alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 17.2 What definitions apply to these regulations?

*Department* means the U.S. Department of Labor.

*Order* means E.O. 12372, issued July 14, 1982, and amended April 8, 1983 and titled “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.”

*Secretary* means the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Labor or an official or employee of the Department acting for the Secretary under a delegation of authority.

*State* means any of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, or the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.
§ 1915.156 Foot protection. ( a ) *Use.* The employer shall ensure that each affected employee wears protective footwear when working in areas where there is a danger of foot injuries due to falling or rolling objects or objects piercing the sole.
( b ) *Criteria for protective footwear.* ( 1 ) Protective footwear must comply with any of the following consensus standards: ( i ) ASTM F-2412-2005, “Standard Test Methods for Foot Protection,” and ASTM F-2413-2005, “Standard Specification for Performance Requirements for Protective Footwear,” which are incorporated by reference in § 1915.5;
( ii ) ANSI Z41-1999, “American National Standard for Personal Protection—Protective Footwear,” which is incorporated by reference in § 1915.5; or
( iii ) ANSI Z41-1991, “American National Standard for Personal Protection—Protective Footwear,” which is incorporated by reference in § 1915.5.
( 2 ) Protective footwear that the employer demonstrates is at least as effective as protective footwear that is constructed in accordance with one of the above consensus standards will be deemed to be in compliance with the requirements of this section.
[61 FR 26352, May 24, 1996,, as amended at 74 FR 46358, Sept. 9, 2009]
###### Editorial Note on Part 399

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 399 appear at 84 FR 15947, Apr. 16, 2019.

#### § 399.39 Equipment purchase deposits.

Equipment purchase deposits are advance payments made by air carriers to manufacturers for the purchase of equipment to be delivered in the future, or funds segregated by air carriers for this purpose. It is the policy of the Department not to recognize equipment purchase deposits in an air carrier's investment base for ratemaking purposes. When equipment is acquired by an air carrier and placed in air-transport service, the Department will recognize in the air carrier's investment base interest on purchase deposits on such equipment capitalized and amortized in accordance with the Uniform System of Accounts and Reports for Certificated Air Carriers (part 241 of this chapter).

[PS-32, 32 FR 5370, Mar. 30, 1967]
#### HARTWELL, et v CONSUMERS ICE & CREAM CO

Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist, Sandusky Co

No. 216.

Decided Oct. 8, 1929

Graves & Duff, Port Clinton, for Hart-well, et.

Stahl, Stahl & Stahl, Fremont, for Company.

*660WILLIAMS, J.

We are of the opinion it was in time. With the clause above quoted in the journal entry there would be no reason why the defendant would appeal as the journal entry, in its original form, was in favor of the defendant. The decree of the court as modified by the second entry became the ultimate decree in the case and therefore the period within which the appeal bond could be filed would run from the filing of the second journal entry.

We are therefore of the opinion that the motion to dismiss the appeal was properly overruled. .

Lloyd and Richards, JJ, concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In  connection  with  the  accompanying  Annual  Report  on  Form 10-KSB/A,
Amendment  No.  3  of  Gateway  Distributors,  Ltd.  for  the fiscal year ending
December  31,  2005,  I,  Richard  A. Bailey, Chief Executive Officer of Gateway
Distributors,  Ltd.,  hereby  certify  pursuant  to  18  U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best
of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  that:

     1. Such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A, Amendment No. 3 for the fiscal year
ending  December 31, 2005, 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  such  Annual  Report on Form 10-KSB/A,
Amendment  No.  3 for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005, fairly presents,
in  all  material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Gateway  Distributors,  Ltd.

     Dated:  November  8,  2006.

                                      /s/  Richard A. Bailey
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                      Richard A. Bailey, Chief Executive Officer
                                      of Gateway Distributors, Ltd.
t>oT .. O!;T· 201\-0 l '!6' 

August 7, 2012 

Dennis J. DeVany 

Chief, Essential Air Service Division, X-53 

Dear Dennis: 

The .Brainerd Lakes Regional Airport Commission encourages you to consider SkyWest's RFP 

to serve the Brainerd Community. 

