alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 28986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-13946]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology


Judges Panel of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of 
Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of closed meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 
2, notice is hereby given that there will be a closed meeting of the 
Judges Panel of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award on Tuesday, 
June 9, 1998. The Judges Panel is composed of nine members prominent in 
the field of quality management and appointed by the Secretary of 
Commerce. The purpose of this meeting is to review final judging 
interaction, survey of applicants and judging process improvement 
discussions, and to begin the review process of the 1998 Award 
applicants to be recommended as Award winners. The applications under 
review contain trade secrets and proprietary commercial information 
submitted to the Government in confidence.

DATES: The meeting will convene June 9, 1998, at 8:30 a.m. and adjourn 
at 3:00 p.m. on June 9, 1998. The entire meeting will be closed.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology, Administration Building Conference Room, 
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Harry Hertz, Director, National 
Quality Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, telephone number (301) 975-2361.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Assistant Secretary for Administration, 
with the concurrence of the General Counsel, formally determined on May 
19, 1998, that the meeting of the Judges Panel will be closed pursuant 
to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 
2, as amended by Section 5(c) of the Government in the Sunshine Act, 
Pub. L. 94-409. The meeting, which involves examination of records and 
discussion of Award applicant data, may be closed to the public in 
accordance with Section 552b(c)(4) of Title 5, United States Code, 
since the meeting is likely to disclose trade secrets and commercial or 
financial information obtained from a person and privileged or 
confidential.

    Dated: May 19, 1998.
Robert E. Hebner,
Acting Deputy Director.
[FR Doc. 98-13946 Filed 5-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-M
# Celebrating DLA’s legacy as the agency closes in on 60 years

/ Published Aug. 23, 2021

For nearly 60 years, the Defense Logistics Agency has played a critical role in supporting our servicemen and women around the globe. As we close in on DLA’s official anniversary October 1, each major subordinate command is being highlighted in the order they were organized, with Troop Support kicking things off for us all last week. This week is a time to reflect on DLA Land and Maritime’s contributions to that incredible history of excellence and Warfighter support.

Our installation hit its 100-year milestone in 2018 and we celebrated the rich, diverse history of the Defense Supply Center Columbus’ many missions throughout the years. In keeping with the Agency’s 60th Anniversary theme of “Forged by History, Focused on the Future,” you’ll see information shared about the past 60 years of Land and Maritime history through videos featuring long-time associates, historical photographs and trivia on our website and social media platforms.

Our shared legacy of Warfighter support is one forged in consistent and steadfast dedication to our nation’s defense and I’m proud to serve alongside you as we innovate solutions for the future.

Happy 60th Birthday DLA and wishing you many more to come!

Warfighter Always!

RDML Kristen B. Fabry, SC, USN

Commander

DLA Land and Maritime
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Pedro A. Umana, Appellant.

Submitted March 27, 2017;

decided March 30, 2017

*946Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 granted and motion papers treated as a timely CPL 460.20 application.
#### Com. v. Howard

11/10/2015

464 MAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 122 A.3d 435
EXHIBIT 10.31

FIRST AMENDMENT TO
  LEASE

          This
  Agreement, made this 5th day of November, 2002, by and between:

	
        

    	
      PARAMUS PLAZA IV ASSOCIATES,
        having an office at 12 Route 17 North, Paramus, New Jersey 07652, hereinafter
        referred to as “Landlord”,

    
	
        

    	
        

    
	
      AND

    
	
        

    	
        

    
	
        

    	
      NU VIM, INCORPORATED,
        having an office at 12 Route 17 North, Paramus, New Jersey 07652, hereinafter
        referred to as “Tenant”.

    



         WHEREAS,
  the parties have heretofore entered into the following Lease documents:

	
      #1.

    	
      Lease, dated December 8, 1999

    
	
      #2.

    	
      Addendum II to Lease, dated
        December 8, 1999

    



         For
  2,572 rentable square feet of Leased Premises, located on the second floor of
  Paramus Plaza IV, 12 Route 17 North, Paramus, New Jersey 07652;

AND

         WHEREAS,
  the Tenant desires to extend the Lease term for an additional two (2) years
  (January 1, 2003 - December 31, 2004).

         NOW,
  THEREFORE, in consideration of one dollar ($1.00) and the covenants hereinafter
  set forth, the parties agree that:

ARTICLE FIRST:

  #1.    The Termination Date is hereby changed:

                    FROM:     December
  31, 2002

                            TO:     December
  31, 2004

	
      #2.

    	
      Effective January 1, 2003, the
        rent reserved under this First Amendment to Lease, shall be as follows:

    
	
        

    	
        

    
	
        

    	
      $20.50/rsf/year plus $1.50/rsf/year
        tenant electric

    










	
 ARTICLE TWENTY-FOURTH:


	
  #1.
 	
  Base Year shall remain January 1, 2000 - December 31,   2000.
 




	
      ARTICLE FORTY-FIRST:

    
	
      #1.

    	
      Tenant hereby accepts the Leased
        Premises in the “AS IS” Condition, except as stated in attached
        letterdated 10/31/02.

    


         Except
  as expressly modified herein, the aforementioned Lease documents remain in full
  force and effect.

         IN
  WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused these presents to be executed by their
  signature, this day and year first above written.

	
        

    	
        

    	
      PARAMUS PLAZA
        IV ASSOCIATES

    
	
        

    	
        

    	
        

    
	
      [ILLEGIBLE]

    	
       

    	
      /s/ MALVERN C. BURROUGHS

    
	
      

    	
        

    	
      

    
	
      Witness:

    	
        

    	
      Malvern C. Burroughs,

    
	
        

    	
        

    	
      Managing Member

        (Landlord)

    




	
        

    	
        

    	
      NU VIM
        INCORPORATED

    
	
        

    	
        

    	
        

    
	
      [ILLEGIBLE]

    	
        

    	
      /s/ RICK KUNDRAT

    
	
      

    	
       

    	
      

    
	
      Witness:

    	
        

    	
      Rick Kundrat,

    
	
        

    	
        

    	
      President & CEO

        (Tenant)

    


2
RENAISSANCE ACQUISITION CORP.

                                                         _____________ ___, 2006

BMD Management Company, Inc.
50 E. Sample Road, Suite 400
Pompano Beach, Florida 33064

Gentlemen:

     This letter will confirm our agreement that, commencing on the effective
date ("Effective Date") of the registration statement for the initial public
offering ("IPO") of the securities of Renaissance Acquisition Corp. ("RAC") and
continuing until the consummation by RAC of a "Business Combination" (as
described in RAC's IPO prospectus), BMD Management Company, Inc. shall make
available to RAC certain office and secretarial services as may be required by
RAC from time to time, situated at 50 E. Sample Road, Suite 400, Pompano Beach,
Florida 33064. In exchange therefore, RAC shall pay BMD Management Company, Inc.
the sum of $8,000 per month on the Effective Date and continuing monthly
thereafter.

                                        Very truly yours,

                                        RENAISSANCE ACQUISITION CORP.


                                        By:
                                            ------------------------------------
                                        Name:
                                        Title:


AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY:

BMD MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC.


By:
    ---------------------------------
Name:
Title:
# Mobile Battle Creek Veterans Affairs team vaccinates local community members

/ Published May 10, 2021
BATTLE CREEK, Mich, 
The Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center played host to Battle Creek Veterans Affairs as they administered COVID vaccinations to veterans, their spouses and their caregivers. The crew of seven Veterans Affairs medical practitioners are part of a mobile unit that travels around the state of Michigan to provide vaccinations.

                Installation Management Deputy Site Director Earl Burge receives a COVID vaccination from the Battle Creek Veterans Affairs mobile transport team at the Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center May 7, 2021.                            Nurse gives a vaccine shot                            Installation Management Deputy Site Director Earl Burge receives a COVID vaccination from the Battle Creek Veterans Affairs mobile transport team at the Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center May 7, 2021.            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: Jason ShambergerVIRIN: 210507-D-AU600-012The COVID Vaccine Mobile Transport Coordinator Jenny Evans said, “Since March 1 we have traveled 3,840 miles and vaccinated about 800 to 900 hundred people.”

By traveling to locations such as the HDIFC, the mobile team reaches more patients and covers areas where vaccinations are not always readily available. For members of the community, this method of vaccination by a mobile team offers a major benefit versus scheduling an appointment at a local pharmacy or hospital.

                COVID Vaccine Mobile Transport Coordinator Jenny Evans consults with a nurse who administers vaccinations to veterans, their spouses, and caregivers at the Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center May 7, 2021.                            Vaccine clinic                            COVID Vaccine Mobile Transport Coordinator Jenny Evans consults with a nurse who administers vaccinations to veterans, their spouses, and caregivers at the Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center May 7, 2021.            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: Jason ShambergerVIRIN: 210507-D-AU600-006“It was so convenient for me to get it at the HDIFC,” said Earl Burge, the Battle Creek Installation Management deputy site director. “The process itself, was just about as simple as it could be – answer just a few screening questions, administer the shot, wait 15 minutes to ensure no adverse reaction, and off you go.”

While the VA team provides vaccinations to those in Battle Creek today, they must also make plans for where the future takes them next.

“We’re finishing up with some second doses next,” said Evans. “We have to go back to some of those clinics. If the need comes up, then we will be deployed again. The more vaccinations we can do the better off we’ll be.”

For information on COVID vaccinations, please visit the CDC’s frequently asked questions page.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 97-40121

Summary Calendar

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JEANNE CARSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:96-CR-31-2

_________________________________________________________________

September 17, 1997

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jeanne Carson was convicted of conspiracy to defraud the

United States by filing false claims for federal income tax refunds

and aiding and abetting. 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 286, 287. She appeals,

arguing that there was insufficient evidence to support her

conviction. Because Carson failed to move for a judgment of
-2-

acquittal at the close of the evidence with respect to the courts

that she was ultimately convicted on, review is limited to whether

there was a manifest miscarriage of justice. United States v.

McCarty, 36 F.3d 1349, 1358 (5th Cir. 1994). We have reviewed the

record and it is not “devoid of evidence pointing to guilt” or “so

tenuous that a conviction would be shocking.” Id.

A F F I R M E D.
# Distribution Norfolk C-PART Team wins DLA Team Performance Award

/ Published Jan. 20, 2022
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Norfolk’s COVID-19 Pandemic Action Response Team won the DLA Team Performance Award (Small Team) in the Agency’s 54th Annual Employee Recognition program for their superior work performance, teamwork and outstanding support.

With 70% of the organization’s personnel unavailable due to underlining health conditions, the manager of the out-loading mission consolidated the remaining 30% of personnel consisting of all volunteers, to form the C-PART. This initiative, combined with daily adjustments and precise execution, resulted in a zero decrease in performance. The C-PART team – made up of a stevedore, a distribution process worker, a hustler driver and two block and bracers – emulated DLA Distribution Norfolk’s “If it’s not safe were not doing it!” motto, and thanks to the family-like culture, individuals felt zero pressure or push-back when it came to self-reporting safety issues including COVID-19 symptoms and unsafe actions which proved priceless to keeping the entire team healthy.

When given the option to take safety leave, this team selflessly declined, choosing instead to accept the challenge and stay-the-course – the epitome of selfless service. Their combined efforts were even more impressive given manning shortages which started at 55% and spiked at times past 75% due to the pandemic; still this abridged team continued to march toward its goal of accomplishing a throughput goal of 10 days or fewer with historical results. In total, the team’s production continued to surge daily posting monthly throughput averages under 10 days, culminating with the team, for the first time ever, meeting, succeeding and crushing metrics with an annual throughput time and metrics of 8.47 days – “tailgate to offer.”

DDNV’s C-PART successfully performed over 1,000 container moves and scanned, consolidated, wrapped, blocked, braced and completed approximately 634 shipping containers in 46 days destined for 18 different overseas locations with approximately 40,413 cube of mission critical and life sustaining items including foods, medical equipment, no-touch digital thermometers, protective masks, hand sanitizer, toilet tissue, tissues, latex gloves and sanitation wipes weighing more than 186 ton and valued as priceless. Thanks mainly in part to the complete buy-in from the C-PART, the team accomplished a feat believed to be impossible by most.

The response team’s ability to adapt, adjust, cover-down and overcome each obstacle it faced including one of the biggest ever – the COVID-19 pandemic – was truly amazing. This team exemplifies the “deliver with pride!” slogan. Their job performance, dedication, resiliency and commitment directly contributed to the overall success of DLA Distribution Norfolk and the ability to accomplish the mission of providing global support to our customers worldwide.
**EXHIBIT 12.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, T.C. Leung, certify that:

1.                                       I have reviewed this annual report on Form20-F of Euro Tech Holdings Company Limited (the “Company”);

2.                                       Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

3.                                       Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the company as of, and for, the periods presented in the report;

4.                                       The Company’s other certifying officer and Iare responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theCompany and have:

(a)          Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to thecompany, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;

(b)         Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)          Disclosed in this report any change in thecompany’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theperiod covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

5.                                       The company’s other certifying officer(s) andI have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the company’s auditors and the audit committee of thecompany’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)          All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to 

----

adverselyaffect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

(b)         Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in company’sinternal control over financial reporting.

Date:  June 28, 2007
|   | /s/T.C. Leung            |
|--------|--------------------------|
|   | T.C. Leung               |
|   | Chief Executive  Officer |

 

----
#### Com. v. Dapra

12/10/2015

363 WAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 131 A.3d 88
Sanitized

Comparative 

Pulmonary 

Absorption, 

Distribution, 

and Toxicity of 
Similar 

Substances
#### In the Matter of John P. Licciardi, Appellant, v Vicki Been et al., Respondents, et al., Respondent.

[53 NYS3d 282]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered November 18, 2015, denying the petition to annul the determination of respondent, Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), dated April 7, 2015, that petitioner was not entitled to succeed to the tenancy of his deceased aunt’s Mitchell-Lama apartment, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The determination denying petitioner succession rights to the subject apartment has a rational basis *(see Matter of Pietropolo v New York City Dept. of Nous. Preserv. & Dev.,*39 AD3d 406 [1st Dept 2007]). To succeed to the leasehold rights of a Mitchell-Lama apartment, a petitioner who is a senior citizen is required to make a three-part showing that he or she (1) is a member of the tenant’s family; (2) resided with the tenant in the apartment as a primary residence for a period of not less than one year immediately prior to the tenant’s permanent vacating of the apartment; and (3) has appeared on income documentation submitted by such tenant, i.e., income affidavits, recertifications or Section 8 forms, for at least the reporting period immediately prior to the permanent vacating of the apartment by the tenant (28 RCNY 3-02 [p] [3]).

Petitioner is unable to establish the second and third prongs of this standard. There are two relevant time periods: the time frame prior to petitioner’s aunt (the tenant) vacating the subject apartment for a nursing home in 2009, and the time frame prior to her husband’s vacating the apartment for a nursing home in 2011. The fact that petitioner did not appear on any income affidavits or other pertinent income documentation during these time periods, and that another address was listed *666on his 2010 and 2011 tax returns precludes a finding that he was entitled to succession rights (28 RCNY 3-02 [n] [4] [iv]; *Matter of Studley v New York City Dept. of Hous. Preserv. & Dev.,*277 AD2d 101 [1st Dept 2000]). Even if petitioner were able to satisfy the income affidavit requirement, he was still unable to prove that he was a co-resident of the subject apartment for the one-year period prior to vacatur (cf. *Shadick v 430 Realty Co.,*250 AD2d 417, 418 [1st Dept 1998]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Acosta, Renwick, Moskowitz and Kahn, JJ.
1 

### Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 2:31 PM

To: 'rcoconut@yahoo.com'

Cc: Pappas, Rob (FAA); Pearson, Lakisha (FAA); C ooper, Thuy (FAA); Ferritto, Michelle (FAA) Subject: Request for Additional Info rmation: Ryan K. Koffman



### January 7, 2015

Mr. Ryan K. Koffman 12289 Daisy Court Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739-1921

Dear Mr. Koffman:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-0958). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration to process your petition. Please submit the additional information to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headqua rters or electronically via e-mail to nia.daniels@faa.gov

.

 Describe the aircraft make and model for the prop osed UAS operation. The description should include

size.

 List the aircraft’s cruise speed.

 Provide information regarding the radio frequency sp ectrum. This information can be located in the

aircraft manual.

 Provide description of proximity to airports.

 Your petition does not reference a pre-flight inspecti on. Describe the process used to determine if the UAS is airworthy and in safe c ondition for operation in the NAS.

 Your petition references a flight operations manual and aircraft opera tions manual, however they were not submitted for the record. Please provide a copy of the manuals.

Please provide the additional information by January 21, 2015.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-7626.

Sincerely,2 

### Nia Daniels Program Analyst

Nia Daniels, ARM

‐ 108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075 nia.daniels@faa.gov