alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 150
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 150 appear by USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36284, June 25, 2010.

§ 150.617 What are the requirements for tagout? ( a ) The deepwater port operator must ensure that, before work takes place on equipment that is disconnected from the power source, a tag complying with this section is placed at the location where the power is disconnected. The operator must ensure that, if there is a control panel for the equipment in line between the equipment and the location where the power is disconnected, a tag complying with this section is also placed on the control panel.
( b ) Each tag or sign must have words stating: ( 1 ) That equipment is being worked on;
( 2 ) That power must not be restored or the equipment activated; and
( 3 ) The name of the person who placed the tag.
( c ) Only the person who placed the tag, that person's immediate supervisor, or the relief person of either, is authorized to remove the tag.
Opinion issued August 2 , 201 2 .

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

____________ NO. 01
- 1 1
- 00612
- CV

____________ PRSI TRADING COMPANY LP , Appellant

V. ASTRA OIL TRADING NV , Appellee

On Appeal from the 270th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 20 09
- 25450A

MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an a ppeal from a judgment signed June 29, 2011

. On July 2 , 2012, the parties filed a joint motion which states that they have settled the case and executed the necessary settlement documents

. The motion requests that this Court dismiss2

the appeal, vacate the trial court ’s judgment , dismiss the case with prejudice , and release the supersedeas bond and rider filed with the Harris County District Clerk

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.1. No opinion has issued. The motion is granted , the trial court ’s judgment is vacated, all claims and counterclaims are dismissed with prejudice , and the appeal is dismissed. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.1(a)(2 ) (A) , 43.2(e) , (f)

. We dismiss any other pending motions as moot. In accordance with the parties’ agreement, the Harris County District Clerk shall release the supersedeas bond and rider filed by appellant. Pursuant to the agreement of the parties, Supersedeas Bond Number 8216

- 83

- 60 is hereby fully and unconditionally discharged and released, and Federal Insuran ce Company, its parents, affiliates and subsidiaries are hereby released from any and all past, present and future liability under said bond

. C osts of the appeal are taxed against the parties who incurred them , i n accorda nce with the parties’ agreement

. See T EX
. R.
A PP
. P. 42.1(d). The Clerk is directed to issue the mandate upon issuance of this opinion, in accordance with the parties ’ agreement

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 18.1 (c)

. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Bland, Massengale, and Brown

.
Editorial Note on Part 117
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

§ 117.741 Raccoon Creek. ( a ) The draw of the Route 130 highway bridge, mile 1.8 at Bridgeport, shall open on signal: ( 1 ) May 1 through October 31, from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.
( 2 ) At all other times, if at least four hours notice is given.
( b ) The draw of the CONRAIL Railroad Bridge, mile 2.0 at Bridgeport, shall operate as follows: ( 1 ) From March 1 through November 30, the draw shall be left in the open position at all times and will only be closed for the passage of trains and to perform periodic maintenance authorized in accordance with subpart A of this part. ( i ) Trains shall be controlled so that any delay in opening of the draw shall not exceed ten minutes except as provided in § 117.31(b).
( ii ) Before the bridge closes for any reason, a train crewmember will observe the waterway for approaching craft, which will be allowed to pass. A train crewmember will then operate the bridge by radiophone. The bridge shall only be closed if a train crewmember's visual inspection shows that the channel is clear and there are no vessels transiting in the area.
( iii ) While the CONRAIL Railroad Bridge is moving from the full open to the full closed position, a train crewmember will maintain constant surveillance of the navigational channel to ensure no conflict with maritime traffic exists. In the event of failure or obstruction, the train crewmember will stop the bridge and return the bridge to the open position.
( iv ) The CONRAIL Railroad channel traffic lights will change from flashing green to flashing red anytime the bridge is not in the full open position.
( v ) During closing of the span, the channel traffic lights will change from flashing green to flashing red, the horn will sound four times, followed by a pause, then the four blasts will be repeated and the bridge will close. When the rail traffic has cleared the swing span, the horn will automatically sound five times to signal the draw of the CONRAIL Railroad Bridge is about to return to its full open position.
( vi ) During open span movement, the channel traffic lights will be flashing red, the horn will sound four times, followed by a pause, then four blasts will be repeated until the bridge is in the full open position. In the full open position, the channel traffic lights will then turn from flashing red to flashing green.
( 2 ) At all other times, the draw may be left in the closed position and opened on signal if at least four hours notice is given by telephone at (856) 231-2393.
[CGD05-02-065, 68 FR 27461, May 20, 2003, as amended by USCG-2013-0711, 79 FR 44698, Aug. 1, 2014]
Version March 2020

Request for Change in Authorized 

Organizational Representative (AOR)

This document provides guidance on submitting a change in Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR).

