alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 3.5 Mobile or traveling housing facilities. ( a ) *Heating, cooling, and temperature.* Mobile or traveling housing facilities for dogs and cats must be sufficiently heated and cooled when necessary to protect the dogs and cats from temperature or humidity extremes and to provide for their health and well-being. The ambient temperature in the mobile or traveling housing facility must not fall below 50 °F (10 °C) for dogs and cats not acclimated to lower temperatures, for those breeds that cannot tolerate lower temperatures without stress or discomfort (such as short-haired breeds), and for sick, aged, young, or infirm dogs and cats. Dry bedding, solid resting boards, or other methods of conserving body heat must be provided when temperatures are below 50 °F (10 °C). The ambient temperature must not fall below 45 °F (7.2 °C) for more than 4 consecutive hours when dogs or cats are present, and must not exceed 85 °F (29.5 °C) for more than 4 consecutive hours when dogs or cats are present. The preceding requirements are in addition to, not in place of, all other requirements pertaining to climatic conditions in parts 2 and 3 of this chapter.
( b ) *Ventilation.* Mobile or traveling housing facilities for dogs and cats must be sufficiently ventilated at all times when dogs or cats are present to provide for the health and well-being of the animals, and to minimize odors, drafts, ammonia levels, moisture condensation, and exhaust fumes. Ventilation must be provided by means of windows, doors, vents, fans, or air conditioning. Auxiliary ventilation, such as fans, blowers, or air conditioning, must be provided when the ambient temperature within the animal housing area is 85 °F (29.5 °C) or higher.
( c ) *Lighting.* Mobile or traveling housing facilities for dogs and cats must be lighted well enough to permit proper cleaning and inspection of the facility, and observation of the dogs and cats. Animal areas must be provided a regular diurnal lighting cycle of either natural or artificial light. Lighting must be uniformly diffused throughout animal facilities and provide sufficient illumination to aid in maintaining good housekeeping practices, adequate cleaning, adequate inspection of animals, and for the well-being of the animals.
[32 FR 3273, Feb. 24, 1967, as amended at 63 FR 10498, Mar. 4, 1998]
Page 1of2

Fielder, Phillip
From: Landers, Stephen (MSK) [STEPHEN.LANDERS@GAPAC.com] Sent: Monday, April 07, 20084:10 PM To: Fielder, Phillip Cc: Givens, Dustin (MSK); Aguilar, MarkJ. Subject: BART EI Comment·GP, Muskogee Phillip,
Below is our response for using the emissions rates thatwe did. It is short, but quite to the pOint. Ifyou need to discuss it, please call atthe number below.

Table 2 ofthe March 2007 exemption report presents the maximum 24-hr actual emissions. These values reflect actual operating history during the baseline years evaluated by the Mill. Boiler No.1 is a backup unit and normally runs to provide steam when another boileratthe steam plant is off-line. Thus, daily operating rates and fuel specifications were tabulated for all BART-eligible boilers and a daily emission rate for eachp611utant was calculated. This methodology reflects worst case conditions when both BART-eligibleunits (Boilers 1 and 2) were operating simultaneously. The methodology is consistent with the CENRAP Protocol, section 6.4.4. Regarding inclusion ofthe Papermachines, Oklahoma DEQ identified BART-eligible units in 2006. The federal BART guidelines (Appendix Yto Part 51-Guidelines for BART Determinations underthe Regional Haze Rule) identifythe3 steps to determine emission units.that are BART-eligible. Section II ofthe Guidelines state: Step 1: Identifythe emission units in the BARTcategories, Step 2: Identifythe**start~up** dates ofthose emission units, and Step 3: Compare the potential emissions to the 250 ton/yrcutoff.
The BART categories include group (3) Kraft pulp mills and (22) Fossil-fuel boilers of more than 250 million BTUs per hour heat input. The Muskogee Mill operates four emission units in .group 22. Two ofthese Boilers were put intooperation in the time period of interest. Regarding BART category 3, the pulp mill and papermaking processes at the Mill are nota Kraft process. Therefore, w'e believe that all papermaking-related operations are, not included in group 3. The paper machines at the Mill are not part ofa BART category and thus not BART eligible.



### SteveLanders Environmental Program Mgr.

4/9/2008Page2of2

Georgia-PacificConsumer Products LP 918-684-4859 404-231-4189fax

4/912008
### §306. Delegation of functions

Subject to the concurrence of the head of the department or agency concerned, the Secretary may make such provisions as he shall deem appropriate, authorizing the performance by any officer, agency, or employee of the United States Government departments or offices, or the governments of any areas over which the United States exercises sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control, of any function of the Secretary, contained in this chapter.

