alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 71.88 Air transport of plutonium. ( a ) Notwithstanding the provisions of any general licenses and notwithstanding any exemptions stated directly in this part or included indirectly by citation of 49 CFR chapter I, as may be applicable, the licensee shall assure that plutonium in any form, whether for import, export, or domestic shipment, is not transported by air or delivered to a carrier for air transport unless: ( 1 ) The plutonium is contained in a medical device designed for individual human application; or
( 2 ) The plutonium is contained in a material in which the specific activity is less than or equal to the activity concentration values for plutonium specified in Appendix A, Table A-2, of this part, and in which the radioactivity is essentially uniformly distributed; or
( 3 ) The plutonium is shipped in a single package containing no more than an A2 quantity of plutonium in any isotope or form, and is shipped in accordance with § 71.5; or
( 4 ) The plutonium is shipped in a package specifically authorized for the shipment of plutonium by air in the Certificate of Compliance for that package issued by the Commission.
( b ) Nothing in paragraph (a) of this section is to be interpreted as removing or diminishing the requirements of § 73.24 of this chapter.
( c ) For a shipment of plutonium by air which is subject to paragraph (a)(4) of this section, the licensee shall, through special arrangement with the carrier, require compliance with 49 CFR 175.704, U.S. Department of Transportation regulations applicable to the air transport of plutonium.
[60 FR 50264, Sept. 28, 1995, as amended at 69 FR 3795, Jan. 26, 2004]
Dear Sir or Ma’am,

Recently the Houston FSDO has deemed that 135.293a (1) and (4

‐ 8) exams are aircraft specific and can

only be given to our company airmen by check airmen that are current, qualified, and type rated on the

same aircraft as what the company airmen is current, qualified, and type rated in. For years, it has been

the practice that any qualified company check airman can give the 135.293a (1) and (4

‐ 8) check to any

company pilot no matter what aircraft that pilot is flying. This was due to the thought that the 135.293a

(1) and (4

‐ 8) was not aircraft specific.

Although Wing Aviation Charter Services has not received any official ruling that the 135.293a (1) and (4

‐

8) is indeed aircraft specific and is of the opinion that it is not, our company is respectfully requesting

that the 135.293a (1) and (4

‐ 8) check be allowed to be given by any of its qualified company check

airmen to any company pilot no matter which type rating either the company check airman or the pilot

to be checked has.

If this ruling becomes official it will create a large burden on the Houston FSDO who will need to provide

many more FAA representatives to accomplish the 135.293a (1) and (4

‐ 8) exams. Our company by itself

has 10 different types of aircraft that would require FAA representatives to perform the exams that we

have always done in house.

This procedure of using in house check airmen to give the 135.293a (1) and (4

‐ 8) exams has been done

ever since this company opened its doors in 2001 and we have never had any kind of safety incident.

We feel because of this safety would not be adversely affected and in fact, the safety margin would

increase because our in house check airmen are subject matter experts in our company procedures. We

believe they are more versed in our procedures than an FAA representative brought in from the outside

to perform the exam.

In summary, Wing Aviation Charter Services (Y9PA) does not believe the 135.293a (1) and (4

‐ 8) exams

are aircraft specific and would like an official ruling that they are or are not. In the meantime, we

respectfully request for our company to continue to allow any of our company qualified check airman to

give the 135.293a (1) and (4

‐ 8) exams to any of our company pilots.

Thank you so very much for your help and consideration.

Very respectfully,

Jon Mostyn

Director of Operations

Wing Aviation charter Services, LLC (Y9PA)
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 28, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 81612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32555]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary


Findings of Misconduct in Science; Correction

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS

ACTION: Correction of notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document corrects errors that appeared in the notice 
published in the November 29, Federal Register entitled ``Findings of 
Misconduct in Science.''

DATES: Effective Date: December 28, 2010.
    Applicability Date: The correction notice is applicable for the 
Findings of Misconduct in Science notice published on November 29, 
2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Gorirossi or Sheila Fleming at 
240-453-8800.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In FR Doc. 2010-29867 of November 29, 2010 (75 FR 73084-73085), 
there was an error, which included an incorrect date of implementation 
of administrative actions. The error is identified and corrected in the 
Correction of Errors section below.

