alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 980 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to modify authorities relating to 

the collective bargaining of employees in the Veterans Health Administration. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 7, 2017 

Mr. TAKANO (for himself, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania, 

Ms. BROWNLEY of California, Mr. CA ́RDENAS, Mr. COHEN, Mr. COOPER, 

Mrs. DINGELL, Ms. ESHOO, Mr. GARAMENDI, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. 

JAYAPAL, Mr. KILDEE, Ms. KUSTER of New Hampshire, Ms. LOFGREN, 

Mr. LOWENTHAL, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. NOLAN, Mr. POCAN, Miss RICE

of New York, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. WALZ, Mr. PANETTA, 

Mr. CORREA, and Mr. KHANNA) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to modify authorities 

relating to the collective bargaining of employees in the 

Veterans Health Administration. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘VA Employee Fairness 

5 Act of 2017’’. 


emcdonald on DSK9F6TC42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 980 IH

1 SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITIES ON COLLECTIVE 

2 BARGAINING OF EMPLOYEES OF THE VET3 ERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION. 

4 Section 7422 of title 38, United States Code, is 

5 amended— 

6 (1) by striking subsections (b), (c), and (d); and 

7 (2) by redesignating subsection (e) as sub8 section (b). 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK9F6TC42PROD with BILLS
###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 2.906 Obligation of parties to avoid introduction of restricted data or national security information.

It is the obligation of all parties in a proceeding subject to this part to avoid, where practicable, the introduction of Restricted Data or National Security Information into the proceeding. This obligation rests on each party whether or not all other parties have the required security clearance.
#### HAYMAN, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 5, 1914.)

Action by Millie L. Hayman against the City of New York.

No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. See Hayman v. City of New York, 148 N. Y. Supp. 63, decided herewith. See, also, 148 N. Y. Supp. 1119.
**Oregon**

**Oregon 14 Umatilla**
§ 1126.6 Organization of the other parts of this subchapter. ( a ) Each of parts 1128 through 1138 of this subchapter is organized into subparts and appendices. ( 1 ) Each appendix provides the standard wording of general terms and conditions for one of the articles of general terms and conditions that the part addresses.
( 2 ) For each appendix addressing a particular article, the part has an associated subpart that provides the prescription for DoD Components' use of the standard wording for that article.
( b ) For example, Table 1 to § 1126.5 indicates that 2 CFR part 1128 provides the standard wording of general terms and conditions for FMS Articles I through VII and the prescriptions for DoD Components' use of that standard wording. ( 1 ) FMS Article I on financial management system standards is the first of the articles that 2 CFR part 1128 covers. Appendix A to 2 CFR part 1128 provides the standard wording of general terms and conditions for FMS Article I. The associated subpart of 2 CFR part 1128, subpart A, provides the prescription for DoD Components' use of the standard wording of that article.
( 2 ) Appendices B through G of 2 CFR part 1128 provide the standard wording of general terms and conditions for FMS Articles II through VII, respectively. The associated subparts, Subparts B through G, provide the corresponding prescriptions for DoD Components.
§ 603.910 Access to a for-profit participant's records. ( a ) If a for-profit participant currently grants access to its records to the DCAA or other Federal Government auditors, the TIA must include for that participant the standard access-to-records requirements at 10 CFR 600.342(e). If the agreement is a fixed-support TIA, the language in 10 CFR 600.342(e) may be modified to provide access to records concerning the recipient's technical performance, without requiring access to the recipient's financial or other records. Note that any need to address access to technical records in this way is in addition to, not in lieu of, the need to address rights in data (see § 603.845).
( b ) For other for-profit participants that do not currently give the Federal Government direct access to their records and are not willing to grant full access to records pertinent to the award, the contracting officer may negotiate limited access to the recipient's financial records. For example, if the audit provision of an expenditure-based TIA gives an IPA access to the recipient's financial records for audit purposes, the Federal Government must have access to the IPA's reports and working papers and the contracting officer need not include a provision requiring direct Government access to the recipient's financial records. For both fixed-support and expenditure-based TIAs, the TIA must include the access-to-records requirements at 10 CFR 600.342(e) for records relating to technical performance.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

Scott W. Johnson and Florence H. 

Cummings, 

 

 Appellants,

v.

