alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 61.423 What are the recordkeeping requirements for a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating? ( a ) As a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating you must: ( 1 ) Sign the logbook of each person to whom you have given flight training or ground training.
( 2 ) Keep a record of the name, date, and type of endorsement for: ( i ) Each person whose logbook you have endorsed for solo flight privileges.
( ii ) Each person for whom you have provided an endorsement for a knowledge test, practical test, or proficiency check, and the record must indicate the kind of test or check, and the results.
( iii ) Each person whose logbook you have endorsed as proficient to operate— ( A ) An additional category or class of light-sport aircraft;
( B ) In Class B, C, and D airspace; at an airport located in Class B, C, or D airspace; and to, from, through, or at an airport having an operational control tower;
( C ) A light-sport aircraft that is an airplane with a VH less than or equal to 87 knots CAS; and
( D ) A light-sport aircraft with a VH greater than 87 knots CAS.
( iv ) Each person whose logbook you have endorsed as proficient to provide flight training in an additional category or class of light-sport aircraft.
( b ) Within 10 days after providing an endorsement for a person to operate or provide training in an additional category and class of light-sport aircraft you must— ( 1 ) Complete, sign, and submit to the FAA the application presented to you to obtain those privileges; and
( 2 ) Retain a copy of the form.
( c ) You must keep the records listed in this section for 3 years. You may keep these records in a logbook or a separate document.
[Doc. No. FAA-2001-11133, 69 FR 44875, July 27, 2004, as amended by Amdt. 61-125, 75 FR 5222, Feb. 1, 2010; Amdt. 61-125A, 75 FR 15610, Mar. 30, 2010; Docket FAA-2010-1127, Amdt. 61-135, 81 FR 1307, Jan. 12, 2016]
EXHIBIT 99.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wells Real Estate Fund XII, L.P.
(the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Leo F. Wells, III, Chief Executive Officer
of the corporate General Partner of the Registrant, hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that, to the best of his knowledge and belief:



| | (1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.
| | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ LEO F. WELLS,
III                                
|Leo F. Wells, III Chief Executive Officer May 9, 2003
Editorial Note on Part 302
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 302 appear at 84 FR 15935, Apr. 16, 2019.

§ 302.216 Administrative law judge's initial or recommended decision. ( a ) In a case that has been set for oral evidentiary hearing under § 302.210(a)(4), the administrative law judge shall adopt and serve an initial or recommended decision within one hundred thirty-six (136) days after the issuance of the order establishing further procedures unless: ( 1 ) The DOT decisionmaker, having found extraordinary circumstances, has by order delayed the initial or recommended decision by a period of not more than thirty (30) days; or
( 2 ) An applicant has failed to meet the procedural schedule adopted by the judge or the DOT decisionmaker. In this case, the administrative law judge may, by notice, extend the due date for the issuance of an initial or recommended decision for a period not to exceed the period of delay caused by the applicant.
( b ) In a case in which some of the issues have not been set for oral hearing under § 302.210(a)(4), the administrative law judge shall adopt and serve an initial or recommended decision within the time established by the DOT decisionmaker in the order establishing further procedures, except that that due date may be extended in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
( c ) The initial or recommended decision shall be issued by the administrative law judge fourteen (14) days after it is served. Unless exceptions are filed under § 302.217 or the DOT decisionmaker issues an order to review on his or her own initiative, an initial decision shall become effective as the final order of the Department the day it is issued. Where exceptions are timely filed or the DOT decisionmaker takes action to review on his or her own initiative, the effectiveness of the initial decision is stayed until further order of the DOT decisionmaker.
( d ) In all other respects, the provisions of § 302.31 shall apply.
#### § 38.9 Relationship to other regulations.

