alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

39–011 2014

113th Congress, 2d Session – – – – – – – – – – – – House Document 113–145 

CONTINUATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY 

WITH RESPECT TO EXPORT CONTROL REGULATIONS 

COMMUNICATION 

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRANSMITTING

A CONTINUATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY REGARDING 

EXPORT CONTROL REGULATIONS, PURSUANT TO 50 U.S.C. 1622(d) 

SEPTEMBER 8, 2014.—Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and 

ordered to be printed 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGE:\Seals\Congress.#13

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, August 7, 2014. 

Hon. JOHN BOEHNER, 

Speaker of the House of Representatives, 

Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. SPEAKER: Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies 

Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides for the automatic termination of 

a national emergency unless, within the 90-day period prior to the 

anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the 

Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating 

that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary 

date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent to the Federal 

Register for publication the enclosed notice, stating that the national emergency in light of the expiration of the Export Administration Act of 1979, is to continue in effect for 1 year beyond August 17, 2014. 

Sincerely, 

BARACK OBAMA. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(3) 

NOTICE

CONTINUATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO

EXPORT CONTROL REGULATIONS

On August 17, 2001, consistent with the authority provided to 

the President under the International Emergency Economic Powers 

Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), the President issued Executive Order 

13222. In that order, he declared a national emergency with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States in light of the 

expiration of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. 

App. 2401 et seq.). Because the Export Administration Act has not 

been renewed by the Congress, the national emergency declared on 

August 17, 2001, must continue in effect beyond August 17, 2014. 

Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13222. 

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress. 

BARACK OBAMA. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, August 7, 2014. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
#### § 1915.1004 alpha-Naphthylamine.

Note:

The requirements applicable to shipyard employment under this section are identical to those set forth at [§ 1910.1003 of this chapter](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/section-1910.1003).

[[61 FR 31430](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/61-FR-31430), June 20, 1996]
Exhibit 31



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Michael F. Holloran, certify that:



1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of ELGRANDE INTERNATIONAL, INC.;



2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report  does not  contain any  untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the  circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to  the period covered by this quarterly report; and



3.  Based  on  my  knowledge,  the financial  statements,  and other  financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present, in  all material respects, the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows  of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.



4.  The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)

Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5.  The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting;



/s/ Michael F. Holloran

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

Michael F. Holloran, Chief Executive

Officer and Principal Financial Officer

Date: April 13, 2005
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Report of the Commissioner ofInternal Revenue for the fiscal year ended June 30...**
 
1875 | 1876 | 1877 | 1878 | 1879
1880 | 1881 | 1882 | 1883 | 1884 | 1885 | 1886 | 1887 | 1888 | 1889
1890 | 1891 | 1892 | 1893 | 1894 | 1895 | 1896 | 1897 | 1898
 
SuDoc Number:T 22.1:
Item Number:0955 (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000934125
 
January 30, 2018
#### § 1472.210 To whom must I distribute my drug-free workplace statement?

You must require that a copy of the statement described in § 1472.205 be given to each employee who will be engaged in the performance of any Federal award.
#### STRAUSS, et al. v PAPY

Case No. 85-188 AP

Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Appellate Division, Dade County

October 8, 1986

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Philip Glatzer for appellants.

Peter Manheimer for appellee.

Before SALMON, GREENBAUM, KORNBLUM, JJ.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MICHAEL H. SALMON, Judge.

*141In order to resolve this case, we need only to determine whether or not the Appellants were released from all claims by the Appellee, and, if not, whether the trial court properly awarded attorney’s fees to the Appellee.

Before this action came about, the Appellee had delivered an instrument entitled “General Release” to Appellants. This instrument was a printed form. If nothing more had been done than fill in the blanks (e.g. name, date, etc.), the document would have released Appellants of all claims. However, following the printed words were typed the words “in particular”, followed by a list of things, none of which embrace the matter in controversy in this action. A question presented to the trial judge was whether extrinsic evidence should be admitted to explain the contents of the document. The trial judge permitted such evidence to be permitted, and in so doing he was correct. When there is printed and written material in a document, various rules of construction may apply, but the better one is to allow extrinsic evidence of the parties’ intent. *Hurt v. Leatherby Insurance Co.,*380 So.2d 432 (Fla. 1980).

The trial judge awarded attorney’s fees to the Appellee. We have concluded that under the facts of this case there was no basis for this award. The Appellee’s action against the Appellant was not for indemnification, nor was there absence of a justifiable defense for the Appellant.*

Affirmed in party, and reversed in part, with directions to modify the Amended Final Judgment by deleting the provision for attorney’s fees.

*

 Appellee relies heavily upon *Concrete Systems, Inc. v. Florida Electric Company of Orlando,*425 So.2d 632 (2d DCA 1983). We are unable to determine the precise theory upon which this case was decided.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:Mysteries of the sun [electronic resource]**
 
Booklet
 
Videos:
Space Weather
 
Solar Variability
 
Heliosphere
 
Earth�s Magnetosphere
 
Ionosphere,  Thermosphere, and Mesosphere
 
 
SuDoc Number:NAS 1.2: SU 7/11
Item Number:0830-C (online)
CGP systemNumber:000931664
 
June 1, 2018
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4932 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to ensure appropriate 

global surgical package code values in the Medicare program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 1, 2020 

Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to ensure 

appropriate global surgical package code values in the 

Medicare program. 

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 ‘‘Medicare Reimburse5 ment Equity Act of 2020’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ENSURING APPROPRIATE GLOBAL SURGICAL PACK7 AGE CODE VALUES IN MEDICARE. 

8 Section 1848(c)(8) of the Social Security Act (42 

9 U.S.C. 1395w–4(c)(8)) is amended by adding at the end 

10 the following new subparagraph: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4932 IS

1 ‘‘(D) ENSURING APPROPRIATE GLOBAL

2 SURGICAL PACKAGE CODE VALUES.—For serv3 ices furnished on or after January 1, 2021, the 

4 Secretary shall ensure that the valuation of 

5 evaluation and management (E/M) post-opera6 tive visits is equal to the valuation of evaluation 

7 and management (E/M) services identified as of 

8 January 1, 2021, by HCPCS codes 99211– 

9 99215, 99217, 99224–99226, 99231–99233, 

10 99238–99239, 99291–99292, and 99354– 

11 99357 (or any successor codes).’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### CHIPPEWA INDIANS OF MINNESOTA v. UNITED STATES ET AL.

[80 C. Cls. 410; 301 U. S. 358]

*709Mr. Justice Van Devanter

delivered the opinion of the court.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 31191]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12339]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Meeting: Committee for the Preservation of the White House

    In compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, notice is 
hereby given of a meeting of the Committee for the Preservation of the 
White House. The meeting will be held at the Old Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC at 1:30 p.m., Monday, May 22, 2000. It is 
expected that the agenda will include policies, goals and long range 
plans. The meeting will be open, but subject to appointment and 
security clearance requirements. Clearance information must be received 
by May 18, 2000.
    Inquiries may be made by calling the committee for the Preservation 
of the White House between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., weekdays at (202) 619-
6344. Written comments may be sent to the Executive Secretary, 
Committee for the Preservation of the White House, 1100 Ohio Drive, 
SW., Washington, DC 20242.

    Dated: May 11, 2000.
James I. McDaniel,
Executive Secretary, Committee for the Preservation of the White House.
[FR Doc. 00-12339 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-M
No. 01-15-00312-CR

In the

Court of Appeals 

for the

First District of Texas 

at Houston 



No. 1421605 

In the 176th District Court 

Harris County, Texas 



HARVEY SMITH

Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

Appellee



APPELLANT’S FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

WITHIN WHICH TO FILE APPELLATE BRIEF 



TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: 

 APPELLANT, pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1, 10.5(b) and 38.6(d), moves for an 

extension of time within which to file its appellate brief. In support of its motion, appellant 

submits the following: 

1. Appellant was charged with aggravated robbery. 

2. A jury convicted appellant of the charged offense and sentenced him to 28 

years confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of 

Criminal Justice on March 23, 2015. 

3. Notice of appeal was filed on March 23, 2015. 

ACCEPTED

01-15-00312-CR

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

8/20/2015 7:13:31 AM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 8/20/2015 7:13:31 AM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
2

4. Appellant’s brief was due on August 13, 2015.

5. Appellant seeks an extension to file his brief until November 13, 2015.

6. The following facts are relied upon to show good cause for the requested 

extension:

a. Counsel filed a petition for discretionary review in Miranda v. State, 

No. PD-0827-15, and Hayes v. State, No. PD-0885-15 and No. PD0886-15.

b. Counsel has filed a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme 

Court in Masterson v. Stephens.

c. Counsel has filed a writ of habeas corpus in Ex parte Williams, 

1371668A.

7. Appellant’s motion is not for purposes of delay, but so that justice may be 

done. 

WHEREFORE, the State prays that this Court will grant the requested extension.

 Respectfully submitted,

 /s/MANDY MILLER

 Attorney for appellant

 2910 Commercial Center Blvd., Ste. 103-201

 Katy, TX 77494

 SBN 24055561

 PHONE (832) 900-9884

 FAX (877) 904-6846

 mandy@mandymillerlegal.com
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing instrument has been delivered via 

electronic mail to the following address:

Harris County District Attorney’s Office

ATTN: Alan Curry

curry_alan@dao.hctx.net

 /s/MANDY MILLER

 Attorney for appellant

 2910 Commercial Center Blvd., Ste. 103-201

 Katy, TX 77494

 SBN 24055561

 PHONE (832) 900-9884

 FAX (877) 904-6846

 mandy@mandymillerlegal.com
#### § 18.601 General rule of competency.

Every person is competent to be a witness except as otherwise provided in these rules. However with respect to an element of a claim or defense as to which State law supplies the rule of decision, the competency of a witness shall be determined in accordance with State law.
§ 1471.220 Are any procurement contracts included as covered transactions? ( a ) Covered transactions under this part— ( 1 ) Do not include any procurement contracts awarded directly by a Federal agency; but
( 2 ) Do include some procurement contracts awarded by non-Federal participants in nonprocurement covered transactions (see appendix to this part).
( b ) Specifically, a contract for goods or services is a covered transaction if any of the following applies: ( 1 ) The contract is awarded by a participant in a nonprocurement transaction that is covered under § 1471.210, and the amount of the contract is expected to equal or exceed $25,000.
( 2 ) The contract requires the consent of a(n) FMCS official. In that case, the contract, regardless of the amount, always is a covered transaction, and it does not matter who awarded it. For example, it could be a subcontract awarded by a contractor at a tier below a nonprocurement transaction, as shown in the appendix to this part.
( 3 ) The contract is for federally-required audit services.
Complete the following tables for each sampling point

Plant Name

Sample 

Collection 

Number

Date of Sample 

Collection

Sample Collection 

Time Temperature (°C)

pH

(S.U.)

Set 1

Set 2

Set 3

Set 4

Plant Name

Sample 

Collection 

Number

Influent Samples 

Collected as 

Grabs

(Yes or No)

Mercury and Cyanide 

Samples Collected 

as Grabs

(Yes or No)

Bioreactor Influent 

and Bioreactor 

Effluent Samples 

Collected as 24-Hour 

Composites

(Yes or No)

Tyvek Suits 

used

(Yes or No)

Dust Masks 

Used for 

Mercury 

(Yes or No)

Clean Hands/Dirty 

Hands Sampling 

Techniques Used

(Yes or No)

Description of Sample 

Collection Technique (if 

different than 

instructions)

Set 1

Set 2

Set 3

Set 4
Description of Abnormal 

Conditions in FGD System 

or FGD Wastewater 

Treatment System that May 

Impact Concentrations
Complete the following tables based on the plant operating characteristics during each set of samples collected

