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

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 790 

Providing for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 2193), a bill to grant 

States authority to enforce State and local sales and use tax laws 

on remote transactions, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 19, 2018 

Mrs. NOEM submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 2193), a 

bill to grant States authority to enforce State and local 

sales and use tax laws on remote transactions, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Resolved, That immediately upon adoption of this res2 olution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in 

3 the House of the bill (H.R. 2193) to grant States author4 ity to enforce State and local sales and use tax laws on 

5 remote transactions, and for other purposes. All points of 

6 order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill 

7 shall be considered as read. The previous question shall 

8 be considered as ordered on the bill and on any further 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 790 IH 

1 amendment thereto to final passage without intervening 

2 motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and 

3 controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Lead4 er or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to re5 commit with or without instructions. 

6 SEC. 2. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to 

7 the consideration of H.R. 2193. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
§ 727.5 What acknowledgment and consent is required for access to information on DOE computers? An individual may not be granted access to information on a DOE computer unless: ( a ) The individual has acknowledged in writing that the individual has no expectation of privacy in the use of a DOE computer; and
( b ) The individual has consented in writing to permit access by an authorized investigative agency to any DOE computer used during the period of that individual's access to information on a DOE computer and for a period of three years thereafter.
Editorial Note on Part 55
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 55 appear at 80 FR 74980, Dec. 1, 2015.

§ 55.41 Written examination: Operators. ( a ) *Content.* The written examination for an operator will contain a representative selection of questions on the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to perform licensed operator duties. The knowledge, skills, and abilities will be identified, in part, from learning objectives derived from a systematic analysis of licensed operator duties performed by each facility licensee and contained in its training program and from information in the Final Safety Analysis Report, system description manuals and operating procedures, facility license and license amendments, Licensee Event Reports, and other materials requested from the facility licensee by the Commission.
( b ) The written examination for an operator for a facility will include a representative sample from among the following 14 items, to the extent applicable to the facility. ( 1 ) Fundamentals of reactor theory, including fission process, neutron multiplication, source effects, control rod effects, criticality indications, reactivity coefficients, and poison effects.
( 2 ) General design features of the core, including core structure, fuel elements, control rods, core instrumentation, and coolant flow.
( 3 ) Mechanical components and design features of the reactor primary system.
( 4 ) Secondary coolant and auxiliary systems that affect the facility.
( 5 ) Facility operating characteristics during steady state and transient conditions, including coolant chemistry, causes and effects of temperature, pressure and reactivity changes, effects of load changes, and operating limitations and reasons for these operating characteristics.
( 6 ) Design, components, and functions of reactivity control mechanisms and instrumentation.
( 7 ) Design, components, and functions of control and safety systems, including instrumentation, signals, interlocks, failure modes, and automatic and manual features.
( 8 ) Components, capacity, and functions of emergency systems.
( 9 ) Shielding, isolation, and containment design features, including access limitations.
( 10 ) Administrative, normal, abnormal, and emergency operating procedures for the facility.
( 11 ) Purpose and operation of radiation monitoring systems, including alarms and survey equipment.
( 12 ) Radiological safety principles and procedures.
( 13 ) Procedures and equipment available for handling and disposal of radioactive materials and effluents.
( 14 ) Principles of heat transfer thermodynamics and fluid mechanics.
§ 60.74 Tests. ( a ) DOE shall perform, or permit the Commission to perform, such tests as the Commission deems appropriate or necessary for the administration of the regulations in this part. These may include tests of: ( 1 ) Radioactive waste,
( 2 ) The geologic repository including its structures, systems, and components,
( 3 ) Radiation detection and monitoring instruments, and
( 4 ) Other equipment and devices used in connection with the receipt, handling, or storage of radioactive waste.
( b ) The tests required under this section shall include a performance confirmation program carried out in accordance with subpart F of this part.
[48 FR 28222, June 21, 1983]
§ 611.3 On-road advanced technology vehicle. In order to demonstrate that a light duty vehicle is an “on-road advanced technology vehicle”, an automobile manufacturer must provide the following: ( a ) Emissions certification. An automobile manufacturer must certify in writing that the vehicle meets, or will meet, the emissions requirements specified in the definition of “on-road advanced technology vehicle”; and
( b ) Demonstration of fuel economy performance. An automobile manufacturer must demonstrate that the vehicle has a combined average fuel economy of at least 125 percent of the average combined fuel economy for vehicles with substantially similar attributes for model year 2005. ( 1 ) A combined average fuel economy calculation required under this paragraph for a vehicle that is a dual fueled automobile for the purpose of CAFE is calculated as if the vehicle were not a dual fueled automobile.
( 2 ) The average combined fuel economy for vehicles with substantially similar attributes is a harmonic production weighted average of the combined average fuel economy of all vehicles with substantially similar attributes in model year 2005, as published by DOE.
( 3 ) In the case of an electric drive vehicle with the ability to recharge from an off-board source, an automobile manufacturer must provide DOE with a test procedure and sufficient data to demonstrate that the vehicle meets or exceeds the applicable average combined fuel economy of vehicles with substantially similar attributes.
[73 FR 66731, Nov. 12, 2008, as amended at 89 FR 33203, Apr. 29, 2024]
#### In the Matter of Dennis M. Pizzo, an Attorney.