Information Required

 Grantee should submit a Grant Note that includes a dated cover letter signed by the current AOR or designee 

that contains the following information:

o Grant Award Number and Grantee Organization Name 

o New AOR contact information (name, title, business phone number and business email address) 

o Effective date of the change 

How to Submit Your Request:

Please submit all requests for AOR changes via Grant Notes in GrantSolutions. When submitting the request, the Grant 

Note subject line as well as the Category Type should be “AOR Change.” The Notes box should contain the 

following “Requesting a change of AOR to Jane Smith” and your cover letter should be uploaded as an attachment to the 

note AND send an email to the Project Officer and Grants Management Specialist making them aware of the change.

The change will be made in GrantSolutions upon receipt and review, and the new AOR will receive access to the grant 

award within 15 days of review. A Notice of Award will not be issued solely for this change. The change will reflect on 

the next action that requires a Notice of Award be issued.
#### Stuart *v.*Pennis.

*(Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia,*

*July 11, 1899.)*

[33 S. E. Rep. 1015.]

Appellate Practice- — Court Equally Divided.

Where the appellate court is equally divided the ruling of the lower court is affirmed.

Same — Decrees—“Without Prejudice.”

In this case it appeared to the court that the decree dismissing the bill should have been without prejudice to the right of the appellant to bring his action at law on the contract, and the decree was amended in that respect.

Appeal from circuit court, Russell county.

Bill by one Stuart against one Pennis. Prom a decree dismissing the bill, complainant Appeals.

Modified.

*J. J. Stuart, W. E- Burns,*and *M. P. Burks,*for appellant.

*II. A. Roiuth, W. W. Bird, Henry de Graham,*and *J. G. Gent,*for appellees.

Cardwell, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

In this case, which is a sequel of the case of Stuart v. Pennis, 91 Va. 688, 22 S. E. 509, the court being equally divided as to the right of appellant to have a decree for the specific *668performance of the contract in his bill mentioned, no opinion has been prepared ; but, it appearing to the court that the decree dismissing the bill should have been without prejudice to the right of appellant to bring his action at law upon said contract, if he be so advised, the decree appealed from will be amended in this respect, and, as amended, will be affirmed, with costs to appellee.
OUTLOOKfor

U.S. Agricultural Trade

February 22, 1999 AES-21

FISCAL 1999 AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS FORECAST TO FALL BELOW $50 BILLION

U.S. agricultural exports in fiscal 1999 are forecast at $49 billion,

down $1.5 billion from the November estimate and $4.6 billion below

3

The forecasts in the Outlook for U.S. Agricultural Trade are based on

5

U.S. coarse grain exports are raised 1.2 million tons and $100 million
6

estimate. Also due to lower shipments and export prices, soybean meal

and oil exports are reduced to $1.2 billion and $7.2 billion,

8

Given that the dollar appreciated by 28 percent against the developing

Pacific-Asian countries since 1997 and this is combined with 2 years of

Asian recession, the United States should expect continued weak demand

from this prime market for U.S. agricultural exports. Against Latin

American currencies, the inflation-adjusted dollar actually depreciated

slightly over the past 2 years because of managed exchange rates and in

1998 overvaluation of currencies like the Brazilian real.

Nevertheless, the real’s devaluation and weaker economies in

neighboring countries offset the dollar’s competitiveness gained since

1997.

U.S. exporters also should not expect much help from major markets in

Europe, Japan, and Canada. The dollar appreciated 14 percent against

the European currencies and 40 percent against the Japanese yen since

1996, and 35 percent against the Canadian dollar since 1992. But, the

dollar gained only 1 percent in real terms against the Mexican peso in

1998 despite almost a 16-percent nominal appreciation because Mexico’s

10
11

additional GSM-102 allocation of $10 million was announced for Tunisia

to assist vegetable oil sales.

