alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2866 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2866

            To suspend temporarily the duty on Thidiazuron.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 19, 2006

   Mr. Burr introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To suspend temporarily the duty on Thidiazuron.

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

SECTION 1. THIDIAZURON.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.10.81       N-Phenyl-N-(1,2,3- Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         thiadiazol-5-                                                      31/2009
                         yl)urea
                         (Thidiazuron) CAS
                         No. 51707-55-2),
                         whether or not
                         mixed with
                         application
                         adjuvants
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2934.99.15 or
                         3808.30.15)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          37,264
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,197,149
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,059,147
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,402,960
<PP&E>                                         292,984
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,624,333
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,518,489
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,128,370
<COMMON>                                       143,521
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,624,333
<SALES>                                      3,025,872
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,025,872
<CGS>                                        2,143,367
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,143,367
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,804,955
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             621,427
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,049,106)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.073)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.073)
        

</TABLE>
#### § 51.61 Congressional interest in contracts.

No member of, or delegate to Congress, or Resident Commissioner, shall be admitted to any share or part of any contract provided for in the regulations in this subpart or to any benefit that may arise therefrom, but this provision shall not be construed to extend to such contract if made with a corporation for its general benefit, and shall not extend to any benefits that may accrue from the contract to a member of, or delegate to Congress, or a Resident Commissioner in his capacity as a farmer.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 238 (Monday, December 13, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 77745]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30567]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

48 CFR Parts 3, 5, 7, and 10

[FAC 2005-47; Item VII; Docket 2010-0110, Sequence 1]


Federal Acquisition Regulation; Technical Amendments

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration 
(GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document makes amendments to the Federal Acquisition 
Regulation (FAR) in order to make editorial changes.

DATES: Effective Date: December 13, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The FAR Secretariat, 1275 First St., 
NE., Washington, DC 20417, (202) 501-4755, for information pertaining 
to status or publication schedules. Please cite FAC 2005-47, Technical 
Amendments.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document makes amendments to the 
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) in 48 CFR parts 3, 5, 7, and 10 
for purposes of updating.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 3, 5, 7, and 10

    Government procurement.

    Dated: November 24, 2010.
Millisa Gary,
Acting Director, Acquisition Policy Division.

0
Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA amend 48 CFR parts 3, 5, 7, and 10 as set 
forth below:
0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 3, 5, 7, and 10 continues to 
read as follows:

    Authority:  40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 42 
U.S.C. 2473(c).

PART 3--IMPROPER BUSINESS PRACTICES AND PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF 
INTEREST


3.104-1  [Amended]

0
2. Amend section 3.104-1 by removing from the definition ``Federal 
agency procurement,'' in the second sentence, the word ``innovative'' 
and adding the word ``innovation'' in its place.

PART 5--PUBLICIZING CONTRACT ACTIONS


5.601  [Amended]

0
3. Amend section 5.601 by removing from paragraphs (a), (b)(1), and 
(b)(2) ``http://www.contractdirectory.gov'' and adding ``http://
www.contractdirectory.gov/contractdirectory/'' in its place.

PART 7--ACQUISITION PLANNING


7.105  [Amended]

0
4. Amend section 7.105 by removing from paragraph (b)(1), in the second 
sentence, ``http://www.contractdirectory.gov'' and adding ``http://
www.contractdirectory.gov/contractdirectory/'' in its place.

PART 10--MARKET RESEARCH


10.002  [Amended]

0
5. Amend section 10.002 by removing from paragraph (b)(2)(iv) ``http://www.contractdirectory.gov'' and adding ``http://
www.contractdirectory.gov/contractdirectory/'' in its place.

