alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
OUTLINE FOR STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES (SOPs)

 

I. INTRODUCTION

1. Background information on the facility 

2. Major objectives and activities 

3. Location of the facility 

II. PHYSICAL CONTAINMENT STANDARDS

Describe the physical characteristics of the facility in detail using the guidelines.

1. Description of site 

2. Signs (APHIS inspected facility) 

3. Schematic floor plan of the facility on 8" X 12" paper 

4. Description of the facility with safeguards in each compartment of the facility that will have 

permitted organisms or is part of the safeguard system. This includes entrance and exit doors, 

vestibules, corridors, various package opening, laboratories, rearing areas, pupal emergence 

rooms, growth chamber rooms, greenhouses, emergency exit, etc. Inclusion of photographs of 

critical areas are encouraged. 

 a. Walls, ceilings, and floors 

 b. Screening over large areas, mesh size, material, replacement interval 

 c. Windows 

 d. Exterior doors 

 e. Vestibule 

f. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning - (e.g., screens with mesh size, filters, etc.) 

 g. Benches, cabinets, etc., in laboratories 

 h. Pupal Emergence cabinet - describe, provide diagram or photo 

i. Solid waste sterilization - type of autoclave, time, temperature, pressure, quality 

control, etc., double bagging and incineration off site etc. 

III OPERATIONAL STANDARDS 

Describe the general operating procedures - follow guidelines.

1.Containment director - designation of a containment director (name, address, and telephone 

number of the containment director) 

2. Responsibilities of containment director 

3. Signs 

4. Accessing the facility 

 a. Before entering the facility (e.g., personal apparel, hand washing, etc.) 

 b. Entering the facility 

 c. Exiting the facility 

5. Sanitation 
 a Removal of articles or plants from containment 

 b. Maintenance and repairs in the containment 

c. Probable local emergencies and contingency plans to manage them. Detailed 

description is needed. 

d. Response to reports of escapes, notifications including phone numbers of the 

appropriate State Plant Regulatory Official and State Plant Health Director 

(APHIS-PPQ). 

6. Cleaning and disinfesting the facility 

7. Opening and handling packages, disposing of packaging materials. 

8. PPQ regulatory requirements - notification of PPQ of escapes from containment, follow 

conditions of PPQ 526 permit.
Exhibit 23.1


                       Independent Auditors' Consent


The Board of Directors
Financial Federal Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in registration statements
(Nos. 333-1240, 33-32519 and 333-50962) on Form S-8 and (No. 333-56651) on
Form S-3 of Financial Federal Corporation of our report dated September 27,
2002, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of Financial Federal
Corporation as of July 31, 2002, and the related consolidated statements of
stockholders' equity, income and cash flows for the year ended July 31, 2002,
which report appears in the July 31, 2002 annual report on Form 10-K of
Financial Federal Corporation.



/s/ KPMG LLP

New York, New York
October 28, 2002

                                       43
Attachment O:

Partnership Agreement Form
EPA WasteWise Partner Agreement

The EPA WasteWise Program encourages organizations to voluntarily reduce waste and conserve

environmental resources while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Partners benefit from reduced waste 

generation by saving money and being recognized as environmental stewards in the United States. 

With this agreement, my organization joins EPA's WasteWise Program and agrees to: 

Submit baseline data within 60 days of registering. 

Report on waste management activities and progress towards goals annually. 

Commit to set goals and make continuous improvement related to: 

o Preventing waste (i.e. source reduction) 

o Recycling

o Purchasing or manufacturing recycled content products 

Use the WasteWise logo in a manner that is consistent with the use guidelines, available at

www.epa.gov/waste/partnerships/wastewise/guidelines.htm 

In return, EPA commits to provide:

Public recognition, by recognizing partners on our website. 

Partner support and communications assistance. 

An online waste reporting and data management system. 

The opportunity to compete for WasteWise Program Awards. 

General Terms:

Either party can terminate this agreement at any time without prior notification and with no 

further obligation. EPA will not comment publicly regarding the withdrawal of Partners. 

Partner agrees that the activities it undertakes connected with this voluntary agreement are not 

intended to provide services to the federal government and that the Partner will not seek 

compensation from a federal agency. 

Partner agrees that it will not claim or imply that its participation in the WasteWise Program 

constitutes EPA approval or endorsement of anything other than its participation in the program 

and will not make statements or imply that EPA endorses the Partner or the purchase or sale of 

the Partner's products and services or the views of the Partner's organization. 

