alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 10,059

 10,230

 9,402

 8,561

 8,317

 8,331

 7,779

 7,136

 7,059

 7,851

 9,030

 9,489

 10,713

 11,112

 11,362

 11,979

 13,308

 13,595

 12,739

 11,850

 11,217

 10,834

 10,933

 10,633

 10,998

 11,727

 12,143

 12,409

 13,509

 13,439

 12,737

 1,858

 1,801

 1,227

 1,284

 1,200

 1,396

 1,223

 1,216

 1,509

 1,944

 3,019

 2,906

 2,075

 2,215

 1,758

 1,891

 2,246

 3,317

 3,974

 4,317

 4,041

 4,240

 4,613

 4,042

 3,526

 3,114

 2,793

 2,132

 2,573

 3,483

 3,798

 6,005

 5,792

 5,225

 4,890

 4,777

 4,642

 4,273

 4,042

 4,192

 4,814

 5,386

 5,151

 5,459

 5,689

 6,001

 6,411

 6,979

 7,700

 8,101

 8,057

 7,465

 7,560

 7,702

 6,900

 6,572

 6,558

 6,699

 6,780

 7,088

 8,320

 8,045

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

AUGUST 2009 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: September 2, 2009

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

COLLINSVILLE BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
**Exhibit 99.1**

** **
| PEC  Solutions, Inc. |                         | 12750 Fair  Lakes Circle |
|----------------------|-------------------------|--------------------------|
|                 | Fairfax, VA  22003      |
|                 |                    |
|                 | 703-679-4900  voice     |
|                 | 703-679-4901  facsimile |
|                 | www.pec.com             |

 

Certification of Principal Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

 

**I,David C. Karlgaard, President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executiveofficer) of PEC Solutions, Inc. (the “Registrant”), certify that to the best ofmy knowledge, based upon review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the periodended September 30, 2002 of the Registrant (the “Report”):**

 

**(1)****              The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) [15(d)] of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and**

 

**(2)****              The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.**

 

 
| **/s/ David C. Karlgaard** |                   |
|----------------------------|------------------------|
| **Name:**                  | **David C. Karlgaard** |
| **Date:**                  | **November 14, 2002**  |
|                            |                        |  |

 

----
- Newsroom        - Press Releases
      - Public Statements
      - Speeches
      - Testimony
      - Spotlight Topics
      - Media Gallery
      - Upcoming Events
      - Webcasts
      - What's New
      - SEC Videos
      - Reports and Publications
      - RSS Feeds
      - Social Media 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

**FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT:** 85 FR 52166, August 24, 2020

**PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING:** Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 10:00 a.m.

**CHANGES IN THE MEETING:** The following item will not be considered during the Open Meeting on Wednesday, August 26, 2020:- whether to adopt amendments to the definition of “accredited investor” in Commission rules and the definition of “qualified institutional buyer” in Rule 144A under the Securities Act to update and improve the definition to identify more effectively investors that have sufficient financial sophistication to participate in certain private investment opportunities.  The amendments are the product of years of efforts by the Commission and its staff to consider and analyze possible approaches to revising the accredited investor definition. 

**CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:** For further information; please contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

Dated: August 25, 2020

Vanessa A. CountrymanSecretary
cc: Hon. Valerie Adair, District Judge Kocka & Bolton Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk Gary Wadale Blalock

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 2 23ME=1
#### William Kelly, an Infant, by Helen Kelly, His Guardian ad Litem, et al., Appellants, v. Myer Products, Inc., et al., Respondents.

No opinion. Present — Hagarty, Carswell, Adel, Taylor and Lewis, JJ.
### §460nnn–122. Use of land and water conservation fund

#### (a) Availability of fund

There are authorized to be appropriated $25,000,000 from the land and water conservation fund established under section 200302 of title 54 to provide funds for the acquisition of land and interests in land under section 460nnn–24 of this title and to enter into nondevelopment easements and conservation easements under subsections (b) and (c) of section 460nnn–42 of this title.

#### (b) Term of use

Amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in subsection (a) shall remain available until expended.