We feel that Sky West has a good and reliable business record and providing CRJ200 will best 

provide for our passenger needs. The CRJ will give us the capability to use our jet bridge, which 

makes boarding passengers of all ages and physical challenges easier. This aircraft also has the 

ability to carry the cargo for our hockey camps and golfing passengers. 

Plus, SkyWest serving the Brainerd area through Delta keeps the rewards program intact for our 

frequent flyers. · 

As stewards of the public's money, SkyWest's RFP makes the most sense. 

Thank you for your consideration. 

Sincerely, 

AndyL 

1a1r, Airport Commission 

Cj: 5 i
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NOS. WR-71,667-01 AND WR-71,667-03

EX P ARTE WAYNE DALE WAGNER, JR., Applicant

ON AP P LICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NOS. CR30704-A AND CR30704-C IN THE 385 DISTRICT COURT T H F ROM MID LAND COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Applicant was convicted of ag g ravated sexual assault of a child and sentenc ed t o l ife imprisonment. The Eleventh Court of Appea ls aff irmed his conviction. W

agner v. State, No. 11-06- 00235-CR (Tex. App. — East land J une 7, 2007) (not desig nated for publication). Applicant filed these applications for writs of habea s corpus in the county o f co n v i ction, and the district cler k forwa rded the m to this Court. SeeT E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07. On Marc h 25, 2009, this Court denied ap p l i cation number WR -71,667-01 based on the findin gs of the trial court without a hearing. On September 21, 2011, this Court dismiss ed application number

WR -71,667-02 as a subsequent application barred by Article 11.07, Sec tion 4 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e. On J anuar y 7, 2022, this Court rec eived a third2

application in the same trial court cause number alleg ing that Applicant was denied due proce ss as the result of judicial and prosec utorial misconduct in the revie w of his initial habea s application in Midland County

. It has been deter mined that former assistant district attorney Ralph Petty was paid by the district judge s to work on Applicant’s -01 application when Petty was employ ed at the same time as an appellate prosec utor by the Midland County District At t o rney ’s office

. That dual employ ment was not disc losed to this Court or Applicant at the time his -01 application was under consideration. Whil e it does not appea

r that Petty ’s dual employ

ment aff ecte d the pre- trial, trial, or appellate proce eding s in App l i ca n t ’s case , the undisclosed employ ment relationship betwee n the District J udg e who presided over the initial h ab eas proce eding s in this case and the prosec utor who simult aneously repr esente d the State in the same proce eding leads us to conclude that Applicant was deprive d of his due proce ss rig hts to fair consideration of his claims in the first habea s application. There fore , this Court now rec onsiders on its own motion the denial wit h o u t wr i t t en order on the finding s of the trial c ourt of application number WR-71,667-01 Howeve r, afte r an independe nt revie w of the rec ord in this case without consideration of the trial court’s finding s of fac t and conclusions of law, this Court believes that Applicant’s claims are without merit. There fore , afte r rec onsideration on the Court’s own motion, relief is ag ain denied in

cause number WR-71,667-01. Applicant’s most rec ent application, cause numbe r WR-75,609-03 is dismi ssed as moot. Filed: Mar ch 2, 2022 Do not publish
§ 1612.7 Public announcement of agency meetings. ( a ) Public announcement of each meeting by the agency shall be accomplished by recorded telephone message at telephone number (202) 921-2750, and by posting such announcements on the Commission's public Web site located at *http://www.eeoc.gov* not later than one week prior to commencement of a meeting or the commencement of the first meeting in a series of meetings, except as otherwise provided in this section, and shall disclose: ( 1 ) The time of the meeting.
( 2 ) The place of the meeting.
( 3 ) The subject matter of each portion of the meeting or series of meetings.
( 4 ) Whether any portion(s) of a meeting will be open or closed to public observation.
( 5 ) The name and telephone number of an official designated to respond to requests for information about the meeting.
( b ) Where a meeting is closed to the public, the agency may withhold and not announce the information specified in paragraph (a)(3) of this section, if and to the extent that it finds that such action is justified under § 1612.4. Information shall be withheld only by a recorded vote of a majority of the entire membership of the agency.
( c ) The announcement described in paragraph (a) of this section may be accomplished less than one week prior to the commencement of any meeting or series of meetings where: ( 1 ) A majority of the members of the Commission determines by recorded vote that agency business requires that any such meeting or series of meetings be held at an earlier date.
( 2 ) A meeting is closed under the Commission's regulation as set forth in § 1612.13(a) of this part.
( 3 ) A meeting is closed pursuant to a request made under § 1612.6 of this part and submitted less than seven days prior to the meeting.
( 4 ) There has been a change in the subject matter or determination to open or close a meeting previously announced. In these instances, the agency shall make public announcement at the earliest practicable time.
( d ) Immediately following any public announcement accomplished under the provisions of this section, the agency shall submit a notice for publication in the Federal Register disclosing: ( 1 ) The time of the meeting.
( 2 ) The place of the meeting.
( 3 ) The subject matter of each portion of each meeting or series of meetings.
( 4 ) Whether any portion(s) of a meeting will be open or closed to public observation.
( 5 ) The name and telephone number of an official designated to respond to requests for information about the meeting.
[42 FR 13830, Mar. 14, 1977, as amended at 55 FR 8140, Mar. 7, 1990; 74 FR 3430, Jan. 21, 2009; 74 FR 42025, Aug. 20, 2009; 87 FR 14799, Mar. 16, 2022]
#### § 61.181 Applicability.

