alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 520.1 Purpose and scope. ( a ) Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (83 Stat. 853; 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)), as implemented by Executive Order 11514 (3 CFR, 1966-1970 Comp., p. 902) and the Council on Environmental Quality's Guidelines of April 23, 1971 (36 FR 7724), requires that all agencies of the Federal Government prepare detailed environmental statements on proposals for legislation and other major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. The purpose of the Act is to build into the agency decision-making process careful consideration of all environmental aspects of proposed actions.
( b ) This part specifies National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) procedures for conducting environmental assessments and reviews, and for the preparation of environmental impact statements on proposals for legislation and other major agency actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsBlade Tip Rubbing Stress PredictionAn analytical model was constructed to predict the magnitude of stresses produced by rubbing a turbine blade against its tip seal. This model used a linearized approach to the problem, after a parametric study, found that the nonlinear effects were of insignificant magnitude. The important input parameters to the model were: the arc through which rubbing occurs, the turbine rotor speed, normal force exerted on the blade, and the rubbing coefficient of friction. Since it is not possible to exactly specify some of these parameters, values were entered into the model which bracket likely values. The form of the forcing function was another variable which was impossible to specify precisely, but the assumption of a half-sine wave with a period equal to the duration of the rub was taken as a realistic assumption. The analytical model predicted resonances between harmonics of the forcing function decomposition and known harmonics of the blade. Thus, it seemed probable that blade tip rubbing could be at least a contributor to the blade-cracking phenomenon. A full-scale, full-speed test conducted on the space shuttle main engine high pressure fuel turbopump Whirligig tester was conducted at speeds between 33,000 and 28,000 RPM to confirm analytical predictions.Document ID19910009122Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsDavis, Gary A.*(Rockwell International Corp. Canoga Park, CA, United States)*Clough, Ray C.*(Rockwell International Corp. Canoga Park, CA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJanuary 28, 1991Subject CategoryMechanical EngineeringReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-184100RI/RD-91-114NAS 1.26:184100Accession Number91N18435Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS8-36361Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19910009122.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
§ 580.10 Application for assistance. ( a ) A State may apply to NHTSA for assistance in revising its laws to comply with the requirements of 408(d) (1) and (2) of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, 15 U.S.C. 1988(d) (1) and (2) and §§ 580.4 and 580.5 of this part.
( b ) Each application filed under section shall— ( 1 ) Be written in the English language;
( 2 ) Be submitted to the Office of Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, W41-326, Washington, DC 20590;
( 3 ) Include a copy of current motor vehicle titling and/or disclosure requirements in effect in the State; and
( 4 ) Include a draft of legislation or regulations intended to amend or revise current State motor vehicle titling and/or disclosure requirements to conform with Federal requirements.
( c ) The agency will respond to the applicant, in writing, and provide a list of the Federal statutory and/or regulatory requirements that the State may have failed to include in its proposal and indicate if any sections of the proposal appear to conflict with Federal requirements.
[53 FR 29476, Aug. 5, 1988, as amended at 84 FR 52702, Oct. 2, 2019]
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States governmentSkip to main content
end of header


Census.gov
                                    >                                
                                Business and Economy    >Wholesale    >Monthly    >FAQs    >General FAQs
 Skip to looking for section Main	About	Information for Respondents	Data	Time Series/Trend Charts	Technical Documentation	Release Schedule	Definitions	FAQs	Contact Us Back to Our Surveys & Programs
 Main	About	Information for Respondents	Data	Time Series/Trend Charts	Technical Documentation	Release Schedule	Definitions	FAQs	Contact Us
                                Back to Our Surveys & Programs
  **Monthly Wholesale Trade - General FAQs**
  Why is the Monthly Wholesale Trade Survey conducted?   What is the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)? NAICS
   What are economic indicators?   What data are produced by the Monthly Wholesale Trade Survey?   How are the data used?   Why aren't the latest Monthly Wholesale reports for the current month?   Release Schedule
  What is sampling variability and how do I interpret it? 
  How do the Monthly Wholesale historic release files differ from the Monthly Wholesale historic time series files? Current month preliminary estimates are added.
	Prior month estimates are finalized.
 What steps does the Census Bureau undertake to ensure that confidential data are secure? Title 13


CONNECT WITH US

Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
                   Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
Second Department,

May Term, 1885.

