alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
6.302-2 Unusual and compelling urgency. ( a ) *Authority.* ( 1 ) Citations: 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(2) or 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(2).
( 2 ) When the agency's need for the supplies or services is of such an unusual and compelling urgency that the Government would be seriously injured unless the agency is permitted to limit the number of sources from which it solicits bids or proposals, full and open competition need not be provided for.
( b ) *Application.* This authority applies in those situations where— ( 1 ) An unusual and compelling urgency precludes full and open competition; and
( 2 ) Delay in award of a contract would result in serious injury, financial or other, to the Government.
( c ) *Limitations.* ( 1 ) Contracts awarded using this authority shall be supported by the written justifications and approvals described in 6.303 and 6.304. These justifications may be made and approved after contract award when preparation and approval prior to award would unreasonably delay the acquisition.
( 2 ) This statutory authority requires that agencies shall request offers from as many potential sources as is practicable under the circumstances.
( d ) *Period of Performance.* ( 1 ) The total period of performance of a contract awarded or modified using this authority— ( i ) May not exceed the time necessary— ( A ) To meet the unusual and compelling requirements of the work to be performed under the contract; and
( B ) For the agency to enter into another contract for the required goods and services through the use of competitive procedures; and
( ii ) May not exceed one year, including all options, unless the head of the agency determines that exceptional circumstances apply. This determination must be documented in the contract file.
( 2 ) ( i ) Any subsequent modification using this authority, which will extend the period of performance beyond one year under this same authority, requires a separate determination. This determination is only required if the cumulative period of performance using this authority exceeds one year. This requirement does not apply to the exercise of options previously addressed in the determination required at paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section.
( ii ) The determination shall be approved at the same level as the level to which the agency head authority in paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section is delegated.
( 3 ) The requirements in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section shall apply to any contract in an amount greater than the simplified acquisition threshold.
( 4 ) The determination of exceptional circumstances is in addition to the approval of the justification in 6.304.
( 5 ) The determination may be made after contract award when making the determination prior to award would unreasonably delay the acquisition.
[50 FR 52431, Dec. 23, 1985, as amended at 74 FR 52851, Oct. 14, 2009; 74 FR 65615, Dec. 10, 2009; 79 FR 24198, Apr. 29, 2014; 80 FR 38309, July 2, 2015; 84 FR 19842, May 6, 2019; 87 FR 73896, Dec. 1, 2022]
6101.12 Stays and dismissals [Rule 12]. ( a ) *Stays.* The Board may stay a case for a specific duration, or until a specific event, for good cause.
( b ) *Dismissals* — ( 1 ) *Generally.* The Board may dismiss a case or part of a case either on motion of a party or after permitting a response to an order to show cause. Dismissal is with prejudice unless a Board order or other applicable law provides otherwise.
( 2 ) *Voluntary dismissal.* Subject to Rule 12(b)(3) (paragraph (b)(3) of this section), the Board will dismiss all or part of a case on the terms requested if the appellant, petitioner, or applicant moves for dismissal with prejudice or moves jointly with the respondent for dismissal with or without prejudice.
( 3 ) *For lack of jurisdiction.* If the Board finds that it lacks jurisdiction to decide all or part of a case, the Board will dismiss the case or the part of the case, regardless of the parties' positions on jurisdiction or dismissal.
( 4 ) *For failure to prosecute.* The Board may dismiss all or part of a case for failure to prosecute.
( c ) *Dismissal orders and decisions.* The presiding judge acting alone may stay a case or grant voluntary dismissal with or without prejudice. A panel or the full Board may dismiss a case on other grounds.
( d ) *Admonition.* Dismissal of a party's case without prejudice does not necessarily mean that the party may later refile the case at the Board or in another forum under the jurisdictional and procedural laws applicable to the case.
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch on Law Enforcement Responses to Opioid Overdoses (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Resource: Mentoring for Enhancing Career Interests and Exploration      

