alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §46314. Entering aircraft or airport area in violation of security requirements

(a) Prohibition.—A person may not knowingly and willfully enter, in violation of security requirements prescribed under section 44901, 44903(b) or (c), or 44906 of this title, an aircraft or an airport area that serves an air carrier or foreign air carrier.

(b) Criminal Penalty.—(1) A person violating subsection (a) of this section shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

(2) A person violating subsection (a) of this section with intent to evade security procedures or restrictions or with intent to commit, in the aircraft or airport area, a felony under a law of the United States or a State shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.

(c) Notice of Penalties.—

(1) In general.—Each operator of an airport in the United States that is required to establish an air transportation security program pursuant to section 44903(c) shall ensure that signs that meet such requirements as the Secretary of Homeland Security may prescribe providing notice of the penalties imposed under section 46301(a)(5)(A)(i) and subsection (b) of this section are displayed near all screening locations, all locations where passengers exit the sterile area, and such other locations at the airport as the Secretary of Homeland Security determines appropriate.

(2) Effect of signs on penalties.—An individual shall be subject to a penalty imposed under section 46301(a)(5)(A)(i) or subsection (b) of this section without regard to whether signs are displayed at an airport as required by paragraph (1).

(Pub. L. 103–272, §1(e), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1239; Pub. L. 112–74, div. D, title V, §564(b), (c), Dec. 23, 2011, 125 Stat. 981.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 46314 | 49 App.:1472(r). | Aug. 23, 1958, Pub. L. 85–726, 72 Stat. 731, §902(r); added Dec. 30, 1987, Pub. L. 100–223, §204(f)(2), 101 Stat. 1520. |

Section

In subsection (b), the words "fined under title 18" are substituted for "a fine not to exceed $1,000" and "a fine not to exceed $10,000" for consistency with title 18.

In subsection (b)(1), the words "Upon conviction" are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (b)(2), the words "airport area" are substituted for "secured area" for consistency in this section.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2011—Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 112–74, §564(b), inserted "with intent to evade security procedures or restrictions or" after "of this section".

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 112–74, §564(c), added subsec. (c).
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [S-221-2020]

An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board by the City of Mesa, grantee of FTZ 221, requesting subzone status for the facility of CMC Steel Fabricators, Inc., d/b/a CMC Steel Arizona, located in Mesa, Arizona. The application was submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally docketed on December 10, 2020.

The proposed subzone (225.8 acres) is located at 11444 East Germann Rd., Mesa, Maricopa County. No authorization for production activity has been requested at this time. The proposed subzone would be subject to the existing activation limit of FTZ 221.

In accordance with the FTZ Board's regulations, Qahira El-Amin of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to review the application and make recommendations to the Executive Secretary.

                    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the FTZ Board's Executive Secretary and sent to:                     *ftz@trade.gov.*                     The closing period for their receipt is January 25, 2021. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to February 9, 2021.                

                    A copy of the application will be available for public inspection in the “Reading Room” section of the FTZ Board's website, which is accessible via                     *www.trade.gov/​ftz.*

                    For further information, contact Qahira El-Amin at                     *Qahira.El-Amin@trade.gov.*

Dated: December 11, 2020.

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2020-27649 Filed 12-15-20; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
----

| I.   | Term.  The final three sentences shall be deleted in their entirety and the following shall be added to the end of the existing text of Section 3, Term, in the Agreement: |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
#### § 576.406 Equal participation of faith-based organizations.

The HUD program requirements in § 5.109 of this title apply to the ESG program, including the requirements regarding disposition and change in use of real property by a faith-based organization.

[81 FR 19418, Apr. 4, 2016]
#### § 582.10 Jurisdiction and responsibilities of Director.

