alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1781.14 Planning, options, and appraisals. ( a ) WS and RCD area plans are developed by sponsoring local agencies and organizations with technical assistance from NRCS and other Federal and State agencies. These plans include WS works of improvement and RCD measures to be developed or constructed for which NRCS construction funds may be made available on a cost share basis along with funds provided by the sponsoring local organization, a portion or all of which may be obtained by a WS loan and/or WS advance or a RCD loan.
( b ) Current information on the availability of cost share funds and purposes for which they may be used is provided by NRCS. The amount of NRCS cost share funds and the amount of funds to be provided by the sponsoring local organizations will be indicated in each plan. The estimated amount of WS loan, WS advance or RCD loan anticipated by the sponsoring local organization should also be included.
( c ) Plans for the development or construction of individual WS works of improvement and RCD measures will normally be developed with NRCS technical assistance. In every case they will be approved by both the NRCS State conservationist and the Rural Development State Director or their designated agent when a WS loan, WS advance or RCD loan is made.
( d ) Options and appraisals related to the purchase of real estate for which a WS loan, WS advance, or RCD loan is made must be developed in accordance with NRCS and RUS requirements and approved by RUS. The determination of present market value will be made in accordance with § 1780.44(g) of this chapter.
#### CONNELLY, Appellant, v. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS R. CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department,

June 15, 1906.)

Action by John Connelly against the Brooklyn Heights Railroad Company.

No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court reversed, and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event; on the ground that the case presented a question for the jury.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v. NICHOLAS ROLL, Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 115 EAL 2015 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 17th day of August, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED
.
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-14-0000829 21-AUG-2014 08:15 AM
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Kodiak Oil & Gas Corp. (the "Registrant") for the
period ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lynn A. Peterson, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



Date:

August 5, 2008By:

/s/LYNN A. PETERSONLynn A. Peterson Chief Executive Officer
(principal executive officer)


---



QuickLinks
§ 1755.370 RUS specification for seven wire galvanized steel strand. ( a ) RUS incorporates by reference ASTM A475-78, Standard Specification for Zinc-Coated Steel Wire Strand, issued May 1978. All seven wire galvanized steel strand purchased after April 1, 1990, for use on telecommunications systems financed by RUS loan funds must conform to this standard. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 on January 19, 1990). Copies of ASTM A475-78 are available for inspection during normal business hours at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and the Rural Utilities Service, Administrative Services Division, room 0175-S, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250, telephone 202-382-9551. For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .* Copies are available from the American Society for Testing and Materials, 1916 Race Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103, telephone 215-299-5400.
( b ) In addition to the requirements of ASTM 475-78, all coils and reels having Class B or C coatings shall be marked with a 3-inch wide and 6-inch long deep-colored stripe, green or orange, respectively, to identify the class of galvanized coating of the strand. This marking shall be applied to the exposed convolutions of the strand in the eye of the coils and located near the midpoint on the outside layer of strand on the reels. The marking shall not cover any welded joint markings.
[55 FR 1792, Jan. 19, 1990; 55 FR 3685, Feb. 2, 1990. Redesignated at 55 FR 39397, Sept. 27, 1990, as amended at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004]
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 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: Postsecondary Enrollment Status of Youth From Rural Areas      

# Resource: Postsecondary Enrollment Status of Youth From Rural Areas

This resource (PDF, 5 pages) examines differences in postsecondary enrollment status by students’ high school locale (city, suburban, town, and rural) in the following three ways:  
                  -  Differences in enrollment status immediately following students’ expected year of high school graduation.   
                  -  Differences in the enrollment status of students 3 years after their expected year of high school graduation, to capture those who delayed entry into postsecondary education.   
                  -  The employment status of students 3 years after their expected year of high school graduation, with a focus on those who were neither enrolled in postsecondary education nor employed.  

**Learn more.**
January 15, 2014 

Monthly generator capacity factor data now 

available by fuel and technology

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Monthly, Tables 6.7a and 6.7b

Capacity factors are an important measure of electric generator usage. In December 2013, EIA 

began publishing tables of monthly capacity factors for 16 different fossil and non-fossil fuel and 

technology combinations in the Electric Power Monthly. 