In accordance with certain provisions of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 (CAA) (42 U.S.C. 7571 *et seq.*), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is authorized to set standards for aircraft engine emissions in the United States, while the FAA is authorized to ensure compliance with those standards under a delegation from the Secretary of Transportation (49 CFR 1.83). The fuel efficiency limits in § 38.17 are intended to be the same as that promulgated by the EPA in 40 CFR part 1030. Accordingly, if the EPA changes any regulation in 40 CFR part 1030 that corresponds with a regulation in this part, a certification applicant may request a waiver of those provisions as they appear in this part in order to comply with part 1030. In addition, unless otherwise specified in this part, all terminology and abbreviations in this part that are defined in 40 CFR part 1030 have the meaning specified in part 1030.
#### County of Nassau, Appellant and Respondent, *v.*City of Long Beach et al., Respondents and Appellants.

Submitted March 1, 1937;

decided March 16, 1937.

Motion for reargument granted and case set down for first week of next session. (See 272 N. Y. 260.)
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4567 

To designate the Rocksprings Station of the U.S. Border Patrol located 

on West Main Street in Rocksprings, Texas, as the ‘‘Donna M. Doss 

Border Patrol Station’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2020 

Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Ms. SINEMA, Mr. CRUZ, and Mr. TESTER) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To designate the Rocksprings Station of the U.S. Border 

Patrol located on West Main Street in Rocksprings, 

Texas, as the ‘‘Donna M. Doss Border Patrol Station’’. 

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 ‘‘Donna M. Doss Memo5 rial Act of 2020’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 

8 (1) A native of the State of Washington, Agent 

9 Donna Marie Doss— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4567 IS

1 (A) proudly and honorably served her 

2 country as an Agent of the U.S. Border Patrol 

3 for more than 15 years; 

4 (B) began her service with the U.S. Border 

5 Patrol in 2003; and 

6 (C) graduated as part of the 569th Session 

7 of the Border Patrol Academy with Class 584 

8 on June 6, 2005. 

9 (2) Agent Doss— 

10 (A) served on a Drug Enforcement Admin11 istration Task Force on the southern border for 

12 3 years before being assigned to the northern 

13 border; 

14 (B) was promoted to Supervisory Border 

15 Patrol Agent in Laredo Border Patrol Sector, 

16 where she was named an Operations Officer in 

17 2016; and 

18 (C) relocated to Abilene, Texas in 2017, 

19 where she served as a Resident Agent. 

20 (3) On February 2, 2019, Agent Doss re21 sponded to a call for assistance from the Texas De22 partment of Public Safety near Interstate 20 in Tye, 

23 Texas. While on scene, Agent Doss was struck and 

24 killed by a passing vehicle. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4567 IS

1 (4) Agent Doss is survived by her husband, fa2 ther, mother, 2 stepchildren, a sister and a brother. 

3 SEC. 3. DESIGNATION. 

4 The Rocksprings station of the U.S. Border Patrol 

5 located on West Main Street in Rocksprings, Texas, shall 

6 be known and designated as the ‘‘Donna M. Doss Border 

7 Patrol Station’’. 

8 SEC. 4. REFERENCES. 

9 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

10 paper, or other record of the United States to the station 

11 described in section 3 shall be deemed to be a reference 

12 to the ‘‘Donna M. Doss Border Patrol Station’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### § 372.4 Enforcement.

In case of any violation of the provisions of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII, or this part, or any other rule, regulation, or order issued under the Statute, the violator may be subject to a proceeding pursuant to section 46101 of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII before the Department, or sections 46106 through 46108 of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII before a U.S. district court, as the case may be, to compel compliance therewith, to civil penalties pursuant to the provisions of section 46301 of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII, or in the case of willful violation, to criminal penalties pursuant to the provisions of section 46316 of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII; or other lawful sanctions.

[SPR-54, 37 FR 11163, June 3, 1972, as amended at 60 FR 43529, Aug. 22, 1995; Doc. No. DOT-OST-2014-0140, 84 FR 15938, Apr. 16, 2019]
# Επίσημη Εφημερίδα C 68A/2011

| | ISSN 1725-2415
  doi:10.3000/17252415.CA2011.068.gre |
| --- | --- |
| Επίσημη Εφημερίδα
  της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης | C 68A |
| | |
| Έκδοση στην ελληνική γλώσσα | Ανακοινώσεις και Πληροφορίες | 54ό έτος3 Μαρτίου 2011 |

ISSN 1725-2415

doi:10.3000/17252415.CA2011.068.gre

Επίσημη Εφημερίδα

της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης

C 68A

Έκδοση στην ελληνική γλώσσα

Ανακοινώσεις και Πληροφορίες

54ό έτος3 Μαρτίου 2011

---

| Ανακοίνωση αριθ | Περιεχόμενα | Σελίδα |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Διορθωτικά |
| 2011/C 068A/01 | Διορθωτικό στην προκήρυξη του γενικού διαγωνισμού EPSO/AST/112/10 — Βοηθοί (AST 3) (ΕΕ C 341 A της 16.12.2010) | 1 |

Ανακοίνωση αριθ

Περιεχόμενα

Σελίδα

Διορθωτικά

2011/C 068A/01

Διορθωτικό στην προκήρυξη του γενικού διαγωνισμού EPSO/AST/112/10 — Βοηθοί (AST 3) (ΕΕ C 341 A της 16.12.2010)

(ΕΕ C 341 A της 16.12.2010)

1

ΑΝΑΚΕΦΑΛΑΙΩΤΙΚΟΣ ΠΙΝΑΚΑΣ ΤΩΝ ΕΠΙΣΗΜΩΝ ΕΦΗΜΕΡΙΔΩΝ C A ΔΙΑΓΩΝΙΣΜΟΙ

Κατωτέρω παρατίθεται πίνακας των τευχών της Επίσημης Εφημερίδας C A που δημοσιεύθηκαν το τρέχον έτος.

Εκτός αντίθετης ένδειξης, οι Επίσημες Εφημερίδες δημοσιεύονται σε όλες τις κοινοτικές γλώσσες.

| 19 | (PL) |
| --- | --- |
| 24 | |
| 35 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 37 | (PL/RO) |
| 60 | |
| 68 | |

19

(PL)

24

35

(DE/EN/FR)

37

(PL/RO)

60

68

| EL | |
| --- | --- |

EL

---

Διορθωτικά

| 3.3.2011 | EL | Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης | CA 68/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.3.2011

EL

Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης

CA 68/1

---

Διορθωτικό στην προκήρυξη του γενικού διαγωνισμού EPSO/AST/112/10 — Βοηθοί (AST 3)

(
  Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης C 341 A της 16ης Δεκεμβρίου 2010
  )

(2011/C 68 A/01)

Στη σελίδα 3, στον τίτλο IV.2:

αντί:

| «Δοκιμασία δ) | επαγγελματικές δεξιότητες:


  ορθότητα και ακρίβεια | βαθμολόγηση: από 0 έως 20 μονάδες


  βάση: 10 μονάδες |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Δοκιμασία ε) | επαγγελματικές δεξιότητες:


  καθορισμός προτεραιοτήτων και οργάνωση | βαθμολόγηση: από 0 έως 20 μονάδες


  βάση: 10 μονάδες» |

«Δοκιμασία δ)

επαγγελματικές δεξιότητες:

ορθότητα και ακρίβεια

βαθμολόγηση: από 0 έως 20 μονάδες

βάση: 10 μονάδες

Δοκιμασία ε)

επαγγελματικές δεξιότητες:

καθορισμός προτεραιοτήτων και οργάνωση

βαθμολόγηση: από 0 έως 20 μονάδες

βάση: 10 μονάδες»

διάβαζε:

| «Δοκιμασία δ) | επαγγελματικές δεξιότητες:


  ορθότητα και ακρίβεια | βαθμολόγηση: από 0 έως 20 μονάδες |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Δοκιμασία ε) | επαγγελματικές δεξιότητες:


  καθορισμός προτεραιοτήτων και οργάνωση | βαθμολόγηση: από 0 έως 20 μονάδες |
| | Η βάση είναι το 20 για το σύνολο των δοκιμασιών δ) και ε)». |

«Δοκιμασία δ)

επαγγελματικές δεξιότητες:

ορθότητα και ακρίβεια

βαθμολόγηση: από 0 έως 20 μονάδες

Δοκιμασία ε)

επαγγελματικές δεξιότητες:

καθορισμός προτεραιοτήτων και οργάνωση

βαθμολόγηση: από 0 έως 20 μονάδες

Η βάση είναι το 20 για το σύνολο των δοκιμασιών δ) και ε)».