EPA may publish information about the Partner's program accomplishments, but will honor all 

requests to keep the Partner's reported waste data confidential. 

EPA may use the Partner's logo in selected marketing materials. This added benefit is available 

only to Partners that have received an award for their commitment to reducing waste. 

EPA may periodically revise eligibility requirements. 

Termination Clause:

Failure to comply with any of the terms of this partnership agreement can result in its termination 

and cessation of access to the benefits of the program, including use of the WasteWise Re-TRAC 

system and the program logo.
# C_2019246EN.01000301.xml

| 22.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 246/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 246/3

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Judecătoria Orăștie (Romania) lodged on 20 November 2018 — EV v Inspectoratul General al Poliției Române-Brigada Autostrăzi și misiuni speciale — Biroul de Poliție Autostrada A1 Râmnicu Vâlcea — Deva (IGPR)

(Case C-723/18)

(2019/C 246/03)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Judecătoria Orăștie

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: EV

Defendant: Inspectoratul General al Poliției Române-Brigada Autostrăzi și misiuni speciale — Biroul de Poliție Autostrada A1 Râmnicu Vâlcea — Deva (IGPR)

By order of 8 May 2019, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Sixth Chamber) declared that it manifestly lacks jurisdiction to answer the questions referred by the Judecătoria Orăștie (Romania) by decision of 5 November 2018.

---
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol Campus
Capitol Hill Facts
        
                  You asked, we answered. Here are some of the most popular questions we get about the U.S. Capitol. The answers may surprise you!
            
          Exterior view of a building.


      Which is taller, the Capitol or the Washington Monument?

        
The Washington Monument, standing 555 feet tall, is 267 feet taller than the U.S. Capitol. Because the base of the Washington Monument is 30 feet above sea level, and that of the Capitol is 88 feet above sea level, the top of the Washington Monument is 209 feet higher than the top of the Capitol Building.
    Painted portrait of Thomas Ustick Walter, Fourth Architect of the Capitol.


      Who designed the U.S. Capitol?

        
The original design for the Capitol Building was drawn by Dr. William Thornton and the current dome on the Capitol was designed by Thomas U. Walter, but there have been 12 Architects of the Capitol who have all made contributions to the building.
    Exterior view of a building.


      Why does the Statue of Freedom face east, away from the National Mall?

        
The Capitol's East Front was planned, and still serves, as its principal entrance (being the only front on level ground), and the statue faces those who arrive from this direction.
    
            Pagination
    First page
            « First
                          Previous page
            ‹
                                      Page1
              Current page2 Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATIONS BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Education Management Corporation
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John R. McKernan, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certify in such capacity, 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 results of operations of the Company for the periods reflected
therein.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: May 4, 2006



By:

/s/    JOHN R. MCKERNAN,
JR.John R. McKernan, Jr. Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM MAGAININ
PHARMACEUTICALS INC. FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           2,602
<SECURITIES>                                     6,216
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,053
<PP&E>                                           4,445
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,850
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,814
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,066
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            54
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,581
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,814
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,412
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 146
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,424)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,424)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,424)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.09)


</TABLE>
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

444444444444444444

NO. 03-06-00101-CV

444444444444444444

In re Level 3 Communications, Inc. and Level 3 Communications, LLC

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

RelatorsLevel 3 Communications, Inc., and Level 3 Communications, LLC,filed this

petition for writ of mandamus. We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. 

 

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Pemberton and Waldrop

Filed: March 20, 2006
USDA APHIS Tribal Nations Wild Cervid 

Chronic Wasting Disease Opportunities 

2021 Cooperative Agreements 

2021 Spending Plan 

September 2021 
Tribal Wild Cervid Management Projects 

Project Title Entity Funding Amount 

Developing CWD Sampling Capacity and a Tribal 

Management Plan for the S’Klallam Tribes Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe $30,803.00 

