alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
52.202-1 Definitions.

As prescribed in 2.201 , insert the following clause:

Definitions (Jun 2020)

When a solicitation provision or contract clause uses a word or term that is defined in the Federal

Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the word or term has the same meaning as the definition in FAR 2.101

in effect at the time the solicitation was issued, unless-

(a) The solicitation, or amended solicitation, provides a different definition;

(b) The contracting parties agree to a different definition;

(c) The part, subpart, or section of the FAR where the provision or clause is prescribed provides a

different meaning; 

(d) The word or term is defined in FAR part 31, for use in the cost principles and procedures; or

(e) The word or term defines an acquisition-related threshold, and if the threshold is adjusted for

inflation as set forth in FAR 1.109(a), then the changed threshold applies throughout the remaining

term of the contract, unless there is a subsequent threshold adjustment; see FAR 1.109(d).

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 52.202 [Reserved]
47.305-9 Commodity description and freight

classification.

(a) Generally, the freight rate for supplies is based on the rating applicable to the freight

classification description published in the National Motor Freight Classification (NMFC) (for

carriers) and the Uniform Freight Classification (UFC) (for rail) filed with Federal and State

regulatory bodies. Therefore, the contracting officer shall show in the solicitation a complete

description of the commodity to be acquired and of packing requirements to determine proper

transportation charges for the evaluation of offers. If supplies cannot be properly classified through

reference to freight classification tariffs or if doubt exists, the contracting officer shall obtain the

applicable freight classification from the transportation office. In some situations prospective

contractors have established an official freight classification description that can be applied.

(b)

(1) When the supplies being acquired are new to the supply system, nonstandard, or modifications of

previously shipped items, and different freight classifications may apply, the contracting officer shall

insert in solicitations the provision at 52.247-53, Freight Classification Description.

(2) The contracting officer shall alert the transportation officer to the possibility of negotiations for

appropriate freight classification ratings and reasonable transportation rates.

(c) The solicitation shall contain adequate descriptions of explosives and other dangerous supplies

according to-

(1) The regular freight classification; and

(2) The hazardous material description and hazard class as shown in 49 CFR172.101.

(d) The contracting officer shall furnish the freight classification information developed in

47.305-9(a), (b), and (c) of this section to the contract administration office.

Parent topic: 47.305 Solicitation provisions, contract clauses, and transportation factors.
#### Helen Doboshinski, Respondent, v Fuji Bank, Ltd., Appellant.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 26, 1979, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Order reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Plaintiff seeks damages for personal injuries she allegedly sustained when she tripped over office machinery wires on the defendant’s premises while working there. Special Term found that there existed ^issues of fact regarding the nature of the relationship between the parties”. We disagree. Plaintiff sought temporary office employment through City-Wide Temporary Services, Inc., and was assigned *538to the defendant to work in its accounting department. She was injured while engaged there. She successfully claimed workers’ compensation benefits through City-Wide, but nevertheless commenced suit against defendant for damages as a result of the accident. Defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that it was plaintiff’s special employer, and that the workers’ compensation claim was plaintiff’s exclusive remedy. In a factually similar case, in part relied upon by Special Term, it was concluded, *inter alia,*that the defendant was the plaintiff’s special employer, wherefore the former was held to be shielded as a matter of law from a suit brought by the latter by virtue of the plaintiff’s election to receive workers’ compensation from her general employer *(Mitchell v Adam Hat Stores,*279 App Div 877). Although a trial was held in that case, one is not indispensable, where, as in the case at bar, the proof before the court on a motion for summary judgment establishes as a matter of law the existence of a special employment relationship between the plaintiff and defendant. Here, except for the fact that plaintiff was compensated for her work by checks drawn upon City-Wide, all of the principal concomitants of an employee/employer relationship between herself and the defendant are extant. Plaintiff was directed in her work solely by the defendant, and the record (which includes a transcript of her deposition) makes clear her understanding that she was to look to the defendant as her employer, albeit only as a temporary employer. (See *Nyholm v Cauldwell-Wingate Co.,*12 AD2d 802; cf. *Paulsen v Kahn,*248 App Div 744; *Gallo v Higgins Erections & Haulers,*45 AD2d 790.) The opposing papers being legally insufficient to raise a dispute as to any of the material facts, the only inference which may be reasonably drawn therefrom is that the defendant was, at the operative time, the special employer of the plaintiff (cf. *Gerard v Inglese,*11 AD2d 381). Accordingly, summary judgment dismissing the complaint was improvidently withheld (see *Kazmercik v Goble,*8 AD2d 820; cf. *Ehrlich v American Moninger Greenhouse Mfg. Corp., 26*NY2d 255; *Banasik v Reed Prentice Div. of Package Mach. Co.,*34 AD2d 746). Titone, J. P., Lazer, Gulotta and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1







                                                               EXHIBIT 21.1

                           SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

                                                STATE OR OTHER JURISDICTION OF
NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                              INCORPORATION OR ORGANIZATION

PictureTel Securities Corporation               Massachusetts

PictureTel International Corporation            Delaware

PictureTel Technology Corporation               Delaware

PictureTel Service Corporation                  Delaware

PicTel Videoconferencing Systems Corporation    Delaware

PictureTel Australia Pty. Ltd.                  Australia

PictureTel International Ltda.                  Brazil

PictureTel GmbH                                 Germany

PictureTel Italy S.r.l.                         Italy

PictureTel Japan, KK.                           Japan

PictureTel Mexico S.A. de C.V.                  Mexico

PictureTel Service Ltd. Pte.                    Singapore

PictureTel Scandinavia AB                       Sweden

PictureTel (Schweiz) AG                         Switzerland

PictureTel UK Limited                           United Kingdom

PictureTel FSC, Ltd.                            United States Virgin Islands



         All the subsidiaries are wholly owned (except for directors' qualifying
shares in certain countries), either directly or indirectly, by the company and
may do business under their own name as well as the name PictureTel Corporation



                                      ~19~
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 1 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 2 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 3 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 4 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 5 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 6 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 7 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 8 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 9 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 10 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 11 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 12 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 13 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 14 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 15 of 16
Case 2:06-cr-00169-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 16 of 16
Case 2:06-cv-00620-WKW-CSC Document 1 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 1 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00620-WKW-CSC Document 1 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 2 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00620-WKW-CSC Document 1 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 3 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00620-WKW-CSC Document 1 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 4 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00620-WKW-CSC Document 1 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 5 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00620-WKW-CSC Document 1 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 6 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00620-WKW-CSC Document 1 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 7 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00620-WKW-CSC Document 1 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 8 of 8
#### § 51.1831 Fairly firm.

*Fairly firm* means that the flesh may be slightly soft but is not bruised or badly puffy, and that the skin has not become seriously separated from the flesh of the tangerine.
----

**ANNUAL      STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

**Pooling      and Servicing Agreement dated December 1, 2006 (the "Pooling and Servicing      Agreement") by and among Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp.,      as depositor, Keycorp Real Estate Capital Markets, Inc., as master servicer,      Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee and LNR Partners as special servicer (the      "Special Servicer")**

**CSMC      2006-C4**

| 1.   | I                have reviewed the activities performed by the Special Servicer under                the                Pooling and Servicing Agreement during the period ending the end                of the                fiscal year 2006 (the “Reporting                Period”)                and the Special Servicer’s performance under the Pooling and Servicing                Agreement has been made under my supervision;                and |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | To                the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer                has                fulfilled its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement                in all                material respects throughout the Reporting Period. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
**Exhibit 31**

 

**WAMU ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORP.**

** **

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE**

 

I, Thomas G. Lehmann, certify that:

 

1.         I have reviewed this report on Form 10–K and all reports on Form 10–D required to be filed in respect of theperiod covered by this report on Form 10–K of WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-AR15 Trust (the ‘‘Exchange Act periodic reports’’);

 

2.         Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement ofa  material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.         Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form10–D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.         Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB,and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement(s) in all material respects; and

 

5.         All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their relatedattestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a–18 and 15d–18 have been included as anexhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10–K. 