Food Aid Programs

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)announced the

allocations for Title I for fiscal year 1999. The total program
12

Imports of horticultural products for fiscal 1999 are forecast at $14.6

billion, up $100 million from November and $750 million above 1998.

Rising imports of fruits, preparations, and juices are causing this

upward revision. Imports of fruits, preparations, and juices are

increased to $4.2 billion, compared with $4 billion in 1998 and $4.1

billion in November. Although projected vegetable imports remain

unchanged from November at $4.5 billion, they are $250 million above

1998. And, wine and malt beverage imports for 1999 are expected to

reach $3.8 billion, $300 million more than in 1998, even though slower

growth in U.S. househo84,bic Impo slower
13

Oilseeds and tropical products, including coffee and cocoa, are revised

downward from the November forecast. Lower than anticipated import

prices largely account for the decreased value of these commodities.
14

Table 7--U.S. agricultural imports: Value by region, 1997-99

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

October-December Fiscal Fiscal 1999

Region 1997 1998 1998 Forecast

Nov. Feb.

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

--Billion dollars--

Western Hemisphere 5.902 5.692 19.978 20.9 20.9

 Canada 2.004 2.004
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT N OT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED W E INSURE GROUP, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION , A ppellant ,
v. Case No

. 5D 23 -81 LT Cas e No. 2019- CA

- 2370

CHRISTOPHER SALAMEH ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decision filed April 25, 2023 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Du val C ounty , Gilbert L. Feltel, Jr. , J udge. Michael J. Korn, of Korn & Zehmer, P.A., Jacksonville, and H. Leon Holbrook, III, and Adam B. Edgecombe, of Lippes Mathias, LLP, Jacksonville, for Appellant. Alison A. Blake and P. Campbell Ford, of Ford Miller & Wainer, P.A., Jacksonville Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. LAMBERT, C.J. , EISNAUGLE and HARRIS , JJ. , conc ur.
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Michael Tokarz, in the capacity of the officer who performs the functions of Principal Executive Officer of MVC Capital, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Registrant”), certifies that:

 

1.                                     The Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended October 31, 2018 (the “Form 10-K”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.                                     The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 

In the capacity of the officer who performs the functions of Principal Executive Officer for MVC Capital, Inc.

 
| /s/   Michael Tokarz          |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|
| Michael   Tokarz              |   |
|                          |   |
| Date:   January 14, 2019 |   |

 

Scott Schuenke, in the capacity of the officer who performs the functions of Principal Financial Officer, of MVC Capital, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Registrant”), certifies that:

 

1.                                     The Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended October 31, 2018 (the “Form 10-K”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.                                     The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 

In the capacity of the officer who performs the functions

of Principal Financial Officer for

MVC Capital, Inc.

 
| /s/   Scott Schuenke          |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|
| Scott   Schuenke              |   |
|                          |   |
| Date:   January 14, 2019 |   |

 

----
[organization logo]

# STORY/PHOTO/VIDEO RELEASE

Event/activity description****(if applicable):

Location of photo (if applicable)**:**

I agree to allow the [organization], its representatives, and its employees to use my [photograph/recorded interview/story] in connection with activities related to [description of primary intent] and in materials related to [secondary intent or general use statement]. 

I authorize the [organization] to use and publish the materials in print and/or by electronic means for any related lawful purpose, including but not limited to publicity, illustration, advertising, and web content. 

I understand my story and likeness will not be sold or used in ways not described by this release.

**Signature:**_________________________________ 

**Printed name:**__________________________________

**Signature of parent/guardian:**__________________________________*(if under age 18)*

**Email address:**__________________________________ 

**Phone number:**__________________________________

**Date:**____________________ 

[federal funding disclaimer, if applicable]
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 695 

Commending the Honor Flight Network and its volunteers and donors for 

making it possible for World War II veterans to travel to the Nation’s 

capital to visit the World War II Memorial created in their honor. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 30 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 17), 2008 

Mrs. DOLE (for herself, Mr. BROWN, Mr. VOINOVICH, Mr. BURR, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. VITTER, Mr. ROBERTS, and Mr. MCCONNELL) submitted the 

following resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Commending the Honor Flight Network and its volunteers 

and donors for making it possible for World War II 

veterans to travel to the Nation’s capital to visit the 

World War II Memorial created in their honor. 

