alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1678 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1678

    To temporarily increase the standard mileage rate for use of an 
    automobile for purposes of certain deductions allowed under the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and to temporarily increase the 
   reimbursement rate for use of an automobile by Federal employees.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 12, 2005

  Mr. Schumer (for himself and Ms. Mikulski) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To temporarily increase the standard mileage rate for use of an 
    automobile for purposes of certain deductions allowed under the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and to temporarily increase the 
   reimbursement rate for use of an automobile by Federal employees.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Reimbursing Our American Drivers 
(ROAD) Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN MILEAGE RATE DEDUCTION.

    (a) Rate for Business, Medical, and Moving Use of an Automobile.--
For purposes of sections 162(a), 213(d)(1)(B), and 217 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986, the standard mileage rate for use of an 
automobile shall be 60 cents per mile for any use after August 31, 
2005, and before January 1, 2007.
    (b) Rate for Charitable Use of an Automobile.--Section 170(i) of 
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ``(60 cents 
per mile for any use after August 31, 2005, and before January 1, 
2007)'' before the period at the end.

SEC. 3. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN REIMBURSEMENT RATE FOR USE OF AN 
              AUTOMOBILE FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.

    For purposes of section 5704 of title 5, United States Code, the 
standard mileage rate for use of an automobile for an employee who is 
engaged on official business for the Government shall be 60 cents per 
mile for any use after August 31, 2005, and before January 1, 2007.
                                 <all>
```
30th
1

Clancy, Maeve

From: Heidi Haggerty <Haggerty.Heidi@azdeq.gov>

Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 5:25 PM

To: Clancy, Maeve

Cc: Marina Mejia; Smith, Noah

Subject: AZ 2015 Ozone Transport I-SIP Submittal Clarification

Hi Maeve, 

This email is just to clarify ADEQ’s December 3, 2015 submittal letter as it pertained to the 2008 Ozone NAAQS CAA 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) SIP revision (the submittal was also for other infrastructure SIP provisions). In the letter, ADEQ 

stated that the previously submitted 2012 Ozone infrastructure SIP revision had not been acted on. We also requested 

that the entire 2012 ozone submittal for CAA 110(a)(2)(D) be withdrawn and that the 2015 ozone submittal should take 

its place. These statements were made in error as EPA already partially approved ADEQ’s 2012 submittal for CAA 

110(a)(2)(D) in 2015. (Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Arizona; 

Infrastructure Requirements for Lead and Ozone, 80 FR 40905, Jul. 14, 2015). Therefore, the December 2015 submittal 

is only intended to replace ADEQ’s 2012 submittal for prongs 1, 2, and 4 of CAA 110(a)(2)(D). 

Please let me know if you have any questions or need further clarification. 

Thank you, 

Heidi Haggerty 

State Implementation Planner 

Air Quality SIP Section 

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 

1110 W. Washington Street 

Phoenix, AZ 85007 

602-771-4815 

haggerty.heidi@azdeq.gov

NOTICE: This e-mail (and any attachments) may contain PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL information and is intended only for the use of the 

specific individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged and confidential under state and federal law. This 

information may be used or disclosed only in accordance with law, and you may be subject to penalties under law for improper use or further 

disclosure of the information in this e-mail and its attachments. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the person 

named above by reply e-mail, and then delete the original e-mail. Thank you.
#### Raymond SWIFT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 76-1006-76-1010.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 17, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 15, 1977.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, Frank B. Kessler, Asst. Public Defender, and James K. Green, Legal Intern, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Paul H. Zacks, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See *Martin v. State,*243 So.2d 189 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971).

DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

Certification of President



I, Ramon Chimelis, President, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Big Sky Industries II, Inc.;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.



Dated: January 15, 2009



/s/ Ramon Chimelis

Ramon Chimelis, President
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 168 (Friday, August 29, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 45799]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23114]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Cooperative Research and Development Agreement for Proximity 
Sensor Technology

AGENCY: U.S. Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the United States Army Tank-
automotive and Armaments Command, Armament Research, Development and 
Engineering Center (TACOM-ARDEC) has entered into a Cooperative 
Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with KDI Precision Products, 
Inc. to explore the feasibility of adapting Army proximity sensor 
technology for potential use in proximity sensor applications for other 