# Resource: Mentoring for Enhancing Career Interests and Exploration

This review (PDF, 83 pages) examines research on the role of mentoring in facilitating career interest and exploration for adolescents under 18 years old. The analysis addresses four issues: the effects of mentoring on a youth’s career interests and exploration (CIE), the factors involved in the influence of mentoring on CIE, the identification of the most important features of mentoring that have beneficial effects on CIE, and an assessment of the effectiveness of various efforts to implement and impact mentoring practices related to youths’ CIE. **Learn more.**
729.402-70 Foreign contracts. ( a ) The annual Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act (SFOAA) requires USAID to take certain steps to prevent countries from imposing taxes, including value added tax (VAT) and customs duties, on U.S. foreign assistance, or if imposed, requires the countries to reimburse the assessed taxes or duties. The SFOAA also requires certain reporting to Congress on host country taxation. Because countries imposing such taxes assess them directly on contractors, USAID requires contractors to report annually on whether taxes have been imposed and, if so, whether the foreign government reimbursed the taxes.
( b ) The contracting officer must insert the clause at § 752.229-71, Reporting of Foreign Taxes, in solicitations and resulting contracts when: ( 1 ) A contract is fully or partially funded with funds appropriated under titles III through VI of an SFOAA making appropriations for the Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs, and
( 2 ) The contract is to be performed wholly or partly in a foreign country.
[88 FR 39191, June 15, 2023]
#### 52.214-8-52.214-9 [Reserved]
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch on Law Enforcement Responses to Opioid Overdoses (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Supporting Young Parents      

# Supporting Young Parents

This webpage shares resources that highlight how programs and child welfare professionals can support young parents, including parents in out-of-home care. State and local examples of strengths-based programs for young parents are provided. **Learn more.**
44.203 Consent limitations. ( a ) The contracting officer's consent to a subcontract or approval of the contractor's purchasing system does not constitute a determination of the acceptability of the subcontract terms or price, or of the allowability of costs, unless the consent or approval specifies otherwise.
( b ) Contracting officers shall not consent to— ( 1 ) Cost-reimbursement subcontracts if the fee exceeds the fee limitations of 15.404-4(c)(4)(i);
( 2 ) Subcontracts providing for payment on a cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost basis;
( 3 ) Subcontracts obligating the contracting officer to deal directly with the subcontractor;
( 4 ) Subcontracts that make the results of arbitration, judicial determination, or voluntary settlement between the prime contractor and subcontractor binding on the Government; or
( 5 ) Repetitive or unduly protracted use of cost-reimbursement, time-and-materials, or labor-hour subcontracts (contracting officers should follow the principles of 16.103(c)).
( c ) Contracting officers should not refuse consent to a subcontract merely because it contains a clause giving the subcontractor the right of indirect appeal to an agency board of contract appeals if the subcontractor is affected by a dispute between the Government and the prime contractor. Indirect appeal means assertion by the subcontractor of the prime contractor's right to appeal or the prosecution of an appeal by the prime contractor on the subcontractor's behalf. The clause may also provide that the prime contractor and subcontractor shall be equally bound by the contracting officer's or board's decision. The clause may not attempt to obligate the contracting officer or the appeals board to decide questions that do not arise between the Government and the prime contractor or that are not cognizable under the clause at 52.233-1, Disputes.
[69 FR 76358, Dec. 20, 2004]
#### BAYVIEW COMPANY, INC. d/b/a Bayview Insulation Company v. INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HEAT AND FROST INSULATORS, and Asbestos Workers, Local 2, Bayview Company, Inc., Appellant.

No. 07-3003.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) May 23, 2008.

Filed: May 28, 2008.

Tibor R. Solymosi, Segel & Solymosi, Erie, PA, for Bayview Company, Inc.

Joshua M. Bloom, Joshua M. Bloom & Associates, Pittsburgh, PA, for International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators, and Asbestos Workers, Local 2.

Before: SMITH, HARDIMAN, and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

NYGAARD, Circuit Judge.

Bayview Company, Inc. appeals an order of the District Court to grant summary judgment to appellee, International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Worker’s Local 2. Because our opinion is wholly without precedential value, and because the parties and the District Court are familiar with its operative facts, we offer only an abbreviated recitation to explain why we will affirm the order of the District Court.

This case arises from a disagreement between the parties on whether Bayview violated the “Project Stabilization Agreement” by employing certain workers to install insulation on the construction project. Specifically, the union charged that particular employees hired by Bayview did not have the proper training and experience. The union charged that this violated the referral system established by the union and consented to in the Agreement by the parties. The Agreement required arbitration of all such disputes.

The arbitrator found that Bayview had violated the agreement in the manner in *130which it employed workei’s at the job site, and he ordered Bayview to comply with the terms of the Agreement. The arbitrator also ordered Bayview to pay to the Union an amount equal to all back pay and benefits that it lost from this violation of the Agreement. Bayview appealed the arbitrator’s decision and the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the union.

