alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Subpart 5109.1 - Responsible Prospective Contractors

**Parent topic:**Part 5109 - Contractor Qualifications

## 5109.103 Policy.

(b) Army contracting officials shall use the Determination       of Responsibility Assistant (DORA) Contractor Responsibility bot to assist them to determine       prospective contractor responsibility or non-responsibility. Instructions on how to use the       bot can be found on the Acquisition Innovation through Technology page located at: https://procurement.army.mil/botand at AFARS PGI 5109.103(b)-1.. 

## 5109.104 Standards.

### 5109.104-5 Representation and certifications regarding responsibility matters.

(a)(2)   See 5109.406-3 and 5109.407-3 for Army notification procedures.

(b)(2)  See 5109.406-3 and 5109.407-3 for Army notification procedures.

## 5109.105 Procedures.

### 5109.105-2 Determinations and documentation.

(a) *Determinations.*  The contracting officer shall submit a copy of the determination of non-responsibility to the cognizant suspension and debarment official listed at 5109.403.

## 5109.108 Prohibition on contracting with inverted domestic corporations.

### 5109.108-4 Waiver.

The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) may approve the waiver set forth in FAR 9.108-4.   See Appendix GG for further delegation.
# 52.244 [Reserved]

- 52.244-1 [Reserved] 
- 52.244-2 Subcontracts. 
- 52.244-3 [Reserved] 
- 52.244-4 Subcontractors and Outside Associates and Consultants (Architect-Engineer Services). 
- 52.244-5 Competition in Subcontracting. 
- 52.244-6 Subcontracts for Commercial Products and Commercial Services. 

**Parent topic:**Subpart 52.2 - Text of Provisions and Clauses
FAX
      (303) 623-4258621
      SEVENTEENTH STREET
                SUITE
      1550
                DENVER,
      COLORADO 80293
                TELEPHONE
      (303 623-9147






Exhibit
No. 23.1








CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS





As
independent petroleum and natural gas consultants, we hereby consent to the
reference of our name in the Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December
31, 2008 of Rockies Region 2006 Limited Partnership (the “Partnership”). We have
no interest of a substantial or material nature in the Partnership, or in any
affiliate. We have not been employed on a contingent basis, and we are not
connected with the Partnership, or any affiliate as a promoter, underwriter,
voting trustee, director, officer, employee or affiliate.








/s/
      Ryder Scott Company, L.P.RYDER
      SCOTT COMPANY, LP








Denver,
Colorado


March 30,
2009










1100
      LOUISIANA, SUITE 3800
                HOUSTON,
      TX 77002-5218
                TEL
      (713 651-9191
                FAX
      (713) 651-08491100
      530-8TH
      STREET, S.W.
                CALGARY,
      ALBERTA T2P 2W2
                TEL
      (403) 262-2799
                FAX
      (403) 262-2790
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 13

- 00773

- CR

Pablo DUENAS

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 371st Judicial District Court, Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 1314224D

Honorable Mollee Bennett Westfall, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE

, JUSTICE BARNARD , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED June 4, 2014.

_____________________________ Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
Exhibit 32.1

STATEMENT PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the
Annual Report of Allied Nevada Gold Corp. (the Corporation) on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned officer of the
Corporation does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |                                      
|---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: November 4, 2011 |  | /s/    SCOTT A.
CALDWELL             
|                       |  | Scott A. Caldwell,                   
|                       |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Corporation and will be retained by the Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### In the Matter of Richard V. Proverb, Appellant, v. John R. Niesley et al., Constituting the Nassau County Civil Service Commission, Respondents.

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR to direct respondents to entertain petitioner’s appeal from a determination of the Nassau County Acting Police Commissioner, disciplining petitioner for violation of departmental regulations, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 15, 1965, which dismissed the petition. Judgment reversed, on the law, with $10 costs and disbursements, and respondents are directed to hear and determine petitioner’s appeal from the determination of the Acting Commissioner on the merits. Petitioner had the right to elect to appeal to respondents (Civil Service Law, §§ 76, 2). The reference in subdivision d of section 8-13.0 of the Nassau County Administrative Code (L. 1939, chs. 272, 701-709, as amd. by L. 1948, ch. 436) to “A petition to review a determination ” does not constitute a limitation to a proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

________________________ DIVISION

_________________________________, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CASE NO. __________________

)

_________________________________, )

)

Defendants, )

CONFLICT DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

COMES NOW ___________________, a in the above-captioned

matter, and in accordance with the order of this Court, making the following disclosure

concerning parent companies, subsidiaries, partners, limited liability entity members and

managers, trustees (but not trust beneficiaries), affiliates, or similar entities reportable under

the provisions of the Middle District of Alabama’s General Order No. 3047:

This party is an individual, or

This party is a governmental entity, or

There are no entities to be reported, or

The following entities and their relationship to the party are hereby reported:

Reportable Entity Relationship to Party

________________________________ _________________________________

________________________________ _________________________________

________________________________ _________________________________

________________________________ _________________________________

Date (Signature)

(Counsel’s Name)

 

Counsel for (print names of all parties)

Address, City, State Zip Code

 

Telephone Number

Northern

Willie McNair

Richard Allen, et al.

