alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §685. Hunting, trapping, killing, or capturing game in designated breeding areas unlawful

When such areas have been designated in the Wichita National Forest as provided for in section 684 of this title, hunting, trapping, killing, or capturing of game animals and birds upon the lands of the United States within the limits of said areas shall be unlawful, except under such regulations as may be prescribed from time to time, by the Secretary of the Interior.

When such areas have been designated in the Grand Canyon National Forest as provided in section 684 of this title, hunting, trapping, killing, or capturing of game animals upon the lands of the United States within the limits of said areas shall be unlawful, except under such regulations as may be prescribed from time to time by the Secretary of Agriculture.

(Jan. 24, 1905, ch. 137, §2, 33 Stat. 614; June 29, 1906, ch. 3593, §2, 34 Stat. 607; 1939 Reorg. Plan No. II, §4(f), eff. July 1, 1939, 4 F.R. 2731, 53 Stat. 1433; June 25, 1948, ch. 645, §§8, 9, 62 Stat. 860.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Words "in the Wichita National Forest and in the Grand Canyon National Forest" inserted, and "Secretary of the Interior and Secretary of Agriculture, respectively" substituted for "Secretary of Agriculture" because of Reorg. Plan No. II of 1939, which transferred Bureau of Biological Survey from Department of Agriculture to Department of the Interior. The successor to Wichita National Forest, which was then administered by that Bureau, was affected by the transfer. However, the successor to Grand Canyon National Forest was administered by Forest Service and was consequently not affected.

For successors to Wichita National Forest and Grand Canyon National Forest, see Presidential Designation note set out under section 684 of this title.

#### Amendments

1948—Act June 25, 1948, struck out penal provisions. See section 41 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure.

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

#### Effective Date of 1948 Amendment

Section 20 of act June 25, 1948, provided that the amendment made by that act is effective Sept. 1, 1948.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

Reorg. Plan No. II of 1939, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, transferred functions of Secretary of Agriculture relating to conservation of wildlife, game, and migratory birds to Secretary of the Interior.
#### § 303.413 Hearing procedures.

A hearing held under § 303.411 must be conducted according to the procedures under 34 CFR 99.22.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1417(c), 1439(a)(2), 1439(a)(4), 1442)
g:\blm\buttermp\ams\FinalFigures\Fig2-10_ConiferEncroach8511.mxd 

Butte 

Helena 

Bozeman 

Boulder 

Big Sky 

Townsend 

Gardiner 

Belgrade 

Anaconda 

Whitehall 

Livingston 

Three Forks 

East Helena 

West Yellowstone 

Deerlodge

County 

Silverbow

County 

Lewis and Clark 

County 

Broadwater 

County 

Gallatin

Coun ty 

Park

County 

Meagher

County Powell

County

Granite

Coun ty 

Beaverhead

County 

Madison

County 

Wheatland

County 

Sweet Grass

County 

Stillwater 

Coun ty 

Yellowstone National

Park 

Freemont

County 

Clark

County 

Jefferson

County 

§ ̈¦15 

§ ̈¦15 

§ ̈¦90 

§ ̈¦90 

£¤12 

£¤12 

WYOMING

IDAHO 

MONTANA 

IDAHO 

Cascade

County 

I Conifer Encroachment Areas 

Conifer Encroachment 0 Miles 25
 

Butte Field Office - EIS

No warranty is made by the Bureau of

Land Management (BLM) for use of RMP Planning Area, Montana
 data for purposes not intended by BLM. FIGURE 2-10
(No. 73-CC-66

#### The Jewish Children’s Bureau of Chicago, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Children and Family Services, Respondent.