This subpart prescribes the requirements for the issuance of flight instructor certificates and ratings (except for flight instructor certificates with a sport pilot rating), the conditions under which those certificates and ratings are necessary, and the limitations on those certificates and ratings.

[Doc. No. FAA-2001-11133, 69 FR 44869, July 27, 2004]
### Swanson , Bria n (OST) 

# ^£-o9r'Zooo-o-^^3 f From : Sent : To : Subject : Devany , Denni s (OST ) Thursday , Decembe r29 , 2011 1:0 6 P M Swanson , Bria n (OST ) FW : -

' • ' ? • ' 

### r3 0

From : Cheyn e Naeole(a)nps.ao v[mailto:Clieyn e Naeole(g)nps.aov 1 Sent : Thursday , Decembe r29 , 201 1 1:0 5 P M To : Devany , Denni s (OST )

. , Subject : I a m i n suppor to fmakan i ka i becaus e pacifi cwing s ar e to o expensiv e $50 0 fo ra roun d tri p fo ra 5 minut e plan e rid e i s to o expensiv e i can' taffor d tha tkin e o f purchas e the yar e t o ridiculous

.
EXHIBIT 99.2



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, Douglas P. Williams, Chief Financial
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/ DOUGLAS P.
WILLIAMS                              
|Douglas P. WilliamsChief Financial OfficerMay 9, 2003
# EUR-Lex - 31995R2268 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31995R2268

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 2268/95 of 27 September 1995 concerning the second list of priority substances as foreseen under Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 **

*
Official Journal L 231 , 28/09/1995 P. 0018 - 0019 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2268/95 of 27 September 1995 concerning the second list of priority substances as foreseen under Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 of 23 March 1993 on the evaluation and control of the risks of existing substances (1), and in particular Articles 8 and 10 thereof,

Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 envisages a system of evaluation and control of the risks of existing substances and whereas in order to undertake the risk evaluation of such substances, it is appropriate to identify priority substances requiring attention;

Whereas in consequence, Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 requires that the Commission shall draw up a list of priority substances and whereas Article 8 further indicates the factors which shall be taken into account in drawing up the said list;

Whereas Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 foresees that for each substance on the priority lists a Member State shall be given responsibility for its evaluation and whereas the allocation of substances shall ensure a fair sharing of the burden between Member States;

Whereas a first priority list has been adopted by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1179/94 (2);

Whereas, the provisions of this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established pursuant to Article 15 of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Priority list

1. The second list of priority substances is hereby established and is set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

2. For each substance on the priority list, the Member State which shall be responsible for its evaluation is hereby designated and is indicated in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 27 September 1995.

