text:
InformationWeek is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC
This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.
8 IT Hiring Trends You Can't Ignore Drill down on the latest trends in the IT labor market for job seekers and employers and get expert advice from an IT recruiter.
Edelman CIO Shares His 90-Day Game Plan Any IT leader looking to re-energize or re-evaluate a team can adapt the plan CIO Denis Edwards used to start his new job.
Windows RT Woes: HTC Scraps Tablet Tablets are cannibalizing PC sales -- but while iOS and Android feast, consumers have left Windows RT to starve. Can Windows 8.1 save Microsoft's lightweight OS?
IBM Appoints First Federal Chief Innovation Officer Dr. Jane Snowdon hails from IBM Research, where she led global outlook for the company's 12 labs.
10 Social Business Leaders For 2013 State Street, Unisys, GE Capital, KPMG and Leaseplan lead list of companies recognized as E2 Social Business Leaders.
MIT Sees Zombies And MOOCs In Education's Future MIT's Sloan School of Management is one of several universities using AvayaLive Engage to meld real and virtual classrooms.
Appthority Portal Helps Assess Mobile Risk Appthority Portal gives customers greater granularity in determining and responding to mobile risk factors.
Demand For IT Apprenticeships Outpaces Opportunities In U.K. With 17 applicants for every available IT apprenticeship position in the U.K., government leaders encourage employers to add more opportunities.
Parents Press For Mobile Tech In Education More than 50% of parents believe schools should make added use of mobile devices in education, new survey finds.
U.K. Fiber Failures Hinder Economic Growth U.K. should follow France's model of public-private investment in broadband infrastructure to bolster its economy, telecom consultants say.
20 People Who Changed Tech: Ted Turner And Jerry Levin By bringing the world of content to the world of technology, they transformed media and entertainment.
3 Ways IT Can Support Talent Strategy Technology that bolsters the talent strategy gives IT leaders an essential role shaping the business environment.
Google, Workday, Evernote Preach Future Of Enterprise Software At E2 Enterprise software landscape is changing dramatically, driven by rapidly evolving customer needs and a growing list of technology providers ready to answer them.
HIE Participation Doesn't Create Test Savings, Study Says Physicians in Colorado HIE ordered fewer lab tests and the same number of imaging tests, but costs remained constant.
Big Data Drives 'National Day Of Civic Hacking' Nationwide hackathon this weekend encourages coders to use publicly available data to tackle problems ranging from poverty to poultry handling.
The IBM Way On Analytics IBM analytic services size up HR data from multiple sources to predict employee satisfaction and retention. Warning: Consulting is required.
Google Adds Stock-Android Smartphones With $599 version of HTC One, Google responds to demand for more smartphones that have the stock version of Android installed.
Google Pushes On iPhone Apps Google's Sundar Pichai reveals why the company makes apps for Apple's iPhone but not for Microsoft's Windows Phone.
Amazon Cloud Pricing Threatens Tech Titans Amazon Web Services is on track to be a $24 billion annual infrastructure-as-a-service supplier within a decade, Morgan Stanley says. That's bad news for Red Hat, Oracle, SAP, Microsoft, IBM and Brocade.
EHR Mandate Riles Massachusetts Doctors Doctor's angry blog post calls attention to year-old law that would punish those who don't meet Meaningful Use EHR criteria with loss of their medical licenses.
IT Job Interviews: 8 Tips To Avoid Disaster IT job hunters, avoid foolish flubs in your next interview. Take this expert advice on manners, money and more.
Why You Need A Mobile Center Of Excellence A division created specifically to marshal your mobile efforts can bring your company long-term rewards. Here's what it needs to succeed.
Government IT Can't Pass The Buck On Open Data Improving the way government shares data will make it more efficient -- if IT commits to getting that work done.
HP, IBM Bruised By Sluggish Server Market Worldwide server revenue drops 7.7% in Q1, says IDC. Dell, on the strength of its data center products, was the market's best performer.
O2 Call Center Layoff Details Leaked British telco O2 plans deep worker cuts driven by a "contact deflection" plan to force customers to use online help, says newspaper.
Website Aims To Inspire Digital Makers Non-profit educational group Nesta addresses U.K.'s fading IT heritage through Make Things Do Stuff, a website that offers British teens online tools that foster digital creativity.
NASA Launches Second Robot Challenge Contestants to demonstrate robots that can collect geologic samples in bid for $1.5 prize money.
State Street: Social Business Leader Of 2013 Learn lessons from the global financial company, which will be honored at the E2 Conference for social collaboration on a large scale.
Gmail Inbox Update: Hopes And Fears Gmail's new categorization capabilities bring optimism -- and apprehension -- to this email addict's heart.
British Government IT Projects Running Late Several IT- heavy government projects are either way behind schedule or need TLC to succeed, says government watchdog group Major Project Authority.
Windows 8.1: Thanks For Listening, Microsoft Consumers will keep chasing new and shiny; business users will keep working on a PC. Microsoft finally appears to understand that.
Giants, Red Sox, Celtics To Talk Customer Experience At E2 IT leaders from some of history's most successful sports franchises join the E2 keynote lineup to discuss how they're transforming fan experience through technology innovation.
Samsung Galaxy S4 Mini Dials Back Specs Billed as a smaller version of its powerful flagship smartphone, Samsung's Galaxy S4 Mini is nothing short of a land grab.
Windows 8.1 Restores Start Button, With Twist Microsoft confirms Windows 8.1 will include boot-to-desktop options and a restored Start button. But other interface criticisms remain unanswered.
Salesforce.com Sees Company Communities As Intranet Killers Salesforce says Company Communities spell the end for legacy intranets. But some companies have been investing in newer collaboration and HR apps for the past decade.
Motorola To Make Moto X Phone In Texas Motorola CEO Dennis Woodside confirms it's preparing to storm the market with a new flagship phone in early fall.
Rackspace Meets VMware Halfway On Hybrid Cloud Rackspace president Lew Moorman agrees on the power of hybrid cloud, but says rival VMware has the wrong notion of how it should work.
Coursera MOOC Embraced By 10 State University Systems State programs will tailor Coursera resources to their own needs, blending its content with their own.
Meeker's State Of The Internet: 5 Key Trends Internet analyst Mary Meeker has seen the future -- and it is wearable, flyable and drivable.
Amazon's Vision For Single Sign-On Amazon Web Services urges developers to use its single sign-on option, which would let Amazon, Facebook and Google users log in once for access to all three services.
25 Most Influential Government CIOs On InformationWeek's Government CIO 25, we profile the top public sector tech executives who are driving big changes in government IT.
ONC Steps Up MU Stage 2 Preparation Agency releases interoperability guidelines, launches training modules to help providers meet criteria for information exchange.
Parliament Slams U.K. Government Spin Doctors Government press releases cite statistics selectively, undermining public trust and good policymaking, say members of Parliament.
3 Reasons Linux Doesn't Star In U.S. Schools Why haven't cash-strapped American schools embraced open-source operating systems on the desktop?
5 Windows 8 Gripes Microsoft Must Address Almost in spite of itself, Windows 8 could finally be poised for takeoff. But first, Microsoft will need to appease unhappy and confused users.
FDA Warns Mobile Health Apps Makers Agency says some apps may be regulated as medical devices, but expert predicts final FDA guidance won't resolve critical issues.
Intel Buys GPS Technology To Boost Mobile Effort Intel scoops up ST-Ericsson's geo-location business in a bid to improve its mobile offerings.
Apple Settles iPhone Water Damage Claims For $53M Apple will pay out an eight-figure sum to settle a class-action lawsuit over iPhone and iPod warranties.
NTT Expands Private Cloud Services Japan's NTT now can offer consistent private cloud services from nine data centers in eight countries, with more on the way.
Big Data ROI Still Tough To Measure Business leaders believe in big data's potential but are frustrated by lengthy projects and complicated tools, according to IDG/Kapow study.


text:
Find Saginaw Alabama visitors centers, or tourist centers. Visitors centers provide information on vacation packages, tours, hotels, conventions, attractions, and landmarks in an area.
Historic Fourth Avenue Visitors Center 319 17th Street North Birmingham AL 35203 20.7 miles from Saginaw 205-328-1850
Tuscaloosa Tourism 1900 Jack Warner Parkway Tuscaloosa AL 35401 44.5 miles from Saginaw 205-391-9200
St Clair County Tourism 78 6th Avenue Ashville AL 35953 52.8 miles from Saginaw 205-594-2116
Visitors Centers associated with a particular attraction are typically open during the attraction's hours of operation. The hours of operation for a Tourism Visitors Center tend to be influenced by seasonal fluctuations in tourism. During the busy season, a Tourism Visitors Center is more likely to be open during extended business hours, including weekends.How are Visitors Centers funded?
A Visitors Center that is part of a particular attraction or company is usually funded as part of that entity's operations. State Visitors Centers are typically funded by the state's tourism agency. Tourism Visitors Centers are usually funded and operated by a Convention and Visitors Bureau, local economic development agency, merchants' association, or by a combination of several entities.What kind of security is in place at Visitors Centers?
The type and extent of security is determined largely by the purpose and location of the Visitors Center. A Visitors Center that contains valuable artifacts, such as artwork or historical items, will likely have higher security. Visitors Centers at government buildings and other places of political importance are also more likely to have a higher level of security.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Home Page Chess Life Online Archives World Team Update: US Falls to China, Defeats Azerbaijan
|World Team Update: US Falls to China, Defeats Azerbaijan
|December 2, 2013
Six rounds into the World Team Championship in Antalya, Turkey, the US squad is ranked 5th just behind China, out of ten teams.
In round five, the US lost to China. Hikaru Nakamura, now ranked #4 in the World, won on board 1 but US Champion Gata Kamsky and Webster student GM Ray Robson both lost.
We rebounded with a win vs. Azerbaijan in round six, in which Robson scored the key victory, finding the unusual tactical resource 20.Nxc4!
Of his marathon grind today, Nakamura tweeted:
Follow the tournament on the official site at http://wctc2013.tsf.org.tr/ An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that China and US were currently tied for 4th-5th.