2:06cv695-WKW

Richard Allen

Alabama Dept. of Corrections

6/20/2007

Commissioner

/s/ J. Clayton Crenshaw

Richard Allen, Grantt Culliver

11 South Union Street

Montgomery, AL 36130

(334) 242-7423

Defendant

J. Clayton Crenshaw

Case 2:06-cv-00695-WKW-CSC Document 66 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

________________________ DIVISION

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I,____________________________________, do hereby Certify that a true and correct copy

of the foregoing has been furnished by ___________________________(manner of service,

i.e., U.S. Mail, electronic mail, etc.) on this _______day of ____________ 20__, to:

Date Signature

Northern

J. Clayton Crenshaw

CM/ECF System

20th June

Stephanie L. Cohen, Vincent R. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Heather K. McDevitt,

Randall Susskind, and Cathleen Price

6/20/2007

07

/s/ J. Clayton Crenshaw

Case 2:06-cv-00695-WKW-CSC Document 66 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### Dorothy Allard, Appellant, v. Roy Allard, Respondent.

Reynolds, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Schenectady County, directing *777the specific performance of a stipulation entered into by the litigants and their counsel in open court. On November 3, 1965, the date set for the trial of this marital proceeding, a stipulation was entered into in open court designed to establish the property rights of the litigants. Proof was then taken in the separation action, but no findings of fact, conclusions of law or decree have as yet been entered. Thereafter, on November 19, 1965, the instant motion for specific performance based on the stipulation was made. The sole question here is the authority of Special Term to enforce the stipulation summarily on motion. In our view it did have such authority. As long as an action is pending, the court retains continued control over all proceedings therein *(Barry*v. *Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N. Y.,*53 N. Y. 536; *Thompson Medical Co.*v. *Benjamin Pharmaceuticals,*4 A D 2d 504; *Colla-Negri*v. *Colla-Negri,*8 Misc 2d 415). Here unlike *Ariel*v. *Ariel*(5 A D 2d 168) relied on by appellant the stipulation did not discontinue the action but rather by its very terms contemplated a continuance of the action and thus a separate action was not mandated. Order affirmed, with costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur in a memorandum decision by Reynolds, J.
5246.706 Warranty terms and conditions.

(b)(2) Remedies.

(iv) Acceptable turnaround time(s) for warranty corrective actions taken by the contractor should be

specified, and consideration should be given to using liquidated damages or charging the contractor

for product replacement costs when specified turnaround times are not met.

(5) Markings. Warranted items should be marked with the National Stock Number (NSN) or

manufacturer's part number, a serial number or other item identifier (if the warranty applies to

uniquely identified items), the contract number, an indication that a warranty applies, the

manufacturer or entity (if other than the contractor) providing the warranty, the date or time the

warranty expires, and an indication of whether or not attempted on-site repair by DON personnel

will void the warranty.

Parent topic: Subpart 5246.7 - WARRANTIES
###### 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.

#### § 810.1403 Basis of determination.

Each determination of broken kernels and foreign material is made on the basis of the grain when free from dockage. Each determination of class, damaged kernels, heat-damaged kernels, and stones is made on the basis of the grain when free from dockage and that portion of the broken kernels, and foreign material that will pass through a 1.98 mm (5/64 inches) triangular-hole sieve. Other determinations not specifically provided for in the general provisions are made on the basis of the grain as a whole except the determination of odor is made on either the basis of the grain as a whole or the grain when free from dockage, broken kernels, and foreign material removed by the 1.98 mm (5/64 inches) triangular-hole sieve.

[57 FR 58971, Dec. 14, 1992]
§ 985.54 Issuance of annual allotments. ( a ) Whenever the Secretary establishes a salable quantity and allotment percentage for a class of oil that may be freely marketed during a marketing year, the Committee shall issue an annual allotment to each producer holding an allotment base for that class of oil. Each producer's annual allotment for a class of oil shall be determined by multiplying the producer's allotment base for that class of oil by the applicable allotment percentage.
( b ) On or before December 1, the Committee shall furnish each registered holder of an allotment base a form for the producer to apply for an annual allotment for the ensuing marketing year. The Committee, with the approval of the Secretary, shall establish rules and regulations prescribing the information to be submitted on this form. The Committee shall notify each producer of the producer's annual allotment for each class of oil within 10 days after the Secretary establishes the salable quantity and allotment percentage.
( c ) Through 1981, a handler may acquire oil of a producer's own production to fulfill a written contract entered into by these two persons prior to February 27, 1979. The terms of this contract shall require the producer to deliver to that handler a specified quantity of a class of oil from that producer's production at a specific price from a specified acreage and produced prior to 1982. The quantity of oil acquired by the handler pursuant to that contract during the 1980-81 or 1981-82 marketing year may exceed the producer's annual allotment for the applicable marketing year, but shall be charged against the producer's annual allotment for that year.
# Subpart 913.4 [Reserved]

**Parent topic:**PART 913 - SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION PROCEDURES
250.103-5 Processing cases.

(1) At the time the request is filed, the activity shall prepare the record described at PGI 250.101-3

(1)(i) and forward it to the appropriate official within 30 days after the close of the month in which

the record is prepared.

(2) The officer or official responsible for the case shall forward to the contract adjustment board,

through departmental channels, the documentation described at PGI 250.103-5 .

(3) Contract adjustment boards will render decisions as expeditiously as practicable. The Chair shall

sign a memorandum of decision disposing of the case. The decision shall be dated and shall contain

the information required by FAR 50.103-6. The memorandum of decision shall not contain any

information classified “Confidential” or higher. The board's decision will be sent to the appropriate

official for implementation.

Parent topic: 250.103 Contract adjustments.
Case 2:06-cv-00616-MHT-SRW Document 6-2 Filed 08/14/2006 Page 1 of 1
Subpart 2945.1 - General

Parent topic: PART 2945 - GOVERNMENT PROPERTY

2945.104 Review and correction of contractors' property

control systems.

When the Government's property administrator determines that review and approval of the

contractor's property control system rests with DOL, the Government's property administrator must

review the system to determine whether the contractor will be able to meet the requirements of FAR

45.104. The review must be completed, signed by the appointed property administrator, and

retained in the contract file.

2945.105 Records of Government property.

Contracting officers must maintain a file on any Government-furnished property (GFP) in the

possession of contractors. As a minimum, the file must contain the following:

(a) A copy of the applicable portions of the contract that list the GFP;

(b) Contracting officer's letters assigning the GFP administrator to the contract;

(c) Written evidence that the contractor's property control system was reviewed and approved as

required by FAR 45.104;

(d) If applicable, documentation of the request and approval or denial of the contractor's requests to

acquire or fabricate special test equipment in accordance with FAR 45.307 or other property;

(e) The contractor's written notice of receipt of the GFP and any reported discrepancies thereto, as

required by FAR 45.502-1 and 45.502-2, respectively;

(f) Any other documents pertaining to or affecting the status of the GFP in the possession of

contractors or subcontractors under the contract;

(g) Documentation of the screening and disposal of all GFP as required by FAR 45.6.
#### § 97.16 Amendment by applicant.

An application may be amended before or after the first examination and action by the Office, after the second or subsequent examination or reconsideration as specified in § 97.107, or when and as specifically required by the examiner. Such amendment may include a specification that seed of the variety be sold by variety name only as a class of certified seed, if not previously specified or if previously declined. Once an affirmative specification is made, no amendment to reverse such a specification will be permitted unless the variety has not been sold and labeled or publication made in any manner that the variety is to be sold by variety name, only as a class of certified seed.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3016 

To suspend temporarily the duty on ceramic frit powder. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 24, 2006 

Mr. REID (for Mr. ROCKEFELLER) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on ceramic frit powder. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERAMIC FRIT POWDER. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.38.23 Ceramic frit powder; ceramic 

arc tube sealing ring of 

pressed powder (provided for 

in subheading 8546.20.00) .. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

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

9 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 


dsatterwhite on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
2 

•S 3016 IS 

1 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

2 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


dsatterwhite on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 10

- 00 400

- CV

IN RE CAROL ANN GIBBONS

AND VIRGINIA FLOYD RELATOR S

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

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

The court has considered R elator s ’ petition for writ of mandamus and

emergency motion for stay and is of the opinion that all relief should be denied.

Accordingly, Relators’ petition for writ of mandamus and motion for stay are

denied.