Cale Andrew Clifton; Christopher Matther 

Clifon; Pamela Parker Clifton; Cog 

Operating, LLC; Desert Partners IV, LP; 

Kelli Clifton Gossmann; Lambert Land 

Co., LLC; KMF Land, LLC; McCamey 

Farm & Ranch, LP; J. LLoyd Parker III 

Estate; Springwood Mineral 4, LP; robin 

Lee Young; Young Oil and Gas, LP and 

Lake Ranch, LP.,

Appellees.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-22-00132-CV

Appeal from the

143rd District Court

of Reeves County, Texas 

(TC# 20-07-23609-CVR)

O R D E R

On July 21, 2022, this Court issued an order for mediation referral. The order required 

the parties to make any objection to referral within ten days of the order. On August 1, 2022, 

Appellees filed an objection. The Court finds Appellees’ objection persuasive.

Therefore, the Court ORDERS this appeal to continue, the appellate timetable suspension 

is lifted, and the Clerk’s Record shall now be filed in this Court on or before September 30, 

2022.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of August, 2022.

PER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox and Alley, JJ.
# · ISSUES RELATED TO TEST PROCEDURE FOR COMMERCIAL WARM IR FURNACE AS- - DISCUSSED IN THE NOPR - January 

## 27, 2000 StanleyT. Liu NIST

# Incorporation of SI-IR E1IES 

# Standard 90.1 Referenced Furnace Test Standards • Proposed in NOPR: Test procedures for energy efficiency as prescribed in the following: - ANSI Z21.47 -1993 for Gas-fired furnaces - UL 727-1994 for oil-fired furnaces 

## • Reasons: - EPCA specifies adoption of industrytest standards referenced 

### by ASHRAElIES 90.1 and in effect on June 30,1992 - The standards are those referenced by ASHRAE 90.1 forfurnaces - The latestversions ofthe test standards are proposed since there is no change in the sections on efficiencytest procedure from the priorversions (before June 30, 1992) ofthe standards 

## • Comments during the priorworkshops: All support.

# Definition of Thermal Efficiency 

# for Commercial Warm Air Furnaces • Proposed in NOPR: Define the term Thermal Efficiencyfor commercial furnaces as (100 • 

### % Flue Loss). 

## • Reasons: - EPCA specifies the minimum standard for commercial warm air furnaces in term ofThermal Efficiency (the same as in ASHRAE 90.1) - ASHRAE 90.1 usesthermal efficiency as the efficiencydescriptor - The referenced ANSI Z21.47·1993 explicitly definesthermal efficiency as equal to (100 •%Flue Loss) in its efficiencytest section. - To eliminate possible confusion with the usual definition ofthermal efficiencyas output energy divided by input energy. 

## • Comments during the priorworkshops: - All supportthe proposal. - Nojacket loss should be included.

# Flue Loss**Ca~cu!ation** 

# for Oil- 

# .Fired Furnaces • Proposed in NOPR: Adopting the flue loss calculation procedure specified in the 1989 Hydronics Institute test standard for oil fired boilers as the calculation procedure for oiI fired furnaces. 

## • Reasons:· - UL 727 (foroil furnaces) does not provide a method forflue loss calculation that is needed for determining thermal efficiency. - The 1989 Hydronics Institutetest standard isthe ASHRAE 90.1 referenced test standard for oil fired boilers. - There is no difference in the flue gas analysisfor oil-fired heating equipment (furnace or boiler). . 

## • Comments during priorworkshops: No objection tothe proposal.

# Optional Test for Gas-Fired Condensing Furnaces • Proposed in NOPR: Adopting the steady state test method for flue condensate measurement specified in ASHRAE 103-1993. 

## • Reasons: - To provide a readily available test method for measuring the increased efficiencyfor gas-fired condensing furnaces. - To provide a method for use in the design option evaluation process. - The referenced test standards do not provide thetest method for condensing furnace - ASHRAE 103-1993 is the referenced test procedure for residential ,furnaces and is afamiliar procedure forthe industry. 

## • Comments during priorworkshops: Not needed since no commercial condensing furnace is produced atthe presenttime.
§ 950.31 Covered event dispute resolution. ( a ) If a sponsor disagrees with the Covered Event Determination rendered in accordance with § 950.22 and cannot resolve the dispute informally with the Claims Administrator, then the disagreement is subject to resolution as follows: ( 1 ) A sponsor shall, within thirty (30) days of receipt of the Covered Event Determination, deliver to the Claims Administrator written notice of a sponsor's rebuttal which sets forth reasons for its disagreement, including any expert opinion obtained by the sponsor.
( 2 ) After submission of the sponsor's rebuttal to the Claims Administrator, the parties shall have fifteen (15) days during which time they must informally and in good faith participate in mediation to attempt to resolve the disagreement before instituting the process under paragraph (b) of this section. If the parties reach agreement through mediation, the agreement shall constitute a Final Determination on Covered Events.
( 3 ) The parties shall jointly select the mediator(s). The parties shall share equally the cost of the mediation.
( b ) If the parties cannot resolve the disagreement through mediation under the timeframe established under paragraph (a)(2) of this section and the sponsor elects to continue pursuing the claim, the sponsor shall within ten (10) days submit any remaining issues in controversy to the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (Civilian Board) or its successor, for resolution by an Administrative Judge of the Civilian Board utilizing the Civilian Board's Summary Binding Decision procedure. The parties shall abide by the procedures of the Civilian Board for Summary Binding Decision. The parties agree that the decision of the Civilian Board constitutes a Final Determination on Covered Events.
#### § 501.162 Contents of a complaint.