*Opinion filed October 18, 1973.*

Aaron, Aaron, Schimberg & Hess, Attorney for Claimant.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsDocumentation of the Recirculation in a Closed-Chamber Rotor Hover TestA rotor hover test was performed inside the JPL 25-foot-diameter Space Simulator. The 40-inch-diameter rotor was tested at two locations in the chamber-on the chamber centerline and 2m off-axis. The rotor was tested in both upright and inverted configurations for 500 < RPM < 2000. Fluorescent tufts were used to identify regions of recirculation. Velocities on the entrainment side of the rotor were measured. Tabulated values for the mean entrainment velocity components and the corresponding root mean square velocity fluctuations are provided. Unsteady velocity measurements provide a description of the turbulence ingested into the rotor plane and quantify the unsteady velocity field that the Mars Scout Helicopter can expect to encounter during free flight inside the Space Simulator.Document ID20160014322Acquisition SourceAmes Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsMcCoy, Miranda*(Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Washington, DC, United States)*Wadcock, Alan J.*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA United States)*Young, Larry A.*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA United States)*Date AcquiredDecember 2, 2016Publication DateAugust 1, 2016Subject CategoryAeronautics (General)Report/Patent NumberNASA/TM-2016-219162ARC-E-DAA-TN35203Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.KeywordsRotor Hover TestDocumentationClosed-ChamberAvailable DownloadsNameType20160014322.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 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5099 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5099

To require the Director of the Office of Personnel Management to submit 
 to Congress a plan to ensure that the executive branch of Government 
  has a full workforce composed of qualified employees, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 14, 2019

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the Director of the Office of Personnel Management to submit 
 to Congress a plan to ensure that the executive branch of Government 
  has a full workforce composed of qualified employees, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Employee Recruitment and 
Retention Plan Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. PLAN TO ENSURE FULL WORKFORCE.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 3 months after the date of the 
enactment of this section, the Director of the Office of Personnel 
Management shall submit to Congress a plan, including the actionable 
strategies described in subsection (b), to ensure that the executive 
branch of Government has a full workforce composed of qualified 
employees.
    (b) Actionable Strategies Described.--The actionable strategies 
described in this subsection are to--
            (1) hire new employees for vacant positions or positions 
        that are predicted to be vacant within 2 years after the date 
        of the enactment of this section;
            (2) attract at least 1 qualified applicant for each job 
        opening not later than 2 weeks after the date such opening is 
        made available for applicants to apply; and
            (3) prevent the loss of institutional knowledge when an 
        employee leaves the executive branch.
    (c) Employee Defined.--In this section, the term ``employee''--
            (1) has the meaning given that term in section 2105 of 
        title 5, United States Code; and
            (2) includes an employee of the United States Postal 
        Service or of the Postal Regulatory Commission.
                                 <all>
```
§ 33.37 Initial decision. ( a ) The ALJ shall issue an initial decision, based only on the record, that contains findings of fact, conclusions of law, and the amount of any penalties and assessments imposed.
( b ) The findings of fact must include a finding on each of the following issues: ( 1 ) Whether the claims or statements identified in the complaint, or any portions of the complaint, violate § 33.3.
( 2 ) If the person is liable for penalties or assessments, the appropriate amount of any such penalties or assessments considering any mitigating or aggravating factors that the ALJ finds in the case, such as those described in § 33.31.
( c ) The ALJ shall promptly serve the initial decision on all parties within 90 days after the time for submission of post-hearing briefs and reply briefs (if permitted) has expired. The ALJ shall at the same time serve all parties with a statement describing the right of any defendant determined to be liable for a civil penalty or assessment to file a motion for reconsideration with the ALJ or a notice of appeal with the Department head. If the ALJ fails to meet the deadline contained in this paragraph, he or she shall notify the parties of the reasons for the delay and shall set a new deadline.
( d ) Unless the initial decision of the ALJ is timely appealed to the Department head, or a motion for reconsideration of the initial decision is timely filed, the initial decision shall constitute the final decision of the Department head and shall be final and binding on the parties 30 days after it is issued by the ALJ.
(Authority: 31 U.S.C. 3803(h)(i))
**Exhibit 32**

**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 Reflect Scientific, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), We, Kim Boyce, our Chief Executive Officer and director and Keith Merrell, our Chief Financial Officer, 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.

Dated: 02/09/2010                            /s/Kim Boyce

                                                           Kim Boyce

                                                           Chief Executive Officer and Director

Dated: 02/09/2010                           /s/Keith L. Merrell

                                                          Keith L. Merrell

                                                          Chief Financial Officer
#### Emmett B. CHAMBERS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. John E. POTTER,* Postmaster General of the United States, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 01-55669. D.C. No. CV-99-12891-CRM.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*376Submitted March 4, 2002 **.

Decided May 10, 2002.

Before BROWNING, THOMAS and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 John E. Potter is substituted for his predecessor, William Henderson, as Postmaster Gen*376eral. Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM ***

Emmett Chambers appeals the district court’s grant of the Postmaster General’s motion for summary judgment. Chambers failed to raise a material question of fact regarding whether he was a qualified individual with a handicap,1 and whether certain employment actions were taken because of his race and/or alleged disability. Chambers also failed to raise a material question of fact regarding the employer’s proffered reasons for taking the allegedly retaliatory actions and the lack of a causal connection between the protected activity and the alleged retaliatory action. Chambers’ conclusory allegations of discrimination and retaliation are insufficient to defeat summary judgment.

*Steckl v. Motorola, Inc.,*703 F.2d 392, 393 (9th Cir.1983).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. Chambers’ additional argument that the Postmaster failed to engage in an interactive process to identify a reasonable accommodation also fails. An agency’s requirement to accommodate only applies to qualified individuals. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(c). Moreover, the interactive process is triggered only when the employee has specifically requested an accommodation or when the employee meets the exception articulated in *Barnett. See Brown v. Lucky Stores,*246 F.3d 1182, 1188 (9th Cir.2001). In *Barnett,*we held that the exception to the general rule that the employee must request an accommodation applies only when the employer "knows, or has reason to know, that the disability prevents the employee from requesting a reasonable accommodation.” *Barnett v. U.S. Air, Inc.,*228 F.3d 1105, 1112 (9th Cir.2000) (citation omitted). The record does not show that Chambers was unable to request a reasonable accommodation, or that the Postal Service knew or had reason to know that Chambers had a disability preventing him from making such a request. *See Brown,*246 F.3d at 1188.
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

DAY HIGH

 683

 689

 663

 662

 669

 670

 675

 682

 686

 706

 687

 699

 696

 723

 718

 719

 740

 747

 702

 704

 710

 692

 684

 697

 691

 714

 677

 669

 671

 674

 672

 636

 629

 649

 648

 664

 664

 673

 674

 678

 668

 681

 688

 676

 698

 699

 704

 655

 686

 645

 682

 680

 676

 681

 671

 667

 664

 662

 664

 667

 676

 666

 653

 656

 659

 667

 668

 676

 678

 693

 674

