alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 869
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 869 appear at 84 FR 45646, Aug. 30, 2019.

§ 869.10 Posting of certificates of licensing, certificates of authorization or other USWA documents. ( a ) The warehouse operator must post, in a conspicuous place in the principal place where warehouse receipts are issued, any applicable certificate furnished by AMS that the warehouse operator is an authorized licensee under the Act.
( b ) Immediately upon receipt of their certificate of service licensing or any modification or extension thereof under the Act, the licensee and warehouse operator must jointly post the same, and thereafter, except as otherwise provided in the regulations in this part or as prescribed in the applicable licensing agreement, keep such certificate of licensing conspicuously posted in the office where all or most of the services are done, or in such place as may be designated by AMS.
( c ) The provider must post, in a conspicuous place in the principal place of business, any applicable certificate of authorization furnished by AMS that the provider is authorized to offer and provide specific services under the Act.
§ 917.176 Pears. ( a ) *Report of daily packout.* When requested by the Pear Commodity Committee, each shipper who ships pears shall furnish to the manager of the Control Committee or when designated to the Federal-State Inspection Service a report of the number of packages by container type, by variety and by district of origin, which the shipper packed during the preceding day.
( b ) *Recapitulation of shipments.* When requested by the Pear Commodity Committee, each shipper of pears shall furnish to the manager of the Control Committee a recapitulation of his shipments. The recapitulation shall show: ( 1 ) The name of the shipper,
( 2 ) The shipping point,
( 3 ) The district of origin,
( 4 ) The variety, and
( 5 ) The number of packages, by size, for each container type.
( c ) *Report of pears held in storage.* Each shipper who has pears under refrigeration in a storage warehouse shall upon request, file with the manager of the Control Committee within the time specified in the request an accurate report containing the following information: ( 1 ) The name and address of the shipper; and
( 2 ) The total quantity, as of the date specified in the request, of pears in storage outside of the State of California and in storage in the State of California.
[39 FR 27117, July 25, 1974] Effective Date Note
Effective Date Note: At 59 FR 10056, Mar. 3, 1994, § 917.176 was suspended, effective Apr. 4, 1994.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3224 

To extend the duty reduction on artichokes, prepared or preserved by vinegar 

or acetic acid. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 25, 2006 

Mr. MENENDEZ introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the duty reduction on artichokes, prepared or 

preserved by vinegar or acetic acid. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF REDUCTION OF DUTY ON ARTI4 CHOKES, PREPARED OR PRESERVED BY VIN5 EGAR OR ACETIC ACID. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.03.90 of the Har7 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

8 artichokes, prepared or preserved by vinegar or acetic 

9 acid) is amended by striking ‘‘12/31/2006’’ and inserting 

10 ‘‘12/31/2009’’. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•S 3224 IS 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
Subpart 205.2 - SYNOPSES OF PROPOSED

CONTRACT ACTIONS

Parent topic: Part 205 - PUBLICIZING CONTRACT ACTIONS

205.203 Publicizing and response time.

(b) Allow at least 45 days response time when requested by a qualifying or designated country

source (as these terms are used in Part 225) and the request is consistent with the Government's

requirement.

(S-70) When using competitive procedures, if a solicitation allowed fewer than 30 days for receipt of

offers and resulted in only one offer, the contracting officer shall resolicit, allowing an additional

period of at least 30 days for receipt of offers, except as provided in 215.371-4 and 215.371-5 .

205.205 Special situations.

See PGI 205.205 for instructions on the solicitation notice regarding timely definitization of

equitable adjustments for change orders under construction contracts.

205.205-70 Notification of bundling of DoD contracts.

(a) When a proposed acquisition is funded entirely using DoD funds and potentially involves

bundling, the contracting officer shall, at least 30 days prior to the release of a solicitation or 30

days prior to placing an order without a solicitation, publish in the Governmentwide point of entry

(https://www.sam.gov) a notification of the intent to bundle the requirement. In addition, if the

agency has determined that measurably substantial benefits are expected to be derived as a result of

bundling, the notification shall include a brief description of those benefits (see FAR 7.107).

(b) This requirement is in addition to the notification requirements at FAR 10.001(c)(2)(i) and (ii).

205.205-71 Only one responsible source.

Follow the procedures at PGI 206.302-1 (d) prior to soliciting a proposal without providing for full

and open competition under the authority at FAR 6.302-1.

205.207 Preparation and transmittal of synopses.

(a)(i) For numbering synopsis notices, follow the procedures at PGI 205.207 (a)(i).

(d) For special notices for small business events, follow the procedures at PGI 205.207 (d).
EX-34 (g)
(logo) Grant Thornton

Accountants and Business Advisors


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


Board of Directors and Shareholders
LandAmerica Tax and Flood Services, Inc.