military munition items and non-military applications. The goal of this 
collaborative effort is to provide a variety of proximity sensor users 
(e.g. military munitions, intelligent highway collision-avoidance 
sensors, proximity sensors used in machine control and robotics 
applications) with a low cost and reliable proximity sensor alternative 
to current technology. Any others wishing to pursue the possibility of 
a CRADA for similar activities should contact TACOM-ARDEC at the 
address below.

ADDRESSES: U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC, ATTN: AMSTA-AR-ASC Picatinny Arsenal, 
N.J. 07806-5000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Tim Ryan, General Engineer, telephone, (201) 724-7953 or fax, (201) 
724-2934.
    E-mail address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1b6f69627a755b6b72787a357a69766235767277"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f1858388909fb181989290df90839c88df9c989d">[email protected]</span></a>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: None.

Timothy S. Ryan.
[FR Doc. 97-23114 Filed 8-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
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 Big Sky Industries V, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ramon Chimelis, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 results of operations of the Company.



Dated: February 13, 2009



/s/ Ramon Chimelis

Ramon Chimelis, President

Big Sky Industries V, Inc.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 161 (Wednesday, August 20, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44271]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21991]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket Nos. FA95-26-001 and FA95-27-001]


Western Resources, Inc.; Notice of Filing

August 14, 1997.
    Take notice that on June 9, 1997, Western Resources, Inc., tendered 
for filing its refund report in the above-referenced docket.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said 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 18 CFR 385.214). All such motions or 
protests should be filed on or before August 20, 1997. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. 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.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-21991 Filed 8-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Earl SHELBY v. TERMINIX 7, INC. d/b/a Terminix Service.

No. 50018.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Feb. 22, 1978.

W. B. Duggins, Jr., Vicksburg, for appellant.

Teller, Biedenharn & Rogers, Landman Teller, Jr., Vicksburg, for appellee.

Before SMITH, P. J., and ROBERTSON and LEE, JJ.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 11

                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                 (In thousands, except earnings per share data)


                                             Nine months ended
                                                  September 30
                                              2000          1999
                                              ----          ----

Net (loss) income                      ($1,179,373)  ($1,993,580)
Basic earnings per common share              ($.15)        ($.39)
Diluted earnings per common share            ($.15)        ($.39)
Weighted average common shares
outstanding                                  8,054         5,167
Weighted average common shares
outstanding assuming                         8,054         5,167
dilution



<PAGE>
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. Miguel A. BETANCOURT, Loynas Boquete, and Luis Garcia, Relators, v. Herbert M. KLEIN, Judge of the Circuit Court, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Dade County, Florida, Respondent.

No. 77-2423.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 10, 1978.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 13, 1978.

*393Peter F. K. Baraban and Colin Guy, John Muldowney, Miami, for relators.

Richard E. Gerstein, State’s Atty. and Edward McHale, Asst. State’s Atty., for respondent.

Before PEARSON and NATHAN, JJ., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

We have been presented with a petition for writ of prohibition and, pursuant to Fla.App. Rule 4.5(d)(2), have issued the rule therein provided. Return to the rule has been made and upon consideration of the petition and the return and the record submitted, the following appears:

The petitioner was arrested for the unlawful possession of marijuana. A trial was set for October 3, 1977. At trial, it appeared that a witness subpoena issued for a defense witness who was a policeman had not been obeyed because the policeman was on vacation. The court, of its own motion, continued the trial until October 17th. At the time of the trial, the policeman witness again did not respond to the subpoena. The court declined to continue the trial again unless petitioner moved for such a continuance. Thereupon, the motion was made and granted and the trial set for a date beyond the 180 day period which began on April 28, 1977, when appellant was arrested upon the pending charge.

On November 18, 1977, the petitioner moved for a discharge, which was denied. In order to be entitled to discharge because of the expiration of the 180 day period,- the defendant must have been continuously available for trial. See Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.191(a)(1). It is petitioner’s position that he was prevented from being ready for trial only by the actions of the State. In order to make this argument, he must identify the witness who was a policeman as an agent of the State. This assumption is not warranted under the circumstances of this case. Therefore, the petition must be dismissed pursuant to *State ex rel. Butler v. Cullen,*253 So.2d 861 (Fla.1971). Therefore, the writ is quashed and the petition is dismissed.