(Added Pub. L. 87–826, §2, Oct. 15, 1962, 76 Stat. 952.)
#### Vasiliy P. Litvinov, Respondent, v Eileen M. Hodson et al. Defendants, and Jack Foy et al., Appellants.

[826 NYS2d 536]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Peter J. Notaro, J.), entered May 18, 2005. The order denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint against defendants Jack Foy and New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance Company.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by granting the motion in part and dismissing the seventh cause of action and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this lawsuit asserting causes of action for, inter alia, rescission of a release, fraud in the procurement of that release, and unfair claim settlement practices. As a preliminary matter, we note that, in evaluating defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint against Jack Foy and New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance Company (collectively, defendants), we have not considered any new arguments, grounds, or evidence advanced by defendants in their reply submissions *(see Watts v Champion Home Bldrs. Co.,*15 AD3d 850, 851 [2005]; *cf. Kennelly v Mobius Realty Holdings LLC,*33 *1333AD3d 380 [2006]). Within that framework, we conclude that defendants have failed to establish that the fifth and sixth causes of action do not state a cause of action against them, and have thus failed to establish that dismissal of those causes of action is warranted under CPLR 3211 (a) (7) (see *Watts,*15 AD3d at 851). We agree with defendants, however, that Supreme Court should have dismissed the seventh cause of action, inasmuch as it is premised on a regulation promulgated under Insurance Law § 2601, which itself does not give rise to a private cause of action *(see Rocanova v Equitable Life Assur. Socy. of U.S.,*83 NY2d 603, 614 [1994]; *Zawahir v Berkshire Life Ins. Co.,*22 AD3d 841, 842 [2005]). We therefore modify the order accordingly. Present—Hurlbutt, A.P.J., Gorski, Smith and Centra, JJ.
### §2181. Physical fitness of officers

The Secretary shall prescribe regulations under which the physical fitness of officers to perform their duties shall be periodically determined.

(Added Pub. L. 88–130, §1(10)(C), Sept. 24, 1963, 77 Stat. 190, §335; renumbered §2181, Pub. L. 115–282, title I, §112(b), Dec. 4, 2018, 132 Stat. 4216.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–282 renumbered section 335 of this title as this section.
Exhibit 32.2



WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350



Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, the
undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Insurance Management Solutions Group, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2003 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



|/s/ ANTHONY R. MARANDO                 |  | 
|-------------------------------------- |  | 
|Anthony R. Marando                     |  | 
|Chief Financial Officer August 7, 2003 |  |
Exhibit 21
  Subsidiary
    
    State of OrganizationRegent Broadcasting Management, LLC
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting, LLC
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting Midwest, LLC
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Mansfield, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Mansfield, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Albany, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Lafayette, LLC
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Flint, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Duluth, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Evansville/Owensboro, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Buffalo, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of El Paso, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Erie, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Erie, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Lancaster, Inc.
    
    DelawareLivingston County Broadcasters, Inc.
    
    IllinoisRegent Broadcasting of Lexington, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Lexington, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Peoria, Inc.
    
    DelawareB&G Broadcasting, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of San Diego, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of San Diego, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of St. Cloud, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of St. Cloud, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of St. Cloud II, Inc.
    
    MinnesotaRepCom, Inc.
    
    MinnesotaSartell FM, Inc.
    
    MinnesotaRegent Broadcasting of South Carolina, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of South Carolina, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Utica/Rome, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Utica/Rome, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Watertown, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Watertown, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Bloomington, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting West Coast, LLC
    
    CaliforniaRegent Broadcasting of Chico, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Chico, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Flagstaff, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Flagstaff, Inc.
    
    Delaware




---



##### 



Subsidiary
    
    State of OrganizationRegent Broadcasting of Ft. Collins, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Grand Rapids, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Kingman, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Kingman, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Lake Tahoe, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Lake Tahoe, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Palmdale, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Palmdale, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Broadcasting of Redding, Inc.
    
    DelawareRegent Licensee of Redding, Inc.
    
    Delaware
### §4513a. Federal Housing Finance Oversight Board

#### (a) In general

There is established the Federal Housing Finance Oversight Board, which shall advise the Director with respect to overall strategies and policies in carrying out the duties of the Director under this chapter.

#### (b) Limitations

The Board may not exercise any executive authority, and the Director may not delegate to the Board any of the functions, powers, or duties of the Director.

#### (c) Composition

The Board shall be comprised of 4 members, of whom—

(1) 1 member shall be the Secretary of the Treasury;

(2) 1 member shall be the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development;

(3) 1 member shall be the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission; and

(4) 1 member shall be the Director, who shall serve as the Chairperson of the Board.

#### (d) Meetings

#### (1) In general

The Board shall meet upon notice by the Director, but in no event shall the Board meet less frequently than once every 3 months.

#### (2) Special meetings

Either the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, or the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission may, upon giving written notice to the Director, require a special meeting of the Board.

#### (e) Testimony

On an annual basis, the Board shall testify before Congress regarding—

(1) the safety and soundness of the regulated entities;

(2) any material deficiencies in the conduct of the operations of the regulated entities;

(3) the overall operational status of the regulated entities;

(4) an evaluation of the performance of the regulated entities in carrying out their respective missions;

(5) operations, resources, and performance of the Agency; and

(6) such other matters relating to the Agency and its fulfillment of its mission, as the Board determines appropriate.

(Pub. L. 102–550, title XIII, §1313A, as added Pub. L. 110–289, div. A, title I, §1103(a), July 30, 2008, 122 Stat. 2665.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsec. (a), was in the original "this title", meaning title XIII of Pub. L. 102–550, Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 3941, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of title XIII to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 4501 of this title and Tables.
#### State ex rel. Julian P. Brodie, Trustee *v.*John Powers et al.

The defendants’ motion to dismiss the appeal from the Superior Court in Fairfield County is denied.

*686
      *Warren P. Joblin,*for the appellants (defendants).

*Edward Nusbaum,*and *Bobert H. Bukin,*for the appellee (plaintiff).

Argued June 4

decided June *4,*1974
```

[110th Congress Public Law 16]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ016.110]

[[Page 121 STAT. 71]]

Public Law 110-16
110th Congress

                                 An Act

 
   To provide for the construction, operation, and maintenance of an 
     arterial road in St. Louis County, Missouri. <<NOTE: Mar. 28, 
                         2007 -  [H.R. 1129]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PROJECT DEFINED.

    In this Act, the term ``project'' means only the portion of St. 
Louis County, Missouri, arterial road 1151 that is deed-restricted 
property, which specifically applies to approximately 0.3 acres and 540 
lineal feet and is identified as the ``FEMA'' route in the document 
entitled ``Lemay Connector Road for Long-Term Recovery, Recreational 
Enhancements, & Community, & Economic Development'', dated June 1, 2006, 
on file with the St. Louis County department of highways and traffic.
SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN FEDERAL LAW.

    The St. Louis County arterial road 1151, known as the ``Lemay 
Connector Road'' in St. Louis City and County, Missouri, may be 
constructed, operated, and maintained over the deed-restricted property 
described in section 1, notwithstanding section 404(b)(2) of the Robert 
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 
5170c) or Public Law 103-211 and any easement or other similar 
restriction pursuant to those Federal laws on the development of 
property that requires the property be maintained for open space, 
recreation, or wetland management.
SEC. 3. NO DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON FLOOD PLAIN.

    For the project, St. Louis County, Missouri, shall ensure that the 
project is constructed, operated, and maintained in such a manner that 
would not cause any future additional flood damage that would not have 
occurred without the project. Prior to constructing the project, St. 
Louis County or its assignee must identify and agree to restrict a 
nearby parcel of land of equal or greater size to the deed restricted 
land used for the project so that such parcel is maintained for open 
space, recreation, or wetland management.
SEC. 4. LIABILITY FOR FLOOD DAMAGE.

    The Federal Government shall not be liable for future flood damage 
that is caused by the project. St. Louis County, Missouri, or its 
assignee shall be liable for any future flood damage that is caused by 
the project.

[[Page 121 STAT. 72]]

SEC. 5. NO FUTURE DISASTER ASSISTANCE.

    The deed-restricted property described in section 1 is not eligible 
for any future disaster assistance from any other Federal source.

    Approved March 28, 2007.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 1129:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007):
            Feb. 27, considered and passed House.
            Mar. 13, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
# C_2010328EN.01001203.xml

| 4.12.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/12

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Mons (Belgium) lodged on 13 September 2010 — Belgian State — SPF Finances v BLM SA

(Case C-436/10)

()

2010/C 328/22

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Mons

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Belgian State — SPF Finances

Applicant:

Defendant: BLM SA

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Must Articles 6(2)(a) and 13B(b) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation which treats as an exempt supply of services, on the basis that it constitutes a leasing or letting of immovable property within the meaning of Article 13B(b), the private use by a director and his family of part of a building constructed or owned under a right in rem in that property by a taxable legal person, where the input tax on that asset is deductible?

1

---

(1)  OJ 1997 L 145, p. 1

1

---
CALPUFF Modeling Files for AECC Bailey, AECC McClellan, Domtar, AEP Flint Creek, 

Entergy Lake Catherine and Entergy White Bluff.

Each subject-to-BART facility hired a consultant to prepare a five-factor analysis for the

facility. A copy of these BART analyses, including summaries of the visibility modeling 

performed can be found in the docket for our proposed rulemaking.

Due to the file size of the CALPUFF modeling files, they are not available from the electronic 

docket. These files are available upon request. Please email your request to: Michael Feldman 

(feldman.michael@epa.gov) or call 214-665-7200

Thank you
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1396

To amend section 4532 of title 10, United States Code, to provide for

the coverage and treatment of overhead costs of United States factories

and arsenals when not making supplies for the Army, and for other

purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 20, 1999

Mr. FITZGERALD introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To amend section 4532 of title 10, United States Code,

to provide for the coverage and treatment of overhead

costs of United States factories and arsenals when not

making supplies for the Army, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. OVERHEAD COSTS OF UNITED STATES FAC4 TORIES AND ARSENALS WHEN NOT MAKING

5 SUPPLIES FOR THE ARMY.

6 (a) FINDING.—Congress makes the following find7 ings:
2

•S 1396 IS

1 (1) Factories and arsenals owned by the United

2 States play a vital role in the national defense by en3 suring the making of supplies for the Department of

4 the Army.

5 (2) The vital role of such factories and arsenals

6 in the national defense is not diminished by their

7 unutilization or underutilization in peacetime.

8 (b) OVERHEAD COSTS OF FACTORIES AND ARSENALS

9 WHEN UNUTILIZED OR UNDERUTILIZED.—Section 4532

10 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at

11 the end the following:

12 ‘‘(c) OVERHEAD COSTS WHEN UNUTILIZED OR UN13 DERUTILIZED.—(1) The Secretary shall submit to Con14 gress each year, together with the President’s budget for

15 the fiscal year beginning in such year under section

16 1105(a) of title 31, an estimate of the funds to be required

17 in the fiscal year in order to cover any overhead costs at

18 factories and arsenals referred to in subsection (a) that

19 result from the unutilization or underutilization of such

20 factories and arsenals in the fiscal year due to low produc21 tion requirements of the Department of the Army.

22 ‘‘(2) Funds appropriated to the Secretary for a fiscal

23 year for costs described in paragraph (1) shall be available

24 to the Secretary in such fiscal year to cover such costs.
3

•S 1396 IS

1 ‘‘(3) In determining the cost of making a supply or

2 other good, other than a supply for the Department of

3 the Army, at a factory or arsenal referred to in subsection

4 (a), the Secretary shall not take into account any overhead

5 cost covered with funds available to the Secretary under

6 paragraph (2).’’.

7 (c) STYLISTIC AMENDMENTS.—That section is fur8 ther amended—

9 (1) in subsection (a), by inserting ‘‘AUTHORITY

10 TO MAKE SUPPLIES.—’’ before ‘‘The Secretary of

11 the Army’’; and

12 (2) in subsection (b), by inserting ‘‘ABOLI13 TION.—’’ before ‘‘The Secretary’’.

Æ
# C_2010209EN.01005403.xml

| 31.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/54

---

Action brought on 31 May 2010 — Vakalis v Commission

(Case F-38/10)

()

2010/C 209/86

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Ioannis Vakalis (Luvinate, Italy) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision of the Office for Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements determining the pension rights of the applicant on their transfer to the European Union scheme.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that the Commission decision No 60/2004 of 28 April 2004 is vitiated by illegality; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that the Commission decision No 60/2004 of 28 April 2004 is vitiated by illegality;

| — | annul decision PMO-4/TP D(2009)/434514716; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul decision PMO-4/TP D(2009)/434514716;

| — | annul the decision rejecting the complaint; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision rejecting the complaint;

| — | order the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Commission to pay the costs.

---