What is a capacity factor?

Capacity factors describe how intensively a fleet of generators is run. A capacity factor near 

100% means a fleet is operating nearly all of the time. It is the ratio of a fleet's actual generation 

to its maximum potential generation. 

In the past, EIA published annual capacity factors for only a few fuel types, and several 

renewable fuel types were aggregated. With an updated methodology and more detailed 

technology breakout, these new tables allow readers to distinguish between generators having 

different roles within the electric power system. Baseload generators, like nuclear units, typically 

have high capacity factors, while peaking generators like natural gas-fired combustion turbines 

have low capacity factors. 

Monthly data allow users to see seasonal patterns, such as periods of nuclear refueling outages in 

the shoulder seasons (spring and fall) and increased operation of peaking generators during the 
periods of highest electricity demand in the summer months (driven primarily by air conditioning 

use). 

EIA's new tables include capacity factors for individual renewable generating technologies (see 

chart below). Geothermal and waste technologies operate fairly steadily and at high capacity 

factors. Intermittent renewable sources like solar and wind tend to have lower capacity factors, as 

their output varies with the availability of the sun and wind on both a daily and seasonal basis. 

Solar generators—particularly solar thermal—operate at a minimum during winter months, while 

the U.S. wind fleet on average has a period of low production during the late summer. 

Hydroelectric generators show both seasonal and annual variations reflecting changing levels of 

precipitation, river flow, and snowmelt. 

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Monthly, Tables 6.7a and 6.7b

Principal contributor: EIA Staff

Tags: capacity factor , electricity , generation , renewable
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                            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 Encore Acquisition Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, I.
Jon Brumley, 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.


/s/ I. Jon Brumley


I. Jon Brumley
Chief Executive Officer
March 24, 2003
Draft Proposal CB-29 

This concept has been developed by the DOE Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) as a possible code

change proposal to the Commercial provisions of the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code

(IECC).   Interested parties are asked to submit any and all comments on DOE's initial concepts and draft

code change proposals. For instructions on submitting comments, visit:

www.energycodes.gov/development/commercial/codes/iecc/concepts/

Shutoff Damper Controls (CB-29) 

Objective:  Cover only the types of controls that are required for automatic dampers because other

damper requirements are covered elsewhere in the code.

Suggested Code Change Proposal

Revise Section C403.2.4.4 as follows:

C403.2.4.4 Shutoff damper controls. Both outdoor air supply and exhaust openings in HVAC 

equipment and ducts shall be equipped with motorized dampers that will automatically shut when the 

systems or spaces served are not in use. Dampers shall meet the leakage requirements of Section 

C402.4.5. 

Exceptions: 1. Gravity dampers shall be permitted where permitted in Section C402.4.5.in buildings less 

than three stories in height.

2. Gravity dampers shall be permitted for buildings of any height located in Climate Zones 1, 2 

and 3.

3. Gravity dampers shall be permitted for outside air intake or exhaust airflows of 300 cfm (0.14 

m3/s) or less.

Reason:  The provisions in Section C402.4.5 provide the necessary foundation for damper requirements

on openings in the building thermal envelope.  Currently the exceptions in sections C402.4.5 and

Sections C403.2.4.4 do not match, even though they apply to the same damper conditions.  All that

needs to be covered in the HVAC provisions of the code are requirements for automatic controls to shut

the dampers and a requirement of similar dampers in equipment and ducts.    Referring to section

C402.4.5 ensures that requirements for shutoff dampers will be consistent.

Cost Impact:   There is no cost impact associated with this proposed change.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1810 

To revise the boundaries of John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System 

Gasparilla Island Unit in Florida. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 26, 2013 

Mr. RADEL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To revise the boundaries of John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 

Resources System Gasparilla Island Unit in Florida. 