text:
It's like "40 Minutes of Hell," and it's not just because the heaters at Beck Field House are wide open.
It's like "40 Minutes of Hell," and it's not just because the heaters at Beck Field House are wide open.
The Gadsden State women's basketball team play that get-up-in-your-jersey, will-breaking, full-court defense and uptempo offense the Arkansas Razorbacks made so famous in the 1990s.
"Teams don't like it very much," second-year coach John Butts said. "Dictating tempo on offense and defense is what we really try to do. We try to get them to play at a pace where the last five minutes of the first half, we win easily. And the last 10 minutes of the game, we win easily."
It shows on the scoreboard. Gadsden State, ranked No. 21 in the latest NJCAA poll, is off to a 10-1 start to the season with its only loss coming in the first game of the year. The frenetic style of play has led the Lady Cardinals to outscoring their opponents by an average of 25 points per game.
If "40 Minutes of Hell" doesn't quite fit, then "Controlled Chaos" may as well be the team slogan.
"When you look at us score and you see us in the 90s and breaking 100, you think, 'Man, they must play crazy,'" Butts said. "We do in a way, but we don't in a way. We still have rules, (like) the ball has to get in the lane before taking a three.
"But we routinely get shots with 30 seconds left on the shot clock. … It's how we play every day. What you see when you come to a game is pressure dictating tempo. Hopefully it makes you tired watching it.
"We try to get the gym heated up — we run the heaters pretty much year round — try to get it hot and play belly-to-belly."
The players respond to it, too. The Lady Cardinals' strong start to the season has come despite missing several key players to injury. Katy Miller, the team's leading 3-point shooter from last season, is just now getting back in the rotation after undergoing surgery. In three games and playing an average of 10 minutes, Miller is shooting 42 percent from beyond the arc.
Jasmyne Reeves, who Butts said is one of the best athletes he's ever coached, also has seen limited action while recovering from an injury. Kayla Beaty is another key player the Lady Cardinals should have back at full strength when Alabama Community College Conference play starts in January.
The injuries have led to a very balanced attack. Four players — Tiakeefah Hughley, Lacey Buchanon, Taylor Adams and Sheyene Turner — each average more than 10 points per contest. Hughley, who usually comes off the bench, leads the team with 12.1 points per game with Buchanon just behind at 12 points per game and almost six assists per outing. Adams averages a double-double at 10.1 points and 12 rebounds to go along with three steals per outing, while Turner averages 10 points and leads the team in 3-point shooting.
The Lady Cardinals' hectic style of play also causes heavy rotation from the bench, meaning all 14 players usually see playing time.
Buchanon's on the floor the most, averaging 25 minutes per contest, and Adams — who along with Lacy Huckabee are the only two to start all 11 games this season — sees action an average of 22 minutes per game. If the names Buchanon and Adams sound familiar, they should.
Buchanon led Jacksonville to the Class 4A state championship last year, while Adams took Section to the 2A state title.
Gadsden State boasts several other players who either played in state championship games or made deep runs in the playoffs with their respective high school teams.
"As far as the state of where we are, we haven't even tapped what we can do," Butts said. "We feel like we've got winners and they've meshed well."
Butts is an intense coach on the court.
Off the court — at least when he's not running 13 miles for fun — he's relaxed and is genuinely concerned about the well-being of his team.
Last year, the Lady Cardinals were an Academic All-America team with a squad GPA of 3.02.
This year, he told athletics director Mike Cancilla they would "blow that out of the water" in the first semester — and they did. The cumulative GPA of Butts' team was 3.25 with seven freshman boasting 4.0s.
The philosophy that it's not all basketball for Butts is a powerful recruiting tool, too.
"We tell them this: If you want to go somewhere with a lot of freedom where you come and go as you please and go to classes on a whim, don't come here," Butts said. "Because when you come here, you're going to have study halls — non-negotiable. You're going to go to class every day — non-negotiable. I know sometimes it seems too strict for them. We try to let them off here and there, but it's worth it in the long room."
As for recruiting, it was something new for Butts when he took over the Lady Cardinals' program last year after spending his 18-year coaching career in the high school ranks — including the previous eight at Etowah.
Dedication was the key, he said, to successful recruiting and he has a specific area he likes to recruit players from that stretches from this area, to Chattanooga, Tenn., and Atlanta.
And he always remembers a piece of advice he received at the very beginning.
"The best advice I got was don't recruit anybody that you don't want to be on a four-hour bus ride with," he said with a laugh.
The team's focus on academics, coupled with the cohesion necessary to succeed in its fast-paced style of play, has led to a tight-knit group.
"We're different," said Butts, his voice beginning to reflect his intense style on the sideline. "Of course we play to win games, but other teams play for the scoreboard more than they play for the moments. The opportunity to set a hard screen. The opportunity to really get up in somebody defensively and make them not like it very much. Talking about the last 10 minutes of the second half without the other team scoring a lot. ... They quit. They get tired of it. It gets frustrating for them."
Whether the Lady Cardinals can keep up its intensity will be determined in the coming months.
They play in the South Georgia Tech Classic next week and, after hosting Northwest Georgia Tech and Roane State and traveling to Chattahoochee Valley in early January, begin the cruicial ACCC conference slate on the road against Shelton State.


text:
The NFLPA has confirmed that a grievance has been filed regarding the ongoing suspension of Dolphins guard Richie Incognito.
"Richie Incognito filed a non-injury grievance against his employer, the Miami Dolphins, pursuant to his rights under the Collective Bargaining Agreement," the NFLPA said in a statement. "The grievance challenges his suspension for conduct which was alleged to have occurred while he was with the club. In the grievance, Incognito requests that the hearing be held on an expedited basis so that he can immediately resume playing for the team. The NFL Players Association will continue to protect the rights of all players."
The NFLPA continues to try to strike a delicate balance, protecting the rights of alleged victims like Jonathan Martin and alleged agressors like Incognito. In this specific case, the best way to harmonize the obvious conflict of interest is to find a way to paint Incognito as a victim, too, perhaps via the "Code Red" defense.
As we understand it, the notion that Incognito was merely carrying out orders won't hold water — and that the evidence Martin produces to independent investigator Ted Wells on Friday will show that multiple teammates went far beyond what could reasonably be expected, even if there was an order to toughen up Martin.
Which means that the NFLPA eventually could be defending other alleged aggressors, too.


text:
Wii hacking
Jump to navigation Jump to search
A few starting packages for hacking the Wii on Arch Linux. Also see Wiibrew.org for a guide to getting homebrew setup on the Wii.
Native Coding
- wiiload lets you upload games to the Homebrew Channel
- devkitppc for a basic toolchain (compiler) for C and C++ development.
- libogc for libraries that work with the Wii, for working with graphics, wiimote, etc.
- sdl-wii - a library for SDL on the Wii.
- libfat-ogc - a library for FAT handling (used in USB flash drives).
Game Hacking
- reggie - Level Editor for New Super Mario Bros. Wii.
- riifs - a networked server for Riivolution to run file replacement hacks on the Wii.
- arctool for opening .arc files found in Wii game discs.
- arcman
- u8it for working with u8 archives found in Wii game discs.
- cwiid - a library in C for working with the Wii Remote.
- libwiimote - a library in C for working with the Wii Remote.
- xwii - lets you control your computer from your Wii remote (even has Shell command support).
- xwii-hypocorism
- pymote
- dolphin-emu - the dominant emulator for the Wii (also supports Gamecube).
- dolphin-emu-svn-bin (Binaries) - if you do not have the time to compile it.


text:
gellcell necesitaba un nuevo diseño de página web y lanzó un concurso de diseño en 99designs.
Un ganador ha sido elegido entre 29 diseños de 13 diseñadores freelance.
I need a homepage for a Coffee/Juice shop
I would like it to represent all aspects of my business (Organic Coffee, Smoothies and Juice) As well as my philosophy.
I will need buttons for: Home, Art, Menu Lineup, Locations, Employment Opportunities, Investment Opportunities, Members.
This is the first page of many to be designed
Our Goal: To provide our valued customers with an organic and healthy menu. All of our coffee is organic and fair trade, thus protecting consumers, farmers, the environment and your body. Our Baristas undergo extensive training to produce the finest espresso, lattes and cappuccinos imaginable. All "to-go" beverages will be served in either paper or environmentally friendly, compostable, corn-based plastic cups, as opposed to foam. In addition, we strive to use as few paper products as possible. We are committed to providing our customers with immaculate surroundings, cleaned strictly with environmentally safe products. We even utilize recycled steel in our construction of our stores in an effort to minimize the destruction of the rainforests.
Our dream is that one day our philosophy becomes the industry standard-
Where the primary focus of business will not be profits but, the wellbeing of its customers, society and the environment as a whole.
Please look at my past contests for an idea of what I like.
If you would like and graphics from me in AI (like the logo or other stuff I have done) just email me your request.
Here is a webpage which I really like and is my competitor.


text:
I've been seeing a lot of "bumped" threads here lately, and thought I'd share some information on how to go about getting your thread answered in a manner that is not against SEO Chat rules.
First and foremost, consider your original post.
- Did you offer up enough information to answer the question?
- If not, post again with additional information that will help other members to better assess the situation.
- Is your question specific enough?
- Questions such as "What is SEO?" "What is link building?" "How to do SEO/link building/optimization?" etc. are extremely unlikely to be answered (and are more likely to get you flamed). If your question is basic in nature, try using the search function here, or at www.google.com. We are in the Search Engine industry, so it would be ashame if we're not able to "search" for things on our own.
- Has your question been answered numerous times in the past?
- Once again, you'll need to defer to the search functionality of the site. If you do not find any relevant information, then perhaps you can post and explain why your question/thread is different than those asking similar questions in the past. We do like "different" around here - at least in the form of questions.
- Did you offer too much information?
- Writing a book, then asking "what did I do wrong?" - is often overwhelming, especially for people that (a) only post in between paying gigs, and (b) those that like to keep things simple, as complexity only adds to the confusion.
Try posting again in a manner that uses a simpler explanation. Don't dumb it down all the way, but maybe cut back the fat.
- Did you ask multiple, unrelated questions in the same thread?
- It is often hard to reply back to something that asks questions all over the board. If you have unrelated questions, consider whether or not they may deserve their own thread. If you feel that they do, then cut back your original post to consider those relevant, and post another thread with the additional questions. This will be much more likely to get a response.
- Is the question understandable?
- I hate to bring it up, as not everyone's first language is English, but is your question written in a clear & concise manner? Is it legible? If you are using a translation service, try using a different one and reposting the question.
If the question cannot be understood, it cannot be answered.
- This is a problem even for those of us who have English as a first language. Typos, wording, brains, and lack of them can all contribute to confusing questions. Please review your post from an outsider's perspective.
- Did you post your thread in the correct section?
- Google optimization questions are unlikely to be answered if posted in the HTML Coding forum. If you find that your thread is in the wrong section, contact a moderator or admin and request that it be moved to the correct place.
- Does your title describe the actual question?
- A thread title such as "Help Me ~" that pertains to buying links is wrong on so many levels, but would likely receive better responses if the title were "Help buying links" (which still is not even that descriptive. The more descriptive, the better chances it will be viewed & answered.)
There are many, many other reasons why your thread may go unanswered. Please, if this happens to you, consider the reasons why it might happen. Don't simply "bump" the thread with useless posts such as "bump", "anyone?", "So know one has an answer?" etc. They are unlikely to help, and are likely to be deleted as they add no value.
If you can't figure out why your thread has gone unanswered, ask a moderator or admin. We'll try and point you in the right direction (if and when possible).
As far as those who are interested in helping answer unanswered threads, you'll notice in the "Forum Tools" drop-down menu at the top of each forum section, there is a "View unanswered threads" link. If you use this, you'll get a listing of all the unanswered threads in that particular forum.
If anyone has any other reasons or tips on getting a question answered, speak up.
Comments on this post
- joshz agrees
- EGOL agrees
- NathanielB agrees
- europa agrees : Good job my friend!
- aristocrataks agrees


text:
Delivery within 24 hrs in DELHI/NCR @ Rs. 500 Call @ +91 9717086777
Regular Price:
-25% Off
Be the first to review this product
Out of stock
Our hop in bags open up to make more space for your travel essentials - Available in classic shades of Marsala, Black, Blue & Red
You can unlock the scent in the bags lining by rubbing your hand on the material at any times. Whenever you are feeling low or feel that the bags is consumed wth lots of stuff, just put your hand around the fabric and let it activate the scent to brighten your mood up.
Hop In Bag
Check In Bag(Small)
Regular Price:
-25% Off


text:
High-octane fight over ethanol
AAA and the renewable fuels industry are locking horns over ethanol.
The clash came Friday, when the motorist advocacy group called on the Environmental Protection Agency and gas stations to stop the sale of the E15 ethanol gasoline blend until a better labeling system can be devised to protect drivers and their vehicles.
Story Continued Below
That prompted biofuels groups to return fire.
"If AAA weren't so deep in the Big Oil politics, they would stop manufacturing concern about the efficacy of ethanol blend use and report enthusiastically about ethanol's consumer gasoline price savings," Renewable Fuels Association President Bob Dinneen said in a statement Friday. He spoke out after AAA CEO Robert Darbelnet said the fuel blend could damage cars of unsuspecting motorists.
E15 contains 15 percent ethanol and 85 percent gasoline, compared with the 10 percent ethanol concentration that federal regulators previously allowed. The higher ethanol blend has drawn concerns about potential harm to engines in older-model vehicles.
In a statement earlier Friday, Darbelnet said that "the sale and use of E15 should be suspended until additional gas pump labeling and consumer education efforts are implemented to mitigate problems for motorists and their vehicles." Darbelnet also expressed his views to USA Today.
"Bringing E15 to the market without adequate safeguards does not responsibly meet the needs of consumers," he said.
But Dinneen came out with guns blazing, saying AAA's "misplaced concern" reflects "a pathetic ignorance of EPA's unprecedented test program before approving E15 for commercial use."
About 12 million out of the more than 240 million light-duty vehicles on the roads are approved by manufacturers to use E15 gasoline, according to a AAA survey of auto manufacturers.
The group argues that consumers using E15 could "end up with engine problems that might not be covered by their vehicles' warranties."
AAA said it supports the "development and use of alternative fuels" but that its recent survey of motorists found that about 95 percent of consumers haven't heard of E15 — let alone know that its use in pre-2001-model-year vehicles hasn't been approved by EPA or some manufacturers.
BMW, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota and Volkswagen have said their warranties will not cover fuel-related claims caused by the use of E15, AAA notes, while seven other automakers, such as Ford and Honda, have said the use of E15 "does not comply with the fuel requirements specified in their owner's manuals and may void warranty coverage."
RFA's Dinneen maintained that "E15 is a safe fuel, as evidenced by the fact auto manufacturers are now providing warranty coverage for it."


text:
Lucy Hale Off-the-Shoulder Top
Lucy Hale rocked the off-the-shoulder trend with this striped number by Bella Dahl while visiting Starbucks.
Brand: Bella Dahl
Brand: Bella Dahl
Lucy Hale Skinny Jeans
Lucy Hale tucked her cute top into a pair of blue skinny jeans by Cheap Monday.
Brand: Cheap Monday
Brand: Cheap Monday
Lucy Hale Slip-Ons
Lucy Hale kept it summery all the way down to her white Chanel espadrilles.
Brand: Chanel
Brand: Chanel
Browse: Lucy Hale | Off-the-Shoulder Top | Skinny Jeans | Slip-Ons
Show Lucy Hale Looks With:
Popular Lookbooks see all looks »


text:
The occasion of Her Majesty The Queen's Golden Jubilee is a time for Canadians to
express gratitude to their Head of State for her devotion to duty and to reflect
on our growth as a nation during her reign. Over the past 50 years, Queen Elizabeth
has celebrated a number of historic events with us during her official visits to
Canada, including the Bicentennial of New Brunswick, the Centennial of Confederation,
the XXIst Olympiad in Montréal, and the proclamation of the Constitution
Her Majesty and Prince Philip made their first visit to Canada and New Brunswick
in 1951 as Their Royal Highnesses The Princess Elizabeth and The Duke of Edinburgh.
New Brunswick was privileged to host them again in 1959, 1976, and 1984 and to be
included in the 2002 Jubilee tour. During their visits, The Queen and Prince Philip
have experienced our heritage, culture and traditions; participated in historic
ceremonies; and met New Brunswickers from across the province.
Queen Elizabeth has requested that her Golden Jubilee be a time of community celebrations
and of looking forward as well as back. You are invited, through this exhibit, to
reflect on Her Majesty's 50 years of dedicated service and to recall the special
moments she shared with New Brunswickers.
To View This Exhibit:
Click the year you wish to view at the top of the page to display a drop-down list
of panels. Choosing a panel from the list will display the images within that panel
as well as a description of each image.
Viewing Large Images:
Click on any small image to get a larger view.


text:
Office Products
* All prices incl. the applicable VAT, if applicable. Excl. Shipping costs. All statements without guarantee. The price shown may have risen since the time you last updated them. The actual price of the product on the seller's site at the time of purchase will govern the sale. It is not technically possible for the prices displayed above to be updated in real-time. Please see seller's website for actual shipping costs.


text:
State Releases Map of Food Businesses and Food Rescue, Recycling, & Composting Sites
July 17, 2014
Contact: Josh Kelly, DEC Solid Waste Program
Phone: 802-522-5897
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com
STATE RELEASES MAP of FOOD BUSINESSES
and FOOD RESCUE, RECYCLING, & COMPOSTING SITES
Suggested Tweet: Vermont ANR releases web-based map of food businesses, food rescue, compost, and solid waste facilities [link]
MONTPELIER – The Agency of Natural Resources announces the launch of its web-based "Universal Recycling Materials Management Map" (Materials Management Map). Following the passage of the Universal Recycling law in 2012, ensuring consistent recycling, food scrap, and waste services statewide by 2020, the map connects residents, businesses, and institutions with collection services and food rescue agencies, haulers, and composters with sources of quality food and food scraps. The map will provide the information needed to reduce waste and increase the development of infrastructure and systems to manage food waste for beneficial uses.
"Removing food scraps and other organic material from the waste stream is a high priority for Vermont," said Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) Secretary Deb Markowitz. "These materials account for nearly 30% of what we throw out, wasting limited landfill space; and as the waste breaks down it produces greenhouse gasses that contribute to climate change." Markowitz added that, "in order to make it easier for Vermont businesses and institutions to identify the alternatives that are available to them, the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) is now providing an easy-to-use tool to help connect food producing businesses and institutions with food rescue organizations, solid waste haulers and facility managers." According to Markowitz, the map is also intended to connect users to recycling options and opportunities statewide as features are added.
Vermont's Universal Recycling law bans all food scraps from landfills by July 1, 2020. Larger generators of food scraps need to begin diverting these materials sooner if a certified facility—such as a permitted compost facility—is located within 20 miles. Recyclables (such as metal, glass, plastics #1 & #2, and paper/cardboard) are also banned from the landfill beginning July 1, 2015. The Materials Management Map allows users to find facilities that accept various materials for food rescue, recycling, composting, and disposal, such as food shelves, transfer stations and compost facilities. The map also displays businesses and institutions that generate food scraps (supermarkets, restaurants, schools, hospitals) as well as the local governments, known as the Solid Waste Management Entities, who can provide composting and recycling assistance to businesses and institutions at the local level
Follow this link to access the map http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/wastediv/solid/URmap_launch.html and this link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jFtW8ktNNs&feature=youtu.be for a video tutorial of its key functions.
For more information about Universal Recycling, visit www.recycle.vermont.gov or contact your local solid waste management entity for assistance with recycling and composting. Follow ANR's Solid Waste Program on Twitter, @VTrecycles.


text:
Disclosing Homebirth Plans to OB
On my Navelgazing Midwife Facebook Page, I asked:
If you had an OB and had/are having a homebirth, did you tell your OB? What did s/he have to say about it? Have any of you been fired from care for disclosing your homebirth plans?
I asked this because I've had a couple of recent inquiries about whether to share their upcoming homebirth plans with their doctor or not. My advice is to explore why you want to tell the doctor. Do you want him/her to be your back-up in case of an emergency? Do you feel that not telling is lying by omission? Do you honestly want to know what your OB thinks about your having a homebirth… whether you're a safe candidate or not? Each woman has to answer those questions for themselves, but every single one of them also has to be prepared to be dismissed from care if their doctor isn't too keen on the whole homebirth thing. It might not be fair, but that's the way it is. For many doctors, even those who might be supportive (albeit, grudgingly), their malpractice insurance might not allow them to speak about their feelings, much less act upon them.
Here's how the women answered my question. No names given, of course.
C: No, I didn't want to deal with any comments my OB would have about my home birth plans. I saw the OB three times in my pregnancy for ultrasound and labs, and my midwife for all the other visits. This time I'm not planning to see an OB at all.
J: I'm pretty upfront - my occupation is "homebirth midwife" after all. She didn't flinch one bit, although I know she personally is not a homebirth fan. But she gave me the consultation I needed. I like her a lot. She pulls no punches, just tells you what she thinks, no manipulation.
M: I hinted without saying my plans. She apparently never got the memo. After <my baby> was born (planned homebirth with a midwife turned unplanned UC [Unassisted Childbirth]), I called her to say the baby was born. She wanted me to come in right away and "get checked out". When I refused, she pretty much refused me ANY postpartum care (battled thrush, mastitis, depression); didn't matter. She was pissed and though she never dismissed me from her practice, she refused to see me and instead my appointments were with the [mean, nasty, devoid of feeling] CNM.
J: There is only one practice in our area, a family doc, who will knowingly do dual care for home birth women. Even the CNMs will kick you out of their practice if they find out you are having a home birth. Seriously! There is one group of CNMs who will do dual care on a "don't-ask-don't-tell" basis, but the others are openly hostile to home birthers, as are the OBs in our city. Any hint that a woman is considering a home birth and she'll get a discontinue care letter.
K: I sought care from the OB who performed my Cesarean for scar tissue issues, and since I was newly pregnant, but not her patient she wouldn't see me. A week later I got a letter dismissing me from her practice along with a tear-out of the increased-neonatal-death-with-planned-homebirth article. Had a beautiful healing HBAC three months ago.
L: It was very much our intention to have an OB attended homebirth.
J: Recently, I had a client switch care to me for Out-of-Hospital birth. Then, she got cellulitis/mastitis on day four and her OB took her back, called stuff in, saw her in person when that didn't work and treated her beautifully. I really appreciate that. She didn't have to do that. She could have sentenced my client to the walk-in clinic of uncertain-care.
L: My OB took it pretty well, although he made sure to mention he wouldn't let his own wife or daughter do it, and he asked that I please call him after the birth to let him know that the baby and I both "survived." At a later GYN visit he was very excited to show me an article in some medical journal entitled "What If My Patient Wants a Homebirth?" and how, thanks to me, he has a better answer now if it comes up again. I found the whole experience amusing and I'll probably go back to him for shadow care when we have our next home birth. He delivered my first daughter in the hospital, so I did have a bit more history with him than just random prenatal visits along the way.
M: I was seeing an OB for fertility issues. When I completed the first trimester and was comfortably out of my personal "worry zone" for repeat miscarriage, I let her know that I was switching to a licensed midwife for a homebirth and she supported me completely. She is one of the local favorites for natural hospital birth and midwife backup. We are lucky to have her!
N: I'm seeing an OB but have UC plans, which I most definitely have not shared!
C: My OB used to run a solo practice and is now partnered with two other doctors. He was wonderfully supportive of my unmedicated hospital births when he was the only OB there, but I wouldn't go back to them because I don't know and trust his partners. When I was pregnant with a miscarriage I called to see if I could get in for an ultrasound and was told I would have to schedule the full OB workup at ten weeks in order to be seen in their office at all.
E: With my second pregnancy (first home birth) I told my OB at around 16 weeks. Every visit included a diatribe about the risks of home birth. Finally, at 32 weeks I said 'please make a note in my chart that I don't wish to discuss it any further and if I have to keep going through this I will terminate my care'. It was not mentioned again. With my 3rd pregnancy, the practice already knew my history and was more relaxed about it. My 4th and 5th pregnancies I had no OB care.
P: LOL to the term "fired". Doctors do not pay their patients.
Navelgazing Midwife: I understand, P, but when you can be "dismissed" from their care, it isn't uncommon to consider that fired. It does seem like the only person who can fire should be the woman firing her provider, but The System is twisted enough that women ARE fired from care.
C: I've told my OB for both planned homebirths (the first of which transferred to the hospital). I was offered the same prenatal care as anyone else birthing with his practice (which was still not as wonderful as my homebirth midwife's prenatal care).
The second time, only had prenatal care I didn't have access to with my homebirth midwife after my first visit to say, "I'm pregnant and having a homebirth, but would like to have a plan B option." The other two visits were for an ultrasound and Group B Strep screening. My OB wished me well and made sure to tell me to not to hesitate coming to the hospital if I need anything.
J: Yes. In 2001 in San Diego. It sucked.
A: My OBs obviously don't recommend it, but they give me care anyway. Though, I am convinced it isn't the same care since they know. I also am monitored by a midwife. So many other women I know that see the same OBs tell me such different stories about how their visits go. I guess maybe they think I get everything I need from the midwife, so don't monitor me as closely. I am convinced they just pick numbers to write in my chart as measurements.
E: I saw an ob a few times -- I specifically drove an hour each way to see the one homebirth friendly ob in my city. I told her and she was cool.
K: I didn't tell my OB face to face, but I did tell the front office I wanted copies of my records because I was considering a homebirth. They let me have them for $1 a page. At the next visit, the Dr. didn't ask me about it so I didn't volunteer anything. I didn't get fired; I quietly fired him. Called the office to cancel the next appointment; they were closed (weird, it wasn't a holiday), so left a voicemail saying I was canceling the next appointment because I has chosen to have a homebirth. I was 29 weeks. I never heard from them at all after that.
C: I saw an OB a few times to do genetic counseling (I was paranoid being Advanced Maternal Age) and never told him my plans to UC.
R: I didn't share with the OB my plans of a UC!
A: It was important to me to co-care, and also to not be lectured. So I did not feel obliged to divulge my birth plans.
J: My former OB has two CNMs in his practice. I mentioned, on the first visit, that I was considering a homebirth. (First pregnancy but had been to him for well visits.) He mentioned that with his practice, I could have a, "home-style birth in the hospital" but otherwise didn't push. At 20 weeks, I switched care to my homebirth midwife. Everyone at his practice was cooperative and I never looked back.
C: I was fired from the practice.
S: I'm from the United Kingdom and I was under OB care, when I told her I was going to have a homebirth she went completely mad! Told me I would have a heart attack if I didn't come into hospital as I had Pregnancy Induced Hypertension. I spoke to the head of midwifery and she was great! In the end, our baby arrived unassisted in our living room. If i would of gone to hospital she would of been born in the car!
R: Nope she never knew.
L: It is interesting to read everyone's comments. I have an OB and decided not to see him for prenatal care because I didn't want to risk being ousted OR putting him in an awkward position with the Clinic he's with. So when I needed a script for tests, I saw a local DO who provides parallel care for others as well.
A: In my area, your general practitioner cares for you until around 20 weeks at which point you are transferred to OB care until the end of your pregnancy (New Brunswick, Canada). In a small percentage of cases GPs do deliveries and only transfer care or consult if needed. For my second pregnancy, I advised my GP that I'd hired a midwife for a homebirth, but that I still wanted to see an OB/GYN to introduce myself. I went for one visit with the OB and told him our plans. He reviewed my charts from my previous birth, asked if I was confident our midwife had enough training and told me there was a 99% chance that I wouldn't need him or the hospital. I was totally flabbergasted. He suggested I send in my charts from the midwife after 36 weeks in case I needed to transfer. I wish I could call this OB wonderful on all counts but, I've since worked with him for a few doula clients, he's got some good and bad points, is all I'll say. He also supports placentophagy... go figure!
L: I planned on having a homebirth; then we ended up seeing OBs. My husband mentioned my wanting to homebirth and the OB said basically "Oh no, you don't want that." Never said anything about it to him again but, tried to find out if there was a practising midwife around - nothing. If I'd said something at nanowrimo write-ins though, I'd have had a better idea (as I found out a year later).
While I didn't homebirth, I really wish I had done what I wanted in the first place - my husband finally ended up talking to his midwife-friend who he'd kept telling me I should contact from that first anti-homebirth sentiment we got; she was there for us and was a whole lot better than the L&D staff - suggested helpful things before they even thought of them. If I were pregnant again, I'd be planning on a homebirth again.
R: I was planning a homebirth w/a CNM (with family doctor back-up) until 27 weeks when an ultrasound revealed twins. I switched to a hospital-based OB group with CNMs and tried to avoid revealing my PRIOR plans -- even though I was no longer considering a homebirth, I feared being treated as a "nutso" and disrespected for my original choice. The doctors already seemed annoyed enough at my lack of early-pregnancy ultrasounds and switching to their practice so late in pregnancy. I needed them to take me seriously and be partners in my care and didn't want to alienate anyone. I didn't even want the nurses in the hospital to know. When we arrived at the hospital at 39w5d with me in VERY active labor and the nurses rushing around, my mom mentioned it and I got upset, even though it clearly didn't matter at that point (the babies were born an hour after I arrived, I don't think anyone even had time to read my birth plan). For reference, my care providers are in the area described by J. above, so the fear of bias wasn't just in my head!
J: I live in Washington State where CNM are licensed to do home births, so when I told my OBs, they were supportive and fine with it. In their practice they employed two CNMs that delivered babies in the hospital. They also told me if I needed to transfer to the hospital to have the nurses page them and they would cover my birth. So I really did have the best of both worlds. I realize that I am in a minority!
Me again.
I had concurrent care with my second baby, my UC baby. I certainly didn't tell the OBs I saw at the military hospital. I got enough crap from them after she was born. They even sent Child Protective Services out to the house to make sure we weren't neglectful parents. No, just really, really hands-off. (Much more so then than I am now!) With my third baby, my military CNMs did know of my homebirth plans with a legal hebamme (German midwife) and were wonderful about it. When my plans changed because my membranes had been ruptured longer than the hebamme could legally keep me as a client, the midwives embraced me as a hospital-birthing mama, promising to make the birth as peaceful as possible. I ended up delivering in the car with a CNM and an OB; I wouldn't consider it "peaceful." Hilarious was more like it.
In a perfect world, we'd all be able to share our whole stories... care would be seamless, whoever we were sitting in front of. It makes me sigh with frustration that women are often forced to either lie or omit information because they might lose an important link in their pregnancy care. I applaud the providers that withstand the enormous pressure to punish and ignore women who are choosing to birth at home. Thank you for your tenacity! I also applaud the women who walk the thin line of another form of Don't Ask, Don't Tell... the kind that can get you kicked out, just as readily as when it was gays in the military. Both are just wrong.


text:
A taxpayer funded group under fire for its spending won't be investigated.
As we first reported wednesday, Integrity Florida director Dan Krassner sent a letter to Governor Rick Scott asking him to have his inspector general investigate enterprise Florida.
However, Scott told our CBS affiliate in West Palm Beach he won't do it.
He also said Enterprise Florida is doing a good job.
The group has come under fire for spending money on lavish expenses like luxury suites at sporting events. Its purpose is to recruit business to Florida.
"Thankfully, the issue of Enterprise Florida is bi-partisan," said Integrity Florida Director Dan Krassner. "They were a mess when they were created by Democrats and they've been a mess under Republicans," he said. "Republicans and Democrats have bills to finally hold them accountable," said Krassner.
Krassner says because Governor Scott and the executive branch won't hold Enterprise Florida accountable, the legislative branch needs to take action.
More than $21,000 spent at Yankee Stadium on luxury suites and other purchases.
$7100 spent at Cowboy Stadium in Texas.
Another $4,400 spent for Atlanta Braves baseball.
Those items are just part of the expenses spent by Enterprise Florida, a group designed to recruit business to the state and more than 97 percent funded with tax money.
"There are certainly many red flags," said Integrity Florida Director Dan Krassner.
Krassner has sent a letter to Governor Rick Scott asking the chief inspector general to investigate Enterprise Florida's spending.
It comes after our CBS station in West Palm Beach, WPEC News 12 reviewed 102 pages of spending.
They found more than half a million dollars charged to American Express credit cards for unknown purposes.
"Serious questions need to be asked and the governor's inspector general should investigate," said Krassner.
In a statement from Enterprise Florida it notes the organization abides by the law and received "a clean opinon on its audited financial statements."
The statement goes on to say marketing the state to key decision makers is critical to achieving our mission and "events like these are one such component of that effort."
"Enterprise Florida's job is to recruit companies to expand here Gray Swoope and his team are doing a very good job," said Governor Scott.
But Krassner points out Governor Scott serves as board chair of Enterprise Florida.
In 2012 that board gave its top 3 executives unlimited signing authority to make significant purchases.
Records show Enterprise Florida has spent $300-million since it was formed.
The initial promise was to bring 200,000 jobs to the state by this point.
So far, the group has added 87,000 jobs.