Subject to the authority of the Secretary, the following activities are subject to the regulations in this part and are under the jurisdiction of the Director: Exploration, testing, and mining operations together with the associated environmental protection measures needed to permit those activities to be conducted in an environmentally responsible manner; handling, measurement, and transportation of OCS minerals; and other operations and activities conducted pursuant to a lease issued under 30 CFR part 581, or pursuant to a right of use and easement granted under this part, by or on behalf of a lessee or the holder of a right of use and easement.
EXHIBIT32.1

Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Panavision Inc. (the"Company") for the quarterly period endedMarch 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the "Report"), Robert L.Beitcher, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Bobby G.Jenkins, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each herebycertifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of hisknowledge:

(1)    The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

(2)    The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

/S/ ROBERT L. BEITCHER Name:Robert L. Beitcher Title: President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer Date: May 13, 2005

/S/BOBBY G. JENKINSName: Bobby G. Jenkins Title: ExecutiveVice President, Chief Financial Officer and PrincipalAccounting Officer Date: May 13,2005

----
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsProgressive Fracture of Fiber Composite Builtup StructuresThe damage progression and fracture of builtup composite structures was evaluated by using computational simulation to examine the behavior and response of a stiffened composite (0 +/- 45/90)(sub s6) laminate panel subjected to a bending load. The damage initiation, growth, accumulation, progression, and propagation to structural collapse were simulated. An integrated computer code (CODSTRAN) was augmented for the simulation of the progressive damage and fracture of builtup composite structures under mechanical loading. Results showed that damage initiation and progression have a significant effect on the structural response. Also investigated was the influence of different types of bending load on the damage initiation, propagation, and final fracture of the builtup composite panel.Document ID19970001692Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsGotsis, Pascal K.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Chamis, Christos C.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Minnetyan, Levon*(Clarkson Univ. Potsdam, NY United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 1, 1996Subject CategoryStructural MechanicsReport/Patent NumberNASA-TM-107231NAS 1.15:107231E-10269Meeting InformationMeeting: Technical MeetingLocation: New Orleans, LACountry: United StatesStart Date: October 29, 1995End Date: November 2, 1995Sponsors:Society of Engineering ScienceAccession Number97N11470Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-63-5BDistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19970001692.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
### [§5308. Repealed. Pub. L. 112–141, div. B, §20002(a), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 622]

Section, Pub. L. 103–272, §1(d), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 800; Pub. L. 105–178, title III, §3008(a), (c), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 348; Pub. L. 105–206, title IX, §9009(f), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 855; Pub. L. 109–59, title III, §3010(a), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1572, related to a grant program for clean fuel buses.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Oct. 1, 2012, see section 3(a) of Pub. L. 112–141, set out as an Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment note under section 101 of Title 23, Highways.

#### National Fuel Cell Bus Technology Development Program

Pub. L. 109–59, title III, §3045, Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1705, which provided for the establishment of a national fuel cell bus technology development program, was repealed by Pub. L. 112–141, div. B, §20002(c)(4), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 622.
#### § 57.6312 Secondary blasting.

Secondary blasts fired at the same time in the same work area shall be initiated from one source.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             Nov-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                  Nov-30-1996
<CASH>                        2,121,544
<SECURITIES>                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                 0
<ALLOWANCES>                  0
<INVENTORY>                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              0
<PP&E>                        29,593,299
<DEPRECIATION>                (10,055,068)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                22,052,694
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         898,544
<BONDS>                       6,299,052
<COMMON>                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   0
<OTHER-SE>                    14,855,098
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  22,052,694
<SALES>                       4,695,358
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              4,798,168
<CGS>                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 2,120,789
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              1,167,687
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            492,660
<INCOME-PRETAX>               1,017,032
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           1,017,032
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  1,017,032
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 17.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                 17.21
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Simon Property Group, L.P. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

/s/ DAVID SIMON David Simon
Chairman of the Board of Directors and
Chief Executive Officer of
Simon Property Group, Inc., General PartnerDate: May 14, 2010/s/ STEPHEN E. STERRETT Stephen E. Sterrett
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer of
Simon Property Group, Inc., General PartnerDate: May 14, 2010