II. Correction of Errors

    In FR Doc. 2010-29867 of November 29, 2010 (75 FR 73084-73085), 
make the following corrections:
    1. On page 73084, third column, fourth paragraph, change the 
paragraph to read as follows: ``By letter dated October 4, 2010, the 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notified Dr. Sezen of 
findings of misconduct in science made by ORI and the Department's 
intent to debar her for a period of five (5) years pursuant to the 
Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct, 42 CFR part 50, 
subpart A and part 93, and HHS' Implementation (2 CFR part 376) of the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidelines to Agencies on 
Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (2 CFR part 180). In accordance 
with part 93, subpart E, Dr. Sezen was afforded 30 days within which to 
request a hearing in this matter. As of November 4, 2010, the period of 
time to request a hearing expired. Thus, the following administrative 
actions have been implemented for a period of five (5) years, beginning 
on December 13, 2010.''

    Dated: December 17, 2010.
John Dahlberg,
Director, Division of Research Investigations, Office of Research 
Integrity.
[FR Doc. 2010-32555 Filed 12-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-31-P
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AEC Annual Energy Consumption AEO Annual Energy Outlook AHRI Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute ANSI American National Standards Institute ASHRAE American Society of Hea ting, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers ASM Annual Survey of Manufacturers BOM bill of materials BT building technologies BTU British thermal units CAC Central air conditioners and heat pumps CBEC Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey CEE Consortium for Energy Efficiency CFC chlorofluorocarbons CFR Code of Federal Regulations CIR Current Industry Reports COGS cost of goods sold CMER consumer marginal energy rates CSL candidate standard level DC direct current DOE U.S. Department of Energy DOJ U.S. Department of Justice ECM electronically commutated motors EER energy efficiency ratio EEV electronic expansion valve EIA Energy Information Administration EISA 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPACT 2005 Energy Policy Act of 2005 EPCA Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 °F degrees Fahrenheit FEMP Federal Energy Management Program FTC U.S. Federal Trade Commission GRIM Government Regulatory Impact Model HCFC hydrocholorofluorcarbon HFC hydrofluorocarbon HSPF heating seasonal performance factor HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning ImSET Impact of Sector Energy Technologies kWh kilowatt hours LCC life-cycle cost LSHX liquid-suction heat exchangers MPC manufacturing production cost MIA manufacturer impact analysis

AA-iMLP manufacturer list price MPC manufacturer production cost MSP manufacturer selling price MTA market and technology assessment NAECA National Energy Conservation Act of 1987 NAICS North American Industry Classification System NEMS National Energy Modeling System NES national energy savings NIA national impact analysis NPV net present value NOPR Notice of Proposed Rulemaking OHA Office of Hearings and Appeals PBP payback period PPI producer price indices PSI pounds per square inch PSC permanent split capacitor R&D research and development RTTC Refrigeration and Thermal Test Center RIA regulatory impact analysis SANOPR Supplemental Advanced No tice of Proposed Rulemaking SBA U.S. Small Business Administration SDHV small duct, high velocity SEC U.S. Securities Exchange Commission SEER seasonal energy efficiency ratio SET saturated evaporator temperature SNOPR Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking SPM shaded-pole motors SPVU single-package, vertical unit SWEF shipment weighted efficiency data TSD Technical Support Document TSL trial standard level TTW through-the-wall TXV thermostatic expansion valve USC United States Code W watt WACC weighted-average cost of capital

AA-ii
IV 

House Calendar No. 133 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 619 

[Report No. 109–348] 

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 612 expressing the 

commitment of the House of Representatives to achieving victory in Iraq. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 16 (legislative day, DECEMBER 15), 2005 

Mr. COLE, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; 

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 612 

expressing the commitment of the House of Representatives to achieving victory in Iraq. 

1 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution 

2 it shall be in order without intervention of any point of 

3 order to consider in the House the resolution (H. Res. 

4 612) expressing the commitment of the House of Rep5 resentatives to achieving victory in Iraq. The resolution 

6 shall be considered as read. The previous question shall 

7 be considered as ordered on the resolution and preamble 
2 

HRES 619 RH 

1 to final adoption without intervening motion or demand 

2 for division of the question except: (1) one hour of debate 

3 equally divided and controlled by the chairman and rank4 ing minority member of the Committee on International 

5 Relations; and (2) one motion to recommit which may not 

6 contain instructions. 

7 SEC. 2. On the first legislative day of the second ses8 sion of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, the House shall 

9 not conduct organizational or legislative business. 

House Calendar No. 133 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 619 

[Report No. 109–348] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. 

