alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 646.200 Purpose and applicability. ( a ) The purpose of this subpart is to prescribe policies and procedures for advancing Federal-aid projects involving railroad facilities.
( b ) This subpart, and all references hereinafter made to *projects,* applies to Federal-aid projects involving railroad facilities, including projects for the elimination of hazards of railroad-highway crossings, and other projects which use railroad properties or which involve adjustments required by highway construction to either railroad facilities or facilities that are jointly owned or used by railroad and utility companies.
( c ) Additional instructions for projects involving the elimination of hazards of railroad/highway grade crossings pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 130 are set forth in 23 CFR part 924.
( d ) Procedures on reimbursement for projects undertaken pursuant to this subpart are set forth in 23 CFR part 140, subpart I.
( e ) Procedures on insurance required of contractors working on or about railroad right-of-way are set forth in 23 CFR part 646, subpart A.
[40 FR 16059, Apr. 9, 1975, as amended at 45 FR 20795, Mar. 31, 1980; 62 FR 45328, Aug. 27, 1997]
**Exhibit (31)(i)(a)**

 

I, Mark P. Bulriss, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this annual report onForm 10-K/A of Great Lakes Chemical Corporation;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report doesnot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)              designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b)             evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

c)              disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth quarter inthe case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent function):

 

a)              all significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b)             any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:  July 2, 2004 | /s/ Mark P. Bulriss                      |   |
|-------------------------------|------------------------------------------|--------|
|                          | Mark P. Bulriss, Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
### §430f–7. Definitions

In sections 430f–6 to 430f–12 of this title:

#### (1) Map

The term "Map" means the map entitled "Park Boundary-Corinth Unit", numbered 304A/80009, and dated April 2007.

#### (2) Park

The term "Park" means the Shiloh National Military Park.

#### (3) Secretary

The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior.

#### (4) Unit

The term "Unit" means the Corinth Unit of Shiloh National Military Park established under section 430f–8 of this title.

(Pub. L. 106–271, §3, Sept. 22, 2000, 114 Stat. 793; Pub. L. 110–161, div. F, title I, §127(1), Dec. 26, 2007, 121 Stat. 2122.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2007—Par. (1). Pub. L. 110–161 substituted "304A/80009, and dated April 2007" for "304/80,007, and dated October 1998".
1 

### Muldoon, Albert (OST)

From: Muldoon, Albert (OST)

Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 11:31 AM

To: Carol Piscoya (csdvp@kawerak.org); 'John Bioff'

Cc: 'Scott Zurschmit'; Chris Bassett; Schle mmer, Kevin (OST); Devany, Dennis (OST)

(Dennis.DeVany@dot.gov); Rich Sewell (ric h.sewell@alaska.gov); Blood, Lawrence P

(CED)

Subject: ATNEP @ Diomede, AK - Proposal and Requests for Comments

Attachments: 150413_Erickson Proposal_ATNEP Diomede.pdf

Hi Carol and John,

Attached is Erickson’s proposal to continue providing service under the ATNEP program at Diomede, AK from July 1,

2015, through June 30, 2016. This was the only proposal received. Please provide us your comments by this Friday if

possible so that we can move forward with the process. Let us know if you have any questions. The proposal will also

be placed in docket DOT

‐ OST

‐ 2009

‐ 0260.

Regards,

A.J.

A.J. Muldoon

Office of Aviation Analysis

U.S. Department of Transportation

albert.muldoon@dot.gov

(202) 366

‐ 1058
ADOPT THESE 

HEALTHY PET HABITS

Pets can be good for our health, but they can also carry germs that make people sick. 

Pets can carry germs even if they look clean and healthy. 

Learn how to enjoy pets while staying healthy!

Remember, healthy pets = healthy people!

• Do your homework before 

getting a new pet. 

PICK THE 

RIGHT PET!

• Some pets aren’t safe for kids under 

5, older adults, people with weakened 

immune systems, or pregnant women. 292568-A

Healthy Pet Habits

• Don’t kiss your pets or let them lick

your face.

PLAY SAFELY!

• Take care to avoid bites and

scratches.

• Always supervise young children

around pets.

292568-C

Healthy Pet Habits

• Wash hands after touching, feeding,

or caring for your pets.

• Scoop the poop: clean up after pets in your

house, yard, and in public places.

292568-B

KEEP IT CLEAN!

Healthy Pet Habits

• Regular veterinary visits help

keep pets healthy, which helps

keep you healthy. 

• Take your pet to the vet if you

think it might be sick.

TAKE YOUR PET 

TO THE VET!