For the Commission Ritt BJERREGAARD Member of the Commission

ANNEX

>TABLE>
§ 1614.405 Decisions on appeals. ( a ) The Office of Federal Operations, on behalf of the Commission, shall issue a written decision setting forth its reasons for the decision. The Commission shall dismiss appeals in accordance with §§ 1614.107, 1614.403(c) and 1614.409. The decision shall be based on the preponderance of the evidence. The decision on an appeal from an agency's final action shall be based on a de novo review, except that the review of the factual findings in a decision by an administrative judge issued pursuant to § 1614.109(i) shall be based on a substantial evidence standard of review. If the decision contains a finding of discrimination, appropriate remedy(ies) shall be included and, where appropriate, the entitlement to interest, attorney's fees or costs shall be indicated. The decision shall reflect the date of its issuance, inform the complainant of his or her civil action rights, and be transmitted to the complainant and the agency. For complainants who are not registered with the EEOC Public Portal, the decision will be transmitted by first class mail. For complainants who are registered with the Public Portal, the decision will be transmitted via the Portal provided the complainant affirmatively consents to receive the decision through the Portal. For registered complainants who do not provide affirmative consent, and for complainants who affirmatively consent but subsequently notify the Commission that they withdraw their consent, the decision will be transmitted by first class mail. The Commission will transmit the decision to the agency via FedSEP.
( b ) The Office of Federal Operations, on behalf of the Commission, shall issue decisions on appeals of decisions to accept or dismiss a class complaint issued pursuant to § 1614.204(d)(7) within 90 days of receipt of the appeal.
( c ) A decision issued under paragraph (a) of this section is final within the meaning of § 1614.407 unless a timely request for reconsideration is filed by a party to the case. A party may request reconsideration within 30 days of receipt of a decision of the Commission, which the Commission in its discretion may grant, if the party demonstrates that: ( 1 ) The appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or
( 2 ) The decision will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices or operations of the agency.
[57 FR 12646, Apr. 10, 1992, as amended at 64 FR 37659, July 12, 1999; 77 FR 43505, July 25, 2012; 88 FR 57881, Aug. 24, 2023]
EXHIBIT
32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Centracan Incorporated, a Florida
corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), Ken Roberts, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies
to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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
      Company.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company, and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Ken
      RobertsChief
      Financial OfficerNovember
      19, 2009
# EUR-Lex - 31997D0598 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31997D0598

**97/598/EC: Commission Decision of 25 July 1997 amending Commission Decision 97/252/EC drawing up provisional lists of third country establishments from which the Member States authorize imports of milk and milk-based products for human consumption (Text with EEA relevance) **

*
Official Journal L 240 , 02/09/1997 P. 0008 - 0009 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 25 July 1997 amending Commission Decision 97/252/EC drawing up provisional lists of third country establishments from which the Member States authorize imports of milk and milk-based products for human consumption (Text with EEA relevance) (97/598/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Decision 95/408/EC of 22 June 1995 on the conditions for drawing up, for an interim period, provisional lists of third country establishments from which the Member States are authorized to import certain products of animal origin, fishery products or live bivalve molluscs (1), as last amended by Council Decision 97/34/EC (2), and in particular Articles 2 (1) and 7 thereof,

Whereas Commission Decision 95/340/EEC (3), as last amended by Decision 96/584/EC (4), draws up a list of third countries from which the Member States authorize imports of milk and milk-based products;

Whereas the health and veterinary certification requirements for imports of milk and milk-based products from the countries appearing on that list have been laid down in Commission Decision 95/343/EEC (5), as last amended by Decision 97/115/EC (6);

Whereas Commission Decision 97/252/EC (7) draws up provisional lists of third country establishments from which the Member States authorize imports of milk and milk-based products for human consumption;

Whereas a Community on-the-spot inspection in Bulgaria has shown that certain establishments do not meet the Community health requirements and that the guarantees provided by the competent authorities have not been complied with;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Annex to Decision 97/252/EC is replaced by the Annex to this Decision for Bulgaria.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 25 July 1997.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 243, 11. 10. 1995, p. 17.

(2) OJ L 13, 16. 1. 1997, p. 33.

(3) OJ L 200, 24. 8. 1995, p. 38.

(4) OJ L 255, 9. 10. 1996, p. 20.

(5) OJ L 200, 24. 8. 1995, p. 52.

(6) OJ L 42, 13. 2. 1997, p. 16.

(7) OJ L 101, 18. 4. 1997, p. 46.

ANNEX

País: Bulgaria / Land: Bulgarien / Land: Bulgarien / ×þñá: Âïõëãáñßá / Country: Bulgaria / Pays: Bulgarie / Paese: Bulgaria / Land: Bulgarije / País: Bulgária / Maa: Bulgaria / Land: Bulgarien