D

Iraq. House of Representatives to achieving victory in Res. 612 expressing the commitment of the 

ECEMBER 16 (legislative day, DECEMBER 15), 2005 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed
(logo)****CURCIO

+COHEN

 

 

**Report of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm**

 

Managing Member

Park Bridge Lender ServicesLLC

New York, NY

 

 

We have examinedmanagement’s assertion, included in the accompanying Management’sReport on Assessment of 2016 Compliance by Park Bridge Lender Services LLC withRegulation AB Servicing Criteria (“Management’s Report”), thatPark Bridge Lender Services LLC (the “Company”) complied with theservicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the U.S. Securities andExchange Commission’s Regulation AB as of and for the year ended December31, 2016, excluding those criteria noted as not applicable (N/A) within ExhibitB to Management’s Report. The transactions covered by this report areonly those transactions processed by the Company in its capacity as trustadvisor or operating advisor for the asset backed securities transactions (the “Platform”)identified in Management’s Report. Reference Exhibit A toManagement’s Report for the transactions covered by this examination.Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with theapplicable servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion onmanagement’s assertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conductedin accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company AccountingOversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a testbasis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicableservicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considerednecessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of a selectedsample of the servicing activities related to the Platform, determining whetherthe Company performed those selected activities in compliance with theapplicable servicing criteria during the specified period. Our procedures werelimited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by theCompany during the period covered by this report. Our examination was notdesigned to detect material noncompliance arising from errors that may haveoccurred prior to or subsequent to our tests, that may have affected theCompany’s servicing activities during the period covered by this report.We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’scompliance with the applicable servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion,management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementionedapplicable servicing criteria identified in Exhibit B to Management’sReport with respect to the transactions identified in Exhibit A to Management’sReport as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016, for the Platform, isfairly stated in all material aspects.

 

 

/s/ Curcio & Cohen,CPA’s, P.C.

 

 

New York, NY

February 2, 2017

 

 

CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTSPC 7 PENN PLAZA, SUITE 1500 NEW YORK NY 10001

TEL: 212 557-9800  FAX:212 557 9819   WEBSITE: WWW.CWCCPAFIRM.COM
###### Editorial Note on Part 9

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 9 appear at 82 FR 52825, Nov. 15, 2017.

#### § 9.5 Interpretations.

Except as specifically authorized by the Commission in writing, no interpretation of the meaning of the regulations in this part by an officer or employee of the Commission other than a written interpretation by the General Counsel will be recognized as binding upon the Commission.

[52 FR 49356, Dec. 31, 1987]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### United States Parole Commission

          - [Public Law 94-409; 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552b]

I, Isaac Fulwood, of the United States Parole Commission, was present at a meeting of said Commission, which started at approximately 12 p.m., on Tuesday, December 7, 2010, at the U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 Friendship Boulevard, 4th Floor, Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815. The purpose of the meeting was to decide two petitions for reconsideration pursuant to 28 CFR Section 2.27. Four Commissioners were present, constituting a quorum when the vote to close the meeting was submitted.

Public announcement further describing the subject matter of the meeting and certifications of General Counsel that this meeting may be closed by vote of the Commissioners present were submitted to the Commissioners prior to the conduct of any other business. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the following Commissioners voted that the meeting be closed: Isaac Fulwood, Cranston J. Mitchell and Patricia K. Cushwa, J. Patricia Wilson Smoot.

*In witness whereof,*                     I make this official record of the vote taken to close this meeting and authorize this record to be made available to the public.                

Dated: December 8, 2010.

Isaac Fulwood,

Chairman, U.S. Parole Commission.

[FR Doc. 2010-31860 Filed 12-17-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
#### § 81.31 Selection of an exclusive licensee.

An exclusive licensee will be selected by the Commission on bases consistent with the policy set forth in § 81.11 of this subpart in accordance with the procedures herein, based upon the information supplied to the Commission in a license application under § 81.40. Consideration will be given to: (a) The capabilities of the applicant to further the technical and market development of the invention to bring the same to the point of practical application, (b) the applicant's plan to undertake development of the invention, (c) the projected impact on competition, (d) the benefit to the Government and the public, as well as (e) assistance to small business and minority business enterprises and economically depressed, low income and labor surplus areas, and (f) whether the applicant is a U.S. citizen or corporation.
§ 1138.305 Content of SUB Article III. ( a ) *Requirement.* A DoD Component's general terms and conditions must require recipients to include certain information items in each subaward they make.
( b ) *Award terms and conditions.* A DoD Component's general terms and conditions must use the wording appendix C to this part provides for SUB Article III.
#### WERNER, Appellant, v. SMITH, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 11, 1915.)

Action by Arthur M. Werner against Henry Smith.

H. S. Dottenheim, of New York City, for appellant. J. S. Darcy, of New York City, for respondent.

No opinion. Order .affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed.
#### § 1000.10 Applicable regulations.

