alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §3112. Federal jurisdiction

(a) Exclusive Jurisdiction Not Required.—It is not required that the Federal Government obtain exclusive jurisdiction in the United States over land or an interest in land it acquires.

(b) Acquisition and Acceptance of Jurisdiction.—When the head of a department, agency, or independent establishment of the Government, or other authorized officer of the department, agency, or independent establishment, considers it desirable, that individual may accept or secure, from the State in which land or an interest in land that is under the immediate jurisdiction, custody, or control of the individual is situated, consent to, or cession of, any jurisdiction over the land or interest not previously obtained. The individual shall indicate acceptance of jurisdiction on behalf of the Government by filing a notice of acceptance with the Governor of the State or in another manner prescribed by the laws of the State where the land is situated.

(c) Presumption.—It is conclusively presumed that jurisdiction has not been accepted until the Government accepts jurisdiction over land as provided in this section.

(Pub. L. 107–217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1144.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3112(a) | 40:255 (last par. 1st sentence words before semicolon). | R.S. §355 (last par.); June 28, 1930, ch. 710, 46 Stat. 828; Feb. 1, 1940, ch. 18, 54 Stat. 19; Oct. 9, 1940, ch. 793, 54 Stat. 1083. |
| 3112(b) | 40:255 (last par. 1st sentence words after semicolon). | |
| 3112(c) | 40:255 (last par. last sentence). | |

Section

Subsection (a) is substituted for 40:255 (last par. 1st sentence words before semicolon) to eliminate unnecessary words.

In subsection (b), the words "exclusive or partial" are omitted as unnecessary.
#### Pierce Electrical Engineering Corp., Respondent, v. Howard Barry et al., Appellants.

Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ. [See *post,*

p. 1026.]
§ 1204.5 Manufacturer's instructions. ( a ) For all antennas covered under this part 1204, the following statement shall be included in the manufacturer's instructions, in addition to the material required by 16 CFR 1402.4(a)(1)(ii): Under some conditions, this antenna may not prevent electrocution. Users should keep antenna away from any overhead wires. If antenna contacts a power line, any initial protection could fail at any time. IF ANTENNA NEARS ANY OVERHEAD WIRES, IMMEDIATELY LET GO, STAY AWAY, AND CALL UTILITY COMPANY.
( b ) This warning statement shall be in a separate paragraph immediately following the warning statement required by 16 CFR 1402.4(a)(1)(ii)(A).
( c ) This warning statement shall be legible and conspicuous and shall be in type that is at least as large as the largest type used on the remainder of the page, with the exception of the logo and any identification of the manufacturer, brand, model, or similar designations, and that is preferably no smaller than 10 point type.
### subpart 1—biological products
Exhibit 32.2

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 streetTRACKS® Gold Trust (the ‘‘Trust’’) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, James Lowe, principal financial officer of World Gold Trust Services, LLC, the sponsor of the Trust, 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 Trust.

/s/ James Lowe*                     James Lowe** Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer)July 27, 2007

|         |                                                                                                                                                              |
|---------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| *  | The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the Sponsor’s offices and will be made available for inspection upon request. |

|          |                                                                                                                                              |
|----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| **  | The Registrant is a trust and Mr. Lowe is signing in his capacity as an officer of World Gold Trust Services, LLC, the sponsor of the Trust. |

----
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 June 4, 2021

p0601

Order 

Clerk

June 4, 2021

162386

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 162386

COA: 354847

Van Buren CC: 2019-022045-FH

GLENN ALLEN ZANTELLO,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 27, 2020 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered. We DIRECT the Van Buren County 

Prosecuting Attorney to answer the application for leave to appeal within 28 days after 

the date of this order.

