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

PAVLODAR
by Kevin Lyons

The city of Pavlodar, in heavily industrialized northeastern Kazakstan, was founded
on the site of a former Cossack frontier outpost.  Today, along with the
surrounding region, Pavlodar harkens back to its military origins as its battles to
create a market-oriented economy.  Pavlodar city is the industrial and cultural
center of the region, and produces much of Kazakstan s coal and electrical energy. 
Like most of northern Kazakstan, Pavlodar city's 350,000 residents are
predominantly Slavic.  The entire region has a population of roughly one million,
and includes the cities of Yermak, Ekibastuz, and Irtyshsk. 

Industrial activity in the city and the surrounding region has fallen off sharply since
independence, but the region is rich in coal, copper, metal ores and sodium
chloride.  Its main industrial sectors are mining, fuel and power generation,
metallurgy, machine building and chemicals.  Local agribusiness includes grain
cultivation and livestock rearing.  The climate is severe continental - long, harsh
winters and hot, dry summers.   The Pavlodar region is one of Kazakstan's richest
in terms of mineral resources.  Under the Pavlodar steppe lies gold, silver, coal,
copper, zinc, lead, molybdenum and oil.  Extraction of construction materials such
as clay, sand, and gravel has also been extensive.  Other resources include
approximately twenty deposits of industrial and edible salts, as well as two
sulphate- and nitrate-bearing lakes.  Many deposits are being conserved rather than
exploited, including reserves of coal, gold, polymetals, sands for glass production,
clay, and precious stones.

The region's largest industrial enterprise, the Pavlodar Aluminum Plant, was chosen
to be Kazakstan's first major state enterprise to sell off large blocks of shares (10
percent) at auction.  Half of the shares will be sold at currency auctions and the
other half for investment coupons (the equivalent of Russian vouchers).  The
Pavlodar Aluminum Plant was also one of 14 large insolvent firms transferred to
contract management, mostly by foreign investors.  Under the terms of the
five-year contract the controlling investor, in this case White Swan, Ltd. of the
United Kingdom, must pay off  the plant s debts and attract foreign investment in
return for a small percentage of any profits and preferential right to the purchase of
enterprise shares during the eventual full privatization of the plant.

The stable political situation in the Pavlodar region reflects the relatively calm
situation in the country overall.  Relations are calm between Pavlodar's major
ethnic groups, Russians and other Slavs, ethnic Germans, and Kazaks, although
large numbers of Slavs and ethnic Germans have emigrated since independence
from the Soviet Union in 1991.  For more information on the Pavlodar region,
contact D. Akhmetov, Chief of Administration, Pavlodar, at 7-3182 72-33-35 or A.
Aubakirov, Deputy at 72-63-19.  The nearest U.S. Government offices to Pavlodar
are Peace Corps offices in Akmola (7-31722 75-24-81), and Semipalatinsk
(7-3222 62-72-92).