It is so ordered.
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 Report of China Natural Gas, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David She, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:
August 19, 2010





/s/ David SheDavid
      She
                  Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Silicon Mountain Holdings, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this 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 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:
     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):
   Date: May 16, 2008
    

/s/
Rudolph (Tré) A. Cates III
Rudolph (Tré) A. Cates III, President and
Chief Executive Officer
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 Thomas Equipment, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Luigi
Lo Basso, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
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 and 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.


Dated: February 10, 2006                            By: /s/ LUIGI LO BASSO
                                                        ------------------------
                                                        Luigi Lo Basso
                                                        Chief Financial Officer
**Turkeys--supplement (PTH-BB)
A product of the National Agricultural Statistics Service, Agricultural Statistics Board, U.S. Department of Agriculture**Description:**
**
#### DEMKO’S GOLD COAST TRAILER PARK, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. PALM BEACH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-483.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Dec. 12, 1969.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Palm Beach County; James C. Downey, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
ex10-1.htm


Exhibit 10.1

 

 

AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

 

This Amendment to Employment Agreement (the “Amendment”) amends the Employment Agreement by and between Bio-Techne Corporation, a Minnesota corporation (“Bio-Techne”), and EXECUITVE OFFICER (“Employee”). This Amendment is effective as of October 15, 2015 (“Effective Date”).

 

RECITALS

 

 

WHEREAS, the Parties have entered into an Employment Agreement, dated January 30, 2015 (the "Existing Agreement"); and

 

WHEREAS, the Parties desire to amend the Existing Agreement to clarify the applicability of termination for Good Reason in the event of Change in Control.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises set forth above and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:

 

1.     Definitions. Capitalized terms used and not defined in this Amendment have the respective meanings assigned to them in the Existing Agreement.

 

2.     Amendments to the Existing Agreement. As of the Effective Date (defined above), the Existing Agreement is hereby amended or modified as follows:

 

(a)     Section 5.2 of the Existing Agreement is hereby amended by:

 

(i)     deleting the first sentence of that Section; and 

 

(ii)     inserting as a new first sentence the following: 

 

“If there is a Change in Control, as defined below, and if Employee either resigns for Good Reason or Employee's employment is terminated by Bio-Techne or its successor, in either situation upon consummation of such Change in Control or within one (1) year thereafter, then Employee will be paid an amount equal to one (1) year of her then-current base annual salary plus the pro-rated value of any incentive compensation earned through the date of such termination pursuant to Section 2.2 above and the automatic acceleration of any vesting requirements of the equity grants awarded to Employee by Bio-Techne during the term of her employment (hereinafter referred to as the "CIC Severance Payment"); provided, however, that Employee shall be entitled to the CIC Severance Payment set forth in this Section 5.2 only if she executes within 60 days of resignation or termination of employment, does not rescind, and fully complies with a release agreement in a form supplied by Bio-Techne, which will include, but not be limited to, a comprehensive release of claims against Bio-Techne and its directors, officers, employees and all related parties, in their official and individual capacities.

 


 

 




 


 

 

3.     Except as expressly provided in this First Amendment, all of the terms and provisions of the Existing Agreement are and will remain in full force and effect and are hereby ratified and confirmed by the Parties.

 

 

   THE PARTIES HAVE executed this Agreement in the manner appropriate to each as of the dates set forth below.

 

BIO-TECHNE CORPORATION

 

 

 

	
By
	 	 	
 
	, 2015
	Its Chief Executive Officer 	 	 Date	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	EMPLOYEE	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	, 2015
	EXECUTIVE OFFICER	 	         Date
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:See attachment
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Red River

National Wildlife Refuge

Comprehensive Conservation Plan

Red River

National Wildlife Refuge

USFWS Photo
Comprehensive Conservation Plans provide long-term guidance for

management decisions; set forth goals, objectives, and strategies

needed to accomplish refuge purposes; and identify the Fish and

Wildlife Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail

program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above

current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service

strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans

do not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational

and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition.