alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
32.1
 
 Section
1350 Certification
 
 In connection with the quarterly report
of China Industrial Waste Management, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the "Report"), I, Dong Jinqing, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 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 result of operations of the Company.
  May
      15, 2009
                      
                      /s/ Dong
      JinqingDong
      JinqingChief
      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 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# Subpart 1831.2—Contracts with Commercial Organizations

**Parent topic:**PART 1831—CONTRACT COST PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES

## 1831.205 Selected costs.

## 1831.205-70 Contract clause.

The contracting officer must insert the clause at 1852.231–70, Precontract Costs, in contracts for which specific coverage of precontract costs is authorized. 

                                  Editorial Note:                                  At 85 FR 52927, Aug. 27, 2020, 1831.205–70 was amended; however, the amendment could not be incorporated due to inaccurate amendatory instruction.                               

## 1831.205-671 [Reserved]
2007-2131.

#### State v. Cooper.

Hamilton App. No. C-060677, 2007-Ohio-4464. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.

Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., dissent.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v ) CR. NO. 2:06cr200-WHA

)

HECTOR R. SILVA )

ORDER

On November 7, 2006, the defendant filed a motion for leave to file a motion

to suppress (doc. # 65). The government does not oppose the filing of the motion to

suppress but does oppose the substance of the motion to suppress. (Doc. # 66).

Accordingly, upon consideration of the motion for leave to file a motion to suppress,

and for good cause, it is

ORDERED as follows:

1. That the motion for leave to file a motion to suppress (doc. # 65) be and

is hereby GRANTED

2. That on or before November 20, 2006, the United States shall file a

response to the defendant’s motion to suppress.

3. That an evidentiary hearing on the motion to suppress be and is hereby

SET for 2:00 p.m. on November 28, 2006 in Courtroom 4B, United States

Courthouse Complex, One Church Street, Montgomery, Alabama. The Clerk is

directed to provide a court reporter for this proceeding. 

Case 2:06-cr-00200-WHA-CSC Document 68 Filed 11/14/2006 Page 1 of 2
If the defendant is in custody, the United States Marshal or the person having

custody of the defendant shall produce the defendant for the proceeding.

Done this 14 day of November, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00200-WHA-CSC Document 68 Filed 11/14/2006 Page 2 of 2
2852.000 Scope of part.

This part provides the text of provisions and clauses which are unique to DOJ or supplement the

FAR.

Parent topic: PART 2852 - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
226 So.2d 520

#### BAKER FINANCE CO., Inc. v. Enoch H. HINES.

No. 49940.

Oct. 1, 1969.

In re: Enoch H. Hines applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 222 So.2d 331.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsBOREAS TE-9 NSA Photosynthetic Capacity and Foliage Nitrogen DataThe Boreal Ecosystem-Atmospheric Study (BOREAS) TE-9 (Terrestrial Ecology) team collected several data sets related to chemical and photosynthetic properties of leaves in boreal forest tree species. This data set describes the spatial and temporal relationship between foliage nitrogen concentration and photosynthetic capacity in the canopies of black spruce, jack pine, and aspen located within the Northern Study Area (NSA). The data were collected from June to September 1994 and are useful for modeling the vertical distribution of carbon fixation for different forest types in the boreal forest. The data are available in tabular ASCII files. The data files are available on a CD-ROM (see document number 20010000884), or from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC).Document ID20010004210Acquisition SourceGoddard Space Flight CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsHall, Forrest G.*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD United States)*Curd, Shelaine*(Raytheon Information Technology and Scientific Services Greenbelt, MD United States)*Dang, Qinglai*(Lakehead Univ. Port Arthur, Ontario Canada)*Margolis, Hank*(Laval Univ. Sainte-Foye, Quebec Canada)*Coyea, Marie*(Laval Univ. Sainte-Foye, Quebec Canada)*Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateOctober 1, 2000Subject CategoryEarth Resources And Remote SensingReport/Patent NumberRept-2000-03136-0/VOL156NASA/TM-2000-209891/VOL156NAS 1.15:209891/VOL156Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 462-33-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20010004210.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
FINAL January 10, 2002 Page of 

INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT

Case Number: P020161 Assessor: Bangs

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES

Scenario#: 1 Number of Release Sites: 

Release Activity:

Release Description: WATER LANDFILL INCINER LAND/INCIN FUGITIVE

Total Releases:

(kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr)

Release Days/yr:

Per Site Release:

(kg/day) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/day)

Remarks:

EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 7
INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT Page of

CASE NUMBER:P020161

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 7
INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT Page of

CASE NUMBER: P020161

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 7
INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT Page of

CASE NUMBER:P020161

EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 7
Page of 

INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT

Case Number: P020161 Assessor:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES

Scenario#: 2 Number of Release Sites: 

Release Activity:

Release Description: WATER LANDFILL INCINER LAND/INCIN FUGITIVE

Total Releases:

(kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr)

Release Days/yr:

Per Site Release:

(kg/day) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/day)

Remarks:

EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 7
INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT Page of

CASE NUMBER:P020161

EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 7
INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT Page of

CASE NUMBER: P020161

EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 7
PGI 222.1305 Waivers.

(c) When seeking a waiver of any of the terms of the clause at FAR 52.222-35, Equal Opportunity for

Veterans, submit a waiver request through contracting channels to the labor advisor. If the request

is justified, the labor advisor will endorse the request and forward it for action to—

(i) The agency head for waivers under FAR 22.1305(a); or

(ii) The Secretary of Defense, without the power of redelegation, for waivers under FAR 22.1305(b).

Parent topic: PGI 222.13 -EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR VETERANS
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3477 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3477

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain athletic footwear valued at 
                            not over $2.50.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 8, 2006

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To suspend temporarily the duty on certain athletic footwear valued at 
                            not over $2.50.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN ATHLETIC FOOTWEAR VALUED AT NOT OVER $2.50.

    (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:

``      9902.13.94       Footwear with      Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         outer soles of                                                     31/2009
                         leather or
                         composition
                         leather and
                         uppers of textile
                         materials, valued
                         not over $2.50
                         per pair, the
                         foregoing other
                         than for men
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         6404.20.20)......