A complaint must contain a complete statement of all relevant facts pertaining to the act or transaction that is the subject of the complaint. It must also include the names and addresses of all persons involved (if reasonably ascertainable), a description of the events that led to the complaint, and a statement describing the statutory provision, regulation, ruling, order, rule, or interpretation that allegedly has been violated.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 190 (Monday, October 1, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 59922]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24053]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK

[Public Notice 2012-0523]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the United States.

ACTION: Submission for OMB Review and comments request.

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

    Form Title: EIB 92-64 Application for Exporter Short Term Single 
Buyer Insurance.
SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as a 
part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent 
burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to 
comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
    The ``Application for Exporter Short Term Single Buyer Insurance'' 
form will be used by entities involved in the export of US goods and 
services, to provide Ex-Im Bank with the information necessary to 
obtain legislatively required assurance of repayment and fulfills other 
statutory requirements.
    The application can be reviewed at: www.exim.gov/pub/pending/EIB92-64.pdf. Application for Exporter Short Term Single Buyer Insurance.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before October 31, 2012 to be 
assured of consideration.

ADRESSES: Comments maybe submitted electronically on 
WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV or by mail to Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20038 Attn: OMB 3048-0018.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Titles and Form Number: EIB 92-64. Application for Exporter Short 
Term Single Buyer Insurance.
    OMB Number: 3048-0018.
    Type of Review: Regular.
    Need and Use: The information requested enables the applicant to 
provide Ex-Im Bank with the information necessary to obtain 
legislatively required assurance of repayment and fulfills other 
statutory requirements.
    Annual Number of Respondents: 310.
    Estimated Time per Respondent: 1.5 hours.
    Government Annual Burden Hours: 465 hours.
    Frequency of Reporting or Use: As needed.
    Government Review Time: 6 hours.
    Total Hours: 1,860.
    Cost to the Government: $72,020.