---
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4246 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4246

     To provide that the rules entitled ``Religious Exemptions and 
 Accommodations for Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the 
  Affordable Care Act'' and ``Moral Exemptions and Accommodations for 
Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act'' 
         shall have no force or effect, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 21, 2020

    Mrs. Murray (for herself, Mr. Casey, Mr. Brown, Ms. Hirono, Mr. 
Merkley, Mr. Murphy, Ms. Hassan, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Wyden, 
 Mr. Blumenthal, Ms. Warren, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Markey, 
 Ms. Stabenow, Ms. Rosen, Mr. Reed, Mrs. Shaheen, Mrs. Feinstein, Mrs. 
  Gillibrand, Ms. Cortez Masto, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Durbin, Mr. King, Mr. 
Kaine, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Udall, Mr. Booker, Mr. Bennet, Ms. Cantwell, Ms. 
 Klobuchar, Mr. Peters, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Van Hollen, Ms. Harris, Mr. 
    Heinrich, Mr. Coons, Ms. Smith, and Mr. Tester) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                 Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To provide that the rules entitled ``Religious Exemptions and 
 Accommodations for Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the 
  Affordable Care Act'' and ``Moral Exemptions and Accommodations for 
Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act'' 
         shall have no force or effect, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protect Access to Birth Control 
Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN RULES RELATING TO RELIGIOUS AND MORAL 
              EXEMPTIONS AND ACCOMMODATIONS FOR COVERAGE OF CERTAIN 
              PREVENTIVE SERVICES.