Kevin Lyons covers Kazakstan for BISNIS.
```
#### United States Trust Company of New York v. Martindale Real Estate Company.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Present— Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
### SUBCHAPTER V—SAFETY AND SECURITY IN PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING
#### Olean Medical Group *LLP,*Respondent, v Garwood E. Leckband, M.D., Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[820 NYS2d 915]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Cattaraugus County (Larry M. Himelein, A.J.), entered November 18, 2005. The order denied defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CFLR 3211.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Same memorandum as in *Olean Med. Group LLP v Leckband*(32 AD3d 1214 [2006]). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Kehoe, Martoche, Smith and Pine, JJ.
#### In re Troy M.

*Lynn B. Cochrane,*in support of the petition.

Decided April 5, 1988

The respondent’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 13 Conn. App. 821, is denied.
### SUBCHAPTER XIX—ADULT AND JUVENILE COLLABORATION PROGRAM GRANTS
**Exhibit 31.2**

**Chief Financial Officer Certification**

I, Anthony A. Rabb, Chief Financial Officer and VicePresident, Finance of Brand Energy & Infrastructure Services, Inc. certifythat:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Qof Brand Energy & Infrastructure Services, Inc;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 thisquarterly report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand we have:

(a)          designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared;

(b)         evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report on such evaluation; and

(c)          disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

(a)          all significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)         any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls over financial reporting;
| Date: August 11, 2006 | /s/ Anthony A. Rabb      |
|-----------------------|--------------------------|
|                  | Anthony A. Rabb          |
|                  | Chief Financial Officer, |
|                  | Vice President,  Finance |

 

----
### §1155. Authority for schedule for rating disabilities

The Secretary shall adopt and apply a schedule of ratings of reductions in earning capacity from specific injuries or combination of injuries. The ratings shall be based, as far as practicable, upon the average impairments of earning capacity resulting from such injuries in civil occupations. The schedule shall be constructed so as to provide ten grades of disability and no more, upon which payments of compensation shall be based, namely, 10 percent, 20 percent, 30 percent, 40 percent, 50 percent, 60 percent, 70 percent, 80 percent, 90 percent, and total, 100 percent. The Secretary shall from time to time readjust this schedule of ratings in accordance with experience. However, in no event shall such a readjustment in the rating schedule cause a veteran's disability rating in effect on the effective date of the readjustment to be reduced unless an improvement in the veteran's disability is shown to have occurred.

(Pub. L. 85–857, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1125, §355; Pub. L. 98–223, title I, §101(c), Mar. 2, 1984, 98 Stat. 38; renumbered §1155 and amended Pub. L. 102–83, §§4(b)(1), (2)(E), 5(a), Aug. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 404–406; Pub. L. 102–86, title I, §103(a), Aug. 14, 1991, 105 Stat. 414.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1991—Pub. L. 102–86 amended this section as in effect before the redesignations made by Pub. L. 102–83, §5, by inserting at end "However, in no event shall such a readjustment in the rating schedule cause a veteran's disability rating in effect on the effective date of the readjustment to be reduced unless an improvement in the veteran's disability is shown to have occurred."

Pub. L. 102–83, §5(a), renumbered section 355 of this title as this section.

Pub. L. 102–83, §4(b)(1), (2)(E), substituted "Secretary" for "Administrator" in two places.

1984—Pub. L. 98–223 substituted "percent" for "per centum" wherever appearing.

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

#### Effective Date of 1991 Amendment

Pub. L. 102–86, title I, §103(b), Aug. 14, 1991, 105 Stat. 415, provided that: "The amendment made by subsection (a) [amending this section] shall apply with regard to changes in rating schedules that take effect after the date of the enactment of this Act [Aug. 14, 1991]."

#### Effective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–223 effective Apr. 1, 1984, see section 107 of Pub. L. 98–223, set out as a note under section 1114 of this title.
### §109. Major system

(a) In General.—In this subtitle, the term "major system" means a combination of elements that will function together to produce the capabilities required to fulfill a mission need. These elements may include hardware, equipment, software, or a combination of hardware, equipment, and software, but do not include construction or other improvements to real property.

(b) System Deemed To Be Major System.—A system is deemed to be a major system if—

(1) the Department of Defense is responsible for the system and the total expenditures for research, development, testing, and evaluation for the system are estimated to exceed $75,000,000 (based on fiscal year 1980 constant dollars) or the eventual total expenditure for procurement exceeds $300,000,000 (based on fiscal year 1980 constant dollars);

(2) a civilian agency is responsible for the system and total expenditures for the system are estimated to exceed the greater of $750,000 (based on fiscal year 1980 constant dollars) or the dollar threshold for a major system established by the agency pursuant to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A–109, entitled "Major Systems Acquisitions"; or