Relator s shall pay all costs of this original proc eeding, for which let

execution issue.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MCCOY, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and DAUPHINOT , J.

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

, 52.8 (d).2

DELIVERED: November 4 , 2010
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

 EASTERN DIVISION

ELIZABETH LYNNE HUTCHINSON, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:06cv700-WHA

)

PHENIX CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION )

et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

The Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment (Docs. #29 and 30), filed on June 7,

2007, will be deemed submitted to this Court on July 5, 2007, without oral argument. If any

party desires oral argument, such party should so notify the Court and opposing counsel by July

5, 2007. If, after considering the parties' submissions, the Court finds oral argument is

necessary, a hearing will be scheduled, and the parties will be notified of the date of the hearing.

Affidavits, briefs, depositions, or other documents which the Plaintiff wishes to file in

opposition to said motions shall be filed on or before June 28, 2007.

The Defendants shall have until July 5, 2007, to file any reply they wish to file.

If a document, including a deposition, is to be considered on the issue of summary

judgment, a party shall specifically designate which parts of the document are deemed relevant. 

The designation of parts of depositions shall be by page and line numbers. No parts of

documents not so specifically designated will be considered.

Case 3:06-cv-00700-WHA-WC Document 32 Filed 06/07/2007 Page 1 of 2
DONE this 7th day of June, 2007.

/s/ W. Harold Albritton 

W. HAROLD ALBRITTON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00700-WHA-WC Document 32 Filed 06/07/2007 Page 2 of 2
let's breathe better

Ralph Berry 

t

o

:

Shaheerah Kelly 05/26/2009 01:20 PM

From: Ralph Berry <ralph.berry@gmail.com>

To: Shaheerah Kelly/R9/USEPA/US@EPA

History: This message has been replied to.

Dear Ms Kelly, 

NRG West has submitted an application to the California Energy Commission (Docket Number: 

07-AFC-06) to build a 558 megawatt power plant in coastal Carlsbad, California named the 

Carlsbad Energy Center Project (CECP) and has requested authorization to emit up to 72.8 tons 

of NOx per year (though NRG West admits that the new units have the potential to emit 75.6 

tons of NOx per year). NRG "voluntarily" agreed to limit NOx emissions from the 75.6 tons/yr 

to the 72.8 tons/year, probably in order to avoid the 40 ton/year EPA trigger. This new power 

plant will be located on the same property as the existing 55 year-old 963 megawatt Encina 

Power Station that runs approximately 7% per year. 

As I understand the rules-Section 52.21(b)(48) - concerning a new stationary source of air 

pollution, limits are placed on new applicants for permission to emit air pollution. At its 

soonest, the CECP will not begin construction until 2010 which means the previous 5 years of 

look-back (2005-2009) push the new application over the limit of 40 tons of emissions of NOx 

per year. Based on the 2005-2009 years, the new CECP would emit 25% more than the 

threshold allows. This would require NRG to submit to the EPA for a Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) of air quality. Please require them to do so. 

As the protector of environmental quality, the residents of Carlsbad rely on the EPA to enforce 

Federal air quality rules. It is imperative that NRG West be forced to comply with rules in place 

to protect the public. Other electrical generating assets are coming on-line in San Diego County 

that will provide for demand. There is every reason to make sure that all rules are being 

followed by the addition of CECP to the City of Carlsbad and the region. 

Thank you, I look forward to hearing from you and can provide additional information if needed.

Sincerely, Ralph Berry 

Cc: Senator Barbara Boxer
#### § 993.4 Area.

*Area* means the State of California.
#### § 986.40 Unassessed inventory.

*Unassessed inventory* means inshell pecans held by growers or handlers for which no assessment has been paid to the Council.
§ 784.2 Administration. ( a ) This part shall be administered by FSA under the general direction and supervision of the Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs, FSA. The program shall be carried out in the field by FSA State and county committees (State and county committees) in accordance with their assigned duties and the regulations of this part.
( b ) The Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs, FSA, or a designee, may reverse or modify a determination made by a State or county committee.
( c ) The Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs, FSA, may waive or modify deadlines and other program requirements in cases where timeliness or failure to meet such other requirements does not adversely affect the operation of the program.
( d ) The program described under this part is a one-time program to be administered with respect to eligibility and qualifying factors occurring during or related to the base period of August 1, 2003 through July 31, 2004, as specified in this part.
#### § 983.2 Act.

*Act* means Public Act No. 10, 73rd Congress (May 12, 1933), as amended and as re-enacted and amended by the Agricultural Marketing Order Act of 1937, as amended (48 Stat. 31, as amended; 7 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.*).