Michigan Tribal CWD Management Bay Mills Indian Community $73,106.00 

Chronic Wasting Disease Surveillance in Wild 

Deer on the Leech Lake Reservation, MN 

Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe – 

Division of Resource 

Management $65,423.00 

CWD Surveillance on Navajo Nation 

Navajo Nation Department of 

Fish and Wildlife $75,000.00 

Chronic Wasting Disease Awareness, 

Monitoring, and Surveillance 

Oneida Nation – Oneida 

Conservation Department $10,820.00 

Chronic Wasting Disease Surveillance on Fort 

Belknap 

Fort Belknap Indian 

Community $16,659.00 

Seneca Nation 

Conservation-Fish and 

Seneca Nation CWD Education, Awareness, and 

Monitoring Program 

Wildlife Department 

(SNCFWD) $28,190.00 

TOTAL $300,001.00 

 

 

 

2021 Spending Plans for the Tribal Nations Wild Cervid Chronic Wasting 

Opportunities 2021 Cooperative Agreements 

USDA APHIS WS is awarding $300,000 through Cooperative Agreements to seven Federally recognized 

Native American Tribal governments to combat CWD on Tribal lands across ten different states. These 

projects will allow recipients to further develop and implement CWD management, response, and 

research activities in wild cervids, including surveillance and testing. Funded projects are listed below.
# C_2021088EN.01002601.xml

| 15.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 88/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/26

---

Judgment of the General Court of 27 January 2021 — KPN v Commission

(Case T-691/18) (1)

(Competition - Concentrations - Netherlands market for television services and telecommunications services - Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement - Relevant market - Vertical effects - Manifest error of assessment - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 88/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: KPN BV (Rotterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: P. van Ginneken and G. Béquet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. van Vliet, G. Conte, J. Szczodrowski and F. van Schaik, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: VodafoneZiggo Group Holding BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands), Vodafone Group plc (Newbury, United Kingdom), Liberty Global Europe Holding BV (Amsterdam) (represented by: W. Knibbeler, E. Raedts, A. Pliego Selie and I. Lulof, lawyers)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 3569 final of 30 May 2018 declaring the concentration involving the acquisition by Liberty Global of sole control over Ziggo NV to be compatible with the internal market and the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) (Case COMP/M.7000 — Liberty Global/Ziggo).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders KPN BV to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders KPN BV to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 35, 28.1.2019.

---
#### State v. Peltier

18105

4/25/97

Affirmed in part and Reversed in part
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7008

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

SHARU BEY, a/k/a Jeffrey Lewis,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, 

Chief District Judge. (3:07-cr-00079-FDW-2)

Submitted: November 17, 2016 Decided: November 22, 2016

Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sharu Bey, Appellant Pro Se. Steven R. Kaufman, Assistant United 

States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Sharu Bey appeals the district court’s text order denying 

his Fed. R. Crim. P. 36 motion. We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Bey, No. 

3:07-cr-00079-FDW-2 (W.D.N.C. July 14, 2016). We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Managed Pension Assets Partnership 1989-1, Ltd.'s balance sheet and statement of
opertions contained in its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         52,822
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  66,652
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               119,474
<PP&E>                                         3,089,535
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,568,555)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 640,454
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          8,663
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     631,791
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   640,454
<SALES>                                        224,867
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               226,846
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  101,795<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                54,089
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            54,089
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   54,089
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0

<FN>
<F1>Includes lease operating expenses, production taxes and depreciation and
amortization expense.  Excludes general and administrative and interest expense.
</FN>


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE THIRTEEN AND
TWENTY-SIX WEEKS ENDED DECEMBER 25, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-24-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-27-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-25-1999
<CASH>                                         204,914
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  147,530
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (4,494)
<INVENTORY>                                    736,181
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,131,503
<PP&E>                                         517,520
<DEPRECIATION>                               (230,913)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,558,127
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          959,258
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           941
<OTHER-SE>                                     334,595
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,558,127
<SALES>                                      2,730,984
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,730,984
<CGS>                                        2,302,469
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,302,469
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               440,178
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,194
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (23,915)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (8,969)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (14,946)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (14,946)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.16)


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0731

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

BILLY JOE ROGERS,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including July 29, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 20 2024

06/20/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0731
No. 07-14-00385-CR

Monita Mechelle Smith

Appellant

v.

The State of Texas

Appellee §

§

§

§ From the 181st District Court of

Randall County

February 4, 2015

Opinion by Chief Justice Quinn

J U D G M E N T

Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated February 4, 2015, it is ordered,

adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.

Inasmuch as this is an appeal in forma pauperis

, no costs beyond those that

have been paid are adjudged.

It is further ordered that this decision be certified below for observance.

o O o