alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 436.16 Establishing non-fuel and non-water cost categories. ( a ) The relevant non-fuel cost categories are— ( 1 ) Investment costs;
( 2 ) Non-fuel operation and maintenance cost;
( 3 ) Replacement cost; and
( 4 ) Salvage value.
( b ) The relevant non-water cost categories are— ( 1 ) Investment costs;
( 2 ) Non-water operation and maintenance cost;
( 3 ) Replacement cost; and
( 4 ) Salvage value.
( c ) The present value of recurring costs is the product of the base year value of recurring costs as multiplied by the appropriate uniform present worth factor under § 436.14, or as calculated by computer software indicated in § 436.18(b) and used with the official discount rate and escalation rate assumptions under § 436.14. When recurring costs begin to accrue at a later time, subtract the present value of recurring costs over the delay, calculated using the appropriate uniform present worth factor for the period of the delay, from the present value of recurring costs over the study period or, if using computer software, indicate a delayed beneficial occupancy date.
( d ) The present value of non-recurring cost under § 436.16(a) is the product of the non-recurring costs as multiplied by appropriate single present worth factors under § 436.14 for the respective years in which the costs are expected to be incurred, or as calculated by computer software provided or approved by DOE and used with the official discount rate and escalation rate assumptions under § 436.14.
[55 FR 48220, Nov. 20, 1990, as amended at 61 FR 32650, June 25, 1996]
H. Res. 280

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

May 23, 2005.

Whereas the contributions of Asian Pacific Americans to our

Nation have been historically significant;

Whereas at the direction of Congress in 1978, the President

proclaimed the week of May 4 through 10, 1979, as

Asian Pacific American Heritage Week, to provide the

people of the United States with an opportunity to recognize the achievements, contributions, history, and concerns of Asian Pacific Americans;

Whereas this seven day period designated Asian Pacific

American Heritage Week intended to mark two historical

dates—May 7, 1843, when the first Japanese immigrants

arrived in the United States, and May 10, 1869, Golden

Spike Day, when, with substantial contributions from

Chinese immigrants, the first transcontinental railroad

was completed;

Whereas in 1992, Congress by law designated that the month

of May be annually observed as Asian Pacific American

Heritage Month;

Whereas according to the U.S. Census Bureau an estimated

14.5 million United States residents trace their ethnic

heritage, in full or in part, to Asia and the Pacific Islands;
2

•HRES 280 EH

Whereas Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders can list innovative contributions to all aspects of life in the United

States ranging from the first transcontinental railroad to

the Internet;

Whereas in the mid-1700’s Filipino sailors formed the first

Asian American and Pacific Islander communities in the

bayous of Louisiana;

Whereas Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders have added

to the vast cultural wealth of our Nation; and

Whereas more than 300,000 Americans of Asian or Pacific

Island heritage have bravely and honorably served to defend the United States in times of armed conflict from

the Civil War to the present: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) recognizes that the United States draws its

strength from its diversity, including contributions made

by Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders;

(2) recognizes that the Asian American and Pacific

Islander community is a thriving and integral part of

American society and culture;

(3) recognizes the prodigious contributions of Asian

Americans and Pacific Islanders to the United States;

and
3

•HRES 280 EH

(4) supports the goals of Asian Pacific American

Heritage Month.

Attest:

Clerk.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  1.
    
    This Quarterly Report of Form 10-QSB fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and2.
    
    The information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant at the dates and for
the periods shown in such report.
  By:
    
    /s/ James Benenson, Jr.James Benenson, Jr.
    
    
    
    Date: October 31, 2006Chairman of the Board of Directors,President and Chief Executive OfficerBy:
    
    /s/ John V. CurciJohn V. Curci
    
    
    
    Date: October 31, 2006Vice-President, Treasurer & Chief Financial OfficerPrincipal Accounting Officer
 A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a- 14(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained
by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
 The certification, which accompanies the Form 10-QSB to which it relates, is not deemed filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any
filing of the Registrant under the Securities Exchange Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-QSB ), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Edwin M. Waldman, Deceased. Philip K. Greene, Respondent; Louis J. Beiser, Doing Business as Isbic Company, Appellant.