#### Gerche Koch, Respondent, v. Otto Meyer, Appellant.

Order denying motion to vacate . order of arrest affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 292 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                     November 16, 2001.
    Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is hereby, elected to the 
following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Government Reform: Mr. Lynch of Massachusetts, to rank after 
Ms. Watson of California.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-18-00381-CR

___________________________

On Appeal from the 235th District Court

Cooke County, Texas

Trial Court No. CR17-00284

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Walker and Meier, JJ. 

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice 

Sudderth 

ANDREW COLBY LIVINGSTON, Appellant

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Andrew Colby Livingston attempts to appeal his conviction for 

continuous sexual abuse of a child under the age of 14. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. 

§ 21.02 (West Supp. 2018). Appellant was convicted on July 11, 2018, making his 

notice of appeal due August 10, 2018. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1). He did not file a 

notice of appeal until August 24, 2018.

By letter dated August 28, 2018, we notified Livingston of our concern that we 

may not have jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed and 

requested a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. We warned that a 

failure to do so could result in our dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See 

Tex. R. App. P. 44.3. On September 5, 2018, Livingston’s counsel filed a motion to 

extend time to file a late notice of appeal. But see Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 524 

(Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (holding that the failure to file a motion for extension of time 

within the 15 days of the deadline for the notice of appeal deprives the reviewing 

court of jurisdiction). In it, she asserted that she was confident that a motion for new 

trial was e-filed on August 6, 2018, thereby extending the time for filing a notice of 

appeal, but that she later realized that the motion was not accepted or filed by the 

Cooke County District Clerk. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(2), 26.3. By letter dated 

September 13, 2018, we requested that Livingston’s counsel provide us with 

confirmation of service of the motion for new trial from the electronic filing manager 

or other confirmation that the motion for new trial was tendered to the electronic 
3

filing manager. See generally, Tex. R. App. P. 9.2(c)(4), (6). Livingston’s counsel filed a 

response but it did not include any such confirmation.

We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 

43.2(f), 44.3.

/s/ Bonnie Sudderth

Bonnie Sudderth

Chief Justice

Do Not Publish

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

Delivered: October 11, 2018
Exhibit 32.1



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 Princeton National Bancorp, Inc. ((PNBC() on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the (Report(), I Tony J. Sorcic, President & Chief Executive Officer of PNBC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



(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 represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of PNBC.






/s/ Tony J. SorcicTony J. SorcicPresident & Chief Executive OfficerAugust 3, 2007




---
**EXHIBIT
      23.1**





**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**




We
        consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
        333-128607, 333-10993, 333-100186, 333-106054, 333-106080, and 333-121059
        on
        Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 333-129454, 333-03303, 333-03289,
        333-61598, 333-76316, 333-76288, 333-88372, 333-100184, 333-113684, 333-121371,
        333-125010 on Form S-8 of our reports dated March 8, 2006, August 3, 2006
        as to
        the effects of the restatement of PNM Resources, Inc.’s notes to the
        consolidated financial statements discussed in Note 24, (which express an
        unqualified opinion and includes explanatory paragraphs regarding the adoption
        of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143, *Accounting
        for Asset Retirement Obligations* ,
        effective January 1, 2003, and Financial Accounting Standards Board Financial
        Interpretation No. 47, *Accounting
        for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations* in 2005,
        the change in actuarial valuation measurement date for the pension plan and
        other post-retirement benefits from September 30 to December 31 during 2003,
        PNM
        Resources, Inc.’s acquisition of TNP Enterprises, Inc. in 2005 and PNM
        Resources, Inc.’s restatement discussed in Note 24), relating to the
        consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of PNM
        Resources, Inc. and management's report on the effectiveness of internal
        control
        over financial reporting appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of
        PNM
        Resources, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2005.





