alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

JUSTIN BEGANDY,

Petitioner

v.

CLERK OF COURTS OF ALLEGHENY

COUNTY, AND CAROL A. EDDINS,

COURT ADMINISTRATION, CRIMINAL

DIVISION, ALLEGHENY COUNTY

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 27 WM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 1st day of August , 2019, the “Petition for Review in Mandamus”

and the Application for Relief are DENIED.
1

Pallarino, Bob

From: Poentis, Aaron Y CIV NAVFAC HI, EV <aaron.poentis@navy.mil>

Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 3:55 AM

To: Richard Takaba (richard.takaba@doh.hawaii.gov); roxanne.kwan@doh.hawaii.gov

Cc: Shimabuku, June T. CIV NAVFAC HI, EV4; Kishaba, Raelynn I CIV NAVFAC HI, EV4; 

Tsutsui, Bruce O CIV NAVFAC HI, OPHE3; Shimabuku, June T. CIV NAVFAC HI, EV4; 

stuart.yamada@doh.hawaii.gov; steven.chang@doh.hawaii.gov; Linder, Steven; Pallarino, 

Bob; Lovgren, Andrew C LCDR, NAVSUP FLCPH C700

Subject: RED HILL STATUS REPORT - February 3, 2015

Signed By: aaron.poentis@navy.mil

Importance: High

Hi Richard/Roxanne: 

Attached are the updated information for the weekly progress report from Navy Region Hawaii, and the Fleet Logistic 

Center Pearl Harbor for the week of February 3, 2015. In a process to ease reading, only sections with changes will be 

annotated. 

1. Preliminary Work Plan 

Action complete. 

2. Release Response Action Items (initiate immediately, complete as soon as practicable) 

a. Action 1 - Provide a schedule for the ventilation of Tank 5 and an estimated date to commence the investigation 

of release point(s) within Tank 5. 

Action complete. 

b. Action 2 - The rate of vertical migration for the released JP-8 free product is unknown. Information from the 

previously collected basalt cores could be used for initial modeling of vertical migration. This information is necessary to

protect drinking water resources from petroleum contamination. Prepare models for petroleum JP-8 releases of 10,000, 

20,000 and 30,000 gallons from points at 25% intervals from the bottom to the top of Tank 5. 

No change. 

c. Action 3 - Removal of petroleum free product from the area outside the tank will reduce downward migration of 

the released JP-8 free product. Characterization of the free product plume and recovery of free product with increased 

monitoring are required to address this plume. 

No change. 

d. Action 4 - Additional studies and procedures are required to address the potential and impact of any future 

releases from the USTs within the Complex. This will require new financial and personnel resources to complete. 

Funding for the preliminary work plan and all necessary following work is critical. 

d.(1) Groundwater Monitoring Wells 

Groundwater samples were collected from the two new wells on January 23, 2015. The remaining groundwater 

monitoring wells were sampled January 26-29, 2015. 
2

d.(2) Site Characterization 

No change. 

d.(3) AOC/SOW 

Discussions are ongoing. 

d.(4) Request for Additional Information 

No change. 

d.(5) BWS/USGS Groundwater Flow Study 

No change. 

Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions. 

v/r, 

Aaron
<PAGE>


                                                                    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 Globix Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarter ending December 31, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Peter K.
Stevenson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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.



Date:  December 6, 2004

                                              /s/ Peter K. Stevenson
                                              ----------------------
                                              Peter K. Stevenson
                                              Chief Executive Officer
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Review Guidelines for Field-Programmable Gate Arrays in Nuclear Power Plant Safety Systems (NUREG/CR-7006, ORNL/TM-2009/20)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7006 (PDF - 3.93 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** October 2009**Date Published:** February 2010

**Prepared by:** M. Bobrek1, D. Bouldin2, D.E. Holcomb1, S.M. Killough1 S.F. Smith1, C. Ward1, and R.T. Wood1

1Oak Ridge National Laboratory P.O. Box 2008 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6010

2University of Tennessee 419 Ferris Hall, 1508 Middle Drive Knoxville, TN 37996-5483

M.E. Waterman, NRC Project Manager

NRC Job Code N6351

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report is a compilation of safe field-programmable gate array (FPGA) design practices that can be used by NRC staff as guidance for reviewing FPGA-based safety systems in nuclear power plants. It can also serve as a basis for development of specific activities that will support the licensing process such as FPGA-specific review procedures and acceptance criteria. The report follows on the investigation of existing regulatory documents and standards related to design and review of safety-related FPGA systems. Since the existing regulatory documents are not specific about FPGA design practices, this report also serves as the complement to the standards that cover general issues related to digital and software safety systems in nuclear power plants.

FPGA design practices are classified into three major groups—FPGA hardware design practices, FPGA design entry methods, and FPGA design methodologies. Within these major groups, design practices are further classified according to four top-level attributes—reliability, robustness, traceability, and maintainability according to the framework used in NUREG/CR-6463.

The report focuses on listing and describing FPGA design practices that are potentially unsafe as well as on suggesting which ones are acceptable for safety-critical designs. Additionally, the report outlines a design life cycle that could be used by the designers and the reviewers for FPGA-based safety systems.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
#### State of Maine *vs.*Jack Ennis.

York County.

Decided October 9, 1922.

The respondent was tried upon-the charge of selling intoxicating liquor and a jury verdict of guilty was returned against him. At the conclusion of the charge to the jury the respondent presented three requested instructions as follows;

*597First: That the respondent was acting as the agent of the officer in procuring the liquor in question and is not guilty as charged as a matter of law.

Second: That if the jury find as a matter of fact that the officer gave the respondent the money to purchase the liquor, and that the respondent afterwards purchased the same with that money, as a matter of law the respondent was acting as the agent of the officer or detective and is not guilty as charged.

Third: The proving that the respondent was using this agency as a “cover” is on the State.

The transcript of the testimony was made a part of the bill of exceptions. The charge of the presiding Justice is not brought before us and, as no exceptions thereto are noted, we must assume that it contained a full and correct statement of the principles of “law governing the case, including full and correct instructions regarding the law of agency in matters like the case at bar.

With reference to the first requested instruction the presiding Justice said, “I cannot give you that instruction as a matter of law. It is a question of fact, as I have already stated to you, whether he was acting as the agent of the officer, in good faith, or whether the supposed agency is a mere cover.” The refusal to give the requested instruction, and the reason for the refusal, are correct and in complete harmony with the legal principles governing the trial of criminal causes, whereby the determination of issues of fact is left to a jury.

With reference to the second requested instruction the presiding Justice said, “I cannot give you that as a matter of law. It is a question of fact. The mere giving of the money, and mere payment for the liquor in advance is not decisive ol itae vyuestion of agency.”

Here also the refusal to give the requested instruction, and the reason for the refusal, are correct, especially so when issues of fact are to be decided by consideration of all the evidence in the case and not alone by a single piece of evidence which may or may not be supported by other evidence.

With reference to the third requested instruction the presiding Justice said, “I give you that. I have given you that as a part of the general instruction that the burden is upon the State to satisfy you of its contention that there was a sale of liquor.”

*598
      *Edward S. Titcomb, County Attorney,*for State.

*Stewart & Putnam,*for respondent.

No error appearing in the rulings, and refusals to rule, the mandate must be exceptions overruled. Judgment for the State.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Analysis of Experimental Data for High Burnup PWR Spent Fuel Isotopic Validation—Vandellós II Reactor (NUREG/CR-7013, ORNL/TM-2009/321)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-7013 (PDF - 12.29 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** August 2010**Date Published:** January 2011

**Prepared by:** G. Ilas and I.C. Gauld

Oak Ridge National Laboratory Managed by UT-Battelle, LLC Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6170

M. Aissa, NRC Project Manager

 NRC Job Code N6540

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report is one of the several recent NUREG/CR reports documenting benchmark-quality radiochemical assay data and the use of the data to validate computer code predictions of isotopic composition for spent nuclear fuel, to establish the uncertainty and bias associated with code predictions. The experimental data analyzed in the current report were acquired from a high-burnup fuel program coordinated by Spanish organizations. The measurements included extensive actinide and fission product data of importance to spent fuel safety applications, including burnup credit, decay heat, and radiation source terms. Six unique spent fuel samples from three uranium oxide fuel rods were analyzed. The fuel rods had a 4.5 wt % 235U initial enrichment and were irradiated in the Vandellós II pressurized water reactor operated in Spain. The burnups of the fuel samples range from 42 to 78 GWd/MTU. The measurements were used to validate the two-dimensional depletion sequence TRITON in the SCALE computer code system.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                            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 Pharmaceutical Product Development,
Inc. ("PPD") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Linda Baddour, Chief Financial Officer of PPD, hereby certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 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 PPD as
of, and for, the periods presented in the Report.

Date: November 13, 2002

                                             /s/ Linda Baddour
                                         -----------------------------
                                               Linda Baddour
                                           Chief Financial Officer
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: 2012-CE-015-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

*Internal and 

external inspection 

of the left and right 

wing lower main 

spar caps for cracks

6.0 $ 510.00 0$ 510.00 3,665 $1,869,150.0

0

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

*These inspections 

take from 3 to 6 

hours. For the 

purposes of this 

form, we have used 

6 hours.

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $1,869,150

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product
Currently, there is 

no FAA-approved 

modification for a 

cracked wing lower 

main spar cap. The 

FAA does not have 

availability and cost 

information on 

serviceable spar 

caps, wing spars, or 

wings. 

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
Exhibit 13.1




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 Annual Report of Prana Biotechnology Limited (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ended June 30, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Geoffrey P. Kempler, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




October 31, 2014




/s/Geoffrey P. Kempler*

Geoffrey P. Kempler

Chief Executive Officer




* The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the Company’s offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.
# L_2015297EN.01000701.xml

| 13.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 297/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 297/7

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/2028

of 10 November 2015

appointing two German alternate members of the Committee of the Regions

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the German Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 26 January and on 5 February 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1) and (EU) 2015/190 (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 26 January and on 5 February 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1) and (EU) 2015/190 (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.

| (2) | Two alternate members' seats on the Committee of the Regions have become vacant following the end of the terms of office of Mr Roland HEINTZE and Mr Hermann KUHN, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Two alternate members' seats on the Committee of the Regions have become vacant following the end of the terms of office of Mr Roland HEINTZE and Mr Hermann KUHN,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following are hereby appointed as alternate members to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:

| — | Dr Henrike MÜLLER, Mitglied der Bremischen Bürgerschaft, |
| --- | --- |

—

Dr Henrike MÜLLER, Mitglied der Bremischen Bürgerschaft,

| — | Mr René GÖGGE, Mitglied der Hamburgischen Bürgerschaft. |
| --- | --- |

—

Mr René GÖGGE, Mitglied der Hamburgischen Bürgerschaft.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 10 November 2015.

For the Council

The President

P. GRAMEGNA

---

(1)  
  OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25.

2

---
### NUMBER 13 - 16 - 00 455 - C V COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN R E THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

ORDER Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Longoria Per Curiam Order
Relator , the City of Corpus Christi, Texas , f iled a petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency stay in the above cause on August 17, 2016

. Through this original
pro ceeding, relator seeks to compel the trial court to vacate an August 4, 2016 order requiring relator to produce discovery to the real party in interest, Corina Saenz

. Through its motion for emergency stay, relator seeks to stay the trial court’s August 4, 2016 order pending resolution of this original proceeding

. The Court, having examined and fully considered the motion for emergency relief , is of the opinion that the motion should be granted

. The motion for emergency relief is2

GRANTED and the trial court ’s August 4, 2016 order is ord ered STAYED pending further order of this Court, or until the case is finally decided. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 52.10(b) (“Unless vacated or modified, an order granting temporary relief is effective until the case is finally decided.”).
T he Court requests that the real party in interest , Saenz , or any others whose interest would be directly affected by the relief sought, file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus on or before the expiration of ten days from the date of this order

. See
id. R

. 52.2, 52.4, 52.8. IT IS SO ORDERED. PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed t h is 18th day of August , 201 6

.
Exhibit 31.1

I, Vincent A. Wasik, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 29, 2007, of
Velocity Express Corporation;

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 officer 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:

(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 registrant, 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 registrant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 registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting;

5. The registrants other certifying officer 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):

(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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date: November 13, 2007



/s/ Vincent A. WasikVincent A. WasikChairman of the Board and Chief Executive
Officer


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