text:
This Standard identifies helmets appropriate for recreational snowboarding and skiing, both alpine and cross-country.
There are four reasons to be interested in this Standard:
1. Skiing imposes risks of death or permanent impairment due to head injury.
2. The proper use of protective helmets can minimize the risk of death or permanent impairment.
3. The protective capacity of a helmet is difficult to measure, particularly at the time of purchase or use.
4. Snell certification backed by ongoing random sample testing identifies those helmet models providing and maintaining the highest levels of head protection.
There are at least four critical elements affecting a helmet's protective properties:
1. Impact management - how well the helmet protects against collisions with large objects.
2. Helmet positional stability - whether the helmet will be in place, on the head, when it's needed.
3. Retention system strength - whether the chinstraps are sufficiently strong to hold the helmet throughout an incident involving head impact.
4. Extent of Protection - the area of the head protected by the helmet.
This Standard describes simple tests for all four of these items. However, the tests for the second item, helmet stability, of necessity presume that the helmet is well matched to the wearer's head and that it has been carefully adjusted to obtain the best fit possible. Unless you take similar care in the selection and fitting of your own helmet, you may not obtain the level of protection that current headgear can provide.
The Foundation recommends the simple, straightforward procedure recommended to consumers by most helmet manufacturers:
Position the helmet on your head so that it sits low on your forehead; if you can't see the edge of the brim at the extreme upper range of your vision, the helmet is probably out of place. Adjust the chinstraps so that, when buckled, they hold the helmet firmly in place. This positioning and adjusting should be repeated to obtain the very best result possible. The procedure initially may be time consuming. Take the time.
Try to remove the helmet without undoing the chinstrap. If the helmet comes off or shifts over your eyes, readjust and try again. If no adjustment seems to work, this helmet is not for you; try another.
This procedure is also the basis of the test for helmet stability described in this Standard. This test performs the same steps but uses standard headforms.
However, you must still perform this procedure for yourself when buying a helmet and every time you wear a helmet. Only in this way will you be able to make all the proper adjustments in pads and strapping to get the best fit possible. Furthermore, your test on your own head will be an improvement on ours; you will determine whether the helmet is appropriate for you personally.
There are several other important aspects of helmets to consider. Full face helmets provide a measure of protection from facial injuries. The external shell of these helmets includes a rigid "chin" bar that passes from left to right over the lower part of the face. The Foundation has devised special tests for the chin bars of full face helmets.
Some helmets come with a separate structure that bolts to the helmet in order to cover the lower part of the face. These removable chin bars are often intended to deflect debris and may not be effective facial protection in falls and accidents. The Foundation does not test removable chin bars and considers any headgear equipped with them to be an open face helmet.
Vision is a critical element in safe skiing. The Foundation tests helmets for visual field clearances on standard headforms. However, before buying and, especially, before using a helmet, you should ensure that the helmet gives you all the peripheral vision necessary. If a face shield is provided, check that the view through the face shield is clear and undistorted and that the shield resists fogging.
Visibility as well as vision is an important safety consideration. Bright colors and reflective patches will make you more visible to others and therefore less likely to be involved in a collision.
In an accident, a skier may suffer injury or death. Helmets on the market today offer varying degrees of protection, but the consumer has little basis for judging the relative effectiveness of a given model. This Standard presents a rational means for differentiating between helmets which meet specified standards for impact protection and retention system effectiveness and those which do not.
The Snell Foundation urges that protective helmets be required for all individuals participating in supervised events and encourages the general public to wear helmets which meet appropriate performance standards(1).
This 1998 Standard establishes performance characteristics suitable for recreational, non-motorized winter activities. Helmets certified to this standard may not be sufficient for competitive racing, speed skiing, 'extreme' skiing, acrobatic maneuvers or bobsledding. These uses imply additional levels of risk and may require headgear qualified to more demanding standards. This Standard does not establish construction and material specifications. The Foundation does not recommend specific materials or designs. Manufacturers submit helmets to be tested under this Standard and if the submitted helmets pass, a certification is issued.
The Foundation will make available the identity of those products which have been Snell certified but will not attempt to rank those products according to performance or to any other criteria.
All of the requirements described herein, including both initial certification and random sample testing, are an integral part of this Standard. No helmet can satisfy the Standard unless it is subject to both certification and random sample testing by the Foundation.
Snell certification for protective headgear requires a specific contractual agreement between the primary headgear manufacturer and the Foundation. Certification procedures may be obtained upon application to the Foundation.
SNELL MEMORIAL FOUNDATION is a registered certification mark and RS-98 is a certification mark of the Snell Memorial Foundation.
This Standard addresses the problem of protecting the head from direct impact with various shapes of surfaces that may be encountered in a skiing accident. The Standard prescribes direct measures of several factors bearing on a helmet's ability to protect the head as well as its general serviceability as skiing headgear. Thus, this Standard is directed towards the kinds of performance bearing on head protection that may not readily be discernible by even knowledgeable consumers at the time of purchase.
Some of these performance requirements have been expressed in terms of limitations on the various components and features of the single general helmet configuration currently available. These expressions have been used only for the sake of clarity and should not be misinterpreted as requiring specific configurations or materials. As newer helmet technologies appear, these limitations will be re-examined and, perhaps, restated.
A skiing helmet consists generally of a rigid head covering and a retention system composed of flexible straps and hardware. The rigid covering protects the head from direct impact by its capacity to manage impact energy and also by its capacity to spread a concentrated load at its outer surface over a larger area of the wearer's head.
The retention system holds the headgear in position throughout normal usage and especially during falls and accidents. This Standard applies two different tests to the retention system. The first of these evaluates stability by fitting the headgear to a standard headform and then attempting to displace it by applying tangential shock loads. The second evaluates retention system strength by applying a shock load to the system components through a simulated chin.
The quality of the fit and the care taken with the adjustments are absolutely critical elements in these tests. The manufacturer must provide suitable guidance so that the wearer will be able to select and adjust headgear to obtain the necessary quality of fit and positional stability.
The capacity for impact protection is determined by direct measurement of the shock delivered through the helmet to a headform when the helmeted headform is dropped in a specified manner onto any of three unyielding anvils. All three anvils represent reasonably expected impact surfaces.
The helmet's resistance to penetration is tested by placing the helmet on a headform and dropping a metal cone of specified mass and geometry onto the shell. The tip of this cone must not penetrate to the headform.
Most skiing helmets are intended to accommodate a range of head sizes and shapes. Various thickness' of resilient lining material may be placed within otherwise identical helmets during production to configure the fit to several different ranges of head size. This resilient padding does not significantly affect the way the helmet absorbs and attenuates impact and is not directly addressed in this Standard.
Full face helmets provide a measure of facial protection in addition to the impact protection generally sought. The principle feature of a full face helmet is a chin bar that extends forward to cover the jaw area converting the facial opening into a visual port. Frequently, a face shield is also provided so that the wearer's face is completely covered.
In order to be considered a full face helmet, the chin bar must be an integral part of the helmet structure. The Standard then tests the rigidity of the chin bar by dropping a weight onto it at a specified velocity so as to attempt to force the chin bar toward the interior of the helmet. The chin bar must not deflect more than a specified amount.
Other general features of skiing helmets may include eyeshades, bright colors and reflective surfaces. These features all deal with matters of safety and comfort that are not directly addressed in this Standard but which merit the consideration of wearers as well as manufacturers.
Although helmet use has been shown to reduce head injuries significantly, there are limits to a helmet's protective capability. No helmet can protect the wearer against all foreseeable accidents. Therefore, injury, death or permanent impairment may occur in accidents which exceed the protective capability of any helmet including even those helmets meeting the requirements of this Standard.
A helmet's protective capability may be exhausted in an accident. Helmets are constructed so that the energy of a blow is managed by the helmet, which may cause its partial or total destruction. Because the damage may not be readily apparent, the Foundation strongly recommends that a helmet impacted in an accident be returned to the manufacturer for complete inspection. If it is not possible to return the helmet, the helmet should always be destroyed and replaced.
Finally, the protective capability may diminish over time. Some helmets are made of materials which deteriorate with age and therefore have a limited life span. At the present time, the Foundation recommends that skiing helmets be replaced after five (5) years, or less if the manufacturer so recommends.
The remainder of this Standard is divided into sections on construction, qualifications for certification, modifications, random sample testing, labeling and marking, extent of protection, and testing. Qualifications for certification discusses helmets submitted for the Foundation's certification program. Construction, extent of protection and testing describe the requirements that helmets must meet to be admitted to the Foundation's program. These sections plus the sections on random sample testing, labeling and marking, and modifications describe the requirements that helmets must meet to continue in the Foundation's program.
A. General
The assembled helmet shall have smooth external and internal surfaces. Any feature such as an aerodynamic fairing projecting more than 5 mm beyond the outer surface must readily break away; all other projections on the outer surface shall be smoothly faired and offer minimal frictional resistance to tangential impact forces. There shall be no feature on the inner surface projecting more than 2 mm into the helmet interior. The helmet shall provide as nearly uniform impact protection over the entire protected area as is practicable.
Soft material may be added to the bottom edges of the helmet in order to fair the helmet into the anatomical contours. So long as this material does not intrude into the test areas of the helmet shell, it will not be subject to direct impact. If this material is dislodged, neither it nor the exposed helmet edges shall pose any laceration hazard.
If the absence of any detachable component of the helmet does not prevent its being worn, then this absence must not compromise either the retention system or the impact protection. If any part of the helmet detaches during testing, it must offer no laceration or puncture hazard nor reduce the area of coverage of the head.
If the manufacturer provides add-ons such as visors, face shields and neck curtains with the helmet, these add-ons must neither lessen the protective capability of the basic helmet nor create a direct hazard for the wearer.
B. Materials
Ideally, materials used in the manufacture of the helmet should be of durable quality and not be harmed by exposure to sun, rain, dust, vibration, sweat or products applied to the skin or hair. Similarly, the materials should not degrade due to temperature extremes likely to be encountered in routine storage or transportation.
Materials which are known to cause skin irritation or are conducive to disease shall not be used for the parts which contact the skin. Materials that support the growth of fungi or algae shall not be used. Lining materials, if used, may be detachable for the purpose of washing.
C. Finish
All edges of the helmet shall be smoothed and rounded with no metallic parts or other rigid projections on the inside of the shell that might injure the wearer's head in the event of impact.
D. Retention System
The retention system shall be designed so as to discourage misuse. That is, of all the ways in which the retention system might be used, the design use shall be the simplest and quickest to implement. Helmets shall not be fitted with "non-essential" features which, if misused, can degrade the performance. Quick release buckles, if used, shall not be able to be released inadvertently.
E. Peripheral Vision
The helmet shall provide peripheral visual clearance as measured using a reference headform appropriate to the size of the helmet. This peripheral vision includes a horizontal clearance of at least 105 to the right and left for a total of 210, an upward clearance of at least 25 and a downward clearance of at least 30. These clearances are described in terms of planes fixed in the reference headforms.
For qualification testing, helmets shall be in the same condition as those offered for sale. No helmet or component which has been subjected to any tests described in this Standard shall be offered for sale after testing. A total of six (6) complete helmets must be submitted by the manufacturer for a certification test program for each size of this model offered for sale. Five of these samples will be destroyed in testing; the sixth shall be retained for comparison and reference.
Cosmetic changes to certified headgear are permissible. Such changes are generally limited to marking or trimming the headgear with manufacturer approved paint or tape.
Otherwise, modification of certified headgear creates new headgear which will not have the confidence and certification of the Foundation until samples have been submitted and evaluated. Manufacturers must not place the Foundation's certification label in any modified headgear for which they have not received written permission.
After-market modifiers of such certified headgear should be aware that any structural modification may adversely affect a helmet's protective capability and therefore invalidate the certification.
In addition to the certification testing, the Foundation will routinely obtain and test samples of previously certified models. These samples will be selected from among those stocks intended for retail sale to consumers. In this manner, the Foundation will attempt to ensure that the helmets made available to the public continue to meet the performance requirements of this Standard.
In cases where helmets are provided directly to users and do not pass through a normal sales distribution system, the Foundation will set up alternative pr
Each helmet shall have durable, visible and legible labeling identifying the manufacturer, the month and year of manufacture, the model and the size. Labeling shall be uncoded and either in English or a language common to the area where the helmets are to be distributed. The headgear shall also be labeled to the following effect:
1. Certified for recreational skiing use only.
2. No helmet can protect the wearer against all foreseeable impacts. However, for maximum protection, the helmet must be of good fit and all retention straps must be securely fastened to retain the helmet. The helmet, when fitted and fastened, shall resist any inadvertent dislodgment or removal.
3. This helmet is so constructed that the energy of an impact may be absorbed through its partial destruction, though damage may not be visible. If it suffers an impact, it must either be returned to the manufacturer for inspection or be destroyed and replaced.
If any of the helmet components are sensitive to common solvents, adhesives, paints or cleansers; the helmet must also bear labels to the following effect:
This helmet can be seriously damaged by some common substances without visible damage. Avoid contact with: (List damaging fluids, etc.) Apply only the following: (Recommended cleaning agents, paints, adhesives and the like) as appropriate.
Each helmet shall also include one of the Foundation's serialized certification labels. The Snell certification label shall be placed either inside or on the outside of the helmet, as appropriate, in such a way that it cannot be removed intact.
The registered trademark (certification label) of the Snell Memorial Foundation may be used by the manufacturer only under license from the Snell Memorial Foundation. The specifics of licensure may be obtained from the Foundation.
The extent of protection corresponds to that region of the head for which protection is sought. This region is defined according to the geometry of five reference headforms: 'A', 'E', 'J', 'M' and 'O' which are described in International Standards Organization (ISO) Draft Standard ISO DIS 6220-1983.
There are a number of planes fixed in the geometry of these headforms as shown in Figure 1. This description of the extent of protection uses the ISO definitions of the basic plane, the longitudinal plane, the transverse plane and the reference plane. Since the reference plane used in conjunction with earlier Snell Standards does not correspond at all to the definition for the ISO reference plane, a new S0 plane has been defined. Other planes have also been defined strictly for convenience and clarity.
The basic plane corresponds to the anatomical plane (Frankfort plane) that includes the auditory meatuses and the inferior orbital rims. The longitudinal or midsagittal plane is perpendicular to the basic plane and is the plane of symmetry dividing the right half of the headform from the left. The transverse or coronal plane is perpendicular to both the longitudinal and basic planes. It corresponds to the anatomical plane that contains the two auditory meatuses and divides the front from the rear portions of the head. The reference plane is parallel to the basic plane and lies above it at a distance determined by the size of the headform: 24 mm, 26 mm, 27.5 mm, 29 mm and 30 mm for the 'A' through 'O' headforms respectively.
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
These four planes are all well known entities. The remaining planes, however, have been defined purely for the purposes of this Standard. The S0 plane is parallel to the basic plane and lies above it at a distance determined by the size of the headform: 46.8 mm, 50 mm, 53 mm, 55.2 mm and 57.2 mm for the 'A' through 'O' headforms respectively.
The S3 plane is parallel to the S0 plane and the basic plane and lies between them at a distance of 26.1 mm, 28.2 mm, 30 mm, 31.5 mm and 32.2 mm below the S0 plane for the 'A' through 'O' headforms respectively. The S4 plane is also parallel to the S0 plane and lies below it a distance of 52.2 mm, 56.4 mm, 60 mm, 63 mm and 64.5 mm for the 'A' through 'O' headforms respectively.