(Pub. L. 106–399, title VII, §702, Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1673; Pub. L. 113–287, §5(d)(5), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3264.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2014—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 113–287 substituted "section 200302 of title 54" for "section 460l–5 of this title".
### §916b. Acceptance or rejection by United States Government of regulations, etc.; acceptance of reports, recommendations, etc., of Commission

The Secretary of State is authorized, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Commerce, to present or withdraw any objections on behalf of the United States Government to such regulations or amendments of the schedule to the convention as are adopted by the Commission and submitted to the United States Government in accordance with article V of the convention. The Secretary of State is further authorized to receive on behalf of the United States Government reports, requests, recommendations, and other communications of the Commission, and to act thereon either directly or by reference to the appropriate authority.

(Aug. 9, 1950, ch. 653, §4, 64 Stat. 422; 1970 Reorg. Plan No. 4, eff. Oct. 3, 1970, 35 F.R. 15627, 84 Stat. 2090.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

Transfer of functions to Secretary of Commerce from Secretary of the Interior by Reorg. Plan No. 4 of 1970, see note set out under section 916 of this title.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Ex-12d

                                                      Idaho Power Company
                                              Consolidated Financial Information
                                              Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges


                                                             Twelve Months Ended December 31,
                                                                  (Thousands of  Dollars)
                                                   1994         1995           1996         1997         1998
<S>                                              <C>          <C>            <C>          <C>          <C>
Earnings, as defined:
    Income before income taxes.................. $109,173     $135,333       $142,710     $138,746     $140,984
    Adjust for distributed income of equity
      investees.................................      326       (2,058)        (1,413)      (3,943)      (4,697)
    Equity in loss of equity method
      investments...............................        0            0              0            0          476
    Minority interest in losses of majority
      owned subs................................        0            0              0            0         (125)
    Fixed charges, as below.....................   55,227       57,381         58,339       61,743       61,478

        Total earnings, as defined.............. $164,726     $190,656       $199,636     $196,546     $198,116

Fixed charges, as defined:
    Interest charges............................  $54,433      $56,456        $57,348      $60,761     $ 60,677
    Rental interest factor......................      794          925            991          982          801

          Total fixed charges, as defined.......  $55,227      $57,381        $58,339      $61,743      $61,478

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges..............    2.98x        3.32x          3.42x        3.18x        3.22x




Exhibit 12-D

</TABLE>
#### George E. Kuznesky, as Administrator, etc., of Edward Alexander Kuznesky, Respondent, v. George E. Smith, Appellant.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. All concurred.
<Page>
                                                                    Exhibit 10.3

THIS IS AN ADDENDUM TO THE CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT OF C. J. VAN OPHEM AND FLAG
TELECOM LIMITED ("FLAG") DATED 31 AUGUST 2001 ("THE CONTRACT")


Dear Kees:

EXECUTIVE RETENTION PROGRAM ("THE PROGRAM")

The purpose of the Program is to retain executives who are critical to
maintaining the ongoing operations of FLAG Telecom Holdings Limited and its
group companies.

You will become entitled to a sum of US$500,000 minus applicable tax withholding
(the "RETENTION PAYMENT AMOUNT") on 9 April 2002 (the "PAYMENT DATE").

Furthermore, you will be entitled to 0.375% of the Enterprise Value (as defined
in the William M. Mercer Report addressed to John Draheim, "Enterprise value is
defined as Working Capital + Market Value of Debt + Market Value of Equity") of
FLAG Telecom Holdings Limited and its group companies over a threshold of US$150
million at the time a restructuring plan is decided upon by the Court in the
context of the current restructuring of FLAG Telecom Holdings Limited.

If you terminate your employment with FLAG or give notice to terminate your
employment with FLAG prior to the decision on a restructuring plan by the Court
then you will repay the net Retention Payment Amount to FLAG immediately.

Furthermore, in respect of your notice entitlement from FLAG to terminate your
employment without cause, the terms of the Contract are varied so that you are
entitled to receive one year's base salary plus target bonus of 100% of one
year's base salary if FLAG determines to end your employment without Good Cause.
Such entitlement will not be affected by the previous change in control
reference in the Contract.

Good Cause means any of:

(a)      misconduct, serious or persistent breach of any of your obligations to
         FLAG or any FLAG group company;

(b)      refusal or neglect to comply with any lawful orders given to you by
         FLAG; or

(c)      your failure (without reasonable excuse) to perform your duties
         adequately under your employment contract or such duties as may
         reasonably be required by FLAG.

If you agree to these revised terms please sign and return to me the attached
copy of this agreement.

/s/ Andres Bande                                    /s/ C.J. van Ophem
-------------------------------                     ----------------------------
FOR AND ON BEHALF OF FLAG                           C. J. VAN OPHEM

DATE  April 10, 2002                                DATE  April 9, 2002
      --------------                                      -------------
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Glenn L. Buck, Appellant, against Lester B. Rapp et al., as Councilmen of the City of Rochester, et al., Respondents.

Present—Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling and MeCurn, JJ.
#### Thomas C. Brown and James E. Lowe, Comprising the Firm of Brown & Lowe, Respondents, v. Richard E. Burger, Appellant.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. All concurred.
#### § 303.30 Public agency.

As used in this part, *public agency* means the lead agency and any other agency or political subdivision of the State.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1435(a)(10))
§ 222.52 What requirements must a local educational agency meet to receive a payment under section 8003(d)? To receive a payment under section 8003(d), an eligible LEA shall— ( a ) State in its application the number of federally connected children with disabilities it claims for a payment under section 8003(d);
( b ) Have in effect written IEPs or IFSPs for all federally connected children with disabilities it claims under section 8003(d); and
( c ) Meet the requirements of subparts A and C of the regulations in this part.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1810-0036) (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1400 *et seq.* and 7703)
[60 FR 50778, Sept. 29, 1995, as amended at 80 FR 33166, June 11, 2015]
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jerry Leon TUCKER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-4742.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 7, 2002.

Decided May 14, 2002.

*440Langdon D. Long, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Jane Barrett Taylor, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Jerry Leon Tucker was convicted of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B) (West 1999) and sentenced to eighty-eight months’ imprisonment. Tucker’s attorney has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Counsel states that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but raises the issues of whether the district court erred in denying Tucker’s motion to suppress and whether there was sufficient evidence to support Tucker’s conviction. Tucker has filed a pro se supplemental brief asserting similar claims. We affirm.

We review a district court’s factual findings underlying its denial of a motion to suppress for clear error, while reviewing its legal conclusions de novo. *United States v. Rusher,*966 F.2d 868, 873 (4th Cir.1992). In addition, in reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress, we review the evidence in the light most favorable to the government. *United States v. Seidman,*156 F.3d 542, 547 (4th Cir.1998). Under these standards, we conclude that the district court properly denied Tucker’s motion to suppress evidence discovered in the course of a traffic stop.

In reviewing a sufficiency of the evidence claim on appeal, we must sustain the verdict if the record contains “substantial evidence, taking the view most favorable to the Government, to support it.” *Glasser v. United States,*315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942). Applying this standard, we give due regard to the fact finder’s prerogative to resolve questions of credibility. *United States v. Burgos,*94 F.3d 849, 862-63 (4th Cir.1996). We conclude that the Government presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable trier of fact to find Tucker guilty of the possession with intent to distribute cocaine base beyond a reasonable doubt.

Accordingly, we affirm Tucker’s conviction and sentence. We have examined the entire record in this case in accordance with the requirements of *Anders*and find no meritorious issues for appeal. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
### §673g. Plan for elk restoration and conservation; coordination of Secretary of the Interior with Federal, State and other officers; integration with State plans

The Secretary of the Interior, in coordination with all Federal, State, and other officers having jurisdiction over lands on which Tule elk herds are located or lands which would provide suitable Tule elk habitat, shall develop a plan for Tule elk restoration and conservation, including habitat management, which shall be integrated with the comparable plans of State and local authorities in California.

(Pub. L. 94–389, §3, formerly §4, Aug. 14, 1976, 90 Stat. 1190; Pub. L. 97–375, title I, §108(a), Dec. 21, 1982, 96 Stat. 1820; renumbered §3, Pub. L. 105–362, title IX, §901(b)(2), Nov. 10, 1998, 112 Stat. 3289.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 3 of Pub. L. 94–389 was classified to section 673f of this title, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 105–362.

#### Amendments

1982—Pub. L. 97–375 struck out requirement that the Secretary's annual report to Congress describe the development and implementation of the plan.
§ 303.409 Fees for records. ( a ) Each participating agency may charge a fee for copies of records that are made for parents under this part if the fee does not effectively prevent the parents from exercising their right to inspect and review those records, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section.
( b ) A participating agency may not charge a fee to search for or to retrieve information under this part.
( c ) A participating agency must provide at no cost to parents, a copy of each evaluation, assessment of the child, family assessment, and IFSP as soon as possible after each IFSP meeting.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1417(c), 1432(4)(B), 1439(a)(2), 1439(a)(4), 1442)
§ 222.69 What tax rates does the Secretary use if real property is assessed at different percentages of true value? If the real property of an LEA and its generally comparable LEAs consists of one classification of property but the property is assessed at different percentages of true value in the different LEAs, the Secretary determines whether the LEA meets the applicable tax rate requirement under § 222.68(c)(1) by using tax rates computed by— ( a ) Multiplying the LEA's actual tax rate for real property by the percentage of true value assigned to that property for tax purposes; and
( b ) Performing the computation in paragraph (a) of this section for each of its generally comparable LEAs and determining the average of those computed tax rates.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7703(b)(2))
EX-10.1



 





Exhibit
10.1




ADDENDUM

TO THE AGREEMENT

BETWEEN GE HEALTHCARE

AND LIFEPOINT HOSPITAL HOLDINGS, INC.

Contract No. ____________



This Addendum replaces and supersedes the Addendum dated as of July 10, 2007 to the above-referenced Agreement as set forth below, and,
except as modified in this Addendum, the Agreement shall go into full force and effect as originally written. Unless otherwise indicated, all terms used herein shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Agreement. In consideration of the promises and covenants below and in the Agreement, the parties agree to modify the Agreement as follows:




CONTRACT
PRICING / CONTRACT CAP



A new section is added with the heading above and the following text:




Effective 7/1/2007, contract pricing for all imaging equipment covered under the Agreement, except MR systems, is
revised as outlined in Attachment A.



GLASSPRO
TUBE PRICING



Glasspro tube pricing for CT is revised as outlined in Attachment A.



An authorized representative of each party has executed this Addendum, which shall be effective on as of July 1, 2007.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
GE HEALTHCARE
	 	LIFEPOINT HOSPITAL HOLDINGS, INC.
	By:	 	/s/ Thomas G. Cooper

	 	By: /s/ William Gracey
	 	
	Name:	 	Thomas G. Cooper	 	William Gracey	 	 
	Title:	 	Nat’l Svc Sales Director


	 	President


	Date:	 	9-28-07	 	Date:	 	9-28-07







1
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PremierWest Bancorp (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A,
Amendment No. 1, for the quarter ending March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael D. Fowler, the Chief
Financial Officer and Principal Accounting and Financial 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 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                                       
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                             
|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company for the period certified.

This certification is being furnished solely to comply with the requirements of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and shall not be incorporated by reference into any of the Companys filings under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise be deemed to be filed as part of the Report or under such Acts.

|                     |                                                                                                  
|-------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: June 
11, 2009 | /s/ MICHAEL D. FOWLER
Michael D. Fowler 
Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer

---
### **CHAPTER 7—ASSAULT**

Sec.
111.
Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees.
112.
Protection of foreign officials, official guests, and internationally protected persons.
113.
Assaults within maritime and territorial jurisdiction.
114.
Maiming within maritime and territorial jurisdiction.
115.
Influencing, impeding, or retaliating against a Federal official by threatening or injuring a family member.
116.
Female genital mutilation.
117.
Domestic assault by an habitual offender. 1

118.
Interference with certain protective functions.
119.
Protection of individuals performing certain official duties.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2008**—Pub. L. 110–177, title II, §202(b), Jan. 7, 2008, 121 Stat. 2537, added item 119.

**2007**—Pub. L. 109–472, §4(b), Jan. 11, 2007, 120 Stat. 3555, added item 118.

**1996**—Pub. L. 104–208, div. C, title VI, §645(b)(2), Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–709, added item 116.

**1984**—Pub. L. 98–473, title II, §1008(b), Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2140, added item 115.

**1976**—Pub. L. 94–467, §6, Oct. 8, 1976, 90 Stat. 2000, substituted "official guests, and internationally protected persons" for "and official guests" in item 112.

**1972**—Pub. L. 92–539, title III, §302, Oct. 24, 1972, 86 Stat. 1073, substituted "Protection of foreign officials and official guests" for "Assaulting certain foreign diplomatic and other official personnel" in item 112.

**1964**—Pub. L. 88–493, §2, Aug. 27, 1964, 78 Stat. 610, substituted "certain foreign diplomatic and other official personnel" for "public minister" in item 112.

1  Editorially supplied. Section 117 added by Pub. L. 109–162 without corresponding amendment of chapter analysis.