alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3857 

AN ACT 

To amend the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/ 

11 Commission Act of 2007 to require the Secretary 

of Homeland Security to include as an eligible use the 

sustainment of specialized operational teams used by 

local law enforcement under the Transit Security Grant 

Program, and for other purposes. 
2 

•HR 3857 EH

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Public Transit Security 

5 and Local Law Enforcement Support Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION REGARDING USE OF GRANT FUNDS 

7 RELATING TO OPERATIONAL COSTS OF PUB8 LIC TRANSIT SECURITY. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1406(b)(2) of the Imple10 menting Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 

11 2007 (6 U.S.C. 1135(b)(2)) is amended— 

12 (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) 

13 through (H) as subparagraphs (F) through (I), re14 spectively; and 

15 (2) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the fol16 lowing new subparagraph (E): 

17 ‘‘(E) specialized patrol teams, as defined 

18 by the Secretary in coordination with the recipi19 ents of grants under this section, including the 

20 sustainment of such teams without fiscal year 

21 limitation, as long as the eligible public trans22 portation agency applying for grant funds to 

23 fund a specialized patrol team submits a 

24 sustainment plan for maintaining in future 
3 

•HR 3857 EH

1 years the capability or capacity achieved with 

2 the grant funds;’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

4 subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of enactment 

5 of this Act and shall apply to grants made under section 

6 1406 of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 

7 Commission Act of 2007 (6 U.S.C. 1135) on or after such 

8 date. 

9 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

10 1406(m)(1) of the Implementing Recommendations of the 

11 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (6 U.S.C. 1135(m)(1)) is 

12 amended— 

13 (1) in subparagraph (D) by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

14 the end; 

15 (2) in subparagraph (E)— 

16 (A) by striking ‘‘10 percent’’ and inserting 

17 ‘‘50 percent’’; and 

18 (B) by striking the period and inserting ‘‘; 

19 and’’; and 

20 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

21 ‘‘(F) $400,000,000 for each of fiscal years 

22 2012 and 2013, except that not more than 50 

23 percent of such funds in each of such fiscal 
4 

•HR 3857 EH

1 years may be used for operational costs under 

2 subsection (b)(2).’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 12, 

2012. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3857 

AN ACT 

To amend the Implementing Recommendations of 

for other purposes. under the Transit Security Grant Program, and ational teams used by local law enforcement eligible use the sustainment of specialized operSecretary of Homeland Security to include as an the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 to require the
PETITION FOR EXTENTION OF EXEMPTION 8480F FROM CERTAIN PROVISIONS 

OF 14 CFR PART 110.2 FOR AMERIFLIGHT, LLC 

This petition follows the requirements for inclusion in such 

documents set forth in the order presented in 14CFR Part 11.81 

Your name and mailing address and, if you wish, other contact information such as a fax 

number, telephone number, or e-mail address 

Mr. Andrew Lotter 

Senior Vice President of Flight Operations 

Ameriflight, LLC 

1515 West 20th Street 

PO Box 612763 

Dallas, TX 75261 

Telephone – 877-456-8654 Ext. 76223 

Email – alotter@ameriflight.com 

The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek an exemption

Ameriflight seeks a renewal of Exemption 8480F for the following regulations: 

 14 CFR Part 110.2 

The reasons why granting your request would be in the public interest; that is, how it 

would benefit the public as a whole 

Nothing has changed since the last renewal for this exemption and it still remains valid 

and is in the public interest. 

The reasons why granting the exemption would not adversely affect safety, or how the 

exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from 

which you seek the exemption

Ameriflight continues to have a perfect safety record for all EMB120 operations and the 

renewal of this exemption will not adversely affect those operations. 

 If you want to exercise the privileges of your exemption outside the United States, the 

reason why you need to do

Yes, Ameriflight maintains the same procedures for domestic and international 

operations. 

Sincerely, 

Andrew Lotter 

Senior Vice President 

Flight Operations
### SUBCHAPTER III—STUDIES
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3901 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3901

                 For the relief of Dr. Shakeel Afridi.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 3, 2012

 Mr. Rohrabacher introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                     the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                 For the relief of Dr. Shakeel Afridi.

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

SECTION 1. NATURALIZATION FOR DR. SHAKEEL AFRIDI.

    Notwithstanding title III of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 
or any other provision of law relating to naturalization, Dr. Shakeel 
Afridi is deemed to be a naturalized citizen of the United States as of 
the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeals of - )

)

Pond Constructors, Inc. ) ASBCA Nos. 62046, 62107, 62108

)

Under Contract No. W912DY-13-G-0004 )

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: Garrett E. Miller, Esq.

Philip E. Beck, Esq.

Parker Lewton, Esq.

 Smith, Currie & Hancock LLP

 Atlanta, GA

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Michael P. Goodman, Esq.

 Engineer Chief Trial Attorney

Michael L. Graves, Jr., Esq.

Margaret P. Simmons, Esq.

 Engineer Trial Attorneys

 U.S. Army Engineer District, Huntsville

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The dispute has been settled. The appeals are dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: February 9, 2021

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA Nos. 62046, 62107, 62108, Appeals of 

Pond Constructors, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: February 10, 2021

TIMOTHY P. MCILMAIL

Administrative Judge

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
RlN 2120-AA64

14 CFR Part 39

~

.{491o-13-P) =_slv;;ol

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

o(Pqq

(Docket No. FAA-2010-*****; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-236-AD]

I

Airwortbiness Directives; Viking Air Limited (Type Certificate Previously Held by

Bombardier, inc.) Model DHC-7 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulernaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products

listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness

information (MeAl) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify ( . C-f..N...--

~~

and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MeAl describes the unsafe b /'0 I0 IIQtn 'NO::SYMOOI.

condition as:

Viking Air Limited has completed a system safety review of the aircraft

fuel system against fuel tank safety standArds introduced in Chapter 525 of

the Airworthiness Manual through Noticel of Proposed Amendment (NPA)

2002-043. The identified non-compliances were then assessed using

Transport Canada Policy Letter No. 525-001, to determine if mandatory

corrective action is required.

The assessment showed that supplemental maintenance tasks would be

required to prevent potential ignition sources within the fuel system,

which could result in a fuel tank explosion. '" '" '"

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition

described in the MCAl.
~"O!""w"" .••

14910-13-PI~~'~~>7~-R

D~PARTMENT OF TRANSPORT AnON

Federal AvhltioD Administration (,/&0/10

14 CFR Part 39 ANE-171

(Docket No. FAA-201o-***"*; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-236-ADI

RlN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directivesj Viking Air Limited (Type Certificate Previously Held by

Bombardier, Inc.) Model DHC-7 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. """"""S "lICK,

ANE·170

• ""Ii ",'''<,,

information (MCAl) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify

and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation prI

'

duct. The MCAI describes the unsafe

condition as:

Viking Air Limited has completed a systen safety review oftbe aircrafi

Cuelsystem against fuel tank safety standJrds introduced in Chapter 525 oC

the Airworthiness Manual through NoticelofProposed Amendment (NPA)

2002~043 The identified non-compliances were then assessed using

Transport Canada Policy Letter No. 525-dol, to detcmlinc if mandatory

corrective act.ion is required.

listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing ulrworthincss

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-G ,

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products ;{ ZP':.O

The assessment showed that supplementaf maintenance tasks would be

required to prevent potential ignition sourtes within the fuel system.

which could result in a fuel tank explosiorL '" * •

The proposed AD would require actions l..hatare intended to address the unsaCe condition

described in the MCAL
EXHIBIT
32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL


FINANCIAL
OFFICER PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT BY


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with this Quarterly
Report of Bekem Metals, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the “Report”), I, Yermek Kudabayev, Principal Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, 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.











Date:
      August 11, 2010
            By:
            /s/
      Yermek KudabayevYermek
      KudabayevInterim
      Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>


                                  Exhibit 23.1




                          INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-101055 of HiEnergy Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries on Form SB-2/A of our
report, dated July 8, 2003, which includes an emphasis paragraph relating to an
uncertainty as to the Company's ability to continue as a going concern,
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of HiEnergy Technologies, Inc.
and subsidiaries for the years ended April 30, 2003 and 2002.



SINGER LEWAK GREENBAUM & GOLDSTEIN LLP

Los Angeles, California
August 8, 2003


<PAGE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 200

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 76 FR 60371, Sept. 29, 2011.

#### § 200.502 Definition.

As used in this part: *Foreign government information* means either (a) information provided to the United States by a foreign government or governments, an international organization of governments, or any element thereof with the expectation, express or implied, that the information, the source of the information, or both, are to be held in confidence, or (b) information produced by the United States pursuant to or as a result of a joint arrangement with a foreign government or governments or an international organization of governments or any element thereof, requiring that the information, the arrangement, or both, are to be held in confidence.

[47 FR 47236, Oct. 25, 1982]
550.001 Definitions. 		    “Approving authority,” as used in FAR 50, means GSA’s Administrator. 	  **Parent topic:** Part 550 - Extraordinary Contractual Actions
Power of Attorney


Know all by these presents, that the undersigned (the "Reporting Person")
hereby constitutes and appoints each of Melanie A. DeMorrow, Assistant Vice
President-Shareholder Relations; Richard M. Lavers, Secretary; Joseph P.
Tomczak, Executive Vice President & C.F.O.; Ellen C. Padesky, Assistant
Secretary; and Jessica L. Long, Assistant Secretary,  signing singly, as the
Reporting Person's true and lawful attorney-in-fact, to:

(1) execute for and on behalf of the Reporting Person, in the Reporting
Person's capacity as an officer or trustee of Coachmen Industries, Inc.
(the "Company"), Forms 3, 4, and 5 and such other similar forms as may be
required for filing in accordance with Section 16(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and the rules
thereunder;

(2) do and perform all acts for and on behalf of the Reporting Person
which may be necessary or desirable to complete and execute any such forms
and timely file such forms with the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission and any stock exchange or similar authority or other federal
agency; and

(3) take any other action of any type whatsoever in connection with the
foregoing which, in the opinion of such attorney-in-fact, may be of benefit
to, and in the best interest of, or legally required by, the Reporting
Person.

The Reporting Person hereby grants to each such attorney-in-fact full power and
authority to do and perform any and every act and thing whatsoever requisite,
necessary, or proper to be done in the exercise of any of the rights and powers
herein granted, as fully to all intents and purposes as the Reporting Person
might or could do if personally present, with full power of substitution or
revocation, hereby ratifying and confirming all that such attorney-in-fact, or
such attorney-in-facts substitute or substitutes, shall lawfully do or cause to
be done by the virtue of this Power of Attorney and the rights and powers
herein granted.  The Reporting Person acknowledges that the foregoing
attorneys-in fact, in serving in such capacity at the request of the Reporting
Person, are not assuming, nor is the company assuming, any of the Reporting
Persons responsibilities to comply with any of the above specified laws or
regulations.

This Power of Attorney shall remain in full force and effect until the
Reporting Person is no longer required to file such forms with respect to the
Reporting Person's holdings of and transactions in securities issued by the
Company, unless earlier revoked by the Reporting Person in a signed writing
delivered to the Secretary of  the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Reporting Person has caused this Power of Attorney to
be executed as of this 11th day of July, 2003.


						s/Thomas H. Corson
###### Editorial Note on Part 200

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 76 FR 60371, Sept. 29, 2011.

#### § 200.735-14 Employees on leave of absence.

The provisions of the rules in this subpart relative to employees of the Commission are applicable to employees on a leave with pay or a leave without pay status other than extended military service.
### Part A—Basic Center Grant Program
No: II-16-034 September 19, 2016

CONTACT: Roger Hannah 404-997-4417

Joey Ledford 404-997-4416

NRC Schedules Public Meeting to Discuss Results 

of Augmented Inspection at Westinghouse

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled a public meeting in Columbia, S.C., 

on Tuesday, Sept. 27, to discuss the results of an Augmented Inspection Team review of the 

unexpected accumulation of an excessive amount of uranium-bearing material in a component of the 

Westinghouse fuel fabrication facility.

The meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m. in the Gervais Street Room of the South Carolina State 

Museum at 301 Gervais St. The meeting is open to the public and the NRC staff will be available to 

answer questions after the meeting.

In May, during an annual maintenance shutdown, plant employees discovered an unexpected 

accumulation of uranium-bearing material in a scrubber system, which is designed to remove unwanted

material from a number of plant processes. There were no actual safety-related consequences as a result 

of the accumulation, but the potential for such consequences may have existed. After an in-house 

analysis showed the amount of uranium was much higher than anticipated, the NRC launched the 

inspection to review the issue.

During the NRC inspection, the company committed to the temporary shutdown of affected 

systems in the facility, the performance of a root cause analysis investigation of the event and a review 

and revision of the facility’s safety culture program. The facility also committed to updating 

maintenance and management procedures, installing physical modifications to the scrubber system, 

retraining of personnel operating and maintaining the system, reviewing other potentially affected 

systems and retaining an external nuclear criticality safety expert to oversee such functions.

