 

Alabama have endured a tragic event in southeast Alabama that resulted in the loss of 10 lives and injuries to 

several others; 

Whereas, on March 10, 2009, a man fired at members of his 

family and other innocent bystanders throughout several 

towns in Geneva and Coffee Counties in Alabama; 

Whereas the result of this shooting spree resulted in the 

deaths of Bruce Maloy, Lisa McLendon, Andrea Myers, 

Corrine Gracy Myers, Sonya Smith, James Starling, 


smartinez on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 341 IH 

James White, Virginia White, Dean Wise, and Tracy 

Wise; 

Whereas State Trooper Mike Gillis, Greg McCullough, Ella 

Meyers, and Jeffrey Nelson, were wounded as a result of 

the shootings; 

Whereas the first responders, State Troopers of the Dothan 

Troopers Post, officers of the Geneva Police Department, 

officers of the Geneva County Sheriff’s Department, and 

an officer of the Conservation and Natural Resources department pursued and eventually found the gunman deceased; and 

Whereas the grieving and celebration of the lives of those lost 

in this senseless tragedy will be with the communities of 

Geneva and Coffee Counties for months and years to 

come: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) expresses its heartfelt sympathy for the vic3 tims and families of the shootings in Geneva and 

4 Coffee Counties in Alabama on March 10, 2009; and 

5 (2) conveys its gratitude to the city and county 

6 officials, and all the police, fire, sheriff, and emer7 gency medical teams who responded swiftly to the 

8 scene and helped prevent further violence. 

Æ 


smartinez on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
Date of Arrest: 09/21 

United States District Court 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Magistrate Case No. ll-\141M0 

Plaintiff, ) 

Vs. ) 

) COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF 

Noel Guadalupe GONZALEZ ) 

AKA: None Known ) Title 8, United States Code, Section 1326(a), 073439590 ) enhanced by (b}(l) (Re-Entry After Removal), YOB: 1977 ) Felony Citizen of: Mexico 

Defendant ) 

) 

) 

) 

The undersigned complainant being duly sworn states: 

COUNT 1 

That on or about September 21, 2017 Defendant Noel Guadalupe GONZALEZ, an alien, 

was found in the United States at or near San Luis, Arizona, within the District of Arizona, after 

having been previously denied admission, excluded, deported, and removed from the United 

States to Mexico through the port of Hidalgo, Texas, on or about September 6, 2005. The 

Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security not theretofore having consented to any 

reapplication by the Defendant for admission into the United States, in violation of Title 8, 

United States Code, Section 1326(a), enhanced by (b)(l) (Felony). 

And the complainant further states that this complaint is based on the attached Statement 

of Facts incorporated herein by reference. 

September 22. 2017 

Date 

Sip-~ Roger Keller Jr 

BORDER PATROL AGENT 

at Yuma. Arizona 

City and State 

James F. Metcalf, United States Magistrate Judge 

Name &. Title of Judicial Officer 

-1 -

Case 2:17-cr-01434-SMM Document 1 Filed 09/22/17 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Vs. 

Noel Guadalupe GONZALEZ 

AKA: None Known 

073439590 

STATEMENT OF FACTUAL BASIS 

The complainant states that this complaint is based upon the statements of the apprehending 

officers, that the Defendant was found and arrested on or about September 21, 2017, near San Luis, 

Arizona. Questioning of the Defendant by agents revealed that the Defendant is a citizen of Mexico 

and not in possession of valid documents allowing him to enter or remain in the United States. 

By questioning the Defendant and through record checks, agents detennined the Defendant 

was first ordered removed at or near Seattle, Washington on or about April 24, 1997. The Defendant 

was most recently removed on or about September 6, 2005, through the port of Hidalgo, Texas, 

subsequent to a conviction in an United States District Court, District of Arizona on or about 

November 5, 2003, for the crime of Re-Entry After Removal, a felony. 

Agents detennined that on or about September 21, 2017, the Defendant re-entered the 

United States without the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security having consented to 

reapplication by the Defendant for admission into the United States. 

Sworn to before me and subscribed in my presence, 

September 22, 2017 

Date 

-2-

Case 2:17-cr-01434-SMM Document 1 Filed 09/22/17 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 1

Case 2:17-cv-04629-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/14/17 Page 1 of 8
Case 2:17-cv-04629-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/14/17 Page 2 of 8
Case 2:17-cv-04629-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/14/17 Page 3 of 8
Case 2:17-cv-04629-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/14/17 Page 4 of 8
Case 2:17-cv-04629-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/14/17 Page 5 of 8
Case 2:17-cv-04629-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/14/17 Page 6 of 8
Case 2:17-cv-04629-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/14/17 Page 7 of 8
Case 2:17-cv-04629-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/14/17 Page 8 of 8
#### Patricia HUELSMANN, Employee/Appellant, v. DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION, Employer/Respondent, and Treasurer of the State of Missouri, Custodian for the Second Injury Fund, Respondent.

No. 65574.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Sept. 27, 1994.

Carla G. McBride, Kessler & Kessler, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Vicky L. Anthony, Asst. Atty. Gen., Cape Girardeau, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and CRAHAN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Claimant appeals the order of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) denying her claim against employer and the Second Injury Fund. We affirm. The award of the Commission is supported by substantial and competent evidence. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.-16(b).
Case 2:17-mj-09492-ESW Document 1 Filed 10/31/17 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-09492-ESW Document 1 Filed 10/31/17 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-09492-ESW Document 1 Filed 10/31/17 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-09492-ESW Document 1 Filed 10/31/17 Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

UNIVERSAL CITY FLORIDA HOLDING CO. I

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Universal City Florida Holding Co. I (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 29, 2008 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, John R. Sprouls certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| | (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: August 8, 2008



By:

/s/ JOHN R. SPROULSJohn R. SproulsPrincipal Executive Officer




32
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 106 (Friday, May 31, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27342-27343]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13638]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. PR96-6-000]


Gulf States Pipeline Corporation; Notice of Petition for Rate 
Approval

May 24, 1996.
    Take notice that on May 1, 1996, as corrected on May 10, 1996, Gulf 
States Pipeline Corporation (Gulf States) filed pursuant to Section 
284.123(b)(2) of the Commission's Regulations, a petition for rate 
approval requesting that the Commisison approve as fair and equitable a 
system-wide interruptible transportation rate of $0.2637 per MMBtu, a 
firm reservation rate of $4.6360 per MMBtu, and a firm commodity rate 
of $0.1112 per MMBtu for transportation services performed under 
Section 311(a)(2) of the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978.
    Gulf States states that it is an intrastate pipeline within the 
meaning of Section 2(16) of the NGPA and it owns and operates an 
intrastate pipeline system in the State of Louisiana. Gulf States 
proposes an effective date of May 1, 1996.
    Pursuant to Section 284.123(b)(2)(ii) of the Commission's 
Regulations, if the Commission does not act within 150 days of the 
filing date, the rates will be deemed to be fair and equitable and not 
in excess of an amount which interstate pipelines would be permitted to 
charge for similar transportation services. The Commission may, prior 
to the expiration of the 150-day period, extend the time for action or 
institute a proceeding to afford parties an opportunity for written 
comments and for the oral presentation of views, data, and arguments.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate proceeding must 
file a motion to intervene in accordance with Sections 385.211 and 
385.214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures. All 
motions must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission on or before 
June 10, 1996. Protests will be considered by the Commission in 
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to 
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies

[[Page 27343]]

of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-13638 Filed 5-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of KBLHealthcare Acquisition Corp. II (the‘‘Company’’) on Form 10-QSB for the periodending June  30,  2006 (the‘‘Report’’), as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I Marlene Krauss, M.D.,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.        TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;and

2.        The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of theCompany.

|        |  |  |                                                                       |  |  |        |  |  |                        |
|--------|--|--|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--------|--|--|------------------------|
| By:    |  |  | /s/Marlene Krauss, M.D.                                               |  |  |   |  |  | Dated: August  14,2006 |
|   |  |  | Marlene Krauss, M.DChiefExecutive Officer(Principal ExecutiveOfficer) |  |  |   |  |  |                   |
|        |

----
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 18 (Friday, January 26, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 2499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1287]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. TM96-8-29-000]


Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Proposed 
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

January 22, 1996.
    Take notice that on January 16, 1996 Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line 
Corporation (Transco) tendered for filing to become part of its FERC 
Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, certain revised tariff sheets 
enumerated in Appendix A attached to the filing.
    Transco states that the purpose of the instant filing is to track 
(1) rate changes attributable to storage service purchased from CNG 
Transmission Corporation (CNG) under its Rate Schedule GSS the costs of 
which are included in the rates and charges payable under Transco's 
Rate Schedules LSS and GSS and (2) fuel changes attributable to storage 
service purchased from Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation (TETCO) 
under its Rate Schedule X-28 the costs of which are included in the 
rates and charges payable under Transco's Rate Schedule S-2. This 
tracking filing is being made pursuant to Section 4 of Transco's Rate 
Schedule LSS, Section 3 of Transco's Rate Schedule GSS and Section 26 
of the General Terms and Conditions of Transco's Volume No. 1 Tariff.
    Transco states that Appendices B and C attached to the filing 
contain explanations of the rate changes and details regarding the 
computation of the revised LSS and GSS rates, respectively, and 
Appendix D contains an explanation of the S-2 fuel percentage change.
    Transco states that copies of the filing are being mailed to each 
of its LSS, GSS and S-2 customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as provided 
in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-1287 Filed 1-25-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 12

- 15875 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:11

- cr - 00034

- SPM

- GRJ

- 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus PHILLIP WILLIAM WINTERS, Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________ ____ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida

________________________ (July 11, 2013) Before HULL , JORDAN and ANDERSON , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Case: 12-15875 Date Filed: 07/11/2013 Page: 1 of 22 Chet Kaufman, appointed counsel for Phillip William Winters, in this direct crim inal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals
that counsel = s asse ssment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit,
counsel = s motion to withdraw is GRANTED , and Winters = s conviction and
sentence are AFFIRMED

.

Case: 12-15875 Date Filed: 07/11/2013 Page: 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 101 (Thursday, May 23, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25891]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12982]



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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993 Fastcast Consortium

    Notice is hereby given that, on April 15, 1996, pursuant to 
Sec. 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), the Fastcast Consortium 
(``Fastcast'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the 
identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of the 
venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the 
Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Sec. 6(b) of 
the Act, the identities of the parties are: Accelerated Technologies, 
Inc., Austin, TX; Compression Engineering, Indianapolis, IN; DTM 
Corporation, Austin, TX; The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Akron, OH; 
Komtek, Worcester, MA; Kovatch Castings, Inc., Uniontown, OH; Laser 
Fare Advanced Technology Group, Narragansett, RI; Laserform, Inc., 
Auburn Hills, MS; Manufacturing Sciences Corporation, Oak Ridge, TN; 
Osteonics Corporation, Allendale, NJ; Plynetics Corporation, San 
Leandro, CA; Solidform, Inc., Fort Worth, TX; TexCast, Inc., Inc., 
Houston, TX; 3D Systems Corporation, Valencia CA; Truecast Precision 
Castings, Inc., Louisville, KY; and Walworth Foundaries, Inc., Darien, 
WI.
    Fastcast's area of planned activity is research and development for 
the purpose of advancing the state of the art of investment casting in 
the United States.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 96-12982 Filed 5-22-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
EXHIBIT 10.32


AMENDMENT NO. 3

TO

MSC INDUSTRIAL DIRECT CO., INC.

ASSOCIATE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN


Effective February 1,
2007, Section 2(n) of the MSC Industrial Direct Co., Inc.
Associate Stock Purchase Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as
follows:


“n)        “Purchase
Price” shall mean 90% of the Fair Market Value of the Class A
Common Stock as of the Exercise Date.”