 

Date:  March 15, 2007

 

  /s/ Thomas G. Lehmann_________Name:  Thomas G. LehmannTitle:    President
#

#

#

Olympia

 ̈§¦5

Lacey

DuPont

Anderson 

Island

Hartstene

Island

Squaxin Island

Johnson

 Point

P

U

G

E

T

S

O

U

N

D

#

#

#

Olympia

 ̈§¦5

Lacey

DuPont

Anderson 

Island

Hartstene

Island

Squaxin Island

Johnson

 Point

P

U

G

E

T

S

O

U

N

D

National Wetland Inventory of

Regional Estuarine Wetlands

Figure 3.2-3

Chapter 3 Affected Environment 3-15

Nisqually NWR Draft CCP/EIS

Source: USFWS, 2000; Ducks Unlimited, 1999; EDAW, 2002

N

1:150,000

P:\0e01401 Nisqually\GIS\mxd\Figure3.2-3.mxd

012 0.5

Miles

Wetland Type

Estuarine Intertidal Aquatic Bed

Estuarine Intertidal Beach/Bar

Estuarine Intertidal Open Water

Estuarine Intertidal Flat

Estuarine Intertidal Emergent

Estuarine Intertidal Unconsolidated Shore

Estuarine Subtidal Open Water

Legend

Approved Nisqually NWR Boundary

Major Road

Railroad
#### Benno Scheidegger, Respondent, v. Alpine Sporting Goods Co., Inc., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. Head Ski Co., Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. (Action No. 1.) Benno Scheidegger, Respondent, v. Head Ski Co., Inc., Respondent. (Action No. 2.)

Orders of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated December 30,1966 and January 12, 1967, reversed, with one bill of $10 costs and disbursements payable to plaintiff by defendant and third-party plaintiff-appellant and (1) the latter’s motion to consolidate Actions Nos. 1 and 2 granted; and consolidation directed upon the following conditions: (a) the consolidated action shall retain the index and calendar numbers assigned to Action No. 1; (b) the action by plaintiff against the defendant and third-party plaintiff-appellant shall be tried first by the court without a jury; thereafter a jury shall try the issues remaining to be tried in Action No. 2 and the issues remaining to be tried, if any, in the third-party and fourth-party actions in Action No. 1; (e) plaintiff shall have the right to open and close before the jury; and (d) the consolidated action shall be placed on the September 1967 Calendar for trial and all pretrial proceedings shall be completed before September 1, 1967; and (2) cross motion of third-party defendant-respondent granted to the extent of permitting it to file a jury demand, *nunc pro tu/nc,*in Action No. 1. In our opinion, the denial of consolidation and the failure to permit the third-party defendant-respondent to file a jury demand *nunc pro tunc*constituted an improvident exercise of discretion. TJghetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 2 Filed 12/09/20 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

OFFICE OF RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT 

WESTERN ECOLOGY DIVISION 

200 S.W. 35TH STREET, CORVALLIS, OR 97333

September xx, 2014

«Address_1» «Address_2»

«City_», «State_» «Zip»

«GreetingLine»

In early October, we sent a letter to your address that asked for a member of your household to 

complete a survey about issues related to protecting salmon and steelhead fish populations in the 

Willamette basin. To the best of our knowledge, if has not yet been returned.

We are writing to you again because of the importance that your household’s completed survey has for 

helping our project to get accurate results. It is only by hearing from nearly everyone in the sample that 

we can be sure that the results truly represent the opinions of Oregon residents who live and work in 

different parts of the state and have different backgrounds and views. Therefore, we hope that you or 

somebody in your household who is 18 years or older will fill out and return the survey soon.

As mentioned before, the questions should take about 20 – 30 minutes to complete. Your responses are 

voluntary and will be kept confidential. Your answers will never be associated with your name or 

mailing address. If you have any questions about this survey, please contact Michael Papenfus, the 

study director, by telephone at 1-800-754-xxxx or by email at xxxxxxx@epa.gov. He will be happy to help 

with any questions or concerns you may have.

We hope that you enjoy the survey.