/s/
          DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP





Dallas,
          Texas


August
          3,
          2006
§ 594.10 Fee for review and processing of conformity certificate. ( a ) Each registered importer shall pay a fee based on the agency's direct and indirect costs for the review and processing of each certificate of conformity furnished to the Administrator pursuant to § 591.7(e) of this chapter.
( b ) The direct costs attributable to the review and processing of a certificate of conformity include the estimated cost of contract and professional staff time, computer usage, and record assembly, marking, shipment and storage costs.
( c ) The indirect costs attributable to the review and processing of a certificate of conformity include a pro rata allocation of the average benefits of persons employed in reviewing and processing the certificates, and a pro rata allocation of the costs attributable to the rental and maintenance of office space and equipment, the use of office supplies, and other overhead items.
( d ) The review and processing fee for each certificate of conformity submitted on and after October 1, 2014 is $10. However, if the vehicle covered by the certificate has been entered electronically with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security through the Automated Broker Interface and the registered importer submitting the certificate has an e-mail address, the fee for the certificate is $6, provided that the fee is paid by a credit card issued to the registered importer. If NHTSA finds that the information in the entry or the certificate is incorrect, requiring further processing, the processing fee shall be $57.
[62 FR 50882, Sept. 29, 1997, as amended at 63 FR 45186, Aug. 25, 1998; 65 FR 56500, Sept. 19, 2000; 67 FR 60599, Sept. 26, 2002; 69 FR 57874, Sept. 28, 2004; 71 FR 43990, Aug. 3, 2006; 73 FR 54986, Sept. 24, 2008; 75 FR 48613, Aug. 11, 2010; 77 FR 50642, Oct. 1, 2012; 79 FR 57007, Sept. 24, 2014]
§ 512.23 Under what circumstances may NHTSA publicly release confidential information? ( a ) Information that has been claimed or determined to be confidential under this part may be disclosed to the public by the Administrator notwithstanding such claim or determination, if disclosure would be in the public interest as follows: ( 1 ) Information obtained under chapter 325, 327, 329 or 331 of title 49 of the United States Code (formerly under the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act) may be disclosed when that information is relevant to a proceeding under the chapter under which the information was obtained.
( 2 ) Information obtained under chapter 301 of title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C. § 30101 *et seq.*), relating to the establishment, amendment, or modification of Federal motor vehicle safety standards, may be disclosed when relevant to a proceeding under the chapter.
( 3 ) Except as specified in the next sentence, information obtained under Chapter 301 of title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C. 30101 *et seq.*), related to a possible defect or noncompliance, shall be disclosed when the Administrator decides the information will assist in carrying out sections 30117(b) and 30118 through 30121 of title 49 or is required to be disclosed under 30118(a) of title 49, except as provided in paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
( 4 ) No information will be disclosed under paragraph (a) of this section unless the submitter of the information is given written notice of the Administrator's intention to disclose information under this section. Written notice will be given at least twenty (20) working days before the day of release, unless the Administrator finds that shorter notice is in the public interest. The notice under this paragraph will include a statement of the Administrator's reasons for deciding to disclose the information, and will afford the submitter of the information an opportunity to comment on the contemplated release of the information. The Administrator may also give notice of the contemplated release of information to other persons and may allow these persons the opportunity to comment. In making the determination to release information pursuant to this section, the Administrator will consider ways to release the information that will cause the least possible adverse effects to the submitter.
( b ) Notwithstanding any other provision of this part, information that has been determined or claimed to be confidential may be released: ( 1 ) To a committee of Congress;
( 2 ) Pursuant to an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;
( 3 ) To the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation and other Executive branch offices or other Federal agencies in accordance with applicable laws;
( 4 ) With the consent of the submitter of the information; and
( 5 ) To contractors, if necessary for the performance of a contract with the agency or any Federal agency, with specific prohibitions on further release of the information.
This opinion is subject to adm inistrative correction before final disposition.

Before MONAHAN
, STEPHENS , and DEERWESTER Appellate Military Judges

_________________________ 

### UNITED STATES Appellee

v.
Isaiah C

. DEAN Private First Class (E

- 2 ), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant

No. 202000130

Decided: 25 November 2020
Appeal from the United States Navy

- Marine Corps Trial Judiciary
Military Judge : John P. Norman
Sentence adjudged 27 February 2020 by a general court

- martial convened at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, C alifornia, consisting of a military judge sitting alone. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment : reduction to E

- 1, confinement for 24 months , and a dishonorable discharge.
For Appellant: Lieutenant Commander W. Scott Stoebner , JAGC, USN
For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.