[FR Doc. 2010-30567 Filed 12-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
Exhibit 32.1    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the annual report of Greenleaf Forest Products, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michelle Maresova, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify 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.   Date: August 3, 2007 /s/ Michelle Maresova Michelle Maresova Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
§ 42.133 Portion of production acceptance criteria. ( a ) The acceptability of a portion of production is determined by comparing the calculated CuSum value with the acceptance limit (“L”) for the specified AQL.
( b ) A portion of production is acceptable if the CuSum value, calculated from the subgroup representing that portion, is equal to or less than the acceptance limit (“L”) for all classes of defects.
( c ) A portion of production is rejected if the CuSum value, calculated from the subgroup representing that portion, exceeds the acceptance limit (“L”) for one or more classes of defects.
Exhibit
23.2





Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm





We have
issued our report dated March 7, 2007, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of
Theragenics Corporationon
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008. We hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statements of
Theragenics Corporation on Form S-8, file numbers 33-40737, 333-15313,
333-40653, 333-64801, 333-48136 and 333-136640, and on Form S-3, file
numbers 333-127551 and 333-143839.







/s/ GRANT
THORNTON LLP




Atlanta,
Georgia


March 12,
2009
INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT

PMN: 14

- 0198

Focus Ready Draft 1/23/2014

PV (kg/yr): ENGINEER: Avcin \ AH

SUBMITTER:14/2014):

Same as . Analogs:

. Related Cases and Misc SAT Info:

Migration to groundwater: Anion moderate; Cation moderate

PBT rating: P1B1T1 P1B1T1 for anion, cation.

Health: 1

- 2 Drinking Water, Inhalation

Eco: 3 Water ( All releases to water with a CC = 4 ppb), XB Testing (Testing

desired)OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 2

- 3D

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS:

Generated by the 09/30/2013 version of ChemSTEER.

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS:

None.

EXPOSURE

- BASED REVIEW: NoINITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT

PMN: 14

- 0198

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide

with daily releases from the other sources to the same medium.INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT

PMN: 14

- 0198

ENVIRONMENTAL REL EASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide

with daily releases from the other sources to the same medium.CALL BY: Ariel Hou

CALL TO:

Organization:

Date:

Time:

PMN: 14

- 0198 Organization: ERG for CEB

Phone:

Concerning what TSCA CBI? MEMORANDUM of CBI TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
#### § 58.410 Paraffining room.

When applicable for rind cheese, a separate room or compartment should be provided for paraffining and boxing the cheese. The room shall be of adequate size and the temperature maintained near the temperature of the drying room to avoid sweating of the cheese prior to paraffining.
#### Martin v. The State.

Appeal from Montgomery City Court.

Tried before the Hon. A. D. Sayre.

No counsel marked as appearing for appellant.

William C. Fitts, Attorney-General, for the State.

The appellant was indicted, tried and convicted of murder, and sentenced to the penitentiary for life. The only question presented on this appeal is the overruling of the defendant’s motion in arrest of judgment. The facts pertaining' to this motion are substantially the same as contained in the case of *Hurd v. The State, ante,*p. 440, and the judgment of conviction is affirmed on the authority of that case.

Opinion by

McClellan, J.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Jacque J. Senecal, Appellant, v Allied Bendix et al., Respondents. Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

[816 NYS2d 213]

Crew III, J.P.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed September 7, 2004, which ruled that claimant did not sustain a causally related consequential injury and denied his claim for workers’ compensation benefits.

Claimant sustained a work-related injury to his left shoulder in 1991 and received workers’ compensation benefits. Claimant underwent surgery on this shoulder in 1992 and retired from his employment in 1995. In January 2002, claimant sought treatment for pain he purportedly was experiencing in his right shoulder, contending that he had sustained a consequential injury to his right shoulder as a result of favoring his left shoulder following the 1992 surgery thereon. Liability for the claim thereafter was shifted to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases and, following hearings, a workers’ compensation law judge amended the claim to establish a causally related consequential injury to claimant’s right shoulder. A panel of the Workers’ Compensation Board subsequently reversed, prompting this appeal by claimant.