The application for leave to appeal remains pending.
§ 997.12 Review by NOAA. ( a ) After receiving an application package, NOAA shall have up to 90 calendar days to review the application package and decide whether to certify the applicant.
( b ) Before the 90 calendar days have elapsed, NOAA may request additional information, in which case NOAA shall have up to 30 additional calendar days after that additional information has been received by NOAA, above and beyond the original 90 calendar days, to review the application package and decide whether to certify the applicant.
( c ) NOAA's decision whether to certify the applicant shall be based on whether the RCOS demonstrates that it satisfies the current IOOC certification criteria and these regulations.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

EXHIBIT 10.21    
    


ADDENDUM TO LEASE BETWEEN EUS PARTNERS, THE

SUCCESSOR TO MICHAEL L. HIGHTOWER, LESSOR, AND

NUVASIVE, INC. AS LESSEE; LEASE DATED NOVEMBER 1999;

ADDENDUM DATED MARCH 25, 2002


Both
parties to this lease agree to the following modifications: 


54.    On
August 17, 2001 Michael L. Hightower, the first Lessor under this Lease, sold the Building to EUS Partners. EUS has assumed all responsibilities of Lessor under this Lease 


53.    Both
parties acknowledge that Lessee occupies the entire Building and that Lessee's share of Common Area Expenses per Paragraph 1.6(b) is 100%. 



Lessee
hereby agrees to perform and pay for the items relating to the operation of the Building, that are described in Paragraph 4.2(a)(1) through (ix), (b), (c) and (d). 


The
only Common Area Operating Expenses to be paid by Lessee that are limited to the increases over the Base Year of 1999 as described in Paragraph 4.2, Insert 4.2 and Paragraph 51 are
Real Property Taxes (Paragraph 10), Insurance (Paragraph 8). Lessor does not provide or pay for the cost of any utilities or janitorial service. 


54.    Lessee
has request a build-out of approximately 650 square feet of storage space above the second floor of the building. In consideration of building this space and the
cost incurred by Lessor, on April 1, 2002 the rent is adjusted per the following schedule. 



	Dates-Month-Year
 
	 	Monthly Rent

	April 1, 2002 to November 30, 2002	 	$25,725.00
	December 1, 2002 to November 30, 2003	 	$26,508.00
	December 1, 2003 to November 30, 2004	 	$27,295.00





	

/s/  BILL URBANO      
 EUS PARTNERS, LESSOR

MR. JOE EARLE, PARTNER

DATE: 3-27-02	
 	

/s/  STEVE MCGOWAN      
 NUVASIVE, INC.

STEVE McGOWAN, CFO

DATE:











QuickLinks



EXHIBIT 10.21
CHAPTER 11. CUSTOMER SUBGROUP ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

11.1 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 11-1

11-i
CHAPTER 11. CUSTOMER SUBGROUP ANALYSIS

11.1 METHODOLOGY

The customer subgroup analysis evaluates impacts on any identifiable groups or 

customers who may be disproportionately affected by a national energy conservation standard.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) will conduct this analysis as one of the analyses for the 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR). DOE will accomplish this, in part, by analyzing the lifecycle costs (LCCs) and payback periods (PBPs) for those customers that fall into any identifiable 

groups. DOE plans to evaluate variations in regional energy prices, variations in energy use, and 

variations in installation costs that might affect the net present value of a standard to customer

subpopulations. To the extent possible, DOE will obtain estimates of each input parameter’s 

variability and will consider this variability in its calculation of customer impacts.

DOE will determine the impact on customer subgroups using the LCC Spreadsheet 

Model, which allows for different data inputs. The standard LCC analysis (described in chapter 

8) focuses on the customers that use refrigerated beverage vending machines. DOE can use the 

LCC Spreadsheet Model to analyze the LCC for any subgroup by sampling only that subgroup.

(Chapter 8 explains in detail the inputs to the model used in determining LCCs and PBPs.)

11-1
### subpart ii—general provisions

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 106–345, title III, §301(b)(1), Oct. 20, 2000, 114 Stat. 1345, redesignated subpart III "General Provisions" as subpart II.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior subpart II, consisting of sections 300ff–51 to 300ff–55, was redesignated subpart I of this part by Pub. L. 106–345, title III, §301(b)(1), Oct. 20, 2000, 114 Stat. 1345.
Exhibit
32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
 
 
 In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Benacquista Galleries, Inc. (the
"Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report"), I, James Price, President and
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as added by 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.
    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.
 
 
 
 */s/
      James
      Price*James
      PriceChief
      Executive OfficerDuly
      Authorized Officer and PrincipalFinancial
      and Accounting Officer*Date:
      May 20, 2005*
No: III-13-036 August 29, 2013

CONTACT: Viktoria Mitlyng 630-829-9662

 Prema Chandrathil 630-829-9663

NRC Increases Oversight of Monticello for Flooding Protection Violation

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is increasing its oversight of the Monticello nuclear 

plant for failure to maintain an appropriate plan to protect against a potential flooding event.

Monticello is operated by Northern States Power Co., and is located in Monticello, Minn., 

approximately 30 miles northwest of Minneapolis.

“Even though there was no actual flooding event, this issue is of concern because flood 

protection procedures are extremely important. They require certain safety features be available and 

built within a specific timeframe to protect equipment from potential flood waters,” said NRC Region III 

Administrator Cynthia D. Pederson. “We know the plant has made corrections to address this violation 

and we will review those changes to make sure the issues have been fully addressed.”

As a result of flooding walkdowns directed by the NRC in response to the accident at 

Fukushima, an NRC inspector identified a violation involving the failure of the plant to demonstrate

flood protection features within the required timeframe. 

After the NRC reviewed details of the plant’s flood protection strategy, the NRC staff concluded 

that Monticello did not have appropriate procedures in place and would not have been able to construct a 

protective wall and levee system within the required timeframe. The NRC staff has classified the 

violation as yellow, meaning it has substantial safety significance.

The company has taken corrective actions to address the violation by updating plant procedures 

and by pre-staging the necessary material on-site, so that the protective wall and levee system could now 

be installed within the required timeframe stated in the plant’s licensing basis. 

The NRC will conduct a supplemental inspection to provide assurance that the root cause and 

contributing causes are identified and understood, and to ensure the corrective actions are sufficient to 

prevent recurrence. The inspection will also provide an independent determination of whether safety 

culture issues contributed to this violation.
### SUBCHAPTER VIII—ENERGY PLANNING
§ 1109.1 Scope. ( a ) This part applies to tests or certifications of the following when such testing or certification is used to support a certificate of compliance pursuant to section 14(a) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) or to meet continued testing requirements pursuant to section 14(i) of the CPSA: ( 1 ) Component parts of consumer products; and
( 2 ) Finished products when conducted by a party that is not required to test or certify products pursuant to part 1110 of this chapter.
( b ) Component part manufacturers and suppliers may certify or test their component parts, but are not required to do so. Also, parties that are not required to test finished products, or to issue finished product certificates pursuant to part 1110 of this chapter, may do so voluntarily.
( c ) Subpart A establishes general requirements for component part testing and certification, and relying on component part testing or certification, or another party's finished product certification or testing, to support a certificate of compliance issued pursuant to section 14(a) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) or to meet continued testing requirements pursuant to section 14(i) of the CPSA. Subpart B sets forth additional requirements for component part testing for specific consumer products, component parts, and chemicals. Subpart B is applicable only to those products or requirements expressly included in subpart B. Subpart C describes the conditions and requirements for composite testing.
[76 FR 69580, Nov. 8, 2011, as amended at 80 FR 61732, Oct. 14, 2015]
§ 1051.10 Granting petitions. ( a ) The Commission shall either grant or deny a petition within a reasonable time after it is filed, taking into account the resources available for processing the petition. The Commission may also grant a petition in part or deny it in part. If the Commission grants a petition, it shall begin proceedings to issue, amend or revoke the rule under the appropriate provisions of the statutes under its administration. Beginning a proceeding means taking the first step in the rulemaking process (issuance of an advance notice of proposed rulemaking or a notice of proposed rulemaking, whichever is applicable).
( b ) Granting a petition and beginning a proceeding does not necessarily mean that the Commission will issue, amend or revoke the rule as requested in the petition. The Commission must make a final decision as to the issuance, amendment, or revocation of a rule on the basis of all available relevant information developed in the course of the rulemaking proceeding. Should later information indicate that the action is unwarranted or not necessary, the Commission may terminate the proceeding.
No: I-14-028 June 23, 2014

CONTACT: Diane Screnci 610-337-5330

Neil Sheehan 610-337-5331

New NRC Senior Resident Inspector Assigned To Beaver Valley Nuclear Plant

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in King of Prussia, Pa., have selected James Krafty as 

the new Senior Resident Inspector at the Beaver Valley nuclear power plant in Shippingport, Pa. The 

two-unit site is operated by First Energy Operating Company. 

Krafty joined the NRC in May 2004 as a reactor inspector in the 

Division of Reactor Safety in the Region I office in King of Prussia, Pa. Most 

recently, he was a Resident Inspector at Millstone Station in Waterford, Conn. 

Prior to joining the NRC, Krafty worked as an engineer for more than 

15 years, holding various engineering positions with Weyerhauser in 

Oglethorpe, Ga., Millennium Chemicals in Baltimore, O’Neal Engineering in 

Baltimore, and Archer Daniels Midland in Peoria, Ill. Krafty earned a 

bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the U.S. Naval Academy 

and served as a submarine officer for seven years. He is a registered professional engineer.

“Jim Krafty has the training, experience and commitment to safety that will help the NRC carry 

out its mission of protecting people and the environment, and ensure the safe operation of the Beaver 

Valley plant," said NRC Region I Administrator Bill Dean. 

Each U.S. commercial nuclear plant has at least two NRC Resident Inspectors. They serve as 

the agency's eyes and ears at the facility, conducting inspections, monitoring major work projects and 

interacting with plant workers and the public. Resident Inspectors can be assigned to any one site for up 

to seven years.

The Beaver Valley resident inspectors can be reached at 724-643-2000.
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of AppealsCAAP-11-000000421-MAY-201208:08 AM
**Exhibit 32.1**

Certification of FinancialReports Pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350

The undersigned herebycertify that the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,2006, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d) and that informationcontained in that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/ J. Nicholas Bayne                               |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| J. Nicholas Bayne                                   |
| President and Chief Executive Officer               |
|                                                |
| /s/ Michael I. Williams                             |   |
| Michael I. Williams                                 |
| Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer |

Dated:  August11, 2006

This certification is madesolely for purposes of 18 USC Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standardcontained therein, and not for any other purpose.

 

----
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Mark H. McKinnies, as Chief Financial Officer of ADA-Es, Inc. (the Company), certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

(1) the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (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 results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------
|/s/ Mark H. McKinnies
|Name:                 |  | Mark H. McKinnies      
|Title:                |  | Chief Financial Officer
|Date:                 |  | May 14, 2009
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 227 (Friday, November 26, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 69025]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26189]


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

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY


Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as Amended by Public Law 104-13; 
Proposed Collection; Comment Request

AGENCY: Tennessee Valley Authority.

ACTION: Proposed collection; comment request.

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

SUMMARY: The proposed information collection described below will be 
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, as 
required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, 
as amended). The Tennessee Valley Authority is soliciting public 
comments on this proposed collection as provided by 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1). 
Requests for information, including copies of the information 
collection proposed and supporting documentation, should be directed to 
the Agency Clearance Officer: Alice D. Witt, Tennessee Valley 
Authority, 1101 Market Street (EB 5B), Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-
2801; (423) 751-6832. (SC: 000X1BL)
    Comments should be sent to the Agency Clearance Officer no later 
than January 25, 2005.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Type of Request: Regular submission; proposal for an extension of a 
currently approved collection, without revisions, which will expire 
April 30, 2005.
    (OMB Control number: 3316-0099).
    Title of Information Collection: TVA Aquatic Plant Management.
    Frequency of Use: On occasion.
    Type of Affected Public: Individuals or households.
    Small Businesses or Organizations Affected: No.
    Federal Budget Functional Category Code: 452.
    Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 2,000.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 400.
    Estimated Average Burden Hours Per Response: 0.2 (12 minutes).
    Need For and Use of Information: TVA committed to involving the 
public in developing plans for managing aquatic plants in individual 
TVA lakes under a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement completed 
in August 1993. This proposed survey will provide a mechanism for 
obtaining input into this planning process from a representative sample 
of people living near each lake. The information obtained from the 
survey will be factored into the development of aquatic plant 
management plans for mainstream Tennessee River lakes.

Jacklyn J. Stephenson,
Senior Manager, Enterprise Operations, Information Services.
[FR Doc. 04-26189 Filed 11-24-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8120-08-P
### SUBCHAPTER I—WATER RESOURCES COUNCIL