    The Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of the 
Treasury, and the Secretary of Labor may not take any action to 
implement, enforce, or otherwise give effect to the rules entitled 
``Religious Exemptions and Accommodations for Coverage of Certain 
Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act'' (83 Fed. Reg. 57536 
(November 15, 2018)) and ``Moral Exemptions and Accommodations for 
Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act'' 
(83 Fed. Reg. 57592 (November 15, 2018)).
                                 <all>
```
#### HAZELBAKER v. SCIOTO CO. COMMRS.

Ohio Appeals, 4th Dist., Scioto Co.

Decided Nov. 22, 1928.

*21McLaughlin & Staker, ,and W. L. Hostetter, Portsmouth, for Hazelbaker.

Russell K. McCurdy, Pros. Atty., and Emory Smith, Portsmouth, for Bd. Commrs.

BY THE COURT.

Without minutely examining the instructions complained of we are of the opinion that they were sound. We dispose of the case, however, on other grounds.

The record shows that the bridge and approach were on the Atlantic and Pacific highway. That particular road is specially designated as a main market road by Section 1189-1 G. C. Main market roads are state highways when taken over for improvement by the State. Section 7464. This road had been taken over by -the state, improvement was under way, and the absence of guard rails was due to their necessary removal by state employes for the purpose of making improvements. When the state took over the highway it took over the bridge, Section 1326, and in building the approach it had complete control over the method of so doing, The commissioners had no power in the premises and consequently no duty, and in the absence of a duty they had no liability. Weiher v. Phillips, 103 O. S. 249. Upon the undisputed facts the defendant below was entitled to judgment.

Middleton, P. J., and Mauck, J., concur.

Thomas, J., not participating.
#### § 63.13 Temporary certificate.

A certificate effective for a period of not more than 120 days may be issued to a qualified applicant, pending review of his application and supplementary documents and the issue of the certificate for which he applied.

[Doc. No. 1179, 27 FR 7969, Aug. 10, 1962, as amended by Amdt. 63-19, 43 FR 22639, May 25, 1978]
§ 93.341 Aircraft operations in the DC FRZ. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no pilot may conduct any flight operation under part 91, 101, 103, 105, 125, 133, 135, or 137 of this chapter in the DC FRZ, unless the specific flight is operating under an FAA/TSA authorization.
( b ) Department of Defense (DOD) operations, law enforcement operations, and lifeguard or air ambulance operations under an FAA/TSA airspace authorization are excepted from the prohibition in paragraph (a) of this section if the pilot is in contact with Air Traffic Control and operates the aircraft transponder on an Air Traffic Control-assigned beacon code.
( c ) The following aircraft operations are permitted in the DC FRZ: ( 1 ) Aircraft operations under the DCA Access Standard Security Program (DASSP) (49 CFR part 1562) with a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) flight authorization.
( 2 ) Law enforcement and other U.S. Federal aircraft operations with prior FAA approval.
( 3 ) Foreign-operated military and state aircraft operations with a State Department-authorized diplomatic clearance, with State Department notification to the FAA and TSA.
( 4 ) Federal, State, Federal DOD contract, local government agency aircraft operations and part 121, 129 or 135 air carrier flights with TSA-approved full aircraft operator standard security programs/procedures, if operating with DOD permission and notification to the FAA and the National Capital Regional Coordination Center (NCRCC). These flights may land and depart Andrews Air Force Base, MD, with prior permission, if required.
( 5 ) Aircraft operations maintaining radio contact with Air Traffic Control and continuously transmitting an Air Traffic Control-assigned discrete transponder code. The pilot must monitor VHF frequency 121.5 or UHF frequency 243.0.
( d ) Before departing from an airport within the DC FRZ, or before entering the DC FRZ, all aircraft, except DOD, law enforcement, and lifeguard or air ambulance aircraft operating under an FAA/TSA airspace authorization must file and activate an IFR or a DC FRZ flight plan and transmit a discrete transponder code assigned by an Air Traffic Control facility. Aircraft must transmit the discrete transponder code at all times while in the DC FRZ or DC SFRA.
[Docket No. FAA-2004-17005, 73 FR 76213, Dec. 16, 2008, as amended by Amdt. No. 93-91A, 83 FR 13411, Mar. 29, 2018]
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January

14 , 2014.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 13

- 00344

- CV

SOUTH POOL & SPA, IN C. , Appellant

V.

WATER SPLASH, INC. , Appellee

On Appeal from the 212th District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 13

- CV

- 0205

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from a judgment signed April 2 , 20 13 . On January 8, 2014

, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The motion is granted.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Boyce, Christopher, and Brown.
Order entered January 15, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00017-CR

RICARDO BELTRAN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F10-56077-M

ORDER

The clerk’s record in the above appeal was filed January 11, 2019. The trial court’s 

charge to the jury on guilt/innocence, which counsel requested included in the clerk’s record, is 

missing from that record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5(a)(4); (b).

We ORDER Dallas County District Clerk Felicia Pitre to file a supplemental clerk’s 

record containing the trial court’s charge to the jury on guilt/innocence in this appeal WITHIN 

FOURTEEN DAYS of the date of this order.

/s/ CORY L. CARLYLE 

JUSTICE
NOx Formation Project 

Control Phase

John Hausman

March 7, 2008
1
Possible Solutions

 Predictive NOx Equation from all operating data by varying 

furnace conditions – based on 7 day NOx test.

 Install 1 CEM per line and create an equation based on the 

percentage of NOx emitted from each stack in the furnace.

2

 Install 1 CEM per line and create a predictive equation 

using that and operating data.
Solution Selected

 CCI rejected the idea to install any CEMs due to the 

maintenance and downtime...

 This leaves us only one solution to implement, a predictive 

equation based on operating conditions in the furnace. We 

will have to create a predictive equation while producing High 

3

Compression pellets as well, but we do not have any stack 

testing planned during a high compression pellet run. 
Control Plans

 Control plans will be based on future NOx Stack Testing 

data. 

 Based on MPCA recommendations, we will do stack 

testing on an annual basis and check the regression equation 

to fit that. To ensure the fit meets MPCA requirement, the 

4

standard deviation of the residual divided by the mean of the 

actual concentration of NOx must be no greater than 0.09. 

This value will be used for future stack tests and regression 

modeling of the NOx emissions. 
Standardization and Replication Opportunities

 We will be performing NOx stack testing on the other two 

furnace lines, so we will be trying to determine a viable 

equation to represent the NOx on those two lines as well. 

 After a model is produced, we will create points on the 

control room screen (as requested by the MPCA) to allow us 

5

to evaluate the NOx emissions.