_________________________
This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2 (a)

.United States v. Dean , NMCCA No. 2020 00 130 Opinion of the Court

2 _________________________

PER CURIAM : After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of
error, we have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to A ppellant’s substantial rights occurred. Uniform Code of Military Justice arts. 59, 66, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.
T he findings and sentence are AFFIRMED

. 1

FOR THE COURT:

RODGER A. DREW, JR. Clerk of Court

1 We note that, as the result of an apparent scrivener’s error, the “flapped” referral blocks for both the charge sheet preferred on 26 August 2019 and the charge sheet preferred on 16 September 2019 wer e transposed. Because we can discern no prejudice to Appellant, no corrective action is necessary.
# Iraqi Mosul Offensive Resumes

/ Published Dec. 29, 2016
December 29, 2016Release #20160629-03FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE**SOUTHWEST ASIA —**Today, with Coalition air and artillery support, the Iraqi Security Forces announced that several elements of the Iraqi Army, Federal Police and Counter Terrorism Service initiated a simultaneous advance along three axes in Mosul to defeat ISIL.On the north axis, units of the 16th Division of the Iraqi Army advanced south to clear additional neighborhoods as they take new ground. On the east axis, Counter Terrorism Service units pushed west and south along two fronts. On the south axis, units of the Federal Police began clearing neighborhoods to the North.The Iraqi multi-axis advance opens two new fronts within the city and increases pressure on ISIL's dwindling ability to generate forces, move fighters or resupply.  Since the start of the Mosul operation onOct. 17, the Coalition has struck ISIL with more than 7,650 munitions in support of the Iraqi Security Forces.  Additionally, at the request of the government of Iraq, the Coalition re-struck Mosul Bridges #4 and #5Tuesday, and disabled Bridge #1Monday, the last bridge crossing the Tigris River inside Mosul. The strikes were conducted to reduce enemy freedom of movement, and to further disrupt ISIL's ability to reinforce, resupply, or use vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices in East Mosul.Coalition forces provide operational advice and assistance to Iraqi units along with intelligence, logistics, artillery and air support to the Iraqi Security Forces in a partnership to defeat ISIL in Iraq.  Support is being provided in response to requests by the government of Iraq and in a deliberate and consultative manner to avoid unnecessary casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure.
Editorial Note on Part 393
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 393 appear at 66 FR 49874, Oct. 1, 2001.

§ 393.69 Liquefied petroleum gas systems. ( a ) A fuel system that uses liquefied petroleum gas as a fuel for the operation of a motor vehicle or for the operation of auxiliary equipment installed on, or used in connection with, a motor vehicle must conform to the “Standards for the Storage and Handling of Liquefied Petroleum Gases” of the National Fire Protection Association, Battery March Park, Quincy, MA 02269, as follows: ( 1 ) A fuel system installed before December 31, 1962, must conform to the 1951 edition of the Standards.
( 2 ) A fuel system installed on or after December 31, 1962, and before January 1, 1973, must conform to Division IV of the June 1959 edition of the Standards.
( 3 ) A fuel system installed on or after January 1, 1973, and providing fuel for propulsion of the motor vehicle must conform to Division IV of the 1969 edition of the Standards.
( 4 ) A fuel system installed on or after January 1, 1973, and providing fuel for the operation of auxiliary equipment must conform to Division VII of the 1969 edition of the Standards.
( b ) When the rules in this section require a fuel system to conform to a specific edition of the Standards, the fuel system may conform to the applicable provisions in a later edition of the Standards specified in this section.
( c ) The tank of a fuel system must be marked to indicate that the system conforms to the Standards.
[36 FR 15445, Aug. 14, 1971, as amended at 37 FR 4342, Mar. 2, 1972; 41 FR 53031, Dec. 3, 1976; 53 FR 49400, Dec. 7, 1988]
#### § 537.1 Scope.

This part establishes requirements for automobile manufacturers to submit reports to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration regarding their efforts to improve automotive fuel economy.
§ 299.707 Maintenance intervals. ( a ) The initial scheduled maintenance intervals shall be based on those in effect on the Tokaido Shinkansen system as required under § 299.13(c)(1).
( b ) The maintenance interval of safety-critical components shall be changed only when justified by accumulated, verifiable operating data, and approved by FRA under paragraph § 299.713.