34

---
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.1930 What must be included in my SEMS program for SWA? ( a ) Your SWA procedures must ensure the capability to immediately stop work that is creating imminent risk or danger. These procedures must grant all personnel the responsibility and authority, without fear of reprisal, to stop work or decline to perform an assigned task when an imminent risk or danger exists. Imminent risk or danger means any condition, activity, or practice in the workplace that could reasonably be expected to cause: ( 1 ) Death or serious physical harm; or
( 2 ) Significant environmental harm to: ( i ) Land;
( ii ) Air; or
( iii ) Mineral deposits, marine, coastal, or human environment.
( b ) The person in charge of the conducted work is responsible for ensuring the work is stopped in an orderly and safe manner. Individuals who receive a notification to stop work must comply with that direction immediately.
( c ) Work may be resumed when the individual on the facility with UWA determines that the imminent risk or danger does not exist or no longer exists. The decision to resume activities must be documented in writing as soon as practicable.
( d ) You must include SWA procedures and expectations as a standard statement in all JSAs.
( e ) You must conduct training on your SWA procedures as part of orientations for all new personnel who perform activities on the OCS. Additionally, the SWA procedures must be reviewed during all meetings focusing on safety on facilities subject to this subpart.
[78 FR 20443, Apr. 5, 2013]
§ 585.620 What is a Construction and Operations Plan (COP)? The COP describes your construction, operations, and conceptual decommissioning plans under your commercial lease, including your project easement. BOEM will withhold trade secrets and commercial or financial information that is privileged or confidential from public disclosure under exemption 4 of the FOIA and in accordance with the terms of § 585.114. ( a ) Your COP must describe all planned facilities that you will construct and use for your project, including onshore and support facilities and all anticipated project easements.
( b ) Your COP must describe all proposed activities including your proposed construction activities, commercial operations, and conceptual decommissioning plans for all planned facilities, including onshore and support facilities.
( c ) You must receive BOEM approval of your COP before you can begin any of the approved activities on your lease.
§ 57.22606 Explosive materials and blasting units (III mines). ( a ) Mine operators shall notify the appropriate MSHA District Manager of all nonapproved explosive materials and blasting units to be used prior to their use. Explosive materials used for blasting shall be approved by MSHA under 30 CFR part 15, or nonapproved explosive materials shall be evaluated and determined by the District Manager to be safe for blasting in a potentially gassy environment. The notice shall also include the millisecond-delay interval between successive shots and between the first and last shot in a round.
( b ) Faces shall be examined for proper placement of holes, possible breakthrough, and water. Ammonium nitrate blasting agents shall not be loaded into wet holes.
( c ) Multiple-shot blasts shall be initiated with detonators encased in copper-based alloy shells. Aluminum and aluminum alloy-cased detonators, nonelectric detonators, detonating cord, and safety fuses shall not be used. All detonators in a round shall be made by the same manufacturer.
( d ) Nonapproved explosives shall be used only as primers with ammonium nitrate-fuel oil blasting agents. Such primers shall be placed at the back or bottom of the hole.
( e ) Blast holes shall be stemmed with a noncombustible material in an amount to confine the explosive charge. Breakthrough holes shall be stemmed at both ends.
( f ) Mudcaps or other nonapproved unconfined shots shall not be blasted.
( g ) ( 1 ) Blasting units shall be approved by MSHA under 30 CFR part 25; or
( 2 ) Blasting units used to fire more than 20 detonators shall provide at least 2 amperes through each detonator but not more than an average of 100 amperes through one ohm for 10 milliseconds, and provide the necessary current for at least the first 5 milliseconds with a cutoff not to exceed 10 milliseconds.
[52 FR 24941, July 1, 1987, as amended at 52 FR 41397, Oct. 27, 1987]
#### Stephen Donati, Appellant, v Tommy’s, LLC, Doing Business as Morningside Pub, Respondent, et al., Defendants. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[833 NYS2d 218]

*459In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (LaCava, J.), entered November 15, 2005, which, inter alia, granted the motion of the defendant Tommy’s, LLC, doing business as Morningside Pub, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and (2), as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the same court entered March 3, 2006, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination.

Ordered that the appeal from the order entered November 15, 2005 is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order entered March 3, 2006, made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered March 3, 2006 is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, upon reargument, the order entered November 15, 2005, is vacated, and the motion of the defendant Tommy’s, LLC, doing business as Morningside Pub, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it is denied; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff allegedly tripped and fell over a hose that lay across less than half the doorway of the bar owned by the defendant Tommy’s, LLC, doing business as Morningside Pub (hereinafter the Pub). The hose was attached to an air conditioner located over the front doorway, and ran down the front of the Pub to where it lay in the walkway.

The plaintiff commenced the instant action against, among others, the Pub, alleging negligence. The Pub moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it, contending that the alleged condition was too trivial to be actionable. The Supreme Court determined that the Pub satisfied its burden of showing that the location of the hose in less than half the walkway was a trivial defect, and did not have the characteristics of a trap or snare *(see Trincere v County of Suffolk,*90 NY2d 976 [1997]). The court further found that, in opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. We disagree.

Under the circumstances of this case, a triable issue of fact exists as to whether the alleged condition was too trivial to be actionable *(see Trincere v County of Suffolk, supra; Mishaan v Tobias,*32 AD3d 1000 [2006]; *Herring v Lefrak Org.,*32 AD3d 900 [2006]; *Maxson v Brentwood Union Free School Dist.,*31 AD3d 506, 507 [2006]; *Fairchild v J. Crew Group, Inc.,*21 AD3d *460523, 524 [2005]; *Stelmack v Town of Oyster Bay Hous. Auth.,*295 AD2d 594 [2002]; *Adsmond v City of Poughkeepsie,*283 AD2d 598 [2001]). Prudenti, P.J., Fisher, Garni and McCarthy, JJ., concur.
"Berry, Leslie" 

<Leslie_Berry@americanche

mistry.com>

11/11/2009 10:17 AM

To EHPV-Program-Submissions@EPA

cc "Franz, Christina" 

<Christina_Franz@americanchemistry.com>

bcc

Subject EHPV Propyl Propionate Test Plan/Robust Summaries 

Submission

Good morning, 

I am attaching the following EHPV submission for consideration:

· Type of EHPV Program Sponsorship –Standard EHPV Program commitment

· Sponsor Name – American Chemistry Council, Oxo Process Panel

Submission Title – Propyl Propionate

· CAS Numbers – 106-36-5

Leslie Berry

Chemical Products & Technology Division

American Chemistry Council

1300 Wilson Boulevard 

Arlington, VA 22209

Ph: (703) 741 5612

 - Propyl Propionate Dossier_Nov_2009.doc - Propyl propionate TestPlan_Nov_2009.doc
#### § 556.805 What is the effect of an operating rights owner's assignment of operating rights on the assignor's liability?

An operating rights owner (who does not hold record title) who assigns the operating rights remains liable for all obligations of the lease that accrued during the period in which the assignor owned the operating rights, up to the effective date of the assignment, including decommissioning obligations that accrued during that period. BOEM's approval of the assignment does not alter that liability. Even after assignment, BOEM or BSEE may require the assignor to bring the lease into compliance if the assignee or any subsequent assignee fails to perform any obligation under the lease, to the extent the obligation accrued before approval of the assignment.
Exhibit 99.1 - CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


                          CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Todd Axelrod, Chief Executive Officer of Gallery of History, Inc.,
certify, to the best of my knowledge, that the periodic report, to
which this Statement is attached, fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934,
and the information contained in the periodic report to which this
Statement is attached fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Gallery of History,
Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Statement as of
the date first written below.

Dated December 30, 2002


                                           /s/ TODD AXELROD
                                           _______________________
                                           Todd Axelrod
                                           Chief Executive Officer
#### § 282.40 [Reserved]