Sharon A. Whitt,
Agency Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-24053 Filed 9-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
```
§ 600.171 Closeout procedures. ( a ) Recipients shall submit, within 90 calendar days after the date of completion of the award, all financial, performance, and other reports as required by the terms and conditions of the award. DOE may approve extensions when requested by the recipient.
( b ) Unless DOE authorizes an extension, a recipient shall liquidate all obligations incurred under the award not later than 90 calendar days after the funding period or the date of completion as specified in the terms and conditions of the award or in agency implementing instructions.
( c ) DOE shall make prompt payments to a recipient for allowable reimbursable costs under the award being closed out.
( d ) The recipient shall promptly refund any balances of unobligated cash that DOE has advanced or paid and that is not authorized to be retained by the recipient for use in other projects. OMB Circular A-129 governs unreturned amounts that become delinquent debts.
( e ) When authorized by the terms and conditions of the award, DOE shall make a settlement for any upward or downward adjustments to the Federal share of costs after closeout reports are received.
( f ) The recipient shall account for any real and personal property acquired with Federal funds or received from the Federal Government in accordance with §§ 600.131 through 600.137.
( g ) In the event a final audit has not been performed prior to the closeout of an award, DOE shall retain the right to recover an appropriate amount after fully considering the recommendations on disallowed costs resulting from the final audit.
Webinar Attendees: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Furnace Fans MeetingMeeting Date: Friday, July 27, 2012Name Title Organization Street CityStateZip Phone Fax EmailBennani, SmiresYounessSenior ResearchAssociateLBL One Cyclotron Road Berkeley CA 94705 N/A N/A yfbennani@lbl.govChase, Tom Staff Engineer Johnson Controls, Inc. 3110 N. Mead Wichita KS 67204-9014 316-832-6564 N/A thomas.chase@jci.comCocks, Rachele Senior Design Engineer Regal Beloit Corporation 1946 West Cook Road Fort Wayne IN 46818 260-416-5495 260-416-5460 rachele.cocks@regalbeloit.comEdwards, Peter Principal Peter Edwards Co. 1277 Tredmore Dr. Mississauga ON L5J3V5 905-822-6524 N/A pfedwards@sympatico.caGannon, Greg Marketing Manager First Company 8273 Moberly Lane Dallas TX 75208 214-388-5751x1109214-388-2255 ggannon@firstco.comHundley, John Product Manager LAU-Ruskin-Tomkins 4509 Springfield Street Dayton OH 45431 937-476-6553 N/A jhundley@laufan.comKeil, Heather Managing Consultant Navigant Consulting, Inc. 1400 Old Country Road,Suite 402Westbury NY 11590 202-973-2400 202-973-2401 heather.keil@navigant.comLis, David Appliance StandardsProgram ManagerNortheast Energy EfficiencyPartnerships (NEEP)91 Hartwell Avenue Lexington MA 02421 781-860-9177x 127781-860-9178 djlis@NEEP.orgMaddock, Ray Senior Product Engineer Weil Mclain 523 South New Street Eden NC 27288 336-627-6025 N/A rmaddock@weil-mclain.comMistry, Anuj Engineer, Certification Air-Conditioning, Heating andRefrigeration Institute (AHRI)2111 Wilson Blvd. Suite500,Arlington VA 22201-3001 N/A N/A amistry@ahrinet.orgSmall , Terrell J. CEO/Ower Mortex Products, Inc. 501 Terminal Road Fort Worth TX 76106 817-624-0820x 214817-624-3694 tsmall@mortx.comVerShaw, James T Chief Engineer Ingersoll Rand-Trane ResidentialSystems6200 Troup Highway Tyler TX 75707-1948 903-730-4470 903-581-3280 jim.vershaw@irco.comWilson, Linda Environmental Scientist New York State Office of theAttorney General120 Broadway New York NY 11710 212-416-8948 212-416-6007 Linda.Wilson@ag.ny.govWoodford, Michael Vice President,StandardsAir-Conditioning, Heating &Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)2111 Wilson Boulevard,Suite 500Arlington VA 22201 703-600-0328 703-528-3816 mwoodford@ahrinet.org
2007-0984.

#### State v. Lange.

Mercer App. No. 10-06-28, 2007-Ohio-2280. Reported at 115 Ohio St.3d 1412, 2007-Ohio-4884, 873 N.E.2d 1316. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
Exhibit 32



                       President's Written Certification
                            Of Financial Statements
                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Statute 1350



    Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Statute 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 907 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity
as president of Ridgefield Acquisition Corp. (the "Company") that

    (a) the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period Ended
        September 30, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
        of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

    (b) the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
        material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of
        such period and the results of operations of the Company for such
        period.


Dated: November 13, 2008

                                           /s/ Steven N. Bronson
                                           ----------------------------------
                                           Steven N. Bronson, President
IV 

House Calendar No. 173 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 805 

[Report No. 109–458] 

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 

bill (H.R. 4297) to provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 201(b) 

of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2006 

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered 

to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Waiving points of order against the conference report to 

accompany the bill (H.R. 4297) to provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 201(b) of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006. 

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it 

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 4297) to provide for reconciliation 

4 pursuant to section 201(b) of the concurrent resolution 

5 on the budget for fiscal year 2006. All points of order 


rfake on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

HRES 805 RH

1 against the conference report and against its consideration 

2 are waived. The conference report shall be considered as 

3 read. 


rfake on PROD1PC77 with BILLS

rfake on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
House Calendar No. 173 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 805 

[Report No. 109

–458] 

RESOLUTION 

Waiving points of order against the conference refiscal year 2006. of the concurrent resolution on the budget for vide for reconciliation pursuant to section 201(b) port to accompany the bill (H.R. 4297) to proMAY 9, 2006 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


rfake on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
#### Edward Baker, Appellant, v. Gilbert, Francis, Baker Assoc., Inc., et al., Respondents.

Order, entered on January 9, 1969, granting defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the complaint herein for legal insufficiency unanimously affirmed, without costs, or disbursements and with leave to plaintiff to apply at Special Term, within 20 days after publication hereof, for vacatur of the dismissal and permission to serve an amended complaint if he be so advised. *(Kilgour*v. *Tenney Corp.,*31 A D 2d 517.) The present complaint is legally insufficient, but enough has been shown to indicate that some form of relief may be sought if based upon a proper pleading. Concur — Eager, J. P., Capozzoli, Tilzer, Markewieh and Nunez, JJ.