We affirm. Claimant testified that he first experienced pain in his right shoulder in 1992 following the surgery on his left shoulder and his ensuing return to work, which he attributed to the fact that he had to favor his left shoulder in order to perform tasks related to his then employment. That, however, was not the history that claimant related to Charles Kalman, the physician who examined claimant on behalf of the Special Fund. Kalman testified that claimant indicated that he developed right shoulder pain spontaneously in January 2002. In any event, the record makes clear that regardless of the history related by claimant, he did not seek medical treatment for the pain in his right shoulder until 2002—11 years after the injury to his left shoulder, 10 years after the surgery thereon and almost seven years after he retired. Additionally, Kalman opined that the degenerative changes depicted on the various diagnostic studies *1233of claimant’s right shoulder were consistent with the natural aging process, and claimant’s treating physician acknowledged that the tendinitis and arthritis observed on claimant’s MRI could have developed over time and would not be considered unusual findings in a man claimant’s age. Under such circumstances, we cannot say that the Board erred in concluding that claimant did not suffer a causally related consequential injury to his right shoulder. As the Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole, it will not be disturbed *(compare Matter of Johnson v OCM BOCES,*13 AD3d 707 [2004]). In light of this conclusion, we need not address the alternate ground for reversal invoked by the Board—namely, that the workers’ compensation carrier would have been severely prejudiced by the lack of notice of the asserted consequential injury.

Spain, Carpinello, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
#### § 51.1305 Unclassified.

“Unclassified” consists of pears which have not been classified in accordance with any of the foregoing grades. The term “unclassified” is not a grade within the meaning of these standards, but is provided as a designation to show that no grade has been applied to the lot.
#### FLAHERTY, Respondent, v. MANHATTAN TRANSIT CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 8, 1906.)

Action by William H. Plaherty against the Manhattan Transit Company.

No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Wachovia
                  Securities8739
                  Research Drive, URP4Charlotte,
                  NC 28288








**1123
        SERVICER’S CERTIFICATE**
 
 
 Reference
        is hereby made to that certain Servicing
        Agreement dated as of
        December 22, 2005, by and among UBS Real Estate Investments, Inc., as Note
        A1
        Noteholder, Note A2 Noteholder, Note A3 Noteholder, Note A4 Noteholder and
        Wachovia Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer and Special Servicer,
        with respect to 1155 Avenue of the Americas (the "Agreement"). Capitalized
        terms
        used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the
        Agreement.
 
 Pursuant
        to Section 3.14 of this Agreement, Timothy Ryan and Marilyn Addison, Managing
        Director of Customer Relationship Management and Director of Compliance Third
        Party Oversight do hereby certify that:
 
 1.
            A
                review of the activities of the Master Servicer, during the period
                from
                January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006, and of its performance per
                the
                Agreement during such period has been made under our supervision;
                and 
 2.
            To
                the best of our knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer,
                has
                fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material
                respects throughout the period January 1, 2006, through December
                31, 2006; 
 
 IN
        WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Certificate as of the
        10 th day of
        March 2007.
 
 
 /s/
        Timothy S. Ryan    /s/
        Marilyn Addison
 Timothy
        S. Ryan, Managing Director  Marilyn Addison,
        Director
 Wachovia
        Bank National Association Wachovia Bank
        National Association
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 32 Filed 04/21/05 Page 1 of 5
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 32 Filed 04/21/05 Page 2 of 5
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 32 Filed 04/21/05 Page 3 of 5
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 32 Filed 04/21/05 Page 4 of 5
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 32 Filed 04/21/05 Page 5 of 5
1 Fallon, Gail
From: Jay Baker <jbaker@utah.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 10:33 AM To: Fallon, Gail Cc: Dobrahner, Jaslyn Subject: Re: Question on SIP Section XX.D.6 Gail, You are correct. The reference should be to the May 13, 2015 Staff Review. Thanks,

Jay Baker | Environmental Scientist Phone: 801.536.4015

Right-click here to download pictures. To help pro tect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic down load of this picture from the Internet.

195 North 1950 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116 Website | Blog | Twitter | Facebook On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Fallon, Gail < fallon.gail@epa.gov > wrote: Hi Jay, There’s a footnote in the submittal (pdf p. 10 of a ttached) copied below that appears to have a typo. Just wanted to confirm this with you. Should the footnot e actually read, “Staff Review 2008 PM BART Determination and Recommended Alternative to BART f or NOx, May 13, 2015”?

Thanks!2 Gail Fallon Environmental Engineer Air Quality Planning Unit US EPA, Region 8 Denver, CO (303) 312-6281
47.502 Policy.

(a) The policy of the United States regarding the use of U.S.-flag vessels is stated in the following

acts:

(1) The Cargo Preference Act of 1904 (10 U.S.C. 2631), which requires the Department of Defense to

use only U.S.-flag vessels for ocean transportation of supplies for the Army, Navy, Air Force, or

Marine Corps unless those vessels are not available at fair and reasonable rates.

(2) The Merchant Marine Act of 1936 (46 U.S.C. 1101), which declares it is the policy of the United

States to foster the development and encourage the maintenance of its merchant marine.

(3) The Cargo Preference Act of 1954 (46 U.S.C. 1241(b), which is Section 901(b) of the Merchant

Marine Act). Under this Act, Government agencies acquiring, either within or outside the United

States, supplies that may require ocean transportation shall ensure that at least 50 percent of the

gross tonnage of these supplies (computed separately for dry bulk carriers, dry cargo liners, and

tankers) is transported on privately owned U.S.-flag commercial vessels to the extent that such

vessels are available at rates that are fair and reasonable for U.S.-flag commercial vessels. This

applies when the supplies are-

(i) Acquired for the account of the United States;

(ii) Furnished to, or for the account of, a foreign nation without provision for reimbursement;

(iii) Furnished for the account of a foreign nation in connection with which the United States

advances funds or credits, or guarantees the convertibility of foreign currencies; or

(iv) Acquired with advance of funds, loans, or guaranties made by or on behalf of the United States.

(b) Additional policies providing preference for the use of U.S.-flag vessels are contained in-

(1) 46 U.S.C. 1241(a) for official business travel by officers and employees of the United States and

for the transportation of their personal effects; and

(2) 46 U.S.C. 1241(e) for the transportation of motor vehicles owned by Government personnel when

transportation is at Government expense or otherwise authorized by law.

(c) The provisions of the Cargo Preference Act of 1954 may be temporarily waived when the

Congress, the President, or the Secretary of Defense declares that an emergency justifying a

temporary waiver exists and so notifies the appropriate agency or agencies.

Parent topic: Subpart 47.5 - Ocean Transportation by U.S.-Flag Vessels
EX-34 (f)
(logo) PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
300 Madison Avenue
New York NY 10017
Telephone (646) 471-3000
www.pwc.com


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors of Residential Capital, LLC:

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management's Assertion Concerning Compliance with Regulation AB Item 1122
Servicing Criteria, that GMAC Mortgage, LLC (the "Company"), a subsidiary
of Residential Capital, LLC, complied with the servicing criteria set forth in
Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the
GMACM Private Platform (the "Platform") as of and for the year then ended
December 31, 2006, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii); 1122(d)(2)(iv);
1122(d)(3)(i),(ii) and 1122(d)(4)(i),(ii), which the Company has determined are
not applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to the
Platform. Appendix A to management's assertion identifies the individual asset-
backed transactions and securities defined by management as constituting the
Platform.  Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with the
servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's
assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining,
on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected
asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of
selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether
the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected
activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures
were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by
the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not
designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred
prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or
amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this
report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our
opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria.


In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2006, for the GMACM Private Platform is fairly stated, in all
material respects.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

New York, New York
March 6, 2007
162 So.2d 8

#### Alfred DYER, Sr. v. The TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

No. 47167.

March 30, 1964.

In're: Alfred Dyer, Sr., applying for certiorari' of writ óf review to the Court of *952Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans.. 159 So.2d 788. • ■

• Writ refused. On the facts found by th-e Court of Appeal, there is no error of law in its judgment.

HAMITER, J., recused.