The rear plane divides the rear third of the head from the front two thirds. It is parallel to the transverse plane and lies at a given distance behind the point where the reference plane and longitudinal planes intersect with the front surface of the headform. The distance from this point, hereafter called the reference point, is determined by the size of the headform: 128.6 mm, 139 mm, 148.4 mm, 155.8 mm and 161.5 mm for the 'A' through 'O' headforms respectively.
The fore plane is also parallel to the transverse plane. It lies behind the reference point at a distance determined by the size of the headform: 39 mm, 42.2 mm, 45.2 mm, 47.4 mm and 49.2 mm for the 'A' through 'O' headforms respectively.
The extent of protection provided by the helmet must include the entire region above the S0 plane and forward of the fore plane, the entire region above the S3 plane and between the fore and rear planes and the entire region above the S4 plane and behind the rear plane. (See Figure 2.)
A. Helmet Positioning
Each helmet will be positioned on the appropriate headforms for testing according to the helmet positioning indices specified. If the manufacturer fails to provide positioning information with certification samples, the helmets will be positioned according to the best judgment of the Foundation's technical personnel. If the helmets meet certification requirements, the helmet positioning indices will be those used in all future testing.
These helmet positioning indices represent distances on the headform measured from the basic plane along the intersection with the longitudinal plane to the lower edge of the helmet.
Helmet positioning indices will be assigned for all headform sizes appropriate to the headgear. Each headgear could conceivably require five helmet positioning indices, one each for the 'A', 'E', 'J', 'M' and 'O' headforms.
B. Inspection
Each helmet will be inspected for the required labels and for compliance with the general limitations made on structure. The weight will be recorded for comparison with other samples of the same make and model.
Some helmets may incorporate innovations and other features not anticipated by this Standard but which raise concerns about the safety and effectiveness of the headgear. These will be referred to members of the Foundation's Board of Directors for evaluation. Any feature found to reduce the protective capacity of the headgear, whether explicitly mentioned in this Standard or not, will be a cause for rejection.
C. Marking
The helmet is placed upon the largest appropriate ISO headform, positioned according to the apposite helmet positioning index and held in place with an applied force of 50 newtons (11.25 lbs). The intersections of the shell with the various defined planes are then traced onto the outer surface of the helmet in the following manner:
The level of the S0 plane is marked on that portion of the
helmet in front of the fore plane. The level of the S3 plane is marked on that portion lying between the fore and rear planes. The level of the S4 plane is marked on that portion behind the rear plane. Finally, line segments along the fore plane are marked to join the S0 and S3 planes and, similarly, line segments along the rear plane are marked to join the S3 and S4 planes.
These lines enclose the top of the helmet and are the boundary of the required extent of protection. A test line shall be drawn within this extent of protection so that it is 30 mm from the closest point on the boundary. (See Figure 2)
If identical helmets are to be configured with different thickness' of comfort padding to accommodate different ranges of head size, the required extent of protection marked on the test samples shall include the required extent of protection for each different configuration as marked on the largest headform appropriate for each. That is: the helmet must meet all the requirements of this Standard in each of the intended configurations.
D. Peripheral Vision
The clearance for peripheral vision will be checked by placing the helmet on each appropriate ISO headform, positioning it according to the apposite helmet positioning index and holding it in place with a force of 50 newtons. The clearance must include the following solid angles to the front of the headform:
1. The upward visual clearance.
2. The lateral visual clearance.
3. The downward visual clearance except for the breath deflector allowance.
The upward visual clearance is the solid angle bounded by the reference plane of the headform and a second plane tilted 25 up from the reference plane. This second plane intersects the reference plane at two points on the front surface of the headform that are 31 mm to the right and left of the longitudinal plane as shown in figure 3.
Figure 3.
The lateral visual clearance, as shown in figure 4, is the solid angle bounded by the reference plane, the S4 plane and two more planes that are perpendicular to the reference plane and that contain the point on the front of the headform where the longitudinal and reference planes intersect. One of these two planes forms an angle of 105 with the longitudinal plane and lies to the left of the headform. The other forms the same angle to the right of the headform.
Figure 4.
The downward visual clearance is the solid angle bounded by the basic
plane of the headform and a second plane tilted 30 down from the basic
plane that intersects it at two points on the front surface of the headform
that are 31 mm to the right and left of the longitudinal plane as shown
in figure 5. However, intrusions into this downward clearance are permitted
so long as the intrusions are within the breath deflector allowance.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
The breath deflector allowance is shown in figure 6. It includes the region that is within 31 mm to the right and left of the longitudinal plane and that lies below the two planes that form 45 with the longitudinal plane and that intersect it at the level of the S4 plane.
E. Performance Testing
The performance testing first subjects helmets to a dynamic test of retention system strength or to a test for positional stability. The helmets are then subjected to several impact management tests, to shell penetration tests and to chin bar tests if appropriate. These tests are conducted upon helmet samples either kept under laboratory ambient temperature and humidity or that have been conditioned in one of two environments simulating extremes of the conditions in which the helmet might reasonably be expected to be used.
In certification testing, one of the five samples is kept at laboratory ambient temperature and humidity and allowed to come to equilibrium. It is subjected to the positional stability test and then to the impact management tests. Two samples are conditioned cold and two are conditioned wet. These four samples are subjected to the dynamic test of the retention system and then to the impact management tests.
In random sample testing, the sample may be at ambient temperature and humidity and subjected to either the test for positional stability or to the dynamic test of the retention system before being tested for impact management. Otherwise, the sample may be conditioned either cold or wet and subjected to the dynamic test of the retention system before being tested for impact management.
E1. Conditioning for Testing
a. Cold. The sample shall be conditioned by being exposed to a temperature of -20 C ± 2 C for a period of not less than four (4) hours, nor more than twenty-four (24) hours.
b. Wet. The sample shall be conditioned by being continuously sprayed with water at a temperature of 25 C ± 5 C for a period of not less than four (4) hours, nor more than twenty-four (24) hours. All of the helmet's external surfaces shall be wetted continuously throughout the spray cycle. The helmet shall not be subjected to total immersion.
All testing of these cold and wet helmets shall begin within two (2) minutes from the time of removal from the conditioning apparatus. The samples shall be returned to the conditioning apparatus between tests.
E2. Positional Stability (Roll-Off)
The test for positional stability shall only be applied to samples kept at ambient laboratory temperature and humidity. The helmet shall not have been subjected to any prior performance testing.
The helmet shall be tested on the smallest appropriate standard full-face headform. The headform shall be supported on a stand so that its vertical axis points downward at an angle of 135 to the direction of gravity. The headform shall be oriented face down. The helmet shall be placed on the headform and adjusted to obtain the best configuration of the retention system. A flexible metal strap shall be hooked to the edge of the helmet at the rear centerline and brought forward so that its free end hangs downward across the top of the helmet. An inertial hammer shall be suspended from the free end of the strap. This inertial hammer shall enable a 4.0 kg ± 50 g mass to be dropped through a 0.6 m guided fall in order to deliver an abrupt shock load to the headgear. The shock load will force the helmet to rotate forward on the headform. The helmet may be shifted but must remain on the headform.
The headform shall be repositioned so that it is facing upward but with the vertical axis still oriented downward at 135 to gravity. The helmet shall be positioned and adjusted to obtain the best configuration of the retention system. The metal strap/inertial hammer shall be hooked to the brow edge of the helmet at the center line so that the strap lies along the centerline and hammer is suspended from the top of the helmet. The shock weight shall be dropped through the 0.6 m guided fall delivering an abrupt shock load forcing the helmet to rotate rearward. The helmet may be shifted but must remain on the headform.
The mass of the inertial hammer exclusive of the 4.0 kg shock mass shall be 1.0 kg ± 100 g.
E3. Dynamic Test of Retention System
The dynamic test of the retention system may be applied to any sample either kept at ambient temperature and humidity or conditioned cold or wet. However, the sample shall not have been subjected to any prior performance testing.
The helmet shall be placed on a headform in such a manner that the chin strap may be fastened under a device whose upper end approximates the contour of the bony structure of the jaw. The device will then be given ad by a dynamic loading. The retention system fails if it cannot support the mechanical loads or if the maximum deflection during the dynamic load exceeds 30 mm. The retention system also fails if it cannot be easily and quickly unfastened after testing.
a. This chinstrap loading device shall consist of a simulated jaw and accommodations for the pre-load and dynamic load. The jaw portion shall consist of two metal bars or rollers, each one 12.7 mm ± 0.5 mm in diameter, separated by 76 mm ± 0.5 mm on center. The mass of this device shall not exceed 6.0 kg.
b. A pre-load shall be applied for at least 60 seconds. This pre-load plus the mass of the chinstrap loading device shall total 23 kg ± 500 g.
c. A 38 kg ± 500 g mass shall be dropped in a vertical guided fall a distance of 30 mm so as to load the retaining system abruptly; the 38 kg mass and pre-load mass shall not be additive. In order to protect the test mechanism, the impact of the 38 kg mass may be cushioned with a 00-93 durometer rubber pad 150 mm in diameter by 6½ mm thick, or its equivalent.
E4. Impact Management Tests
The impact management tests may be performed on samples kept at ambient temperature and humidity or conditioned cold or wet. Samples may be first subjected to either positional stability testing or the test for retention system strength. Samples shall not have been subjected to the shell penetration test beforehand.
These tests involve a series of controlled impacts in which the helmet is positioned on a test headform. The helmeted headform is then dropped in guided falls onto specified test anvils. The impact site and the impact energy must meet certain requirements in order for the tests to be valid. If in a valid test, the peak acceleration imparted to the headform exceeds 300 G's, the helmet shall be rejected.
If the sample is so constructed that it interferes with the test equipment preventing impacts at sites within the test line, then, at the discretion of the Foundation's technical personnel, parts of the helmet may be cut away to facilitate testing. Every reasonable effort to minimize such cutting will be made. However, there shall be no relaxation of the impact levels or of the test criteria.
E4.1 Impact Management Test Equipment
The test equipment shall consist of at least the following items:
a. The smallest of the headforms appropriate for the helmet sample. This headform shall be of rigid, low resonance metal such as magnesium alloy and shall conform to the 'A', 'E', 'J', 'M' or 'O' geometries specified in ISO DIS 6220-1983.
b. A ball-arm/collar assembly which is fitted to a socket machined into the base of the headform. The ball/socket configuration shall be such that the geometrical center of the ball is located on the central vertical axis of the headform 12.7 mm above the reference plane as described in ISO DIS 6220-1983. The ball-arm/collar assembly shall also include a uniaxial accelerometer fixed firmly into the ball.
c. A headform support assembly rigidly attached to the ball-arm. This support assembly shall be such that it and consequently the headform may be guided in a vertical drop. The weight of the support assembly shall not exceed 25% of the combined weights of the headform, ball-arm, collar and accelerometer. The total mass of the headform/support assembly shall not be less than 5.0 kg nor more than 6.5 kg.
d. A guidance system such that the headform/support assembly may be guided in a vertical drop onto a test anvil. This guidance system may consist of two or more wires or one or more rails. The headform/support - guidance system - test anvil alignment shall be such that:
d1. The drop trajectory shall be a straight line within 3 of vertical and within 5 of the sensitive axis of the uniaxial accelerometer.
d2. The line parallel to the drop trajectory and passing through the center of the headform ball-socket shall pass within 5 mm of the center of the test anvil, within 10 mm of the center of gravity of the headform/support assembly, and within 5 mm of the sensitive element of the uniaxial accelerometer.
e. A rigid anvil mount consisting of a solid mass of at least 135 kg. The upper surface of the anvil mount shall consist of a steel plate with a minimum thickness of 12 mm and a minimum surface area of at least 0.10 m2.
f. Three test anvils: flat, hemispherical and edge.
f1. The flat anvil shall have a minimum surface area of 0.0127 m2, e.g. 127 mm diameter face. When fixed in position on the anvil mount, the surface shall be perpendicular to the headform trajectory.
f2. The hemispherical anvil shall have a 48 mm ± 0.5 mm radius.
f3. The edge anvil shall have a striking face 6.3 mm wide by at least 180 mm long with a depth of at least 35 mm. When in position, the striking face shall be perpendicular to the headform trajectory.
g. A uniaxial accelerometer. The acceleration data channel must comply with SAE recommended practice J 211 requirements for channel class 1000 with the exception that the frequency response need not include the range from dc to 10 hz which may not be obtainable using certain types of transducers.
h. A velocity measurement device which will yield the velocity of the headform/support assembly within the last 40 mm of travel before impact. The velocity measurements must be accurate to within ±1%.
E4.2 Test Definitions
a. The impact site refers to the portion of the helmet struck during an impact test. It is defined as the point where a line passing through the center of the headform ball and the center of the anvil intersects the outer surface of the helmet at the instant the helmet first touches the anvil.
b. The impact energy is the kinetic energy of the headform/support assembly at the instant of impact. It is defined as the mass of the headform/support assembly times the square of the velocity measurement times one half. The mass of the helmet is ignored in this calculation.
E4.3 Test Impacts
Each sample will be subjected to no more than four test impacts. Test impact sites shall be on or above the test line. Rivets, vents and any other helmet feature within this region shall be valid test sites. Similarly, no allowance shall be made for the cut of the helmet either between the fore and rear planes or at the rear centerline; no matter how closely the edge of the helmet encroaches on the test line. However, if a test impact is sited closer than 120 mm to any previous test impact site on that sample, that impact shall be declared invalid.
There is no restriction regarding test anvil selection except that each anvil shall be used at least once for each helmet sample tested. The impact energies for each test impact are as follows:
a. For each impact against the flat anvil, the impact energy shall be 100 J for all testing regardless of headform size or weight. Given an ideal frictionless mechanical test facility, this impact energy represents a 2.0 meter drop of a 5 kg headform and supporting assembly.
b. For each impact against the hemispherical anvil, the impact energy shall be 80 J for all testing regardless of headform size or weight. Given an ideal frictionless mechanical test facility, this impact energy represents a 1.6 meter drop of a 5 kg headform and supporting assembly.
c. For each impact against the edge anvil, the impact energy shall be 80 J for all testing regardless of headform size or weight. Given an ideal frictionless mechanical test facility, this impact energy represents a 1.6 meter drop of a 5 kg headform and supporting assembly.
d. If the impact energy for any test impact exceeds the energy specified by more than 3%, that impact shall be declared invalid.
E4.4 Impact Test Interpretation
The peak acceleration of the headform shall not exceed 300 G's for any valid test impact. Similarly, the helmet's protective structures shall remain intact throughout the testing. If the Foundation's technical personnel conclude that the headgear has been compromised by breakage, the sample shall be rejected.
If, in certification testing, a sample is found to meet all the test criteria but any two of the impacts were at less than 97% of the impact energy specified, the testing for that sample shall be declared inconclusive and must be repeated. Also, if an invalid impact produces a peak acceleration exceeding 300 G's, the testing for the sample shall be declared inconclusive and must be repeated.
The impact test procedures leave considerable latitude to the helmet tester regarding site and anvil selection. It is expected the tester will orchestrate each test series in order to investigate potential weaknesses and to exercise each likely failure mode.
If at the end of a certification test series, the Foundation's technical personnel conclude that the results obtained in valid impacts are not sufficient to determine whether that helmet model meets the performance requirements of this Standard, additional samples may be conditioned and tested. It is expected that all samples submitted will meet all the test requirements.
E5. Chin Bar Test
The chin bar test applies to full face helmets only. At least one helmet in each certification series shall be tested. The helmet shall be firmly mounted on a rigid base so that the chin bar faces up and the reference plane is at 65 ± 5 from horizontal. A mass of 5 kg ± .2 kg with a flat striking face of 0.01 m² minimum area shall be dropped in a guided fall so as to strike the central portion of the chin bar with an impact velocity of 2.8 m/sec ± 0.2 m/sec. The maximum downward deflection of the chin bar must not exceed 60 mm nor any component fail so as to cause a potential injury to the
E6. Shell Penetration Test
The complete helmet shall be placed on a rigidly mounted headform. If the helmet contains a sling or some other adjustable sizing component, it shall be relaxed to its most extendable position.
The penetration test striker shall have a mass of 3 kg ± 50 grams. The striker shall fall through a height of 1 m &usmn; 15 mm. The point of the striker shall be a cone with an included angle of 60 ± 0.5 and an altitude of 38 mm ± 0.38 mm. The striking tip shall have a hardness of 60 Rockwell (scale C ± 3 points) and a radius of .5 mm ± .01 mm.
The test striker must not penetrate to achieve even momentary contact with the test headform.
0The Foundation has also published Standards for headgear used in bicycling, non-motorized sports, motorcycling, automobile racing, and in equestrian (harness racing) activities. Copies of these Standards are available on request.