Whereas, in 2004, nearly 60 years after World War II ended, 

veterans of that war and all those who supported the war 

effort at home received recognition for their service, sacrifice, and victory by the dedication of the national World 

War II Memorial located on the National Mall in Washington, District of Columbia; 

Whereas many veterans of World War II who fought with 

courage and valor for the United States are now in their 

80s and 90s, and have not had the opportunity, or the 

ability because of physical or financial limitations, to visit 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•SRES 695 ATS 

the Nation’s capital to see the World War II Memorial 

for themselves; 

Whereas Jeff Miller of North Carolina and Earl Morse of 

Ohio created the Honor Flight Network to enable World 

War II veterans to travel to the Memorial; 

Whereas the Honor Flight Network, now operating in communities in more than 30 States, is a grassroots, nonprofit organization that uses commercial and chartered 

flights to send veterans on all-expenses paid trips to 

Washington, District of Columbia; 

Whereas the Honor Flights, as those trips are called, are 

staffed by volunteers and funded by donations; 

Whereas former Senator Bob Dole, himself a wounded veteran of World War II, led the fundraising campaign to 

build the Memorial and often greets veterans arriving at 

the Memorial through the Honor Flight Network; 

Whereas, of the 16,000,000 veterans who served in World 

War II, an estimated 2,500,000 are alive today, and 

those veterans are dying at a rate of more than 900 a 

day; and 

Whereas the Honor Flight Network is working against time 

to thank the Nation’s World War II veterans for their 

service: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate expresses deepest apprecia2 tion to the Honor Flight Network and the Network’s vol3 unteers and donors for honoring the Nation’s World War 

4 II veterans with an opportunity to visit the World War 

5 II Memorial in Washington, District of Columbia. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
J-S57009-16 

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37 

BEFORE: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E., SHOGAN, and STRASSBURGER,* JJ. 

CONCURRING MEMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J.: FILED AUGUST 24, 2016 

Given the current state of the law in Pennsylvania regarding juvenile 

LWOP, I reluctantly join the Majority’s erudite and well-crafted 

Memorandum. This Court in both Commonwealth v. Seagraves, 103 A.3d 

839 (Pa. Super. 2014), appeal denied, 116 A.3d 604 (Pa. 2015) and 

Commonwealth v. Batts (“Batts III”), 125 A.3d 33, 35 (Pa. Super. 

2015), appeal granted in part, 135 A.3d 176 (Pa. 2016), have held that 

our review of a challenge to a juvenile LWOP sentence must apply the 

deferential abuse of discretion standard. This is unlikely to accomplish the 

goal set forth by the United States Supreme Court in Miller v. Alabama,

____ U.S. ____, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012) of making juvenile 

LWOP sentences “uncommon.” 

 

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Appellee 

v. 

:

:

:

:

:

:

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA 

LAMON STREET, :

 :

 Appellant : No. 952 WDA 2015 

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence, January 21, 2015, 

in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, 

Criminal Division, at No(s): CP-02-CR-0011095-2009 
J-S57009-16 

- 2 - 

Moreover, unless a body of appellate law develops as to how agerelated factors should apply to sentences where LWOP is a possibility, likesituated juveniles will be treated differently. I have inveighed against such 

an outcome in the concurrent-consecutive dichotomy, Commonwealth v. 

Zirkle, 107 A.3d 127 (Pa. Super. 2014) (Strassburger, J. concurring), and 

the same principle applies here. 

As the Majority points out in Footnote 4, our Supreme Court has 

granted allowance of appeal in Batts III to determine, inter alia, whether a 

heightened standard of review should apply to juvenile LWOP sentences.
July 20, 2017

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

DANIEL A. GRIFFING, Appellant

NO. 14-16-00516-CR V.

NO. 14-16-00517-CR

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. ER00-2564-000]

Take notice that on May 22, 2000, Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd) tendered for filing a Short-Term Firm Transmission Service Agreement (Agreement) establishing Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPS), as a short-term firm customer under the terms of ComEd's OATT.

ComEd requests an effective date of June 22, 1999 to coincide with the first day of service to NIPS under this type of Service Agreement.

Copies of this filing were served on NIPS.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and protests should be filed on or before June 12, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-14143 Filed 6-5-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M