In this appeal, Bayview alleges that the arbitrator’s award did not draw its essence from the Project Stabilization Agreement and that the award was punitive, which the Agreement does not permit. It is well settled that courts must give strong deference to an arbitrator’s decision if it “draws its essence” from the parties’ agreement. *Koshatka v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc.,*762 F.2d 329 (3d Cir.1985). A review of the record supports the District Court’s conclusion that the arbitrator’s decision and award of back pay and benefits drew its essence from the contract. Accordingly, we will affirm the order of the District Court.
EX-4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 

AGREEMENT TO FURNISH DEBT INSTRUMENTS 

Pursuant to Item 601(b)(4)(iii) of Regulation S-K (the “Item”), British American
Tobacco p.l.c. has not included as an Exhibit any instrument with respect to long-term debt if the total amount of debt authorized by such instrument does not exceed 10% of the total assets of British American Tobacco p.l.c and its subsidiaries on a
consolidated basis. British American Tobacco p.l.c. agrees, pursuant to this Item, to furnish a copy of any such instrument to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) upon request of the Commission. 

 

			
	BRITISH AMERICAN TOBACCO P.L.C.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ British American Tobacco p.l.c.

	 Date:
	 	May 12, 2017
----

**Exhibit      13(a)(iii)**

**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. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                 |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|--------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:                October 1, 2007 |  By:                /s/ M. Glen Kertz        M.                Glen Kertz        Chief                Executive Officer and        Acting                President |
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch on Law Enforcement Responses to Opioid Overdoses (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Resource: Overdose Death Rates Increased Significantly for Black, American Indian/Alaska Native People in 2020      

# Resource: Overdose Death Rates Increased Significantly for Black, American Indian/Alaska Native People in 2020

This page provides data and resources on the increasing racial disparities related to overdose death among Black and American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) people, as compared to other racial/ethnic groups. Findings reveal that Black people 15–24 years old experienced the largest rate increase (86 percent) compared with changes seen in other age/race groups during 2019–2020. **Learn more.**
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 CSS Industries, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Christopher J.
      Munyan, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








/s/
      Christopher J. Munyan


Christopher
      J. Munyan


President
      and Chief Executive Officer


(principal
      executive officer)





November
      1, 2006
#### 616.102 Policies.
#### In the Matter of Samuel Morganroth, Respondent, v. Tax Commission of the City of New York, Appellant.

Order, entered on or about January 7, 1963, reducing assessments on Lot 3, Block 1840, for tax years 1958-1959 through 1962-1963 inclusive, on Lot 16, Block 1887, for tax years 1957—1958 through 1962-1963 inclusive, on Lot 227, Block 2142, for tax years 1958-1959 through 1962-1963 inclusive, and on Lot 55, Block 2143, for tax years 1957-1958 through 1962-1963 inclusive, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to strike out the last four decretal paragraphs of said order and in lieu thereof, to provide- for the reinstatement and confirmation of the assessments, and the order otherwise affirmed, with $30 costs and disbursements to appellant. The evidence as to value of the respective parcels, based on income received therefrom, earning capacities, sales prices of the respective properties in years 1954r-1956, and prices on sales of comparable properties, lead us to conclude that the reductions in the assessments were unwarranted. The subject properties are multiple-story apartment buildings and the reasonable earning capacities of each, based on actual income and a deduction of proper expenses and allowances chargeable thereto (including a realistic vacancy allowance) show a return establishing a valuation equal to or exceeding the respective assessments. Furthermore, Lot 3, Block 1840 (77-81 West 10.4th Street), was sold to the petitioner in 1956 for $165,000, more than 20% in “cash”; Lot 16, Block 1887 (741 West End Avenue), was purchased by petitioner in 1954 for $175,000, with 25% cash paid down; Lot 227, Block 2142 (715 West 175th Street), was sold to petitioner for $200,000 in 1955 with 50% of the price paid in cash; and Lot 55, Block 2143 (1291-1297 St. Nicholas Ave. [600 W. 175th St.]), was acquired by petitioner in 1956 for a purchase price of $113,000, with about 23% of the price paid in cash. The sales to the petitioner represent bona fide, open market transactions at arm’s length and the prices paid -were sums which were more than or approximately equal to the respective assessments. Such prices are “ of course the very best of evidence, because directly reflective of market value, if recent in time, and not explained away as abnormal in any fashion”. *(Matter of Lane Bryant*v. *Tax Comm.,*21 A D 2d 669.) Settle order on notice. Concur — Rabin, J. P., McNally, Eager, Steuer and Witmer, JJ.