text:
The Florida Sonex Association will hold its first Spring Sonex Fest fly-in on Saturday, April 13, at Zephyrhills Municipal Airport in Zephyrhills, Fla.
The event, which will be held from 10 am to 5 pm, is "a great opportunity for SUN 'n FUN attendees interested in Sonex Aircraft to experience a grassroots Sonex builder event, as the Zephyrhills airport is only a 35 minute drive from the SUN 'n FUN grounds on Lakeland-Linder Regional Airport (LAL), officials said.
Fly-in or transient traffic is also welcome, however, event organizers and airport management ask that all attendees driving or flying-in RSVP for the event at the Florida Sonex Association website to ensure adequate food, refreshments, shade and aircraft parking are available.
Sonex Aircraft will also be hosting forums at SUN 'n FUN on Thursday, April 11, and Friday, April 12. A full schedule of events can be found on the Sonex Company Events Calendar. (Note: Sonex will not have an exhibitor booth space at this year's SUN 'n FUN, which runs from April 9-14.)
"This is the first time the Florida Sonex Association will have a 'Member Pilot Home Airport' event, an event where one of our member pilots host at their home field," writes FSA leader Mike January. "We are hoping that we will be able to increase the amount of member-based events in Florida to include fly-out breakfasts to other locations in the coming years. Our main event remains our annual fly-in at Dunnellon, Florida."
For more information: SonexAircraft.com


text:
Rihanna evacuated from hotel over fire fears
RIHANNA was evacuated from her London hotel in the early hours of Wednesday morning (26Jun12) over fears a fire had broken out.
That 6-0 hurt the boys. It will be nice if we can avenge that defeat.
The star is staying at the posh Corinthia Hotel while in the capital but was turfed out of bed after an elevator motor began to smoke, setting off the building's emergency alarm.
The singer and 300 fellow guests were moved onto the street while firefighters carried out a check of the building to ensure it was safe for them to return.
Rihanna jumped in a cab rather than wait, uploading a snap of herself on Twitter.com looking tired in the back of the London taxi, along with the caption, "Roamin da streets since 6am. Fyah in da telly (sic)!"
She then added a picture of a fire engine parked outside her the hotel.
A representative for the hotel says, "It was an unfortunate incident but we were pleased with all the co-operation of hotel guests and how staff dealt with it."