Units Operating 

During Sampling 

Day

Units Off-line 

Entire 

Sampling Day

SCRs/SNCRs 

Operating on 

Units

Set 1

Set 2

Set 3

Set 4

Flow Rate (gpm) Duration

Set 1

Set 2

Set 3

Set 4

Lime Usage 

(tons)

Ferric Chloride 

Usage 

(Liters/day)

Organosulfide Usage 

(Liters/day)

Polymer Usage 

(Liters/day)

Acid Usage 

(Liters/day)

Chemical 

Precipitation 

System 

Effluent Flow 

Rate (gpd)

Dilution Water 

Addition Prior 

to Biological 

Treatment 

System

(gpd)

Biological 

Treatment 

System 

Effluent Flow 

Rate (gpd)

Set 1

Set 2

Set 3

Set 4

FGD Wastewater Treatment Operation During Sample Collection

Plant Name

Date of Sample 

Collection

Sample 

Collection 

Number

Scrubber Purge 

Flow Rate During 

Influent Sample 

Collection

(gpm)

Plant Name

Date of Sample 

Collection

Sample 

Collection 

Number

Plant Operation During Sample Collection

Percent Hydroclone 

Overflow Recycled 

Plant Name Back to Scrubber

Sample 

Collection 

Number

Date of Sample 

Collection

Scrubber Slurry Blowdown Flow 

Rate

Scrubber 

Slurry Percent 

Solids

Plant Operation During Sample Collection
Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4

Daily Power Generation (MW-hrs)

Plant Name Date

Provide the daily power generation for each scrubbed unit starting two weeks prior to the first set of samples through the last set of samples



Unit 5



Chemical 

Precipitation 

Effluent

Dilution Water 

Addition Prior to 

Biological 

Treatment 

System

Biological Treatment 

Plant Name Date System Effluent

FGD Wastewater Treatment System Flow Rates

(gpd)

Provide the average flow rate in the FGD wastewater treatment system for each stream included in the 

table starting two weeks prior to the first set of samples through the last set of samples
§ 101.42 Procedures for obtaining declaratory orders of the Board. ( a ) When both an unfair labor practice charge and a representation petition are pending concurrently in a Regional Office, appeals from a Regional Director's dismissals thereof do not follow the same course. Appeal from the dismissal of a charge must be made to the General Counsel, while appeal from dismissal of a representation petition may be made to the Board. To obtain uniformity in disposing of such cases on jurisdictional grounds at the same stage of each proceeding, the General Counsel may file a petition for a declaratory order of the Board. Such order is intended only to remove uncertainty with respect to the question of whether the Board would assert jurisdiction over the labor dispute.
( b ) A petition to obtain a declaratory Board order may be filed only by the General Counsel. It must be in writing and signed. It is filed with the Executive Secretary of the Board in Washington, DC. No particular form is required, but the petition must be properly captioned and must contain the allegations required by § 102.106 of the Board's Rules and Regulations. None of the information sought relates to the merits of the dispute. The petition may be withdrawn any time before the Board issues its declaratory order deciding whether it would or would not assert jurisdiction over the cases.
#### MOREY v BRECKENRIDGE CO

Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist, Erie Co

J. F. McCrystal, Sandusky, for Morey.

Quigley & Byrnes, Cleveland, and King Ramsey & Flynn, Sandusky, for Breckenridge Co.

*652. RIQHARDS, J.

The record discloses that Lyon never used or had authority to use the truck except in and about the company’s business, and it had no knowledeg.e that he was using it on the day when the plaintiff was injured. The fact that he had worked ten or fifteen minutes beyond the usual quitting time at noon, certainly gave him no authority to take this, truck withhig employer’s consent. It was no concern of his employer whether he rode home on the street car for his midday meal or obtained the meal downtown near the place of business. The competency or incompetency .of Lyons as a driver is immaterial for, in any event, the record is utterly devoid of any evidence showing or tending to show authority or permission, general or special, express or implied, of Lyons to operate, this truck for his own private conveniences.

For the reason given the defendant would not be liable and the judgment must be affirmed.

Williams and Lolyd, JJ, concur.