(3) the head of the agency responsible for the system designates the system a major system.

(Pub. L. 111–350, §3, Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3680.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 109 | 41:259(c)(7). | June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, §309(c)(7), as added Pub. L. 98–369, title VII, §2711(a)(3), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 1180; Pub. L. 98–577, title V, §504(a)(4), Oct. 30, 1984, 98 Stat. 3086; Pub. L. 103–355, title I, §1551, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3299. |
| | 41:403(9). | Pub. L. 93–400, §4(9), formerly §4(10), as added Pub. L. 98–577, title I, §102(3), Oct. 30, 1984, 98 Stat. 3067; redesignated as §4(9), Pub. L. 100–679, §3(c), Nov. 17, 1988, 102 Stat. 4056; Pub. L. 103–355, title VIII, §8001(b)(1)–(3), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3386. |

Section
REMARKS OF NRC CHAIRMAN GREGORY B. JACZKO AT 

JOINT MEETING WITH FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Good afternoon. I want to first welcome our colleagues from the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (FERC). This is the fourth time our two commissions have met jointly 

to discuss issues important to both of our respective agencies. During today’s meeting, we will 

discuss our past work and our future plans on several issues, including grid reliability activities 

affecting nuclear power plants, cyber security, and planning for new reactors 

I believe our two commissions – and the hard-working staffs of both of our agencies – 

can take pride in the open and collaborative working relationship we’ve developed over the last 

few years. 

Specifically, I want to highlight the significant progress the NRC and FERC, as well as 

the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), have made in coordinating our 

efforts on cyber security. Last September, the NRC and FERC updated the Memorandum of 

Agreement, which facilitates our interactions on areas of mutual interest, to include an additional 

section on cyber security. And just this past December, the NRC and NERC finalized a 

Memorandum of Understanding that will coordinate our roles and responsibilities in 

implementing our respective cyber security requirements. It’s important that we continue our 

collaborative efforts on this issue. The cyber threat is a dynamic threat that evolves quickly, and 

one that we have to work together effectively to guard against. 

We have a busy agenda this afternoon. During today’s meeting, we will hear 

presentations from both the NRC and FERC staff, as well as from representatives from NERC. 

We have several important issues to discuss today and I look forward to a productive meeting. 

Note: Briefing slides for this meeting are available at http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/commission/slides/2010/20100316/. A full transcript of the meeting will be 

available soon at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/tr/2010/. 

### 

News releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 10-048 March 16, 2010
No. II-12-008 April 4, 2012

CONTACT: Roger Hannah (404) 997-4417 E-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov

 Joey Ledford (404) 997-4416

NRC SCHEDULES OPEN HOUSE TO DISCUSS

ANNUAL ASSESSMENT OF FARLEY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled an open house for Tuesday, 

April 10, to discuss the agency’s assessment of safety performance during 2011 at the Farley

nuclear power plant. The plant, operated by Southern Nuclear, is 18 miles southeast of Dothan in 

south Alabama.

The open house and poster session, which will be open to the public, is scheduled to begin at 

3 p.m. CDT. It will be held at the Dothan Area Chamber of Commerce, 102 Jamestown Blvd., in 

Dothan.

NRC staff will be available to answer questions on the safety performance of the Farley 

plant, as well as the NRC role in ensuring safe plant operations.

Overall, the NRC staff concluded that the Farley plant operated safely in 2011 and will 

receive normal baseline oversight and inspection efforts. Both units were in the Licensee Response 

Column during the most recent quarter because all inspection findings had very low safety 

significance and all performance indicators were within the expected range.

“During 2011, our inspectors spent many hours ensuring that the Farley plant met NRC 

safety requirements and protected both people living near the plant and the environment,” NRC 

Region II Administrator Victor McCree said.

NRC inspectors also looked at whether there were immediate safety concerns at Farley and 

other U.S. plants after the March 2011 events at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in Japan. Those 

reviews found that the plants remained safe.

The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators to assess plant 

performance. The colors start with “green,” which has very low safety significance, to “white,” 

“yellow” and “red,” based on increasing significance of the issues. Inspection findings and 

performance indicators are updated on the NRC’s web site (www.nrc.gov) each quarter. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region II

245 Peachtree Center Ave. NE, Suite 1200

Atlanta, GA 30303-1257

Web Site: www.nrc.gov
A letter sent from the NRC Region II office to plant officials addresses the performance of 

the plant during 2011 and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the 

NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/far_2011q4.pdf.

Current performance information for Farley Unit 1 is available on the NRC web site at: 

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/FAR1/far1_chart.html. Current performance 

information for Unit 2 is at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/FAR2/far2_chart.html.

###

News releases are available through a free Listserv subscription or by clicking on the EMAIL UPDATES link 

on the NRC homepage (www.nrc.gov). E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to 

NRC's website. For the latest news, follow the NRC on www.twitter.com/NRCgov.
§ 960.12 Applicant-requested waiver before license issuance. As part of the application, the applicant may request that any condition listed in § 960.8, § 960.9, or § 960.10 be waived or adjusted. The Secretary may approve the request to waive or adjust any such condition if the Secretary determines, after consultation with the Secretaries of Defense and State as appropriate, that the Secretary may waive or adjust the condition without violating the Act or other law, and: ( a ) The requirement is not applicable due to the nature of the applicant or the proposed system;
( b ) The applicant will achieve the goal in a different way; or
( c ) There is other good cause to waive or adjust the condition.
### subpart i—public transportation other than by aircraft or certain rail operations
#### §§ 8c.61-8.69 [Reserved]
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Marco Community Bancorp,
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Thomas J. Mitchusson, Senior Vice President and Principal Financial Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as added by § 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. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as
of and for the period covered by the report.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|      |  |                   |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                            
|----- |  | ----------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: |  | November 10, 2009 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Thomas J. Mitchusson                                                   
|      |  |                   |  |  |  |     |  | Thomas J. Mitchusson, Senior Vice President and Principal Financial Officer
TIM SULAK

Judge 

(512) 854-9380

MEGAN HONEY

Staff Attorney 

(512) 854-4281 

PAM SEGER 

 Court Operations Officer 

(512) 854-9179

353RD DISTRICT COURT

TRAVIS COUNTY COURTHOUSE

P. O. BOX 1748

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78767

FAX (512) 854-9332

ELIZABETH GARCIA

Court Clerk 

(512) 854-9457 

RHONDA WATSON

Official Court Reporter

(512) 854-9356

June 2, 2015

Mr. Chris Knowles 

Deputy Clerk 

Third Court of Appeals 

P.O. Box 12547 

Austin, Texas 78711-2457 

Re: Court of Appeals Number: 03-15-00309-CV

Trial Court Cause Number: D-1-GN-15-000067

Style: The United Healthcare Choice Plus Plan for City of Austin Employees and the City of Austin

v. Charles Lesniak

Dear Mr. Knowles: 

Please be advised that payment has not been received by me for the reporter's 

record taken in the above-referenced matter. 

Thank you for your kind attention. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ Rhonda Watson 

Rhonda Watson 

Official Court Reporter
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 20, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17219-17220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06341]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Docket No. DHS-2013-0014]

Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory Committee 
Meeting Cancellation

AGENCY: Science and Technology Directorate, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Cancellation of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Meeting for Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory Committee 
(HSSTAC).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The meeting of the Homeland Security Science and Technology 
Advisory Committee scheduled for March 21, 2013 from 11:30 a.m.-4:30 
p.m. is cancelled. Notice of this meeting was published in the March 4, 
2013 Federal Register at DHS-2013-0014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Hanson, HSSTAC Executive 
Director, Science and Technology Directorate, Department of Homeland 
Security, 245 Murray Lane, Bldg. 410, Washington, DC 20528, 202-254-
5866(O), 202-254-5823 (F), mary.hanson@hq.dhs.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This committee is established in accordance 
with and operates under the provisions of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (FACA), Title 5 United States Code, Appendix. It reports 
to the Under Secretary for Science and Technology. The committee 
addresses areas of interest and importance to the Under Secretary, such 
as new developments in systems engineering, cyber-security,

[[Page 17220]]

knowledge management and how best to leverage related technologies 
funded by other federal agencies and by the private sector. It also 
advises the Under Secretary on policies, management processes, and 
organizational constructs as needed. Notice of cancellation of this 
meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Pub. 
L. 92-463, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App.

    Dated: March 13, 2013.
Mary Hanson,
Executive Director, Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory 
Committee.
[FR Doc. 2013-06341 Filed 3-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-9F-P
```
### **CHAPTER 153—COMMUNITY SAFETY THROUGH RECIDIVISM PREVENTION**

Sec.
17501 to 17504.
Transferred.

#### SUBCHAPTER I—NEW AND INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS TO IMPROVE OFFENDER REENTRY SERVICES

17511.
Transferred.

#### SUBCHAPTER II—ENHANCED DRUG TREATMENT AND MENTORING GRANT PROGRAMS

#### Part A—Drug Treatment

17521.
Transferred.

#### Part B—Mentoring

17531 to 17534.
Transferred.

#### Part C—Administration of Justice Reforms

#### subpart 1—improving federal offender reentry

17541.
Transferred.

#### subpart 2—reentry research

17551 to 17555.
Transferred.