alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 780
Editorial Note: At 82 FR 54949, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 780 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93330, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 780.14 Operation plan: Maps and plans. Each application shall contain maps and plans as follows: ( a ) The maps and plans shall show the lands proposed to be affected throughout the operation and any change in a facility or feature to be caused by the proposed operations, if the facility or feature was shown under 30 CFR 779.24 through 779.25.
( b ) The following shall be shown for the proposed permit area: ( 1 ) Buildings, utility corridors and facilities to be used;
( 2 ) The area of land to be affected within the proposed permit area, according to the sequence of mining and reclamation;
( 3 ) Each area of land for which a performance bond or other equivalent guarantee will be posted under subchapter J of this chapter;
( 4 ) Each coal storage, cleaning and loading area;
( 5 ) Each topsoil, spoil, coal waste, and non-coal waste storage area;
( 6 ) Each water diversion, collection, conveyance, treatment, storage, and discharge facility to be used;
( 7 ) Each air pollution collection and control facility;
( 8 ) Each source of waste and each waste disposal facility relating to coal processing or pollution control;
( 9 ) Each facility to be used to protect and enhance fish and wildlife and related environmental values;
( 10 ) Each explosive storage and handling facility; and
( 11 ) Location of each sedimentation pond, permanent water impoundment, coal processing waste bank, and coal processing waste dam and embankment, in accordance with 30 CFR 780.25, and fill area for the disposal of excess spoil in accordance 30 CFR 780.35.
( c ) Except as provided in §§ 780.25(a)(2), 780.25(a)(3), 780.35(a), 816.71(b), 816.73(c), 816.74(c) and 816.81(c) of this chapter, cross sections, maps and plans required under paragraphs (b)(4), (5), (6), (10) and (11) of this section shall be prepared by, or under the direction of, and certified by a qualified registered professional engineer, a professional geologist, or in any State which authorizes land surveyors to prepare and certify such cross sections, maps and plans, a qualified, registered, professional, land surveyor, with assistance from experts in related fields such as landscape architecture.
[44 FR 15357, Mar. 13, 1979; 44 FR 49685, Aug. 24, 1979, as amended at 45 FR 51550, Aug. 4, 1980; 48 FR 14822, Apr. 5, 1983; 50 FR 16199, Apr. 24, 1985; 56 FR 65635, Dec. 17, 1991; 73 FR 75875, Dec. 12, 2008; 79 FR 76228, Dec. 22, 2014; 81 FR 93330, Dec. 20, 2016; 82 FR 54949, Nov. 17, 2017]
### 60

80 100 120 140 160**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

## Condition 2 **- NOx Emissions** 

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 20 40 60

**Time**

### 80

100 120 140 160 180**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

## Condition 3 **- NOx Emissions** 

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 20 40 60

**Time**

### 100

150 200 250**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

## Condition 4 **- NOx Emissions** 

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 50 100

**Time**

### 100

150 200 250**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

# Condition 5 **- NOx Emissions** 

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 50 100**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s** 



### Time

### 60

80 100 120 140 160**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

## Condition 6 **- NOx Emissions** 

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 20 40 60

**Time**

### 60

80 100 120 140**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

## Condition 7 **- NOx Emissions** 

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 20 40

**Time**

### 80

100 120 140 160 180**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

## Condition 8 **- NOx Emissions** 

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 20 40 60

**Time**

### 150

200 250 300**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

## Condition 9 **- NOx Emissions** 

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 50 100

**Time**

### 150

200 250 300**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

## Condition 10 **- NOx Emissions** 

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 50 100

**Time**

### 60

80 100 120 140 160**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

## Condition 1 **1 -**  **NOx Emissions**

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 20 40 60

**Time**

### 150

200 250 300 350**N O** **x E** **m i** **s s** **i o** **n s**  

## Condition 12 **- NOx Emissions** 

Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4



### 0 50 100

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

§ 250.1725 When do I have to remove platforms and other facilities? ( a ) You must remove all platforms and other facilities within 1 year after the lease, pipeline right-of-way, or right-of-use and easement terminates, unless you receive approval to maintain the structure to conduct other activities. Platforms include production platforms, well jackets, single-well caissons, and pipeline accessory platforms. Other activities include those supporting OCS oil and gas production and transportation, as well as other energy-related or marine-related uses (including LNG) for which adequate financial assurance for decommissioning has been provided to a Federal agency which has given BSEE a commitment that it has and will exercise authority to compel the performance of decommissioning within a time following cessation of the new use acceptable to BSEE. The approval will specify: ( 1 ) Whether you must continue to maintain any financial assurance for decommissioning; and
( 2 ) Whether, and under what circumstances, you must perform any decommissioning not performed by the new facility owner/user.
( b ) Before you may remove a platform or other facility, you must submit a final removal application to the Regional Supervisor for approval and include the information listed in § 250.1727.
( c ) You must remove a platform or other facility according to the approved application.
( d ) You must flush all production risers with seawater before you remove them.
( e ) You must notify the Regional Supervisor at least 48 hours before you begin the removal operations.
[76 FR 64462, Oct. 18, 2011, as amended at 88 FR 23581, Apr. 18, 2023]
Editorial Note on Part 816
Editorial Note: At 82 FR 54979, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 816 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93392, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 816.107 Backfilling and grading: Steep slopes. ( a ) Surface mining activities on steep slopes shall be conducted so as to meet the requirements of §§ 816.102-816.106, and the requirements of this section except where mining is conducted on flat or gently rolling terrain with an occasional steep slope through which the mining proceeds and leaves a plain or predominantly flat area or where operations are conducted in accordance with part 824 of this chapter.
( b ) The following materials shall not be placed on the downslope: ( 1 ) Spoil.
( 2 ) Waste materials of any type.
( 3 ) Debris, including that from clearing and grubbing.
( 4 ) Abandoned or disabled equipment.
( c ) Land above the highwall shall not be disturbed unless the regulatory authority finds that this disturbance will facilitate compliance with the environmental protection standards of this subchapter and the disturbance is limited to that necessary to facilitate compliance.
( d ) Woody materials shall not be buried in the backfilled area unless the regulatory authority determines that the proposed method for placing woody material within the backfill will not deteriorate the stable condition of the backfilled area.
[48 FR 23369, May 24, 1983, as amended at 48 FR 41734, Sept. 16, 1983; 81 FR 93392, Dec. 20, 2016; 82 FR 54979, Nov. 17, 2017]
#### In the Matter of Nathaniel M. Minkoff, as Treasurer of Joint Board of Dress and Waistmakers’ Union of Greater New York, v. Lugay Frocks, Inc.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals and for a stay denied, with $10 costs. The stay contained in the order to show cause, dated May 3, 1962, is vacated. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, McNally and Bergan, JJ.
#### Albert Lloyd Shephard et al., Respondents, v City of New York, Appellant, and John J. Zordan et al., Respondents.

[835 NYS2d 297]—

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant City of New York appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jacobson, J.), dated January 6, 2006, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion of the defendant City of New York for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it is granted.

“The manner in which a police officer operates his or her vehicle in responding to an emergency call may not form the basis for civil liability to an injured third party unless the officer acted in reckless disregard for the safety of others” *(Badalamenti v City of New York,*30 AD3d 452, 452 [2006]; *see Saarinen v Kerr,*84 NY2d 494, 501 [1994]; *Rodriguez v Incorporated Vil. of Freeport,*21 AD3d 1024 [2005]; *Turini v County of Suffolk,*8 AD3d 260 [2004]; *Molinari*v City *of New York,*267 AD2d 436 [1999]; Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1104 [e]). “The ‘reckless disregard’ standard requires proof that the officer intentionally committed an act of an unreasonable character *843in disregard of a known or obvious risk that was so great as to make it highly probable that harm would follow” *(Badalamenti v City of New*York, *supra*at 453).

Here, the City established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the police officers’ conduct did not rise to the level of reckless disregard for the safety of others. In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see *Teitelbaum v City of New York,*300 AD2d 649, 650 [2002]; *Demutiis v City of New York,*253 AD2d 734 [1998]; *DeLeonardis v Port Wash. Police Dist.,*237 AD2d 322 [1997]; *Young v Village of Lynbrook,*234 AD2d 455 [1996]; *Powell v City of Mount Vernon,*228 AD2d 572 [1996]; *cf. Spalla v Village of Brockport,*295 AD2d 900 [2002]). Accordingly, the City’s motion for summary judgment should have been granted. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Covello and McCarthy, JJ., concur.
#### Thaddeus Morawski, defendant in error, v. V. Seng Teaming Company, plaintiff in error.

Gen. No. 29,178.

Action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained in being run over by defendant’s truck. Judgment for plaintiff. Error to the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph Sabath, Judge, presiding. Heard in the third division of this court for the first district at the March term, 1924. *Certiorari*denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).

Affirmed.

Opinion filed April 29, 1925.

Alfred Roy Hulbert, for plaintiff in error.

James L. Bynum and Joseph Mall, for defendant in error; James L. Bynum, of counsel.

Mr. Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                  5
<LEGEND> 
         THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM DRS
         TECHNOLOGIES, INC. FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 
         31, 1998 AND RESTATED INFORMATION FOR THE FISCAL QUARTER ENDED
         SEPTEMBER 30,1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
         FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                           1
<CURRENCY>                            US DOLLARS
       
<S>                                 <C>       
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        9-MOS                  
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                             DEC-31-1998 
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                    1 
<CASH>                                    21,510,000 
<SECURITIES>                                       0 
<RECEIVABLES>                             54,674,000 
<ALLOWANCES>                               1,004,000 
<INVENTORY>                               63,791,000 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         140,949,000 
<PP&E>                                    72,520,000 
<DEPRECIATION>                            37,284,000 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           249,831,000 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     92,374,000 
<BONDS>                                  106,438,000 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0 
<PREFERRED>                                        0 
<COMMON>                                      67,000 
<OTHER-SE>                                43,879,000 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             249,831,000 
<SALES>                                   76,991,000 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          76,991,000 
<CGS>                                     72,985,000 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             72,985,000 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         2,988,000 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            1,054,000 
<INCOME-TAX>                                 390,000 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          664,000 
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           (2,306,000)
<CHANGES>                                          0 
<NET-INCOME>                              (1,642,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.25)
                                     


</TABLE>
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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.
 Dated: November 14, 2008
    /s/ ANTHONY F. EARLEY, JR.Anthony F. Earley, Jr.Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
The Detroit Edison Company
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 Annual Report of Puresafe Water Systems, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Leslie J. Kessler,  Chief  Executive Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:





(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.




/s/ Leslie J. KesslerLeslie J. KesslerChief Executive Officer





April 15, 2011
#### Angelo D. D’Ambrosio, Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v. City of New York et al., Respondents. City of New York, Plaintiff, v. Broadway Maintenance Corporation, Defendant.

Judgment insofar as appealed from unanimousely reversed on the law and a new trial granted with respect to plaintiff-appellant’s claims against both defendants-respondents, with costs to plain tiff-appellant. In this personal injury negligence action, appellant’s complaint was dismissed at the close of his case on the ground that he was eontributorily negligent as a matter of law. For this there is no support, for appellant established prima facie that the street conditions and limited visibility made it difficult to see the sewerhead protruding above the unpaved surface. Whether the undiscoverable protrusion affected plaintiff’s operation of the taxi, and thus was the proximate cause of the accident was a question of fact. The jury might properly have found that a failure to erect and maintain warning devices, under the circumstances, constituted negligence. Proof of the respondent paving contractor’s responsibility for the street condition was sufficient, but, in any event, the trial court improperly precluded appellant from adducing further evidence on this issue. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Valente, Steuer and Bergan, JJ.
§ 161.2 Applicability. This part applies to: ( a ) The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the Military Departments (including the Coast Guard at all times, including when it is a Service in the Department of Homeland Security by agreement with that Department), the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff, the Combatant Commands, the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the Defense Agencies, the DoD Field Activities, and all other organizational entities within the Department of Defense (hereafter referred to collectively as the “DoD Components”).
( b ) The Commissioned Corps of the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS), under agreement with the Department of Health and Human Services, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), under agreement with the Department of Commerce.
§ 948.13 State statutory and regulatory provisions set aside. ( a ) - ( b ) [Reserved]
( c ) The following wording in section 22A-3-23(c)(3) of the Code of West Virginia is inconsistent with section 519(c)(3) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 and is hereby set aside: Provided, however, That such a release may be made where the quality of the untreated postmining water discharged is better than or equal to the premining water quality discharged from the mining site.
( d ) Section 22A-3-12(e) of the Code of West Virginia is inconsistent with section 515(e) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 and is hereby set aside in its entirety.
( e ) - ( f ) [Reserved]
[50 FR 35084, Aug. 29, 1985, as amended at 61 FR 6535, Feb. 21, 1996]
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 amended Annual Report of AccuPoll Holding Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
William E. Nixon, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.


September 28, 2005                          /s/ William E. Nixon
                                            -----------------------
                                            William E. Nixon
                                            Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
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.
### §101337. Leasing of seasonal employee quarters

(a) General Authority.—The Secretary may lease quarters at or near a System unit for use as seasonal quarters for field employees if the Secretary finds that there is a shortage of adequate and affordable seasonal quarters at or near the System unit and that—

(1) the requirement for the seasonal field employee quarters is temporary; or

(2) leasing would be more cost-effective than construction of new seasonal field employee quarters.

(b) Rent.—The rent charged to field employees under the lease shall be a rate based on the reasonable value of the quarters in accordance with requirements applicable under section 5911 of title 5.

(c) Unrecovered Costs.—The Secretary may pay the unrecovered costs of leasing seasonal quarters under this section from annual appropriations for the year in which the lease is made.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3128.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 101337 | 16 U.S.C. 17o(11). | Pub. L. 104–333, div. I, title VIII, §814(a)(11), Nov. 12, 1996, 110 Stat. 4192; Pub. L. 106–176, title I, §120(a)(1)(D), Mar. 10, 2000, 114 Stat. 28. |

Section