alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §12755. Tenant and participant protections

#### (a) Lease

The lease between a tenant and an owner of affordable housing assisted under this subchapter for rental shall be for not less than one year, unless by mutual agreement between the tenant and the owner, and shall contain such terms and conditions as the Secretary shall determine to be appropriate.

#### (b) Termination of tenancy

An owner shall not terminate the tenancy or refuse to renew the lease of a tenant of rental housing assisted under this subchapter except for serious or repeated violation of the terms and conditions of the lease, for violation of applicable Federal, State, or local law, or for other good cause. Any termination or refusal to renew must be preceded by not less than 30 days by the owner's service upon the tenant of a written notice specifying the grounds for the action. Such 30-day waiting period is not required if the grounds for the termination or refusal to renew involve a direct threat to the safety of the tenants or employees of the housing, or an imminent and serious threat to the property (and the termination or refusal to renew is in accordance with the requirements of State or local law).

#### (c) Maintenance and replacement

The owner of rental housing assisted under this subchapter shall maintain the premises in compliance with all applicable housing quality standards and local code requirements.

#### (d) Tenant selection

The owner of rental housing assisted under this subchapter shall adopt written tenant selection policies and criteria that—

(1) are consistent with the purpose of providing housing for very low-income and low-income families,

(2) are reasonably related to program eligibility and the applicant's ability to perform the obligations of the lease,

(3) give reasonable consideration to the housing needs of families that would have a preference under section 1437d(c)(4)(A) of this title, and

(4) provide for (A) the selection of tenants from a written waiting list in the chronological order of their application, insofar as is practicable, and (B) for 1 the prompt notification in writing of any rejected applicant of the grounds for any rejection.

(Pub. L. 101–625, title II, §225, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4113; Pub. L. 114–113, div. L, title II, §235, Dec. 18, 2015, 129 Stat. 2896.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2015—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 114–113 inserted at end "Such 30-day waiting period is not required if the grounds for the termination or refusal to renew involve a direct threat to the safety of the tenants or employees of the housing, or an imminent and serious threat to the property (and the termination or refusal to renew is in accordance with the requirements of State or local law)."

1 So in original. The word "for" probably should not appear.
§ 204.3 General. ( a ) The Chairperson (or designee) may initiate administrative offset with regard to debts owed by a person to another agency of the United States Government, upon receipt of a request from the head of another agency or his or her designee, and a certification that the debt exists and that the person has been afforded the necessary due process rights.
( b ) The Chairperson (or designee) may notify the Department of the Treasury of delinquent debts for purposes of administrative offset, and may request another agency which holds funds payable to a Commission debtor to offset that debt against the funds held; the Commission will provide certification that: ( 1 ) The debt is past due and legally enforceable; and
( 2 ) The person has been afforded the necessary due process rights.
( c ) No collection by administrative offset shall be made on any debt that has been outstanding for more than 10 years unless facts material to the Government's right to collect the debt were not known, and reasonably could not have been known, by the official or officials responsible for discovering the debt. This limitation does not apply to debts reduced to judgment.
( d ) Administrative offset under this subpart may not be initiated against: ( 1 ) A debt in which administrative offset of the type of debt involved is explicitly provided for or prohibited by another statute;
( 2 ) Debts owed by other agencies of the United States or by any State or local Government; or
( 3 ) Debts arising under the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; the Social Security Act; or the tariff laws of the United States.
( e ) The procedures for administrative offset in this subpart do not apply to the offset of Federal salaries under 5 U.S.C. 5514 or Federal tax refunds under 31 U.S.C. 3720A and 31 CFR 285.2.
[58 FR 64370, Dec. 7, 1993, as amended at 66 FR 54130, Oct. 26, 2001]
§ 12.403 Commission review on its own motion. ( a ) *In general.* The Commission may on its own motion, within 30 days after it has been served on all parties, determine to review an initial decision, or other order disposing of all issues in the proceeding as to all claims and all parties, in a proceeding forwarded pursuant to § 12.26 (b) and (c) of these rules. In such event, the Commission may determine the scope of the issues on review, and make provisions for the filing of briefs or, if deemed appropriate, such other means for the parties to present their views. The parties shall be duly notified thereof by the Proceedings Clerk.
( b ) *Commission review of a final decision in a voluntary decisional proceeding.* If such action is necessary to prevent manifest injustice, the Commission may, upon its own motion, review a final decision issued pursuant to § 12.106 of these rules by appropriate order filed with the Proceedings Clerk within 30 days after service upon the parties of the final decision. In such event, the Commission may determine the scope of the issue on review, make provisions for the filing of briefs (or, if deemed appropriate, such other means for the parties to present their views). The parties shall be duly notified thereof by the Proceedings Clerk.
No: 14-065 October 14, 2014

CONTACT: David McIntyre, 301-415-8200 

NRC Seeks Public Comment on Decommissioning Plan for 

San Onofre Nuclear Plant; Public Meeting Scheduled for October 27

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission seeks public comment on a decommissioning plan 

submitted by Southern California Edison for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) 

Units 2 and 3. Edison submitted the plan on Sept. 24, and the plan is now available on the NRC 

website.

NRC staff will conduct a public meeting on Oct. 27 in Carlsbad, Calif., to present the plan and 

receive public comments. The meeting will be held at the Omni La Costa, 2100 Costa Del Mar Road, 

from 6-9 p.m.

Edison permanently ceased power operations at SONGS Units 2 and 3 in June 2013. On Sept. 

23, Edison submitted its plans for decommissioning the reactors, known as a Post-Shutdown 

Decommissioning Activities Report. The report contains a description of planned decommissioning 

activities and includes a decommissioning cost estimate. These documents are available to the public by 

entering ML14272A121 in the search window at the upper right corner of the NRC website. 

At the public meeting, NRC officials will describe the decommissioning process, including the 

current transition of the SONGS licensing basis from operating to decommissioning status, 

decommissioning inspections, and spent fuel management issues. An official from Edison will present 

the company’s plans for decontaminating and dismantling the facilities. NRC staff experts will be 

available to answer questions from the public.

Public comments may be submitted at the Oct. 27 meeting or online via the federal 

government’s rulemaking website, www.regulations.gov, using Docket ID NRC-2014-0223. They may 

also be mailed to Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: 3WFN-06-A44M, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Comments will be accepted through Dec. 22, 

and will be posted on www.regulations.gov.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lewis McLean, Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 141]

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), imposed April 19, 2004, on the ground that the sentence is excessive.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed. No opinion. Prudenti, P.J., Schmidt, Santucci, Rivera and Lunn, JJ., concur.
## Q500 QUICKSTART V2.1A A B B
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 99-2581

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of South Dakota.

James P. Lloyd, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: February 3, 2000

 Filed: February 7, 2000

___________

Before LOKEN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

James P. Lloyd appeals his conviction for presenting a “false, fictitious, or

fraudulent” claim to the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 287. After a flood

damaged Lloyd’s residence in Watertown, South Dakota, two friends let him store his

personal possessions in their rental trailers. When the Federal Emergency Management

Agency, which administers federal disaster relief, rejected Lloyd’s unsupported claim

for reimbursement of trailer rental expenses, Lloyd obtained rental bills from his

friends, marked the bills “paid,” submitted them to FEMA to support his claim for

reimbursement, and received $2,957 in disaster assistance. The government later

investigated and charged him with violating § 287. Following a bench trial, the district
1The HONORABLE CHARLES B. KORNMANN, United States District Judge

for the District of South Dakota.

-2-

court1 found that Lloyd violated the statute because he falsely marked the trailer rental

bills paid, and because his friends had no intention of requiring him to pay those bills.

On appeal, Lloyd contends he is entitled to a judgment of acquittal because he

was charged with violating the wrong statute. Falsely marking the bills paid may have

been the making of a false statement in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001, he argues, but

it was not submitting a false claim in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 287. Like the district

court, we disagree. Lloyd submitted to FEMA a false or fraudulent claim for

reimbursement of disaster-related expenses. Getting his friends to bill him for the

phantom expenses, and then marking the bills paid, no doubt created false statements,

but it also supplied the material falsehoods that prompted FEMA to honor his bogus

claim. Thus, he violated § 287, and the judgment of the district court must be affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
### §16712. Repealed or Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 110–69, title II, §2002, Aug. 9, 2007, 121 Stat. 583, which related to aeronautics research and development program, was repealed in part and omitted in part. Subsec. (b) was repealed and reenacted as section 40103 of Title 51, National and Commercial Space Programs, by Pub. L. 111–314, §§3, 6, Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3328, 3444, which Act enacted Title 51. Subsec. (a), which provided a sense of Congress, was omitted from the Code following the enactment of Title 51.
§ 1404.4 Requirements to provide performance and technical data by labeling—Notice to purchasers. ( a ) Manufacturers of cellulose insulation shall give notification of performance and technical data related to performance and safety ( 1 ) to prospective purchasers at the time of original purchase and
( 2 ) to the first purchaser of such products for purposes other than resale in the following manner. Manufacturers of cellulose insulation shall label all containers of cellulose insulation with the following statement, using capital letters as indicated: Caution *Potential Fire Hazard:* Keep cellulose insulation at least three inches away from the sides of recessed light fixtures. Do not place insulation over such fixtures so as to entrap heat. Also keep this insulation away from exhaust flues of furnaces, water heaters, space heaters, or other heat-producing devices. To be sure that insulation is kept away from light fixtures and flues, use a barrier to permanently maintain clearance around these areas. Check with local building or fire officials for guidance on installation and barrier requirements. *Request to Installer:* Remove this label and give it to the consumer at completion of job.
Manufacturers of cellulose insulation may substitute the phrase “TO HELP AVOID FIRE” for the phrase “POTENTIAL FIRE HAZARD” in the label described above. Manufacturers may also delete the word “cellulose from the first sentence of the label and may delete the word “this” from the third sentence of the label. The remainder of the label statement shall appear exactly as described above.
( b ) The labeling statement required by § 1404.4(a) shall appear prominently and conspicuously on the container. The word “CAUTION” shall appear in capital letters at least one-fourth inch in height. The words “POTENTIAL FIRE HAZARD” and “REQUEST TO INSTALLER” shall appear in capital letters at least three-sixteenths inch in height. The remainder of the statement shall appear in capital letters at least three-sixteenths inch in height, with lower case letters in corresponding proportion but at least one-eighth inch in height. The labeling statement shall be enclosed within a rectangle formed with lines at least one-sixteenth inch in width. The labeling statement shall be printed with legible type in a color which contrasts with the background on which the statement is printed.
( c ) To meet this requirement, manufacturers may use any type of label, including one which is pressure sensitive or glued-on, provided the label is made in such a manner that it will remain attached to the container for the expected time interval between the manufacture of the product and its installation.
[44 FR 40001, July 6, 1979, as amended at 49 FR 21701, May 23, 1984]
### §15922. Consultation regarding oil and gas leasing on public land

#### (a) In general

Not later than 180 days after August 8, 2005, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture shall enter into a memorandum of understanding regarding oil and gas leasing on—

(1) public land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior; and

(2) National Forest System land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture.

#### (b) Contents

The memorandum of understanding shall include provisions that—

(1) establish administrative procedures and lines of authority that ensure timely processing of—

(A) oil and gas lease applications;

(B) surface use plans of operation, including steps for processing surface use plans; and

(C) applications for permits to drill consistent with applicable timelines;

(2) eliminate duplication of effort by providing for coordination of planning and environmental compliance efforts;

(3) ensure that lease stipulations are—

(A) applied consistently;

(B) coordinated between agencies; and

(C) only as restrictive as necessary to protect the resource for which the stipulations are applied;

(4) establish a joint data retrieval system that is capable of—

(A) tracking applications and formal requests made in accordance with procedures of the Federal onshore oil and gas leasing program; and

(B) providing information regarding the status of the applications and requests within the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture; and

(5) establish a joint geographic information system mapping system for use in—

(A) tracking surface resource values to aid in resource management; and

(B) processing surface use plans of operation and applications for permits to drill.