    (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>
```
#### § 993.75 Verification of reports.

For the purpose of checking and verifying reports filed by handlers or the operation of handlers under the provisions of this subpart, the Secretary, and the Committee through its duly authorized agents, shall have access to any premises where prunes may be held by any handler and at any time during reasonable business hours, shall be permitted to inspect any prunes so held by such handler and any and all records of such handler with respect to the holding or disposition of all prunes which may be held or which may have been disposed of by him.

[37 FR 862, Jan. 20, 1972]
Exhibit
10.1

    
      	
              

            	
              23
      East 4th
      St

              3rd
      Floor

              New
      York, NY 10003

              T:
      +1 (212) 201-9280

              F:
      +1 (866) 561-0310

              www.The
      Orchard.com

            


    

    


    February
18, 2010

    


    Brad
Navin

    205 West
88th
Street, Apartment 2C

    New York,
NY 10024

    


    Dear
Brad;

    


    Reference
is hereby made to that certain Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (the
“Agreement”) between The Orchard and you dated February 28,
2008.  This letter constitutes an amendment to the Agreement and
reflects our further understanding and agreement with respect to your continued
employment as CEO of The Orchard, as set forth below. All capitalized terms used
herein but not defined shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the
Agreement.

    


    The
Orchard would like, and the Board of Directors shall take such actions
reasonably necessary, to appoint you to serve as its Chief Executive Officer,
effective immediately.  In connection with your service as Chief
Executive Officer, you will receive an annual base salary of $275,000, paid in
accordance with The Orchard’s customary payroll practices. Your annual bonus for
fiscal 2010 will be based on the cash bonus targets and performance criteria
established by the Compensation Committee for performance-based cash awards to
The Orchard’s management for fiscal 2010 (“2010 Management Bonus
Plan”).  Your fiscal 2010 bonus target will be $125,000 and will be
payable in accordance with the 2010 Management Bonus Plan.

    


    In
addition, prior to the expiration of the Agreement, but no later than August
2010, the Board of Directors of The Orchard will authorize one of its members to
enter into good faith negotiations with you regarding the material terms of your
employment as CEO with The Orchard.

    


    Notwithstanding
anything to the foregoing, the Agreement is and shall remain in full force and
effect until terminated by its terms.

     

    
      
        	 	
                Sincerely
      yours,

                


                The
      Orchard Enterprises, Inc.

              	 
	 	 	 	 
	
                 

              	
                By:
      

              	/s/
      Nathan Fong	 
	 	 	      
                Nathan
      Fong

              	 
	 	 	      
                Chief
      Financial Officer

              	 
	 	 	 	 


      

    

     

    
      	
              
                Agreed
      and Accepted

              

            	 
	 	 	 
	
              By:
      

            	/s/ Brad Navin	 
	 	Brad
      Navin	 
	 	      
               

            	 
	Date:  
      	2/18/10
#### GABIE, Appellant, v. NEWTON, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 5, 1914.)

Action by Arthur Gabie against Homer C. Newton.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant has failed to show any merits, as required by the special rule of this court adopted January 1910. See, also, Schorr v. Weisfeld, 147 N. Y. Supp. 477, decided May 8, 1914. Decision of the motion held for one week for the presentation of proper papers. See also, 147 N. Y. Supp. 1113; 148 N. Y. Supp. 1116.
Open Literature Review Summary 

Chemical Name: Atrazine

CAS No: 1912-24-9

PC Code: 080803

ECOTOX Record Number and Citation: 

Kraak, G. (2014) The Effects of Atrazine on the Cortisol Stress Response in the Zebrafish (Danio 

rerio): Final Report. Project Number: TK0122394. Unpublished study prepared by University of 

Guelph. 20p. MRID 49639108 

Date of Review: March 1, 2016

Author’s Abstract 

“The present study examined the effects of atrazine on basal and forced swimming induced 

changes in whole body Cortisol content in adult zebrafish. Zebrafish were exposed to graded 

concentrations of atrazine or the atrazine degradates deisopropylatrazine (DIA), 

deethylatrazine (DEA) and diamino-s-chlorotriazine (DACT) for up to 10 days. Some fish were 

sampled for the measurement of whole body Cortisol levels under basal conditions while others 

were sampled after being subjected to a 20 min swimming challenge in order to quantify stress 

induced Cortisol levels. In one experiment, zebrafish were subjected to two bouts of forced 

swimming three hours apart to test whether prior atrazine exposure affects the ability of the 

fish to respond appropriately to a repeated stressor. The results demonstrated that controls 

not exposed to atrazine and zebrafish exposed to atrazine or the atrazine degradates at 

nominal concentrations of up to 100 pg/L consistently exhibited increased whole body Cortisol 

content in response to the swimming challenge. Separate analyses revealed few changes in 

basal or stress induced Cortisol levels following atrazine exposure. Overall, these data suggest 

that atrazine and some of its degradates at the concentrations tested have minimal effects on 

the Cortisol mediated stress response in the zebrafish.” 

Description of Use in Document (QUAL, QUAN, INV): Not Reviewed for Classification 

Reviewer Conclusions: 

A brief review of the study results indicate that the direct effects on the cortisol stress response 

do not result in more sensitive endpoints for fish following chronic exposure to atrazine, and 

thus would not contribute new data for refinement of current chronic fish conclusions in the 

risk assessment. Therefore this study was not fully reviewed for inclusion in the risk 

assessment. If, at a later time, these data are to be utilized for regulatory decision making, then 

a complete review of the study should be conducted at that time. 

Limitations: This study was not fully reviewed for scientific or regulatory limitations. 
Primary Reviewer: Frank T. Farruggia Ph.D., EPA/OCSPP/OPP/EFED/ERB3 

Digitally signed by FRANK FARRUGGIA 

DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, 

ou=USEPA, ou=Staff, cn=FRANK 

FARRUGGIA, dnQualifier=0000048865 

Date: 2016.04.14 08:42:26 -04'00'
PGI 216.405-2 Cost-plus-award-fee contracts.

(1) Although weighted guidelines do not apply per DFARS 216.405-2(3)(ii) when definitizing a

contract action, the contracting officer shall, nevertheless, separately assess and document the

reduced cost risk on the contract for—

(i) The period up to the date of definitization; as well as

(ii) The remaining period of performance (see DFARS 217.7404-6).

(2) Normally, award fee is not earned when the fee-determining official has determined that

contractor performance has been submarginal or unsatisfactory.

(3) The basis for all award fee determinations shall be documented in the contract file.

(4) The cost-plus-award-fee contract is also suitable for level of effort contracts where mission

feasibility is established but measurement of achievement must be by subjective evaluation rather

than objective measurement. See Table 16-1, Performance Evaluation Criteria, for sample

performance evaluation criteria and Table 16-2, Contractor Performance Evaluation Report, for a

sample evaluation report.

(5) The contracting activity may—

(i) Establish a board to—

(A) Evaluate the contractor's performance; and

(B) Determine the amount of the award or recommend an amount to the contracting officer; and

(ii) Afford the contractor an opportunity to present information on its own behalf.

Parent topic: PGI 216.405 Cost-reimbursement incentive contracts.
Editorial Note on Part 26
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 26 appear at 87 FR 71455, Nov. 22, 2022.

§ 26.83 Specimens to be collected. Except as permitted under § 26.31(d)(5), licensees and other entities who are subject to this subpart shall— ( a ) Collect either breath or oral fluids for initial tests for alcohol. Breath must be collected for confirmatory tests for alcohol; and
( b ) Collect only urine specimens for both initial and confirmatory tests for drugs, unless the licensee or other entity establishes through its policy and procedures that an oral fluid specimen can be collected and tested for any of the observed specimen collection conditions under § 26.115(a)(1) through (3) and (5). For each observed collection condition under § 26.115(a)(1) through (3) and (5), the licensee or other entity shall always collect and test the same specimen type.
[73 FR 17176, Mar. 31, 2008, as amended at 87 FR 71456, Nov. 22, 2022]
Subpart 811.6 [Reserved]

Parent topic: PART 811 - DESCRIBING AGENCY NEEDS
Exhibit 35.1

SERVICING COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2013-1 for the fiscal year ending
December 31, 2015 (the Report), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Santander Consumer USA Inc. (the Servicer), does hereby certify and represent that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities and performance of the Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of January 16, 2013, among Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, Santander Consumer USA Inc., Santander
Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2013-1 and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (the Agreement) during the period that is the subject of the Report has been made under my supervision.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the period that is the subject of the Report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC./s/ Jennifer M. DavisName: Jennifer M. DavisTitle: Deputy Chief Financial OfficerDate: March 29, 2016/s/ Rich MorrinName: Rich MorrinTitle: Chief Operating OfficerDate: March 29, 2016
* Of the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.



# United Stat es Court of A ppeals

For the First C ircuit
No. 01-2671 IVP PHARMACEUTICAL CARE, INC., Plaintiff, Appellant,

v. TUFTS ASSOCIATED HEALTH PLANS, INC.,

Defendant, Appellee.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Morris E. Lasker, * U.S. District Judge ] Before Boudin, Chief Judge , Bownes, Senior Circuit Judge , and Lipez, Circuit Judge . Geoffrey S. Harper , with whom Lawrence K. Kalodney , Fish & Richardson P.C. were on brief, for appellant. James J. Marcellino , with whom Greg A. Friedholmand McDermott, Will & Emery were on brief, for appellee.
August 12, 2002-2- PER CURIAM . We affirm. The district court has written
a compre hensiv e extensive opinion which correctly states the relevant contract law of Massachusetts. There is no point in restating what the district court has already said clearly and correctly. We, therefore, adopt the district court opinion.