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on
Assessment of Compliance with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria ("Management's
Report"), that LandAmerica Tax and Flood Services, Inc. (the "Company") complied
with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the residential mortgage backed
securities for which the Company served as third-party property tax payment
provider on the underlying collateral (the "Platform") as of and for the year
ended December 31, 2006, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(i)-(iv),
1122(d)(2)(i)-(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i)-(iv), 1122(d)(4)(i)-(x) and
1122(d)(4)(xiii)-(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the
activities performed by the Company with respect to the Platform. Management is
responsible for the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing
criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion
about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria for the
Platform based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the 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 for the Platform and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination
included testing selected asset-backed transactions and securities constituting
the Platform and evaluating whether the Company performed servicing activities
related to those transactions and securities in compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria for the period covered by this report. Accordingly, our
testing may not have included servicing activities related to each asset-backed
transaction or security constituting the Platform. Further, our examination was
not designed to detect material noncompliance that may have occurred prior to
the period covered by this report and that may have affected the Company's
servicing activities 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
applicable servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that LandAmerica Tax and Flood Services,
Inc. complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2006 is fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ Grant Thornton LLP

Irvine, CA
February 20, 2007


18400 Von Karman Avenue
Suite 900
Irvine, CA 92612-0525
T 949.553.1600
F 949.553.0168
W www.grantthornton.com

Grant Thornton LLP
US member of Grant Thornton International
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of

CHRISTOPHER R. STOCKTON 

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT

FROM ADMINISTRATIVE SUSPENSION

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 118 DB 2019 (No. 76 RST 2019)

Attorney Registration No. 47164

(Out of State)

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 30th day of August, 2019, the Report and Recommendation of 

Disciplinary Board Member dated August 22, 2019, is approved and it is ORDERED that

Christopher R. Stockton, who has been on Administrative Suspension, has never been 

suspended or disbarred, and has demonstrated that he has the moral qualifications, 

competency and learning in law required for admission to practice in the Commonwealth, 

shall be and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a member of the Bar of this 

Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing 

of this matter shall be paid by the Petitioner.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2988 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2988

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on railway car body shells 
    for electric multiple unit commuter coaches of stainless steel.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 23, 2006

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on railway car body shells 
    for electric multiple unit commuter coaches of stainless steel.

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

SECTION 1. RAILWAY CAR BODY SHELLS FOR EMU COMMUTER COACHES OF 
              STAINLESS STEEL.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.86.09 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to railway car body shells for 
electric multiple unit (EMU) commuter coaches of stainless steel) is 
amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2009''.
    (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>
```
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter VIII

#### Authority:

7 U.S.C. 71-87K, 1621-1627.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter VIII

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 84 FR 45645, Aug. 30, 2019.

#### § 810.603 Basis of determination.

Other determinations not specifically provided for under the general provisions are made on the basis of the grain when free from dockage, except the determination of odor is made on either the basis of the grain as a whole or the grain when free from dockage.
Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 41 Filed 01/18/2007 Page 1 of 10Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 41 Filed 01/18/2007 Page 2 of 10Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 41 Filed 01/18/2007 Page 3 of 10Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 41 Filed 01/18/2007 Page 4 of 10Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 41 Filed 01/18/2007 Page 5 of 10Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 41 Filed 01/18/2007 Page 6 of 10Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 41 Filed 01/18/2007 Page 7 of 10Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 41 Filed 01/18/2007 Page 8 of 10Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 41 Filed 01/18/2007 Page 9 of 10Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 41 Filed 01/18/2007 Page 10 of 10
FEDERAL AVIATION • ADMINISTRATION 

COMPLIANCE WITH E.O. 12866 

Section 6(a)(3)(E) ofE.O. 12866 requires agencies to identify for the public, in 

a complete, clear, and simple manner, those changes in a regulatory action 

made at the suggestion or recommendation of the Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of Management and Budget. 

Title of Rulemaking: 

Regulatory Identification Number: 

X 

OIRA did not review the rulemaking document. 

OIRA reviewed the rulemaking document, but did not 

suggest or recommend any changes. 

OIRA reviewed the rulemaking document, and we have 

documented the changes we made at OIRA's suggestion or 

recommendation in an attachment to this sheet. 

ignature of Analyst Date 

Attachment 
1. The preflight briefmg requirement was changed to a performance 

standard. 

2. The FAA added preamble language discussing its future plans 

with regard to UAS integration. 

3. Preamble language was amended to provide additional examples 

to the reader. 

4. TSA vetting costs were updated. 

5. Minor clarifications and corrections throughout the document. 

2
§ 58.149 Alternate quality control programs for dairy products. ( a ) When a plant has in operation an acceptable quality control program which is approved by the Administrator as being effective in obtaining results comparable to or higher than the quality control program as outlined in this subpart, then such a program may be accepted in lieu of the program herein prescribed.
( b ) Where a minimum number of samples per batch of product, or per unit of time on continuous production runs are not specified, the phrase “as many samples shall be taken as is necessary to assure compliance to specific quality requirements” is used. Acceptable performance of this would be any method approved by the Administrator as meeting sound statistical methods of selecting samples and determining the number of samples to be taken.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7555

LARRY CHAVIS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-04-577) Submitted: May 17, 2006 Decided: June 8, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Chavis, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Wallace-Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Larry Chavis seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the Respondent’s motion for summary judgment and denying relief on Chavis’ 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as time-barred. This order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Chavis has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Particle DrillingTechnologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period endingMarch 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, J. Chris Boswell, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 

 
| /s/ J. Chris Boswell    |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| J. Chris Boswell        |
| Chief Financial Officer |

 

Date:                    August 12,2005

 

----
§ 632.3 Responsibilities. ( a ) The Rural Abandoned Mine Program is administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) through NRCS in accordance with the delegation of responsibility contained in § 601.1(h) of this chapter. ( 1 ) The Chief of NRCS is responsible for national program management and administration and for coordinating program operations with the Office of Surface Mining (OSM), U.S. Department of the Interior.
( 2 ) State conservationists (Responsible Federal Officials) are responsible for program operations within a State including program coordination with the State reclamation agency and the representatives of OSM.
( b ) The primary public contacts for program assistance are the district conservationists located in local NRCS field offices.
( c ) NRCS is assisted by other USDA agencies in accordance with existing authorities and agreements in carrying out the program.
( d ) NRCS is to coordinate Rural Abandoned Mine Program activities with NRCS programs and the other reclamation programs authorized by Pub. L. 95-87 that are carried out by the Office of Surface Mining of the U.S. Department of the Interior, State reclamation agencies, and Indian tribes. Coordination includes program development, development of reclamation standards, preparation of special reports, requests for funding, and related actions required to achieve coordination between programs.
( e ) NRCS is to consult with State and local reclamation committees to obtain recommendations on program operation, evaluation of applications for reclamation assistance, and public participation. The NRCS State Conservationist is to use existing reclamation committees or encourage the organization of a new State committee for this purpose. The State Conservationist is to serve as a member when the committee is functioning for the purposes of this program. Representatives of the Office of Surface Mining, State reclamation agency, State water quality agency, State conservation agency, and other agencies or groups are to be invited to participate as members. Individual citizens may participate through the State committee. Local committees, if needed, are to be organized on a multicounty, county, conservation district, or other appropriate area with a local membership structure similar to the State committee. The district conservationist is to be a member of a local reclamation committee organized to provide program guidance.
[43 FR 44749, Sept. 28, 1978, as amended at 45 FR 65181, Oct. 2, 1980]
§ 767.251 Agency exception authority. On an individual case basis, the Agency may consider granting an exception to any regulatory requirement or policy of this part if: ( a ) The exception is not inconsistent with the authorizing statute or other applicable law; and
( b ) The Agency's financial interest would be adversely affected by acting in accordance with published regulations or policies and granting the exception would reduce or eliminate the adverse effect upon the its financial interest.
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2015319EN.01002102.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 4.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 319/21 |

---

Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) No 236/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 laying down common rules and procedures for the implementation of the Union's instruments for financing external action

(
[Official Journal of the European Union L 77 of 15 March 2014](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2014_077_R_TOC)
)

On page 103, point (b) of Article 9(1):

for:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| ‘(b) | (...) cooperation programmes in which they participate;’, |

read:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| ‘(b) | (...) cooperation programmes in which it participates;’. |

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

M IDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABA M A

OFFICE OF THE CLERK

POST OFFICE BOX 711

MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36101-0711

 DEBRA P. HACKETT, CLERK TELEPHONE (334) 954-3600

 

August 16, 2006

NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT

RE: Robert D. Brooks et al v. Pactiv Corporation et al

Civil Action No. 2:06cv00680-SRW

The above-styled case has been reassigned to District Judge Myron H.Thompson.

Please note that the case number is now 2:06cv00680-MHT. This new case

number should be used on all future correspondence and pleadings in this action.

Sincerely,

Sheryl K. Lent

Deputy Clerk

Case 2:06-cv-00680-LES-CSC Document 5 Filed 08/16/2006 Page 1 of 1
**AD Economic Evaluation**

Docket No. FAA - 2013 - 0635 Directorate ID: 20 12 - SW - 081 - AD Helicopter Model: Eurocopter France Model EC225LP Helicopters Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): Three Helicopters in the US Registry . Reason : The proposed actions of this AD are intended to detect corrosion or a crack in the swashplates, which could lead to failure of the swashplates and subsequent loss of helicopter control. Costs :  Inspecting the rotating and stationary swashplates f

or corrosion or a crack would require 8 work- hours for a cost of $680 per helicopter and $2,040 for the U.S. fleet, per inspection cycle. Making and installing the placard would require 0.5 work - hour, for a cost of $43 per helicopter. The labor cost of ins talling paper in the flight manual would be negligible for a helicopter.  Replacing the MRH assembly would require 24 work - hours and parts would cost $5,000, for a total cost of $7,040 per helicopter.

Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be c onsidered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory

Flexibility

Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer: Gary

Roach