alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 4
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 4 appear at 77 FR 39904, July 6, 2012.

§ 4.3 Application of this part. This part applies to any program for which Federal financial assistance is authorized under a law administered by NRC. The types of Federal financial assistance to which this part applies are listed in appendix A of this part; appendix A may be revised from time to time by notice published in the Federal Register. This part applies to money paid, property transferred, or other Federal assistance extended, by way of grant, entitlement, cooperative agreement, loan, contract, or other agreement by NRC, or an authorized contractor or subcontractor of NRC, the terms of which require compliance with this part. If any statutes implemented by this part are otherwise applicable, the failure to list a type of Federal financial assistance in appendix A does not mean a program or activity is not covered by this part. This part does not apply to— ( a ) Contracts of insurance or guaranty; or
( b ) Procurement contracts; or
( c ) Employment practices under any program or activity except as provided in §§ 4.13, 4.122 and 4.302.
[52 FR 25358, July 7, 1987, as amended at 68 FR 51344, Aug. 26, 2003]
§ 455.112 Davis-Bacon wage rate requirement. When an energy conservation measure or group of measures in a building, funded under this part, has a total estimated cost for acquisition and installation of more than $5,000, any construction contract or subcontract in excess of $2,000, using any grant funds awarded under this part must include: ( a ) Those contract labor standards provisions set forth in 29 CFR 5.5 and
( b ) A provision for payment of laborers and mechanics at the minimum wage rates determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276a) as set forth in 29 CFR part 1.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 369 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 369

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         July 21, 2005.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 3199) to extend and modify authorities needed to combat terrorism, 
and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. 
All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate 
shall be confined to the bill and the amendments made in order by this 
resolution and shall not exceed two hours, with one hour and 30 minutes equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on the Judiciary and 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the 
chairman and ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the five-minute rule. In lieu of the amendments recommended by the 
Committee on the Judiciary and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence 
now printed in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill 
for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the 
nature of a substitute printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules 
accompanying this resolution. That amendment in the nature of a substitute shall 
be considered as read. All points of order against that amendment in the nature 
of a substitute are waived. Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no 
amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order 
except those printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules. Each 
amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered 
only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be 
debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by 
the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not 
be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the 
Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such amendments are waived. 
At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 
rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment 
adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the amendment in the 
nature of a substitute made in order as original text. The previous question 
shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final 
passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
[881 NE2d 1194, 852 NYS2d 8]

#### In the Matter of David Torrance, Respondent, v Joseph A. Stout, as Commissioner of the Westchester County Department of Parks, Recreation and Conservation, et al., Appellants.

Decided January 15, 2008

*1023APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Charlene M. Indelicato, County Attorney,*White Plains *(Thomas G. Gardiner*of counsel), for appellants.

*James M. Rose,*White Plains, for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The judgment of the Appellate Division, insofar as appealed from, should be reversed, with costs, and the petition dismissed in its entirety.

Petitioner, employed in a supervisory capacity, engaged in the willful and intentional illegal disposition of county property. Accordingly, we cannot conclude that the penalty of demotion to a nonsupervisory position shocks the judicial conscience *(see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County,*34 NY2d 222, 233-234 [1974]). We reiterate that the Appellate Division has no discretionary authority or interest of justice jurisdiction in this CPLR article 78 proceeding to review the penalty imposed by respondent Commissioner of the Westchester County Department of Parks, Recreation and Conservation *(see Matter of Rutkunas v Stout,*8 NY3d 897, 899 [2007]).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), judgment, insofar as appealed from, reversed, etc.
§ 36.63 Pool water purity. ( a ) Pool water purification system must be run sufficiently to maintain the conductivity of the pool water below 20 microsiemens per centimeter under normal circumstances. If pool water conductivity rises above 20 microsiemens per centimeter, the licensee shall take prompt actions to lower the pool water conductivity and shall take corrective actions to prevent future recurrences.
( b ) The licensee shall measure the pool water conductivity frequently enough, but no less than weekly, to assure that the conductivity remains below 20 microsiemens per centimeter. Conductivity meters must be calibrated at least annually.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 January 24, 2017

a0117

Order 

Clerk

January 24, 2017

154430

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 154430

COA: 333645

Antrim CC: 2014-004684-FH

ANGELA MARIE WAY,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 22, 2016 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 41 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 41 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 41 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 41 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 4 of 4
----