The NRC expects to issue its inspection report, which could outline potential violations faced 

by Westinghouse, early next month. When issued, the report will be available on the NRC website or 

through the Office of Public Affairs.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6389

ROBERT STEVEN SMITH,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief

District Judge. (CA-03-292-MU-02-3)

Submitted: October 18, 2004 Decided: October 27, 2004

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Steven Smith, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Robert Steven Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing as untimely his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in

a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by

a district court absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner

satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists

would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that

any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also

debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336

(2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee,

252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed

the record and conclude that Smith has not made the requisite

showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal. 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. 

DISMISSED
Worksheet Title: HCl Emission Test Results Template Using Method 321Who Should Complete this Spreadsheet?Company Name:Facility Name:Leeds Cement PlantAddress:8401 Second AveCity:LeedsState:AlabamaKiln ID:Kiln Type:The kiln is PHIn-line Raw Mill:Control Device Configuration:Parameter Sample #1 Sample #2 Sample #3 Test AverageUnits Units Other DescriptionTest Method Used Test Location NoteSelect appropriate unitfrom list. If other isselected please describeunits in column H at right. Enter the name of the Test Method used.Indicate whether the testoccurred upstream ordownstream of a controldevice(s); list the controldevice(s)If kiln has an in-line raw mill,indicate raw mill status during tests(i.e., raw mill on or raw mill off).Provide any other informationsupporting information you think isnecessary about this test report.Sample Date (mm/dd/yyyy)3/17/2010 3/17/2010 3/17/2010HCl Concentration - as measured - dry basis4.89 2.68 2.48ppmvdOxygen Concentration - dry basis13.46 13.36 13.36%CO2 Concentration - dry basis13 13 13%HCl Concentration - corrected to 7% oxygen9.14 4.94 4.57 6.22 ppmvd @ 7% O2 EPA Method 321 Downstream; BaghouseMill OnExhaust Stream %Moisture10.89 10.04 10.47 %Exhaust Flowrate168,464 160,774 165,693DSCFMExhaust Temperature204.3 198.4 203.6 Degrees FSample Date(mm/dd/yyyy)3/18/2010 3/18/2010 3/18/2010HCl Concentration - as measured - dry basis4.36 2.41 2.22ppmvdOxygen Concentration - drybasis9.6 10.45 10.69%CO2 Concentration - drybasis21 16 17%HCl Concentration20.09 24.16 27.81 24.02ppmvd@7% O2 EPA Method 321 Downstream; BaghouseMill OffExhaust Stream %Moisture13.40 13.91 13.93 %Exhaust Flowrate101,345 116,196 118,188DSCFMExhaust Temperature292.6 300.9 302.3 Degrees FNotes:Facilities that use Method 321 to test for HClLehigh Cement CompanyBaghouseEnter HCl concentration value in dryparts per million volume (ppmvd). Ifthe test results are below detectionlimit, please note the detection limitin brackets(e.g., [< 0.010]).Peach shaded cells indicate areas where the user will enter a responseYesRotary KilnEnclosure5c‐‐ERTSpreadsheetPage1of1
Panel 6 Summary

• First must resolve PFHA, and then develop equivalent SSHAClike process for flooding. Ultimately, using technical output for 

decision makers to make wise decision.

• Modeling shows that antecedent conditions critical.

• Time dependence can be captured with longer term synthetic 

models like SEFM (not just a 72-hour period storm event, but a 

multiday “event” with multiple peaks).

• May need to use different techniques (synthetic storm or flood 

versus historical data) depending on site and other case-bycase factors.

• Using aerial transposition may be appropriate in certain cases, 

but has uncertainty.
• What has been modeled does appear to fit even in the extremes 

(tails) even with small sample sizes.

• Research must be performed to understand the differences 

between rainfall and flood based modeling. 

• Some parameters are bounded (e.g. dry soil and saturated soil), 

which reduce uncertainty.

• Input data must be questioned, all parameters understood, and 

uncertainties identified.

• Distributions of input and output must be developed.

• Some models (SEFM) may not be appropriate at larger watershed 

sizes.

• Move away from single unit hydrograph method, due to better 

physical modeling based on basin parameters.

• In larger models, operation of water control structures adds to 

difficulty, but can be modeled. More coordinated watershed 

approach with all operators and owners involved.
### §15401. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 15401 was editorially reclassified as section 21001 of Title 52, Voting and Elections.