 692

 692

 697

 708

 708

 728

 704

 695

 686

 697

 686

 680

 688

 682

 677

 670

 666

 668

 671

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JUNE 2015 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: July 1, 2015

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 434

 428

 420

 421

 423

 428

 429

 434

 435

 444

 433

 444

 444

 447

 454

 454

 466

 451

 446

 440

 447

 440

 436

 441

 437

 434

 430

 428

 429

 431

TOTAL 20,461

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 21
JOHflA. GUI MONO 

AIRPORT MANAGER 

WILLIAM R. BRIDGED 

CITY MANAGER 

August 23, 2010 

t:.r> 

C D 

-0 

en 

cr 

GO 

Dennis J. Devany, Chief 

Essential Air Service Division, X-53 

Room 6401, Office of Aviation Analysis 

U.S. Dept of Transportation 

400 Seventh St. S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

RE: DOT-OST-1997-2754 

Dear Mr. Devany 

On August 11, 2010 the Airport Advisory Committee, the Maine DOT and 1 held a meeting where both 

Cape Air and Colgan presented their EAS proposals. On August 12 the City Council held an 

informational meeting open to the public and at that time the Airport Advisory Committed recommended 

that the Council endorse Cape Air's proposal. On August 19, 2010 the City Council then held a public 

meeting and voted 8 - 0 to support our recommendation and endorse Cape Air for a 4 yeai" contract. 

Cape Air's proposal offers the communities serviced by the Augusta State Airport more frequent flights, a 

very flexible flight schedule and attractive business and vacation destinations. As outlined in the order the 

Airport understaiids that the proposal submitted by Cape Air utilizes an aircraft with fewer than 15 seats 

and that we are waiving our rights for service with a larger aircraft for this 4 year selection period only. 

Thank you and please call me if you need any further information 

Sincerefy, 

.John A. Guimond 

(^Airport Manager 

Cc: Andrew Bonney, Cape Air 

Jeff Northgraves, Knox County Airport 

75 AIRPORT ROAD • AUGUSTA, MAINE 04330 TEL - (207) 626-2306 FAX - (207) 626-2309 EMAIL: john.guiiiiond@augustaairport.org'
#### Intercounty Properties Corporation, Appellant, v. Carl J. Karpas, Inc., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
---

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the transition report of Yayi International
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Veronica Jing Chen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.

| | /s/ Veronica Jing Chen 
| | -----------------------
| | Veronica Jing Chen     
| | Chief Financial Officer

June 29, 2010

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

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
EXHIBIT 23



    INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


    We consent to the incorporation by reference in Idaho Power
    Company's Registration Statement No. 33-51215 on Form S-3
    and IDACORP, Inc.'s Registration Statement Nos. 33-56071
    and 333-65157 on Form S-8 and Registration Statement Nos.
    333-00139 and 333-64737 on Form S-3 of our reports dated
    January 29, 1999 on IDACORP, Inc. and Idaho Power Company,
    appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of IDACORP,
    Inc. and Idaho Power Company for the year ended December
    31, 1998.





    DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

    Boise, Idaho
    March 19, 1999
ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION * IN THE

OF MARYLAND

* COURT OF APPEALS

* OF MARYLAND

v.

* Misc. Docket AG No. 32

EVAN J. KRAME * September Term, 20 2 1

ORDER

Upon consideration of the “ Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action, and

Request for Immediate Temporary Suspension Pending Final Disposition in the District of

Columbia ,” and attachments thereto

, and the Respondent’s response to this Court’s Order

to Show Cause

, it is this 1 9 th day of November , 20 2 1

ORDERED

, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, in accordance with Maryland

Rule 19

- 737(d) (2) , that Evan J. Krame , Respondent, is hereby temporarily suspended,

effective immediately, from the practice of law in the State of Maryland, pending further

order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED , that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name of Evan J. Krame

from the register of attorneys in this Court and comply with the notice provision s of

Maryland Rule 19

- 761 (b)

.

/s/ Joseph M. Getty

Chief Judge
#### § 602.4 Severability.

If any provision of this subpart or its application to any person, act, or practice is held invalid, the remainder of the subpart or the application of its provisions to any person, act, or practice shall not be affected thereby.

[84 FR 58918, Nov. 1, 2019]
<PAGE>

                                 Exhibit 10.21


                           SunGard Data Systems Inc.
                     Summary Description of the Company's
                Long-Term Executive Incentive Compensation Plan


SunGard Data Systems Inc. has a long-term incentive compensation plan for its
executive officers and other key management employees.  The principal purposes
of this plan are to further align the interests of the executives and key
employees with those of the Company's stockholders and to further reward
successful performance.

The plan currently involves the grant of performance accelerated stock options
("PASOs") to purchase shares of the Company's common stock.  PASOs are
nonqualified options (i.e., will not qualify as incentive stock options for tax
purposes) that are granted annually at the beginning of a three-year performance
period and have a term of ten years beginning on the date of grant.  Shares vest
under PASOs nine and one-half years after the date of grant, except that vesting
may be accelerated in part or in full at the end of the three-year performance
period to the extent certain financial performance goals are met.  In addition,
if performance goals for the three-year performance period are exceeded, the
recipient will receive additional cash compensation upon the completion of the
three-year performance period.

The number of option shares granted to each participant under a PASO is
determined on the basis of an analysis of competitive equity compensation
programs, and is subject to subjective adjustments based upon individual
factors.  The financial performance goals for each PASO are based upon the
cumulative growth, during the three-year period covered by the PASO, in the
operating income of the business unit(s) managed by the participant, with the
growth targets for all PASOs, taken together, being consistent with the
Company's overall growth objectives.

The Company currently plans, but will have no legal obligation or commitment, to
continue granting such PASOs (or comparable awards) on an annual basis, subject
to approval by the Equity Award Subcommittee of the Compensation Committee of
the Company's Board of Directors.