292568-D

Healthy Pet Habits

www.cdc.gov/healthypets

Accessible version: https://www.cdc.gov/healthypets/publications/healthy-pet-habits.html
§ 71.17 Rights of parties. Except as otherwise limited by this part, all parties may ( a ) Be accompanied, represented, and advised by a representative;
( b ) Participate in any conference held by the ALJ;
( c ) Conduct discovery;
( d ) Agree to stipulations of fact or law, which shall be made part of the record;
( e ) Present evidence relevant to the issues at the hearing;
( f ) Present and cross-examine witnesses;
( g ) Present oral arguments at the hearing as permitted by the ALJ; and
( h ) Submit written briefs and proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law after the hearing.
Exhibit 2.5

                                                               STATE OF DELAWARE
                                                              SECRETARY OF STATE
                                                        DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS
                                                       FILED 09:00 AM 07/06/2000
                                                             001342435 - 2407013

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                          EXECUTIVE HELP SERVICES, INC.

Executive Help Services, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under end by
virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware. DOES HEREBY
CERTIFY:

FIRST: That the Board of Directors of said Corporation at a meeting duly
convened and held, adopted the following resolution:

     RESOLVED that the Board of Directors hereby declares it advisable and in
     the best interest: of the Company that Article Fourth of the Certificate of
     Incorporation be amended to read as follows;

          FOURTH: All of the issued and outstanding common stock shares of the
          Company shall be split such, that each issued share of $0.001 par
          value stock :shall be exchanged for one point two (1.2) new shares of
          $0.001 par value stack."

SECOND: Upon this amendment becoming effective, the 4,455,000 issued and
outstanding shares of the par value of $0.001 shall be exchanged for 5,346,004
shares of the new $0.001 par value stock provided for in this Certificate of
Amendment.

THIRD: That the said amendment has been consented to and authorized by the
holders of all of the issued and outstanding stock entitled to vote by a written
Consent given in accordance with the provisions of Section 228 of the General
Corporation Law of the Stale of Delaware

FOURTH: That the aforesaid amendment wet: duly adopted in accordance with the
applicable provisions of Sections 242 and 228 of the General Corporation Law of
the State of Delaware.

FIFTH: That the capital of said corporation will sot be reduced under of by
reason of said amendment.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this Certificate to be signed by
William Crawford, its President, and attested by Bobbie Jo Crawford, its
Secretary, this 29'" day of June, A.D, 2000


                                               /s/ William Crawford, President,


                                     attested: /s/ Bobbie Jo Crawford, Secretary
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 9, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-40132 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus SAUL VILLEDA-TAVERA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:04-CR-595-ALL

-------------------- Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Saul Villeda-Tavera (Villeda) appeals following his guilty-plea conviction for being found in the United States after a previous deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Villeda contends that his sentence should be vacated and remanded because the district court sentenced him under the mandatory guidelines scheme held unconstitutional in United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005).No. 05-40132 -2- As the district court sentenced Villeda under a mandatory guidelines regime, it committed Fanfan error. See United States v. Valenzuela-Quevado , 407 F.3d 728, 733 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 267 (2005). When a defendant has preserved a Fanfan challenge in the district court, this court reviews for harmless error. United States v. Walters , 418 F.3d 461, 463 (5th Cir. 2005) ; Valenzuela-Quevedo , 407 F.3d at 732-33. Villeda’s Fanfan challenge was preserved by his objection in the district court under Blakely v. Washington , 542 U.S. 296 (2004). See United States v. Reyes-Celestino , 443 F.3d 451, 453 (5th Cir. 2006). We conclude that the Government has not met its burden of showing beyond a reasonable doubt that the district court would have imposed the same sentence absent the error. See id. ; United States v. Garza , 429 F.3d 165, 170-71 (5th Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 1444 (2006). We therefore vacate Villeda’s sentence and remand for resentencing. Villeda also challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b) in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Villeda’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Villeda contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi , we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-TorresNo. 05-40132 -3- remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Villeda properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. Therefore, Villeda’s conviction is affirmed. AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART.
---

Exhibit 32.1

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 
  as adopted pursuant to 
  Section 906 of the 
  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Aucxis Corp. (the
  Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed
  with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
  I, Neil Murphy, Chief Operating Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
  18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
  Act of 2002, that:

|(1 | ) | The Report complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                                         
|-- | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                               
|(2 | ) | The financial information contained in the Report
        fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
        results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Dennis Petke
  Dennis Petke 
  Chief Financial Officer
  October 14, 2003

---
Appendix G1 

Millennium Pipeline Project – Phase I
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED September 8, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-41049 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ANDRES AYALA-SORROSO, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:04-CR-1728-ALL

-------------------- Before KING, GARWOOD, and JOLLY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Andres AyalaSorroso raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Appendix K 

References
### §1102. Joint United States-Canadian Commission; establishment; functions

There shall be established, in accordance with the agreement between the Governments of the United States and Canada, signed January 22, 1964, a joint United States-Canadian Commission, to be called the "Roosevelt Campobello International Park Commission," which shall have as its functions—

(a) to accept title from the Hammer family to the former Roosevelt estate comprising the Roosevelt home and other grounds on Campobello Island;

(b) to take the necessary measures to restore the Roosevelt home as closely as possible to its condition when it was occupied by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt;

(c) to administer as a memorial the Roosevelt Campobello International Park comprising the Roosevelt estate and such other lands as may be acquired.

(Pub. L. 88–363, §3, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 299.)
#### In the Matter of Louis Alexander.

Referred to official referee. Order to be settled on notice. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
§ 140.914 Credits for improvements. ( a ) Credit shall be made to the project for additions or improvements which provide for higher quality or increased service capability of the operating facility and which are provided solely for the benefit of the company.
( b ) Where buildings and other depreciable structures of a company which are integral to operation of rail traffic must be replaced, credit shall be made to the project as set forth in 23 CFR 646.216(c)(2).
( c ) No credit is required for additions or improvements which are: ( 1 ) Necessitated by the requirements of the highway project.
( 2 ) Replacements which, although not identical, are of equivalent standard.
( 3 ) Replacements of devices or materials no longer regularly manufactured and the next highest grade or size is used.
( 4 ) Required by governmental and appropriate regulatory commission requirements.
#### § 80.3 Transaction.

The entire transaction which is the subject of the request must be an actual—not a hypothetical—transaction but need not involve only prospective conduct. However, a request will not be considered unless that portion of the transaction for which an opinion is sought involves only prospective conduct. An executed contract is not a prerequisite and, in most—if not all—instances, an opinion request should be made prior to the requestor's commitment to proceed with a transaction.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Brenda Peck, Appellant, v James Square Nursing Home et al., Respondents. Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

[823 NYS2d 630]

Spain, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed March 14, 2005, which, inter alia, rescinded awards pending claimant’s production of documentary proof of attachment to the labor market.

Claimant sustained a compensable injury to her right leg in 1992 and a consequential back injury thereafter. In a decision after a hearing in August 1995, a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (hereinafter WCLJ) found claimant to have a permanent partial disability, and directed payment at the permanent rate of $114 per week. In July 2003 and January 2004, the employer’s workers’ compensation carrier requested information regarding claimant’s search for work within her medical restrictions and, when such information was not produced, the carrier submitted a request for further action to determine whether there had been a voluntary removal from the labor market. A WCLJ directed claimant to submit a record of her job search for employment within her medical restrictions to the carrier. Following claimant’s failure to timely comply with that directive, and after a hearing at which virtually no evidence was adduced regarding claimant’s search for employment, compensation was directed to continue at the tentative rate of $114 per week. The carrier sought review of that decision before the Workers’ Compensation Board. The Board reversed the decision of the *1034WCLJ on the ground that claimant had an obligation to seek work within her medical restrictions and suspended compensation, without prejudice, pending claimant’s production of evidence of her job search. Claimant appeals, and we affirm.

Where a claimant has a permanent partial disability but there has been no finding of involuntary retirement, the claimant has an obligation to demonstrate attachment to the labor market with evidence of a search for employment within medical restrictions *(see Matter of Rothe v United Med. Assoc.,*18 AD3d 1093 [2005]; *Matter of Capezzuti v Glens Falls Hosp.,*282 AD2d 808, 810 [2001]; *Matter of Dudlo v Polytherm Plastics,*125 AD2d 792, 793-794 [1986]; *compare Matter of Bryant v New York City Tr. Auth.,*31 AD3d 936 [2006]; *Matter of Tipping v National Surface Cleaning Mgt., Inc.,*29 AD3d 1200 [2006]; *Matter of Leeber v LILCO,*29 AD3d 1198 [2006]; *Matter of Pepe v City & Suburban,*29 AD3d 1184 [2006]; *Matter of Pittman v ABM Indus., Inc.,*24 AD3d 1056, 1057-1058 [2005] [finding of involuntary retirement due to permanent partial disability gives rise to rebuttable inference that reduction in earnings was due to permanent partial disability]; *Matter of Jiminez v Waldbaums,*9 AD3d 99, 100 [2004]). Here, because there was no finding that claimant had involuntarily retired, the Board did not err in requiring her to demonstrate a search for employment within her medical restrictions.

Cardona, EJ., Peters, Mugglin and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**HerculesIncorporated**

 

 

# **CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of HerculesIncorporated (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31,2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Craig A. Rogerson, President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)     The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934; and

 

(2)     Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date:  March 16, 2005

 

 
| /s/ Craig A.  Rogerson                 |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Craig A. Rogerson                      |
| President and Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
### §460n–4. Hunting, fishing and trapping

The Secretary of the Interior shall permit hunting, fishing, and trapping on the lands and waters under his jurisdiction within the recreation area in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations of the United States and the respective States: Provided, That the Secretary, after consultation with the respective State fish and game commissions, may issue regulations designating zones where and establishing periods when no hunting, fishing, or trapping shall be permitted for reasons of public safety, administration, or public use and enjoyment.

(Pub. L. 88–639, §5, Oct. 8, 1964, 78 Stat. 1040.)