alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 249.15 Closeout procedures. ( a ) *General.* State agencies must submit to FNS a final closeout report for the fiscal year on a form prescribed by FNS and on a date specified by FNS.
( b ) *Grant closeout procedures.* When grants to State agencies are terminated, the following procedures shall be followed in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart D and USDA implementing regulations 2 CFR part 400 and part 415. ( 1 ) FNS may disqualify a State agency's participation under the SFMNP, in whole or in part, or take such remedies as may be appropriate, whenever FNS determines that the State agency failed to comply with the conditions prescribed in this part, in its Federal-State Agreement, or in FNS guidelines and Instructions. FNS will promptly notify the State agency in writing of the disqualification together with the effective date.
( 2 ) FNS may terminate a grant when both parties agree that continuation under the SFMNP would not produce beneficial results commensurate with the further expenditure of funds.
( 3 ) Upon termination of a grant, the affected agency may not incur new obligations after the effective date of the disqualification, and must cancel as many outstanding obligations as possible. FNS will allow full credit to the State agency for the Federal share of the noncancellable obligations properly incurred by the State agency prior to disqualification, and the State agency shall do the same for farmers, farmers' markets, roadside stands, and/or CSA programs.
( 4 ) A grant closeout shall not affect the retention period for, or Federal rights of access to, SFMNP records as specified in § 249.23(a). The closeout of a grant does not affect the responsibilities of the State agency regarding property or with respect to any SFMNP income for which the State agency is still accountable.
( 5 ) A final audit is not a required part of the grant closeout and should not be needed unless there are problems with the grant that require attention. If FNS considers a final audit to be necessary, it shall so inform OIG. OIG will be responsible for ensuring that necessary final audits are performed and for any necessary coordination with other Federal cognizant audit agencies or State or local auditors. Audits performed in accordance with § 249.18 may serve as final audits providing such audits meet the needs of requesting agencies. If the grant is closed out without an audit, FNS reserves the right to disallow and recover an appropriate amount after fully considering any recommended disallowances resulting from an audit which may be conducted later.
[71 FR 74630, Dec. 12, 2006, as amended at 81 FR 66497, Sept. 28, 2016]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000795662
<NAME> STERLING CHEMICALS HOLDINGS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           5,609
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  133,399
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     53,720
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               209,018
<PP&E>                                         593,305
<DEPRECIATION>                               (227,540)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 689,684
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          132,085
<BONDS>                                        714,632
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           106
<OTHER-SE>                                   (272,545)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   689,684
<SALES>                                        790,465
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               790,465
<CGS>                                          679,039
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  679,039
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                47,644
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,380
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 50,402
<INCOME-TAX>                                    16,898
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             33,504
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  1,900
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    31,604
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .620
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .620
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit31.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

I,Frederick C. Herbst, certify that:

1. Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Clayton Holdings,Inc.;

2.      Based on my knowledge, thisreport does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to statea material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

3.      Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

4.      The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) [Paragraph omitted inaccordance with SEC transition instructions contained in SEC Release No.34-47986];

(c) Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presentedin this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and

(d) Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.      The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

(a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

(b) Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
| Date: August 14, 2006 |     |                      |
|-----------------------|----------|---------------------------|
|                  |     | /s/ Frederick C. Herbst   |
|                  |     | Frederick C. Herbst       |
|                  | * * | *Chief Financial Officer* |

 

----
Editorial Note on Part 1951
Editorial Notes: 1. Some of the exhibits referenced in this part 1951 are not published in the Code of Federal Regulations. Exhibits are available in any Rural Development office. 2. Nomenclature changes to part 1951 appear at 80 FR 9890-9894, Feb. 24, 2015.

§ 1951.8 Types of payments. ( a ) *Regular payments.* Regular payments are all payments other than extra payments and refunds. Usually, regular payments are derived from farm income, as defined § 1962.4 of subpart A of part 1962 of this chapter. Regular payments also include payments derived from sources such as Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service payments (other than those referred to in paragraph (b) of this section), off-farm income, inheritances, life insurance, mineral royalties and income from mineral leases (see § 1965.17 (c) of subpart A of part 1965 of this chapter), including income from leases or bonuses. Regular payments in the case of a Section 502 RH loan to an applicant involved in a mutual self-help project will include loan funds advanced for the payment of any part of the first and second installments. All payments to the lock box facility(s) by direct payment borrowers are considered regular payments.
( b ) *Extra payments.* Extra payments are payments derived from: ( 1 ) Sale of chattels other than chattels which will be sold to produce farm income or real estate security, including rental or lease of real estate security of a depreciating or depleting nature.
( 2 ) Refinancing of the real estate debt.
( 3 ) Cash proceeds of real property insurance as provided in subpart A of part 1806 of this chapter (RD Instruction 426.1).
( 4 ) A sale of real estate not mortgaged to the Government, pursuant to a condition of loan approval.
( 5 ) Agricultural Conservation Program payments as provided in subpart A of part 1941 of this chapter.
( 6 ) Transactions of a similar nature which reduce the value of security other than chattels which will be sold to produce farm income.
( c ) *Refunds.* Refunds are payments derived from the return of unused loan or grant funds, except that the term “refunds” as used in Form 1940-17, “Promissory Note,” will be construed to mean the return of funds advanced for capital goods, when a loan is made for operating purposes.
[50 FR 45764, Nov. 1, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 4137, Feb. 3, 1986; 53 FR 35717, Sept. 14, 1988; 58 FR 52646, Oct. 12, 1993]
#### Office of Disciplinary Counsel *v.*Cicero.

[Cite as *Disciplinary Counsel v. Cicero*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 1201.]

(No. 96-1432

Submitted and decided July 21, 1998.)

On Application for Reinstatement.

This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent Christopher Thomas Cicero, Attorney Registration No. 0039882, last known address in Columbus, Ohio.

The court coming now to consider its order of May 14,1997, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a period of one year, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED by this court that Christopher Thomas Cicero be, and hereby is, reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication.

For earlier case, see *Disciplinary Counsel v. Cicero*(1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 351, 678 N.E.2d 517.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.

Lundberg Stratton, J., not participating.
**Exhibit 32.1****CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT**Theundersigned officer of **Standard Aero Holdings, Inc.**herebycertifies pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, to suchofficer’s knowledge that: 1. the Amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Standard AeroHoldings, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 (the“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents,in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Standard Aero Holdings, Inc.     Date:May 12, 2006           By: /s/ David Shaw      Name: David Shaw  Title: Chief Executive Officer     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether madebefore or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2388 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2388

  To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to take certain Federal 
   lands located in El Dorado County, California, into trust for the 
  benefit of the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 14, 2013

Mr. McClintock introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to take certain Federal 
   lands located in El Dorado County, California, into trust for the 
  benefit of the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. LAND INTO TRUST FOR THE SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND OF MIWOK 
              INDIANS.

    (a) In General.--As soon as practicable after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall take the 
land described in subsection (b) into trust for the benefit of the 
Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, subject to valid existing rights 
and management agreements related to easements and rights-of-way.
    (b) Land Description.--The land to be taken into trust pursuant to 
subsection (a) is the approximately 40.852 acres of Federal land under 
the administrative jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management 
identified as ``Conveyance boundary'' on the map titled ``Shingle 
Springs Land Conveyance/Draft'' and dated June 7, 2012, including 
improvements and appurtenances thereto.
    (c) Gaming.--Class II and class III gaming under the Indian Gaming 
Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) shall not be permitted at any 
time on the land taken into trust pursuant to subsection (a).
                                 <all>
```
#### § 29.1131 Rule 25.

Any lot of tobacco containing 10 percent or less of oxidized tobacco, except as provided in rule 12, shall be designated by the combination symbols “PO,” “XO,” or “BO.” Crude or green tobacco containing 10 percent or less of oxidized shall be grade “N2.”
Exhibit 32.1 

Section 1350 Certification

The following statement is provided by theundersigned to accompany the Form 10-K of RFMC Willowbridge Fund, L.P. pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350). Theundersigned certifies that the foregoing Report on Form 10-K fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15U.S.C. 78m) and that the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents,in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofRFMC Willowbridge Fund, L.P.  

September 17, 2008  

/s/ Robert L. Lerner                                     Robert L. LernerPresident, Principal Executive Officer andPrincipal Financial OfficerRuvane Fund Management Corporation,the general partner ofRFMC Willowbridge Fund, L.P.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

Each of the undersignedhereby certifies, for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title18 of the United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his capacity as an officer ofBidz.com, Inc. (“Bidz.com”), that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Reportof Bidz.com on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operation ofBidz.com.

 
| Date:  | August 14, 2006 | By     |   | /s/ David  Zinberg       |   |
|--------|-----------------|--------|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|   |            |   |   | David Zinberg            |   |
|   |            |   |   | Chief Executive  Officer |   |
|   |            |   |   |                     |   |
| Date:  | August 14, 2006 | By     |   | /s/ Lawrence  Kong       |   |
|   |            |   |   | Lawrence Kong            |   |
|   |            |   |   | Chief Financial  Officer |   |

 

1

----
Exhibit 10.6(b)

                Written description of objectives for 2004 under
                ------------------------------------------------
          the Hecla Mining Company Short-Term Performance Payment Plan
          ------------------------------------------------------------

         The following is a description of certain terms of the Hecla Mining
Company (the "Company") Short-Term Performance Payment Plan (the "Plan")
provided pursuant to paragraph (b)(10)(iii) of Item 601 of Regulation S-K, which
requires a written description of material terms and conditions of a
compensatory plan not contained in a formal document.

         The Board of Directors, based on recommendations of the Company's
senior management and the Compensation Committee, established targeted
quantitative and qualitative goals for corporate performance. For 2004,
corporate performance quantitative goals include total gold and silver
production, production costs per ounce for silver and gold, cost containment,
environmental costs, capital expenditures and resource development goals.
Corporate qualitative goals include, among other goals, a successful investor
relations program, acquisitions, positive stock performance and completion of a
preferred stock exchange.

         In addition to quantitative and qualitative goals for corporate
performance, the Board of Directors, based on recommendations of the Company's
senior management and the Compensation Committee, established targeted
quantitative and qualitative goals for individual performance for each executive
officer other than the Chief Executive Officer.

         The Chief Executive Officer's performance payment for 2004 will be
based solely on corporate performance. The other executive officers' performance
payments will be based 60% upon corporate performance with 40% based upon
individual performance.

         For 2004, a performance payment pool was targeted based on the annual
cash salary equal to 60% for the Chief Executive Officer and 40% for each Vice
President.






                                      -10-
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Emilia Krauss, Respondent, v. Marcel Wagner Glove Co. et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Cooke, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed March 22, 1968, which reversed the Referee’s decision and found that claimant sustained a causally related occupational disease. Claimant sewed leather gloves on employer’s electric machine 7% to 8 hours a day for four years, an operation which required constant starting and stopping of the machine approximately once a minute, the former being accomplished by applying pressure with her right foot on a pedal. In December, 1965 pain was experienced in her right calf, same becoming more pronounced in the next few months after a few hours of machine work, and on February 16, 1966 the suffering became severe, a physician was called to her home and employment ceased. Initially identified as a phlebitis but, when pain radiated down the entire right leg eight days later, a diagnosis of sciatic neuritis of the right leg causally related to claimant’s occupation was made. An occupational disease is an ailment which is the result of a distinctive feature of the kind of work performed by claimant and others similarly employed *(Matter of Paider*v. *Park East Movers,*19 N Y 2d 373, 380). Here, the distinctive feature of claimant’s work, common to all jobs of this type, was the persistent repetition of pressure required to be applied to the pedal of the machine to start it and there was substantial medical evidence linking and causally relating this characteristic and the sciatic neuritis *(Matter of Harman*v. *Republic Aviation Corp.,*298 N. Y. 285, 288; *Matter of Roettinger*v. *Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.,*17 A D 2d 76, affd. 13 N Y 2d 1102; cf. *Matter of Goyer*v. *Fred K. Blanchard, Inc.,*25 A D 2d 892; *Matter of Elkin*v. *D. & J. Cleaners,*25 A D 2d 790; *Matter of Moore*v. *Ford Motor Co.,*9 A D 2d 165; *Matter of Preusser*v. *Allegheny Ludlum Steel Corp.,*4 A D 2d 727, affd. 4 N Y 2d 773; *Matter of Briggs*v. *Hope’s Windows,*284 App. Div. 1077; *Matter of Newirth*v. *La Pidus Printing & Lithographing Co.,*273 App. Div. 835). Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Cooke, JJ., concur in memorandum by Cooke, J.
#### Steven C. Spencer, appellant, v. Travelers Insurance Company and Andrea Martinez de Ybarra, appellees.

Gen. No. 37,472.

Opinion filed October 24, 1934.

Rehearing denied November 15, 1934.

D. P. Buzane, N. Berkos, G. Reilly and S. C. Spencer, for appellant; S. C. Spencer, of counsel. Hubbard, Baker & Rice, for appellees.

Mr. Justice Wilson

delivered the opinion of the court.
#### U. S. Plywood, Division of Champion International Corp., Respondent, v Irving Kobelowsky et al., Appellants.

Appeal by defendants from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered January 8, 1980, which, after a nonjury trial, held them personally liable to plaintiff, as guarantors of a corporate debt, in the total sum of $21,863.08. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The trial court improperly permitted plaintiff to introduce hearsay testimony to support its claim that it was the successor to the obligee corporation named in the guarantee. Damiani, J. P., Gibbons, Gulotta and Weinstein, JJ., concur.