Resignation accepted and name stricken from roll of attorneys. Present — Dillon, P. J., Cardamone, Simons, Hancock, Jr., and Callahan, JJ.
No. 75-6967.

#### Holsey *v.*Watkins, U. S. District Judge, et al.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
###### Editorial Note on Part 63

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 63 appear at 81 FR 86909, Dec. 2, 2016.

#### § 63.1 Purpose and scope.

This part prescribes rules governing the licensing (including issuance of a construction authorization) of the U.S. Department of Energy to receive and possess source, special nuclear, and byproduct material at a geologic repository operations area sited, constructed, or operated at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, in accordance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, and the Energy Policy Act of 1992. As provided in 10 CFR 60.1, the regulations in part 60 of this chapter do not apply to any activity licensed under another part of this chapter. This part also gives notice to all persons who knowingly provide to any licensee, applicant, contractor, or subcontractor, components, equipment, materials, or other goods or services, that relate to a licensee's or applicant's activities subject to this part, that they may be individually subject to NRC enforcement action for violation of § 63.11.

[69 FR 2280, Jan. 14, 2004]
§ 1120.700 Scope of programmatic requirements. A requirement is most appropriately included in the programmatic requirements portion of the general terms and conditions if it: ( a ) Is not in one of the subject matter areas covered by the administrative requirements in Subdivision B of the general terms and conditions, as described in § 1120.500.
( b ) Does not meet the criteria in § 1120.600 for a national policy requirement.
( c ) Broadly applies to awards using the general terms and conditions. Requirements that apply to relatively few of those awards are more appropriately included in the award-specific terms and conditions of the individual awards to which they apply.
( d ) Is expected to be in effect for the foreseeable future, rather than for a limited period of time. For example, a requirement in an annual appropriations act that applies specifically to funding made available by that act is better addressed through the award-specific terms and conditions of awards or modifications to which it applies.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v. 

LINO HERNANDEZ, a.k.a. Ramon, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-10518 

D.C. No. 2:02-cr-00213-MCE

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 15, 2018**

Before: FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Lino Hernandez appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his 

motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Hernandez contends that he is eligible for a sentence reduction under 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

AUG 21 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-10518

Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a 

district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See 

United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). Hernandez was 

convicted of offenses involving substances that corresponded to approximately 34 

kilograms of methamphetamine. Even after Amendment 782, the base offense 

level for that drug amount is 38. See U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c)(1) (2014). Because

Amendment 782 did not lower Hernandez’s applicable guideline range, the district 

court correctly concluded that he is ineligible for a sentence reduction. See 18 

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B); Leniear, 574 F.3d at 673. 

Contrary to Hernandez’s contention, once the district court determined his 

ineligibility, it was not required to consider the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3553(a) before denying his section 3582(c)(2) motion. See Dillon v. United 

States, 560 U.S. 817, 826 (2010) (the court must determine that a sentence 

reduction is authorized under section 3582(c)(2) before it may consider whether a 

reduction is warranted under the section 3553(a) factors).

Hernandez’s remaining claims are not cognizable in a section 3582(c)(2) 

proceeding. See id. at 831.