----

Back to top
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with this Quarterly Report of ImClone Systems Incorporated (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael
J. Howerton, Vice President, Finance and Business Development, Acting Chief
Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company, 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; and

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

/s/   MICHAEL J. HOWERTON
-----------------------------------------------------
Michael J. Howerton
Acting Chief Financial Officer
July 3, 2003

                                    Page 43
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

December 1, 2006

NOTICE OF CORRECTION

From: Clerk’s Office

Case Style: Burkett v. McCray et al

Case Number: 1:06cv00775-DRB

This Notice of Correction was filed in the referenced case this date to correct the PDF

document previously attached to include the certificate of service. 

The correct PDF document is attached to this notice for your review. Reference is made to

document # 31 filed on November 30, 2006.

Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 32 Filed 12/01/2006 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 32-2 Filed 12/01/2006 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 32-2 Filed 12/01/2006 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 32-2 Filed 12/01/2006 Page 3 of 3
#### § 39.37 Physical inventory.

Each licensee shall conduct a semi-annual physical inventory to account for all licensed material received and possessed under the license. The licensee shall retain records of the inventory for 3 years from the date of the inventory for inspection by the Commission. The inventory must indicate the quantity and kind of licensed material, the location of the licensed material, the date of the inventory, and the name of the individual conducting the inventory. Physical inventory records may be combined with leak test records.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Raymond Watts, Appellant.

In a *comm, nobis*proceeding, defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered April 13, 1966, as, on reargument, adhered to the original determination denying the application without a hearing. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, and matter remitted to the Criminal Term for a hearing on the issue of defendant’s competency to understand the proceedings and make his defense at the time he pleaded guilty to grand larceny in the second degree, which hearing shall be held before a Justice other than the one before whom defendant pleaded guilty. Ho questions of fact were considered. On this record, it is our opinion that a hearing was required on the above-mentioned issue; and it was error to deny the application without a hearing (see *Pate*v. *Robinson,*383 U. S. 375; *People*v. *Boundy,*10 N Y 2d 518; *People*v. *Sprague,*11 N Y 2d 951; *People*v. *Gonzales,*20 N Y 2d 289; *People*v. *Hines,*18 A D 2d 1016). Such hearing should be held before a Justice other than the one who accepted the guilty plea and imposed the sentence (see *People*v. *Hudson,*19 N Y 2d 137; *People*v. *Hines,*28 A D 2d 909). Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
2414.408-70 Award when only one bid is

received.

When only one bid is received in response to an invitation for bids, such bid may be considered and

accepted if the Contracting Officer makes a written determination that: (a) The specifications were

clear and not unduly restrictive; (b) adequate competition was solicited and it could have been

reasonably assumed that more than one bid would have been submitted; (c) the price is reasonable;

and (d) the bid is otherwise in accordance with the invitation for bids. Such a determination shall be

placed in the file.

Parent topic: Subpart 2414.4 - Opening of Bids and Award of Contracts
### ! .

! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! .

! . ! . ! .

! .

! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! .

! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! .

! . ! . ! .
! . ! . ! . ! . ! .

! . ! . ! . ! . ! .
! . ! . ! . ! .

! .
9 8 7 6 5 7 4 7 3

6 3 6 0 5 8 6 2 6 1 5 9 X 8 X 9 X2 X 3 X 1 7 8 7 6 7 5

4 4 4 3 4 2 4 1 4 0 3 9 3 8 3 7 3 6 3 5 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 1 3 0 2 9

2 8 2 7 2 6 2 5 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 0 1 9

1 8

1 7 1 6 1 5 1 4 1 3 1 2

1 1 1 0

5 7
5 6

5 5 5 4 5 3 5 2 5 1 5 0 4 9 4 8
4 7 4 6 4 5 7 7

X 1 4 X 1 7 X 1 5 X 1 0 X 1 3

X 1 6

S o u rce : E s r i , D i g i t a l G l o b e , G e o E ye , E a rt h s t a r G e o g ra p h i cs , C N E S / A i r b u s D S , U S D A , U S G S , A E X , G e t m a p p i n g , A e ro g r i d , I G N , I G P, s w i s s t o p o , a n d t h e G I S U s e r C o m m u n i ty 

# L e g e n d P i p e l i n e S P S w a t e r r i g h t s ! . 

# We l l s 

#  ́
PGI 215.1 -SOURCE SELECTION PROCESSES AND TECHNIQUES    **Parent topic:** PGI Part 215 - CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATIONPGI 215.101 RESERVED    PGI 215.101-2-70 Limitations and prohibitions.       (a) *Limitations*.          (1)(vi) Contracting officers shall obtain guidance from the requiring activity when it is unclear whether a supply is “predominately expendable in nature” or “nontechnical,” or has a “short life expectancy” or “short shelf life.” In such situations, contracting officers shall only use the lowest price technically acceptable source selection process if the requiring activity establishes that the goods to be procured are predominantly expendable in nature, are nontechnical, or have a short life expectancy or short shelf life.          (vii) The contracting officer shall document the contract file with a determination from the requiring activity that the lowest priced offer reflects full life-cycle costs for the supply or service. For additional information on life-cycle costs for supplies, see DoD Instruction 4140.01, DoD Supply Chain Material Management Policy. For services, full life-cycle costs are equal to the contract cost of the services.
Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

      Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of
China Industrial Waste Management Inc. (the "Company"), for the purposes of 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:

(1) The Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter
ended June 30, 2006 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.

Dated: August 21, 2006

/s/ Jinqing Dong
----------------
Jinqing Dong
Chief Executive Officer

/s/ Jingqing Dong
-----------------
Jinqing Dong
Chief Financial Officer

      A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to China Industrial Waste Management Inc. and will be retained by
China Industrial Waste Management Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 984.78 Certification of reports.

All reports submitted to the Board as required in this part shall be certified to the Secretary and the Board as to the completeness and correctness of the information contained therein.
## Enclosure: Table of SNAP Refrigeration and Air Conditioning End

- Uses and Applications

End

- Use Application New (N)

, retrofit (R) , or both (N / R)? Typical

Charge Size (kg) Maximum

Charge Size (kg)

Chillers (Commercial Comfort AC) Centrifugal Chillers,

Positive Displacement Chillers (includes Reciprocating, Screw, Scroll, Rotary Compressors) N 4 12

Industrial Process Refrigeration (IPR)

Industrial Process Air Conditioning
Ice Skating Rinks Cold Storage
Warehouses N 6 12

Refrigerated Transport Refrigerated Trailers (Reefers)

Refrigerated Shipping Containers

Refrigeration Equipment within Motorized Vehicle (e.g., food delivery, ice cream truck, ship hold)

Retail Food Refrigeration Remote Rack System, Direct

Remote Rack System, Indirect

Stand

- alone Units (self

- contained equipment such as individual reach

- in coolers, glass door merchandisers, fountain beverage dispenser, frozen beverage dispenser, etc.)

Remote Condensing Units for Walk

- in Coolers or Multiple Reach

- in Coolers

Vending Machines

Drinking Water Coolers Built

- in Water Fountain

Stand

- alone Water Coolers

Commercial Ice
Machines Self

- contained Ice Machines

Remote Ice Machines

Household Refrigerators and

Freezers Household Refrigerator and Freezers

Small Refrigerated Household Appliances (e.g., chilled kitchen drawers, wine coolers, and mini

- fridges)

Residential and Light
Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps Room Air Conditioners (such as window units, packaged terminal air conditioners (PTAC) and heat pumps (PTHP), and portable self

- contained air conditioners)

Mini

- Splits, Non

- Ducted

Multi

- Splits, Non

- Ducted
Split

- Systems, Ducted, Household (Central A/C)Split

- Systems, Ducted, Light Commercial (Central A/C)

Packaged Rooftop Units

Water

- Source Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps

Ground

- Source Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps
Residential
Dehumidifiers

Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Light

- duty Vehicles (e.g., passenger cars)

Light

- duty Trucks (e.g., minivans, full size pick

- up trucks, and full

- size SUVs)

Heavy

- duty Vehicles (e.g., heavy

- duty pickup trucks and vans, and commercial medium and heavy

- duty on

- highway vehicles)

Off

- road Vehicles (e.g., farm and construction equipment)

Buses and Passenger Rail

Non

- mechanical Heat
Transfer Thermosiphon
Recirculating Coolers

Mechanical Heat
Transfer Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC)

Very Low Temperature Refrigeration

Other (specify) Uranium Isotope Separation Processing

Ice Cream Makers
2007-1353.

#### Chadwell v. Ohio State Racing Comm.

Franklin App. No. 06AP-1226, 2007-Ohio-2727. Reported at 115 Ohio St.3d 1444, 2007-Ohio-5567, 875 N.E.2d 104. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
SUBPART 43.1 – GENERAL

(Revised August 10, 2018 through PROCLTR 2018-16)

Parent topic: PART 43 – CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS

43.102 Policy.

(b)(S-90) Administrative cost. The administrative cost for contract modifications issued by DLA

Aviation, DLA Contracting Services Office, DLA Disposition Services, DLA Distribution, DLA Energy,

DLA Land and Maritime, DLA Strategic Materials, and DLA Troop Support Industrial Hardware is

$250. The administrative cost for contract modifications issued by DLA Troop Support Construction

and Equipment, Clothing and Textile, Subsistence, and Medical is $750. These fees are in addition to

consideration cost (see 43.102(b)(S-91)); and costs for Government reinspection or retest, if

necessary.

(S-91) Consideration cost. The contracting officer determines the most appropriate calculation

method. The formula below is provided as a potential method for calculating consideration for

issuing the modification.

Formula: (((((E-1)/(E+1))+1)/100)*M*V) + D

Key: E = # of Extensions: The number of extension request instances that contractor asks for at the

time of the modification (i.e., 1 for 1st request, 2 for 2nd request, and 10 for 10th request).

M = Lateness (expressed in months): The number of months the contractor has requested an

extension. For example, if the contractor requests an extension of 30 days for the “current” delivery

time, M would be 1. For 120 days, M would be 4. If this is the contractor’s second request, and they

want another 120 days, M would still be 4.

V = Value of Extended Portion of Contract: The value of the material that is going to be delayed. If

the total contract dollar value is for $50K and the whole contract is going to be late, V would be

$50K. If the contractor is going to deliver half of the contract on time but needs more time on the

other half, then V would be $25K.

D = Direct Cost: Fixed costs associated with writing the modification, re-inspecting material, and

any other cost the Government incurs for making the change ($250 as the base).

Examples:

1. Contract is for $1.5M contractor needs a 30 day

extension:(((((1-1)/(1+1))+1)/100)*1*1,500,000)+250 = $15,250

2. Same contract, but now they need an additional 90

days:(((((2-1)/(2+1))+1)/100)*3*1,500,000)+250 = $60,250.00

3. Same contract, they have delivered half of their order, but they need 120 days to finish:

(((((3-1)/(3+1))+1)/100)*4*750,000)+250 = $45,250
43.103 Types of contract modifications.

(b) Unilateral.

(S-90) In cases when the contractor is unable to sign a bilateral modification deobligating an

unliquidated obligation (ULO), the contracting officer may issue a unilateral deobligation

modification with concurrence of Office of Counsel.