(Pub. L. 109–58, title III, §363, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 722.)
Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 2, 2022

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 2 2

- 00 209

- CV

METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS , Appellant

V.
KAREN SIMMONS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 55 th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2016

- 75783

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal from a judgment signed December 30, 202 1

. After a motion for new trial was timely filed, t he notice of appeal was filed March 18 , 2022

. A ppellant has not paid the filing fee of $205.00, and no evidence that appellant is excused by statute or the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure from paying costs
has been filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 5. On Ap ril 28 , 2022 , the court ordered appellant to pay the filing fee on or before May 19, 2022, and further warned appellant that if2

it did not do so, the appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution

. See Tex. R. App. P. 5

. As of the date of this opinion, ap pellant has not paid the filing fee

. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed

. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case because appellant failed to comply with court order or notice from clerk requiring response or other action with in specified time).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Wise and Jewell.
# ,,VIGOR ALASKA

December 1, 2014 Mr. Kevin Schlemmer, Chief, EAS Division Office ofAviation Analysis U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590
Docket OST-1998-4899
Re: Continuation ofAlaska Airlines' Essential Air Service atCordova, Gustavus, Petersburg, Wrangell, and Yakutat Alaska, Docket OST-1998-4899 Dear Mr. Schlemmer: VigorAlaska, LLC. is the commercial operator ofthe Ketchikan and Seward shipyards that are owned by the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) and City ofSeward respectively. State planningforthe Ketchikan Shipyard began in the mid-1970s to build aviable shipyard enterprise in Ketchikan with the goal of reducing the cost ofoperating commercial, 

### state, and federal marine vessels and to strengthen and diversify the state, regional and local economies. Frequent, dependable, and affordable airfreight and passenger service is essential tothe long term viability ofthe Ketchikan Shipyard and tothe safe, efficient, and dependable operation oftheAlaska Marine Highway System and Inter-Islandferries. On almost a daily basis we require asteady stream of technical representatives, vendors, marine engineers, ship inspectors, critical skill workers, and time critical materials, parts, machinery, and assemblies to keep Alaska's marinetransportation system functioning. This demand is increasing as new businesses are looking to moveto Ketchikan tosupport the growing marine industrial base that supports Vigor Alaska and the marinevessels operating in the region. Alaska Airlines' investments in new aircraft and state-of-the-art navigation performance (RNP) upgrades have provided the means to maintain critical airservice between Cordova, Gustavus, Petersburg, Wrangell, and Yakutat and otherAlaska transportation hubs even during periods of incredibly inclement weather. Many Southeast Alaska communities are coastal communities with no connection to the interstate highway and road system and are entirely dependent on marine and airfreight and passenger transportation service. Air transportation with modern aircraft capable of moving passengers and freight frequently, dependably, and affordably is critical to the economic stability ofSoutheast Alaska and all Alaska coastal communities. Ourgrowing demand for frequent, dependable, and affordable airfreight and passenger transportation service coupled with the regional economic need foryear round employment compel us to encourageyou to select Alaska Airlines to continue providing essential airservice to Southeast Alaska as it has successfully donefor over thirtyyears. Sincerely,

Doug Ward Director ofShipyard Development
#### Carl G. McGreevy, Appellant, v. Frank W. McGreevy et al., Respondents.

Memorandum: A motion by plaintiff for summary judgment may not be granted unless the action comes within one of the first eight subdivisions of rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, and only in such equitable actions as fall within subdivisions six, seven, and eight thereof *(Lederer*v. *Wise Shoe Co.,*276 N. Y. 459, 463; *Donnelly*v. *National City Bank of New York,*276 App. Div. 1096; Tripp, Guide *706to Motion Practice [Rev. ed.], § 96; Shientag on Summary Judgment.) In this action for a declaratory judgment the nature of the relief sought is not included within any of the said subdivisions. All concur. (Appeal from an order denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in an action to remove a cloud upon title to realty.) Present — Taylor, P. J., MeCurn, Kimball, Piper and Wheeler, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**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 Vaso Active Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the three month period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John J. Masiz, Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of the Board of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted 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) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date: July 20, 2004

 
| By:                                                          | /s/ John J. Masiz |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------|--------|
| Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of the Board |

 

 

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

 

----
----

|   | (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 results of operations of the Registrant. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ James M. Trimble                               |   | September 21, 2011 |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------|
| James M. Trimble                                   |   |
| Chief Executive Officer                            |   |
| Petroleum Development Corporation (dba PDC Energy) |   |
| Managing General Partner                           |   |
|                                               |   |               |
|                                               |   |               |
| /s/ Gysle R. Shellum                               |   | September 21, 2011 |
| Gysle R. Shellum                                   |   |
| Chief Financial Officer                            |   |
| Petroleum Development Corporation (dba PDC Energy) |   |
| Managing General Partner                           |   |

----