AFFIRMED.
### Geology of the Mid-Atlantic Corridor (GOMAC): A Project of the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program

By: J. Wright Horton Jr.**

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/fs18497

#### Links

- More information:  **USGS Index Page**                            (html)
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SPECTRUM
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC., AND SUBSIDIARIES UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,517
<SECURITIES>                                     1,527
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,354
<ALLOWANCES>                                        86
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,559
<PP&E>                                             538
<DEPRECIATION>                                     338
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,759
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,335
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,441
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,759
<SALES>                                            101
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,413
<CGS>                                               44
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       44
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (921)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (921)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (921)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.78)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.78)
        

</TABLE>
§ 1108.265 Obligation. *Obligation* means: ( a ) When used in conjunction with a DoD Component's award, a legally binding agreement that will result in outlays, either immediately or in the future. Examples of actions through which a DoD Component incurs an obligation include the grants or agreements officer's signature of a grant, cooperative agreement, or technology investment agreement (or modification of such an award) authorizing the recipient to use funds under the award.
( b ) When used in conjunction with a recipient's or subrecipient's use of funds under an award or subaward, an order placed for property and services, a contract or subaward made, or a similar transaction, during a given period that requires payment during the same or a future period.
PGI 225.7604 Waivers.

Forward waiver requests to the Office of the Principal Director (Contract Policy) via email to

osd.pentagon.ousd-a-s.mbx.asda-dp-c-contractpolicy@mail.mil.

Parent topic: PGI 225.76 -SECONDARY ARAB BOYCOTT OF ISRAEL
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>   5
<LEGEND> THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL
INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE
THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN
SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                             6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                   DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                                        JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                                                    88686
<SECURITIES>                                                           28244242
<RECEIVABLES>                                                                 0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                              0
<PP&E>                                                                        0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                         28332928
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                    162776
<BONDS>                                                                       0
<COMMON>                                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                                                             28170152
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                           28332928
<SALES>                                                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                        1232762
<CGS>                                                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                            237531
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                         156719
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                            0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                          838512
<INCOME-TAX>                                                             838512
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                      838512
<DISCONTINUED>                                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                                             838512
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                                 0


        

</TABLE>
§ 709.16 Application of Counterintelligence Evaluation Review Boards in reaching conclusions regarding CI evaluations. ( a ) *General.* If the results of a counterintelligence evaluation are not dispositive, the Director of the Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence may convene a Counterintelligence Evaluation Review Board to obtain the individual views of each member as assistance in resolving counterintelligence issues identified during a counterintelligence evaluation.
( b ) *Composition.* A Counterintelligence Evaluation Review Board is chaired by the Director of the Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence (or his/her designee) and includes representation from the appropriate line Program Managers, lab/site/facility management (if a contractor employee is involved), NNSA, if the unresolved issues involve an NNSA covered person, the DOE Office of Health, Safety and Security and security directors for the DOE or NNSA site or operations office.
( c ) *Process.* When making a final recommendation under § 709.17 of this part, to a Program Manager, the Director of Intelligence and Counterintelligence shall report on the Counterintelligence Evaluation Review Board's views, including any consensus recommendation, or if the members are divided, a summary of majority and dissenting views.
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATIONS

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350



The undersigned hereby certifies that (i) the foregoing quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed by Fountain Powerboat Industries, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended December 31, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|                   |  |                                                  
|------------------ |  | -------------------------------------------------
|                   | 
|                   |  |                                                  
|                   |  |                                                  
|Date:April 3, 2008 |  | /s/ REGINALD M. FOUNTAIN, Jr.                    
|                   |  | Reginald M. Fountain, Jr.
Chief Executive Officer
|                   | 



|                   |  |                                        
|------------------ |  | ---------------------------------------
|                   | 
|                   |  |                                        
|                   |  |                                        
|Date:April 3, 2008 |  | /s/ IRVING L. SMITH                    
|                   |  | Irving L. Smith
Chief Financial Officer
|                   |
#### § 820.50 Purpose and scope.

This subpart provides for interpretations of the Act, Nuclear Statutes, and DOE Nuclear Safety Requirements. Any written or oral response to any written or oral question which is not provided pursuant to this subpart does not constitute an interpretation and does not provide any basis for action inconsistent with the Act, a Nuclear Statute, or a DOE Nuclear Safety Requirement.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 17, 2020

No. 04-20-00051-CV

MEDFINMANAGER, LLC,

Appellant

v.

John SALAS,

Appellee

From the 407th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019-CI-22706

Honorable Karen H. Pozza, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellee’s brief was due September 14, 2020. On September 15, 2020, appellee filed his 

brief and motion requesting a two day extension of time. We GRANT the motion and DEEM

the brief timely filed.

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 17th day of September, 2020.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court