Sincerely,

Dr. Michael Papenfus

United States Environmental Protection Agency
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76036-76037]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30545]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-72,892]


Bostik, Inc. Formerly Known as ATO Findley Marshall, MI; Amended 
Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment 
Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended 
(``Act''), 19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor issued a 
Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance 
on December 28, 2009, applicable to workers of Bostik, Inc., a 
subsidiary of Elf Aquitaine, Marshall, Michigan. The notice was 
published in the Federal Register on February 16, 2010 (75 FR 7033).
    At the request of the State Agency, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged 
in the production of adhesives and sealants.
    New information shows that Bostik, Inc. was formerly known as ATO

[[Page 76037]]

Findley. Some workers separated from employment at Bostik, Inc. had 
their wages reported under a separate unemployment insurance (UI) tax 
account under the name ATO Findley.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to 
properly reflect this matter.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of the subject firm who were adversely affected by a shift in 
the production of adhesives and sealants to the United Kingdom.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-73,310 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of Bostik, Inc., formerly known as ATO Findley, 
Marshall, Michigan, who became totally or partially separated from 
employment on or after November 18, 2008, through December 28, 2011, 
and all workers in the group threatened with total or partial 
separation from employment on date of certification through two 
years from the date of certification, are eligible to apply for 
adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act 
of 1974, as amended.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 18th day of November 2010.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2010-30545 Filed 12-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
52.241-5 Contractor’s Facilities.

As prescribed in 41.501(c)(4), insert a clause substantially the same as the following:

Contractor’s Facilities (Feb 1995)

(a) The Contractor, at its expense, unless otherwise provided for in this contract, shall furnish,

install, operate, and maintain all facilities required to furnish service hereunder, and measure such

service at the point of delivery specified in the Service Specifications. Titleto all such facilities shall

remain with the Contractor and the Contractor shall be responsible for loss or damage to such

facilities, except that the Government shall be responsible to the extent that loss or damage has

been caused by the Government’s negligent acts or omissions.

(b) Notwithstanding any terms expressed in this clause, the Contractor shall obtain approval from

the Contracting Officer prior to any equipment installation, construction, or removal. The

Government hereby grants to the Contractor, free of any rental or similar charge, but subject to the

limitations specified in this contract, a revocable permit or license to enter the service location for

any proper purpose under this contract. This permit or license includes use of the site or sites

agreed upon by the parties hereto for the installation, operation, maintenance, and repair of the

facilities of the Contractor required to be located upon Government premises. All applicable taxes

and other charges in connection therewith, together with all liability of the Contractor in

construction, operation, maintenance and repair of such facilities, shall be the obligation of the

Contractor.

(c) Authorized representatives of the Contractor will be allowed access to the facilities on

Government premises at reasonable times to perform the obligations of the Contractor regarding

such facilities. It is expressly understood that the Government may limit or restrict the right of

access herein granted in any manner considered necessary (e.g., national security, public safety).

(d) Unless otherwise specified in this contract, the Contractor shall, at its expense, remove such

facilities and restore Government premises to their original condition as near as practicable within a

reasonable time after the Government terminates this contract. In the event such termination of this

contract is due to the fault of the Contractor, such facilities may be retained in place at the option of

the Government for a reasonable time while the Government attempts to obtain service elsewhere

comparable to that provided for hereunder.

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 52.241 Utility Services Provisions and Clauses.
|  | Download Aggressive Driving Brochure in PDF- Ad Slicks  Brochure (ENG)Brochure (ESP)
- Business Reply Card (ENG)  Business Reply Card (ESP)Logo Sheet/Stationary
- Logos Only  Single Sheet Elements
  |
|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
1 

### Wiley, Adina

From: Weiler, Jeff <Jeff.Weiler@energytransfer.com>

Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 10:48 AM

To: Wiley, Adina

Cc: Cowan, Clint

Subject: RE: GHG Permitting Authority Letter

Since our draft permit for the Lone Star Mont Belvieu FRAC III plant is currently in public notice and that will end April 7,

I see no reason to switch permitting authority at this time to the TCEQ. I would prefer to complete the permit issuance

process through the EPA.

Regards,

Jeff Weiler

Sr. Environmental Manager

From: Wiley, Adina [mailto:Wiley.Adina@epa.gov]

Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:03 PM

To: Weiler, Jeff

Subject: GHG Permitting Authority Letter



### Sending on behalf of Jeff Robinson.

Adina R. Wiley, Environmental Engineer

U.S. EPA Region 6

Air Permits Section (6PD

‐ R)

1445 Ross Ave.

Dallas, TX 75202

(214) 665

‐ 2115

wiley.adina@epa.gov

POSITIONS or VIEWS EXPRESSED DO NOT REPRESENT OFFICIAL EPA POLICY

Private and confidential as detailed here . If you cannot access hyperli nk, please e-mail sender.