Except for the deviations set forth elsewhere in this Part, the Department of the Treasury adopts the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, set forth at 2 CFR part 200.
#### In the Matter of William J. Bianchi et al., Respondents, v. Thomas F. McCoy, as State Administrator of the Administrative Board of the Judicial Conference of the State of New York, Appellant.

Reynolds, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County, in a proceeding brought under CPLR article 78, annulling appellant’s determination changing respondents’ job classification from Official Interpreter for the Supreme Court, First Judicial District, to Interpreter in the New York City Unified Court System and directing a restoration of respondents’ former title. The instant review procedure is premature in that respondents have not exhausted their administrative remedies. Admittedly no decision has been rendered by the Administrative Board of the Judicial Conference on the issues involved. We cannot agree that the issues raised solely involve matters of law and thus that the orderly administrative process is therefore obviated (cf., e.g., *Kovarsky*v. *Brooklyn Union Gas Co.,*279 N. Y. 304). Present is a mixed question of law and fact involving an examination of how respondents’ functions and duties after reclassification effect and jeopardize their duties, status and rights as such existed prior to reclassification. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and petition dismissed, without costs. Herlihy, J. P., Reynolds, Cooke and Greenblott, JJ., concur in memorandum by Reynolds, J.; Aulisi, J., not voting.
100.11.27 15:40 B C:\permftp\lps5101\lps5101.tpp --> permanent.access.gpo.gov /diska/netsite-docs/lps5101 lps5101.tpp
100.11.29 13:46 B C:\permftp\lps5101\lps5101.tpp --> permanent.access.gpo.gov /diska/netsite-docs/lps5101 lps5101.tpp
100.11.29 13:46 B C:\permftp\lps5101\WS_FTP.LOG --> permanent.access.gpo.gov /diska/netsite-docs/lps5101 WS_FTP.LOG
100.12.20 12:19 B C:\permftp\lps5101\lps5101.tpp --> permanent.access.gpo.gov /diska/netsite-docs/lps5101 lps5101.tpp
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 402 

Supporting the designation of July 2017 as Uterine Fibroids Awareness 

Month. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 22, 2017 

Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia (for himself, Ms. FUDGE, and Ms. KELLY of 

Illinois) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the designation of July 2017 as Uterine Fibroids 

Awareness Month. 

Whereas fibroids may cause significant morbidity through 

their presence in the uterus and pelvic cavity causing significant pelvic pain, abnormal uterine bleeding, reproductive dysfunction, miscarriages, and even infertility; 

Whereas the pain, discomfort, stress, and other physical and 

emotional symptoms of living with fibroids may significantly interfere with a woman’s quality of life, compromising her ability to function normally, work or care for 

her family; and may lead to more severe health and 

wellness issues; 

Whereas uterine fibroids are the most prevalent medical condition affecting women, with an estimated 30 percent of 


SSpencer on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 402 IH 

women developing a uterine fibroid by age 35, and 80 

percent of women developing a uterine fibroid by age 50; 

Whereas the exact number of affected women is unknown as 

detection and diagnosis is difficult as only 1 out of 4 

women who have a uterine fibroid tumor exhibit symptoms severe enough to require treatment; 

Whereas the overall incidence of uterine fibroid tumors is estimated to disproportionately and more severely impact 

Black and Hispanic women, resulting in an incidence rate 

that is 3 times greater in women with Black ancestry and 

2 times greater in Hispanic women compared to Caucasian women; 

Whereas a hysterectomy, or removal of the uterus, is among 

the most common surgical treatments for uterine fibroids 

and more than 200,000 hysterectomies are performed 

each year to treat uterine fibroids, at an estimated annual cost of more than $2 billion; 

Whereas uterine fibroid tumors were estimated to cost the 

United States $5.9 billion to $34.4 billion annually with 

an estimated annual lost work cost of $1.6 billion to 

$17.2 billion through absenteeism and short-term disability in women age 25 to 54; and 

Whereas public awareness and education campaigns on uterine fibroids prevention, screening, and symptoms are held 

during the month of July each year: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the goals and ideas of Uterine 

3 Fibroids Awareness Month; 


SSpencer on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 402 IH 

1 (2) recognizes the disparity in incidence rates of 

2 African-American and Hispanic uterine fibroid pa3 tients; 

4 (3) recognizes the need for greater research, 

5 treatment, and care options regarding uterine 

6 leiomyoma; and 

7 (4) encourages the President to issue a procla8 mation calling upon the people of the United States 

9 to observe the month with appropriate awareness 

10 and educational activities. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS