alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsExperimental Investigation of Shrouding on Meshed Spur Gear Windage Power LossWindage power loss in high-speed gearboxes results in efficiency losses and increased heating due to drag on the gear teeth. Test results for meshed spur gear windage power loss are presented at ambient oil inlet temperatures, both with and without shrouding. The rate of windage power loss is observed to increase above a gear surface speed of 10,000 feet per minute (51 meters per second), similar to results presented in the literature. Shrouding is observed to become more effective above 15,000 feet per minute (76 meters per second), decreasing power loss by 10 percent at 25,000  feet per minute (127 meters per second). The need for gearbox oil drain slots limits the effectiveness of shrouding in reducing windage power loss. Windage power loss is observed to decrease with increasing gearbox temperatures and to increase with oil flow. Windage power losses for unshrouded meshed spur gears are 7 times greater than losses determined from unshrouded single spur gear tests. A 6- to 12-times increase in windage power loss is observed in the shrouded meshed spur gear data compared with shrouded single spur gear data. Based on this preliminary study, additional research is suggested to determine the effect of oil drain slot configurations, axial and radial shroud clearances, and higher gear surface speeds on windage power loss. Additional work is also suggested to determine the sensitivity of windage power loss to oil temperature and oil flow. Windage power loss for meshed spur gears tested in both the shrouded and unshrouded configurations is shown to be more than double versus windage power loss for the same spur gears run individually in the same shroud configurations. Further study of the physical processes behind these results is needed to optimize gearbox shrouds for minimum windage power loss.Document ID20170009564Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsDelgado, Irebert R.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Hurrell, Michael J.*(HX5 Sierra, LLC Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredOctober 5, 2017Publication DateSeptember 1, 2017Subject CategoryAircraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberE-19395NASA/TM-2017-219536GRC-E-DAA-TN44777Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 664817.02.03.02.02CONTRACT_GRANT: NNC15BA02BDistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.Keywordsdragpower losswindagegearAvailable DownloadsNameType20170009564.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 938 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 938

To designate the Federal building located at 290 Broadway in New York, 
         New York, as the ``Ronald H. Brown Federal Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 2, 1999

   Mr. Rangel (for himself, Ms. Waters, Mr. Jackson of Illinois, Ms. 
 Jackson-Lee of Texas, Mrs. Meek of Florida, Mr. Pallone, Mr. Nadler, 
 Ms. Lee, Mr. Neal of Massachusetts, Mr. Faleomavaega, Ms. Carson, Mr. 
  Rush, Mr. Snyder, Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Matsui, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Ford, Mr. 
  Moakley, Ms. Norton, Mr. Cummings, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, Mr. 
  Lewis of Georgia, Mr. Payne, Mr. Coyne, Mr. Conyers, Mr. Engel, Mr. 
Jefferson, Mr. Clay, Mr. Scott, Mr. Brown of California, Mr. Gejdenson, 
 Mr. Kennedy of Rhode Island, Mrs. Clayton, Mr. Ackerman, Mr. Meeks of 
  New York, Mr. Levin, Mr. McGovern, Mrs. Mink of Hawaii, Mr. Watt of 
 North Carolina, Mr. Quinn, Mr. Sabo, Mr. Kucinich, Mr. Underwood, Ms. 
  Brown of Florida, Mr. LaFalce, Ms. Kilpatrick, Mrs. Maloney of New 
York, Mr. Portman, Mr. Frost, Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, Mrs. Jones of 
     Ohio, Mr. Watts of Oklahoma, Mr. Waxman, Mr. Crowley, and Mr. 
  Etheridge) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To designate the Federal building located at 290 Broadway in New York, 
         New York, as the ``Ronald H. Brown Federal Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building located at 290 Broadway in New York, New York, 
shall be known and designated as the ``Ronald H. Brown Federal 
Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the building referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Ronald H. Brown Federal 
Building''.
                                 <all>
```
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.

  Re: Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
  Certificates, Series 2012-C4 (the "Transaction"), issued pursuant to the
  Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 1, 2012 (the "Pooling
  and Servicing Agreement"), executed in connection with the Transaction
  (capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings set forth
  in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement).

  I, Steven Stern, certify that:

  1.I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D
    required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on
    Form 10-K of Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2012-C4 (the "Exchange Act
    periodic reports");

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

  3.Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other
    information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
    covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

  4.Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required
    in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
    disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have
    fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all
    material respects; and

  5.All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
    for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
    assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
    securities required to be included in this report in accordance with
    Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18
    have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
    disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance
    described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form
    10-K.

    In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
    information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Bank
    of America, National Association as Master Servicer, Berkadia
    Commercial Mortgage LLC as Servicing Function Participant, Midland Loan
    Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association as Special
    Servicer, Pacific Life Insurance Company as Trust Advisor, Wells Fargo
    Bank, National Association, as Certificate Administrator and Wells Fargo
    Bank, National Association as Custodian.

    Date:  March 28, 2014
    By: /s/ Steven Stern
    Name: Steven Stern
    Title: President
#### § 169.8 May tribes administer this part on BIA's behalf?

A tribe or tribal organization may contract or compact under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450f *et seq.*) to administer on BIA's behalf any portion of this part that is not a grant, approval, or disapproval of a right-of-way document, waiver of a requirement for right-of-way grant or approval (including but not limited to waivers of fair market value and valuation), cancellation of a right-of-way, or an appeal. Applicants may inquire at either the BIA office or the tribal office to determine whether the tribe has compacted or contracted to administer realty functions.
# C_2006165EN.01001701.xml

| 15.7.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 165/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.7.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/17

---

Action brought on 5 May 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Austria

(Case C-205/06)

(2006/C 165/30)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: H. Støvlbæk and B. Martenczuk, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Austria

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by not taking suitable measures to eliminate incompatibilities in relation to the provisions concerning transfers in the bilateral investment agreements with Korea, Cape Verde, China, Malaysia, the Russian Federation and Turkey, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under second paragraph of Article 307 of the EC Treaty; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by not taking suitable measures to eliminate incompatibilities in relation to the provisions concerning transfers in the bilateral investment agreements with Korea, Cape Verde, China, Malaysia, the Russian Federation and Turkey, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under second paragraph of Article 307 of the EC Treaty;

| — | order the Republic of Austria to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Republic of Austria to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Article 307 of the EC Treaty requires the Member States to take all appropriate steps to eliminate the incompatibilities established with the EC Treaty of the agreements concluded by them prior to 1 January 1958 or before accession to the European Community.

The Commission considers that the provisions on the free transfer of investment related payments in the bilateral investment agreements which the Republic of Austria concluded with Korea, Cape Verde, China, Malaysia, the Russian Federation and Turkey before its accession to the European Community are incompatible with the EC Treaty. This is because they do not allow the Republic of Austria to apply restrictions on capital or payments which the Council of the European Union may adopt on the basis of Articles 57(2), 59 and 60(1) of the EC Treaty.

The Austrian Government's argument that the way in which it votes in the Council is not predetermined by the agreements is irrelevant. The only relevant issue is whether the Republic of Austria can carry out — in conformity with its obligations under international law — the restrictive measures in a particular case. The provisions of the Austrian investment agreements in dispute show that this is not the case. Likewise, the argument that Austria alone cannot prevent the Council from adopting a decision by a qualified majority is not decisive for the same reason.

Since, in the present case, an incompatibility with the EC Treaty exists, Austria is under an obligation to take appropriate steps to eliminate it. If no other means are available, however, Austria could — according to the case-law of the Court of Justice — be obliged to abrogate the agreement at issue.

---
EXHIBIT 32.2

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the periodic report of STORE Capital Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Catherine Long, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

(1)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

 

(2)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.

 

|                 |                          |
|----------------------|-------------------------------|
|                 |                          |
| Date: March 10, 2015 |                          |
|                 | /s/ Catherine Long            |
|                 | Catherine Long                |
|                 | Chief Financial Officer       |
|                 | (Principal Financial Officer) |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
#### § 248.5 Damage to Government-owned property.

Anyone committing any act of depredation, destruction, theft, or misuse of the land, buildings, fences, signs, or other structures which are the property of the United States shall be subject to prosecution under applicable Federal or State law.
### §859. Art. 59. Error of law; lesser included offense

(a) A finding or sentence of a court-martial may not be held incorrect on the ground of an error of law unless the error materially prejudices the substantial rights of the accused.

(b) Any reviewing authority with the power to approve or affirm a finding of guilty may approve or affirm, instead, so much of the finding as includes a lesser included offense.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 57.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 859(a)859(b) | 50:646(a).50:646(b). | May 5, 1950, ch. 169, §1 (Art. 59), 64 Stat. 127. |

859(b)

50:646(b).

The word "may" is substituted for the word "shall".
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 

Home : Media : News

USINDOPACOM Commander Travels to Australia April 9, 2024 — SYDNEY - Adm. John C. Aquilino, commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, visited Canberra and Sydney, Australia from April 7-10, 2024, where he met with senior government and military leaders and... MORE 

----

2024 (236)2023 (825)2022 (1193)2021 (1066)2020 (1083)2019 (1166)2018 (1116)2017 (1356)2016 (1475)2015 (1408)2014 (904)2013 (32)2012 (4)

About DoDDoD CareersJoin the MilitaryNewsUSA.govPhotos & VideosPrivacy & SecurityTop Issues

US INDOPACOM Inspector GeneralDoD Inspector GeneralAccessibility/Section 508DoD FOIAUS INDOPACOM FOIALink DisclaimerNo FEAR ActRecovery ActINDOPACOM Webmaster

                  - Facebook
                  - X
                  - YouTube
                  - Instagram
                  - RSS

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
#### § 166.409 How is my grazing rental payment determined?

The grazing rental payment is the total of the grazing rental rate multiplied by the number of AUMs or acres covered by the permit.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 3 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                       January 6, 1999.
    Resolved, That a committee of two Members be appointed by the Speaker on the 
part of the House of Representatives to join with a committee on the part of the 
Senate to notify the President of the United States that a quorum of each House 
has assembled and Congress is ready to receive any communication that he may be 
pleased to make.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
### §904. Art. 104. Public records offenses

Any person subject to this chapter who, willfully and unlawfully—

(1) alters, conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys a public record; or

(2) takes a public record with the intent to alter, conceal, remove, mutilate, obliterate, or destroy the public record;

shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(Added Pub. L. 114–328, div. E, title LX, §5415, Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2944.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 904 was renumbered section 903b of this title.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective on Jan. 1, 2019, as designated by the President, with implementing regulations and provisions relating to applicability to various situations, see section 5542 of Pub. L. 114–328 and Ex. Ord. No. 13825, set out as notes under section 801 of this title.
#### § 26.26 What Job Placement services may I receive?

As determined by the service provider, you may receive transportation to work for a limited period, funds to finalize your job resume, and job placement assistance.
MEMORANDUM 

To: File 

From: Michael Galbraith 

Subject: Meeting with Rubber Manufacturers Association 

Date: July 9, 2009 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

On July 9, 2009, EPA (Matt Hale, Michael Galbraith, Lyn Luben) met with representatives from 

the Rubber Manufacturers Association (RMA). RMA was represented by Michael Blumenthal 

and Tracy Norberg. RMA generally discussed EPA’s Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

Titled “Identification of Non-Hazardous Materials That Are Solid Waste” that was published in 

the Federal Register on January 2, 2009. 

RMA generally explained and described the scrap tire recycling markets, with an emphasis on 

used tires used as fuels, and generally explained possible impacts that an EPA designation that 

scrap tires are solid waste when used as fuel would have on tire recycling markets and State tire 

collection programs. 

RMA provided EPA with a list of cement kilns that use tires as a supplemental fuel (see 

attached). 

Attachment
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                APR-2-2000
<CASH>                                           5,244
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  129,206
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,888
<INVENTORY>                                     55,422
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               205,443
<PP&E>                                         919,159
<DEPRECIATION>                                 402,905
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 780,388
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          199,522
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (465,178)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   780,388
<SALES>                                        204,988
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               204,988
<CGS>                                          170,046
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  170,046
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,571
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              24,487
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (3,116)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       148
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (3,264)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3,264)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
154 So.2d 685

#### Aubrey PATE v. STATE.

5 Div. 782.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

June 13, 1963.

Aubrey Pate, pro se.

Richmond M. Flowers, Atty. Gen., for the State.

*328LAWSON, Justice.

Review by this court of the decision and judgment of the Court of Appeals is not by appeal but in the manner prescribed by Supreme Court Rule 39.

Appeal dismissed.

LIVINGSTON, C. J., and GOODWYN and COLEMAN, JJ, concur.