In a proceeding by the executor for judicial disallowance of a claim against the decedent’s estate, the claimant appeals from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Kings County, dated November 22, 1968, which granted the application. Decree reversed, on the law and the facts, with $10 costs and disbursements, payable out of the estate; petition dismissed on the merits; and claim determined to foe valid and enforceable. In our opinion, it is clear that under the language of the agreement in question the decedent and others did not *781
      *“*direet[ly] and unconditional[ly] ” agree to be primarily liable for the corporate debt but, rather, agreed to reimburse appellant if the corporation, of which the decedent was president, failed to repay the loans granted it under the loan agreement. The guarantee agreement, executed on the same date as the loan agreement, provided that in order to induce the claimant to enter into the loan agreement, the decedent and others “jointly and severally guarantee[d] ” payment by the corporation of its obligation to repay the loans. Had the decedent intended to be primarily liable for the corporate debt, he could have signed the loan agreement in an individual capacity as well as in his capacity as president of the corporation, thereby making him a joint primary debtor *(Schwartz*v. *Fifty Greenwich St. Realty Corp.,*265 N. Y. 443; see, also, *Cabrera*v. *Olsen,*165 Misc. 374; *Fischer*v. *Mahland,*191 App. Div. 209). The decedent, however, was not a comaker of the loan contract (cf. *Astra Pictures*v. *Schapiro,*182 Misc. 19), but a *guarantor who*was only secondarily liable in the event of default in payment by the corporation *(General Phoenix Corp.*v. *Cabot,*300 N. Y. 87). Accordingly, since the corporation, the primary debtor, could not rely on the defense of usury against appellant’s claim (General Obligations Law, § 5-521, subd. 1), neither could the decedent, standing in the shoes of his principal *(Schwartz*v. *Fifty Greenwich St. Realty Corp., supra; Salvin*v. *Myles Realty Co.,*227 N. Y. 51). We are therefore of the opinion that the Surrogate was in error *and*that appellant has a valid claim against the decedent’s estate. Brennan, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Benjamin, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
PGI 243.1 -GENERAL    **Parent topic:** PGI Part 243 - CONTRACT MODIFICATIONSPGI 243.170 Identification of foreign military sale (FMS) requirements.       When adding FMS requirements using a contract modification, the contracting officer shall—          (1)  Clearly indicate “FMS Requirement” on the front of the modification; and          (2)  Refer to each FMS case identifier code by line/subline item number within the modification, e.g., FMS Case Identifier GY-D-DCA.PGI 243.171 Obligation or deobligation of funds.       The contracting officer shall include sufficient information in each contract modification to permit the paying office to readily identify the changes for each contract line and subline item.          (1)  Include the information under the heading “Summary for the Payment Office” in—          (i)  Section G, Contract Administration Data (Uniform Contract Format); or          (ii)  The contract schedule (Simplified Contract Format).          (2)  The information normally should contain—          (i)  The amount of funds obligated by prior contract actions, to include—          (A)  The total cost and fee if a cost-type contract;          (B)  The target fee at time of contract award if a cost-plus-incentive-fee contract;          (C)  The base fee if a cost-plus-award-fee contract; or          (D)  The target price and target profit if a fixed-price incentive contract;          (ii)  The amount of funds obligated or deobligated by the instant modification, categorized by the types of contracts specified in paragraph (2)(i) of this section; and          (iii)  The total cumulative amount of obligated or deobligated funds, categorized by the types of contracts specified in paragraph (2)(i) of this section.
#### In the Matter of Sandra L. Fletcher, Appellant, v Devon Fletcher et al., Respondents.

[815 NYS2d 269]

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6 for grandparent visitation, the maternal grandmother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Clark, J.), dated December 16, 2003, which, after a hearing, dismissed her petition.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Queens County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith, including a determination as to whether supervised visitation in New York and limited telephone contact with the petitioner would be in the children’s best interests.

Contrary to the Family Court’s determination, there was no testimony that the children were adversely affected by seeing the petitioner *(see Augustine B. C. v Michael B.,*84 AD2d 740, *909741 [1981]; *cf. Matter of Janczuk v Janczuk,*305 AD2d 680, 681 [2003]; *Matter of Wilson v McGlinchey,*305 AD2d 879 [2003], *affd*2 NY3d 375 [2004]). Indeed, the paternal grandparent, in whose foster care the children were placed, characterized the petitioner’s interaction with the oldest child during visits as “positive” and the law guardian generally supported the petition.

Upon all of the circumstances, we find that the Family Court erred in dismissing the petition. However, the evidence in the record supports a determination that supervised visitation in New York and limited telephone contact with the petitioner would be in the children’s best interests. Mastro, J.P., Rivera, Skelos and Covello, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 245 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 245

Expressing support for designation of April 23 as ``Barbara Johns Day'' 
to highlight the important role Ms. Barbara Rose Johns (Powell) played 
 in the Civil Rights Movement, in Brown v. Board of Education and the 
  desegregation of schools, and her role in the history of the United 
            States and the lives of United States citizens.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 3, 2017

  Mr. Garrett (for himself, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Mr. Brat, and Mr. 
 Taylor) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing support for designation of April 23 as ``Barbara Johns Day'' 
to highlight the important role Ms. Barbara Rose Johns (Powell) played 
 in the Civil Rights Movement, in Brown v. Board of Education and the 
  desegregation of schools, and her role in the history of the United 
            States and the lives of United States citizens.

Whereas on April 23, 1951, at the age of 16, Johns led a student strike for 
        equal education at R.R. Moton High School in Prince Edward, Virginia;
Whereas after securing legal support from the NAACP, these Moton students filed 
        suit in Davis v. Prince Edward County, the largest and only student 
        initiated case consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education, the 
        landmark 1954 United States Supreme Court decision declaring segregation 
        and the ``separate but equal'' principle in public schools to be 
        unconstitutional; and
Whereas April 23 would be an appropriate date to designate as ``Barbara Johns 
        Day'': Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) supports the designation of ``Barbara Johns Day'' to 
        highlight the important role Ms. Johns played in the lives of 
        United States citizens;
            (2) requests that the President issue a proclamation 
        calling upon the people of the United States to observe 
        ``Barbara Johns Day'' with appropriate ceremonies and 
        activities; and
            (3) encourages the people of the United States to consider 
        the role and impact of Ms. Johns in the Civil Rights Movement 
        and the role students have had in American history.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Jeanette Bockman et al., Appellants, v. William D. Meisser et al., Constituting the Board of Elections of Nassau County, and Willam C. Sorace, Respondents.

In a proceeding to validate petitions designating appellants as candidates in the Democratic Party Primary Election to be held on June 17, 1969 for the Party position of County Committeeman for the 42d Election District of the 9th Assembly District, Nassau County, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered June 4, 1969, which denied the application and dismissed the petition in this proceeding. Order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Appellants are granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals. Questions of law have arisen which ought to be reviewed. Beldoek, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Martuseello, JJ., concur.
# 30.201-5 Waiver.

(a)(1)(B) Waiver requests for individual procurements shall be submitted to the DLA Acquisition Contract and Pricing Compliance Division for coordination with the DLA Acquisition Director prior to submission to DPC for approval. (e) The DLA Acquisition Compliance, Policy and Pricing Division prepares the annual report on CAS waivers for approval by the Senior Procurement Executive and submits the report to DPC.

**Parent topic:**SUBPART 30.2 – CAS PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
```

[109th Congress Public Law 413]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ413.109]

[[Page 120 STAT. 2765]]

Public Law 109-413
109th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
103 East Thompson Street in Thomaston, Georgia, as the ``Sergeant First 
            Class Robert Lee `Bobby' Hollar, Jr. Post Office 
            Building''. <<NOTE: Dec. 18, 2006 -  [S. 4050]>> 

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

SECTION 1. SERGEANT FIRST CLASS ROBERT LEE ``BOBBY'' HOLLAR, JR. POST 
            OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 103 East Thompson Street in Thomaston, Georgia, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Sergeant First Class Robert Lee `Bobby' 
Hollar, Jr. Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sergeant 
First Class Robert Lee `Bobby' Hollar, Jr. Post Office Building''.

    Approved December 18, 2006.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S. 4050:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 152 (2006):
            Dec. 6, considered and passed Senate.
            Dec. 8, considered and passed House.

                                  <all>
```
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 the Quarterly Report of Sionix Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James
J. Houtz, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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/ James J. Houtz
-----------------------------------
    James J. Houtz, President

August 16, 2004
```

[109th Congress Public Law 335]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ335.109]

[[Page 120 STAT. 1775]]

Public Law 109-335
109th Congress

                                 An Act

 
 To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
   at 2 South Main Street in Akron, Ohio, as the ``John F. Seiberling 
   Federal Building and United States Courthouse''. <<NOTE: Oct. 12, 
                         2006 -  [H.R. 6051]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building and United States courthouse located at 2 South 
Main Street in Akron, Ohio, shall be known and designated as the ``John 
F. Seiberling Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building and United States 
courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to 
the ``John F. Seiberling Federal Building and United States 
Courthouse''.

    Approved October 12, 2006.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 6051:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 152 (2006):
            Sept. 27, considered and passed House.
            Sept. 29, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Herman Steinmetz, Real Estate Broker, Doing Business as Public Realty Service, Petitioner, v. John P. Lomenzo, as Secretary of State, Respondent.

Determination of the respondent, dated February 28, 1969, suspending the petitioner’s real estate broker’s license for a period of four months, unanimously annulled, without costs and without disbursements, and the same is vacated. We conclude that under all the circumstances disclosed there was no substantial evidence in the record to sustain the finding of the hearing officer, on which the order of the Secretary of State was based, that the petitioner knowingly aided and abetted two minor functionaries in his office in a violation of section 440-a of the Real Property Law. *(.Matter of PMnn*v. *Kross,*8 A D 2d 132.) Among other facets of the proceeding, we note: (a) the complaint was not made until July 18, 1968, or about a year-and-a-half after the events; and (b) the facts are equally consistent with a holding that the wife of the petitioner and the office female employee were but lesser adjuncts of the office and simple office personnel who did not hold themselves out as real estate brokers or saleswomen. Concur — Stevens, P. J., McGivern, McNally and Tilzer, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 51
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 51 appear at 80 FR 74980, Dec. 1, 2015.

§ 51.17 Information collection requirements; OMB approval. ( a ) The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has submitted the information collection requirements contained in this part to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.*). The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has approved the information collection requirements contained in this part under control number 3150-0021.
( b ) The approved information collection requirements in this part appear in §§ 51.6, 51.16, 51.41, 51.45, 51.49, 51.50, 51.51, 51.52, 51.53, 51.54, 51.55, 51.58, 51.60, 51.61, 51.62, 51.66, 51.68, and 51.69.
[49 FR 24513, June 14, 1984, as amended at 62 FR 52188, Oct. 6, 1997; 67 FR 67100, Nov. 4, 2002; 72 FR 57443, Oct. 9, 2007]
|   | 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 Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                                                                                    |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                                                                                                    |   |
|   | /s/ David R. Wells                                                                                      |   |
|   | David R. Wells                                                                                          |   |
|   | President, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary/Treasurer, and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer |   |
- Page 1
- Page 2
- Page 3
- Page 4
- Page 5
- Page 6
- Page 7
- Page 8
- Page 9
- Page 10
- Page 11
- Page 12
- Page 13
- Page 14
- Page 15
- Page 16
- Page 17
- Page 18
- Page 19
- Page 20
- Page 21
- Page 22
- Page 23
- Page 24
- Page 25
- Page 26
- Page 27
- Page 28

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2022-04-15T13:01:02-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
Case 2:06-cv-00778-MEF-WC Document 2 Filed 08/30/2006 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00778-MEF-WC Document 2 Filed 08/30/2006 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00778-MEF-WC Document 2 Filed 08/30/2006 Page 3 of 3