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

3 SECTION 1. JOHN H. CHAFEE COASTAL BARRIER RE4 SOURCES SYSTEM GASPARILLA ISLAND UNIT, 

5 FLORIDA. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—The map subtitled ‘‘Gasparilla Is7 land Unit FL–70P’’ included in the set of maps entitled 

8 ‘‘Coastal Barrier Resources System’’ referred to in section 

9 4(a) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 

10 3503(a)) and relating to the Gasparilla Island Unit in 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1810 IH

1 Florida is hereby replaced by another map relating to the 

2 same unit entitled ‘‘John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Re3 sources System Corrected Gasparilla Unit FL–70/FL– 

4 70P’’, draft dated May 23, 2012. 

5 (b) AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary of the Interior 

6 shall keep the replacement map referred to in subsection 

7 (a) on file and available for inspection in accordance with 

8 section 4(b) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 

9 U.S.C. 3503(b)). 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Vancleave &c. against Beam.

Chancery;

To a bill filodh for the purpose-of setting aside a will, all the devisees are necessary parties; and so is the ex-exutor, uniese he has refused' to act.

. A bill is filed to set aside a will, on the ground that the testator was of unsound mind: defendant pleads that the writing is the last "will *S/-C..*the replicatiqnnegatives the plea ; this issue being referred to a jury, the right to open and conclude the argument to them, - belongs to the defendant, ,who holds the affirmative " ■ — ‘it is his will! #c.

[Sir. Crittenden for Plaintiffs: Mr. C. A. Wickliffe and Mr. Chapeze for-Defendant.]

From the Circuit Court eor Washington Countv.

*April*30.

Judge Underwood

delivered the Opinion of the Oourt.

Beam filed his bill in chancery, to set aside the will of his daughter Margaret, upon the ground that she was not of sound mind. A jury was empannelled, in pursuance of the statute, to try the issue formed. The jury found against the will, and the court decreed accordingly.

The decree must be reversed for want of proper and necessary parties. Yancleave, whose wife was the principal devisee, was the only defendant. The other devisees, although their legacies were inconsiderable in amount, had an equal right to:be heard in support of the will, and an opportunity should have been afforded them. The executor was likewise a necessary party, unless he had refused to act.

It is made a question, which of the parties had the right to open and conclude the argument before the jury. Regarding the issue as formed in this cafee, there is no doubt, under the principles recognized in *Higdon’s heirs*vs. *Higdon’s Devisees, 6 J. J. Mar. 50,*that the right to open and conclude the argument belonged to Vancleave &c. They, for the purpose of forming the issue, pleaded, that the instrument mentioned in the bill was the last will and testament of Margaret Beam, and concluded with a verification. To this plea a replication was filed, denying that the said instrument was the last will and testament of said Margaret. Under this issue, Vandeave &c. held the|affirmative. The burden of proof Say on them, and they were entitled to open and conclude the argument.

*156Upon an ear *j>arte*proceeding — such as a motion to instruct a clerk as

it may be well doubted whether the court ought to have permitted an issue to have been formed, in any other manner than it was. The obvious meaning of the statute was pursued, and it furnishes the best if not the only role upon the subject.

The decree is reversed, with costs, and the cause remanded, with directions to set aside the verdict of the jury, and for proceedings in other respects not inconsistent with this opinion.
§ 1710.115 Final maturity. ( a ) RUS is authorized to make loans and loan guarantees with a final maturity of up to 35 years. The borrower may elect a repayment period for a loan not longer than the expected useful life of the facilities, not to exceed 35 years. Most of the electric facilities financed by RUS have a long useful life, often approximating 35 years. Some facilities, such as load management equipment and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition equipment, have a much shorter useful life due, in part, to obsolescence. Operating loans to finance working capital required for the initial operation of a new system are a separate class of loans and usually have a final maturity of less than 10 years.
( b ) Loans made or guaranteed by RUS for facilities owned by the borrower generally must be repaid with interest within a period, up to 35 years, that approximates the expected useful life of the facilities financed. The expected useful life shall be based on the weighted average of the useful lives that the borrower proposes for the facilities financed by the loan, provided that the proposed useful lives are deemed appropriate by RUS. RUS Form 740c, Cost Estimates and Loan Budget for Electric Borrowers, submitted as part of the loan application must include, as a note, either a statement certifying that at least 90 percent of the loan funds are for facilities that have a useful life of 33 years or longer, or a schedule showing the costs and useful life of those facilities with a useful life of less than 33 years. If the useful life determination proposed by the borrower is not deemed appropriate by RUS, RUS will base expected useful life on an independent evaluation, the manufacturer's estimated useful-life or RUS experience with like-property, as applicable. Final maturities for loans for the implementation of programs for demand side management and energy resource conservation and on and off grid renewable energy sources not owned by the borrower will be determined by RUS. Due to the uncertainty of predictions over an extended period of time, RUS may add up to 2 years to the composite average useful life of the facilities in order to determine final maturity.
( c ) The term for loans made to finance Eligible EE Programs will be determined in accordance with § 1710.408 of this part.
( d ) The Administrator may approve a repayment period longer than the expected useful life of the facilities financed, up to 35 years, if a longer final maturity is required to ensure repayment of the loan and loan security is adequate.
( e ) The final maturity of a loan established pursuant to the provisions of this section shall not be extended as a result of extending loan payments under section 12(a) of the RE Act.
[58 FR 66265, Dec. 20, 1993, as amended at 60 FR 3731, Jan. 19, 1995; 68 FR 54236, May 7, 2003; 78 FR 73366, Dec. 5, 2013]
Piedmont Triad International Airport 243 A Burgess Road, Greensboro, NC 27409 

Office (336) 668-7505, Fax (336) 668-7505 

rwelsh@skylease.aero

March 4, 2013 

DOT Docket Management System 

400 7th Street, S.W., Room PL 401 

Washington, DC 20591-0001 

Reference: DOT Docket No. FAA-2006-26080 

Dear Sirs: 

In accordance with §11.61 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), Sky Lease 1 

petitions the Administrator for an exemption from §121.434(c)(1)(ii) to the extent necessary to 

substitute a qualified and authorized check airman in place of an FAA Inspector to observe a 

qualifying pilot in command (PIC) while that PIC is performing prescribed duties during at least 

one flight that includes a takeoff and a landing when completing initial or upgrade training as 

specified in §121.434. 

The specific section 121.434(c)(1)(ii) – OPERATING EXPERIENCE, OPERATING CYCLES, 

ANDCONSOLIDATION OF KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS reads in pertinent part: 

 “In addition, if a qualifying pilot in command is completing initial or upgrade training specified 

 in FAR 121.424, be observed in the performance of prescribed duties by an FAA Inspector 

 during at least one flight leg which includes a takeoff and a landing.” 

Exemption No. 10231 was granted to Sky Lease I d/b/a TradeWinds Airlines on April 01, 2011. I respectfully 

request an extension of this Exemption to allow Sky Lease I, Inc. (WRNA 256M) to substitute a qualified and 

authorized check airman in those circumstances when an FAA Inspector is unavailable to observe a 

qualifying pilot in command during any operating experience flights §121.434(c)(1)(ii). 

- Sky Lease will nominate qualified check airmen to perform this initial operating experience observation. 

The FAA will approve the qualified check airmen to conduct the observation through a letter of authorization. 

- The requirement of §121.434(c)(1)(ii) will be considered fulfilled if the FAA authorized check airman 

performs the observation. The observation requirement will be documented in the qualifying pilot’s record. 

The authorized check airman would be a check airman other than the one who is conducting the operating 

experience flights of the qualifying pilot. 

The FAA has the authority to observe any pilot any time at the discretion of the Administrator and continues 

to do so regularly. However, the FAA conducts these routine observations on a schedule defined by the 

local office without the requisite burden of specifying a particular flight or flight series necessitated by the 

carrier’s training and service schedule. Relieving FAA Inspectors from §121.434(c)(1)(ii) will allow the FAA 

to focus the efforts on higher priority safety concerns. 

Sincerely, 

R. Todd Welsh 

Director of Operations 

Sky Lease I