alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE OF KANSAS

Department of Health and Environment

Notice of Hearing on Proposed State of Kansas Coal Combustion Residuals Part 256 Plan

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE), Division of Environment, 

Bureau of Waste Management (BWM), will conduct a public hearing at 1:30 p.m. Monday,

September 28, 2015, in Room 530, fifth floor, Curtis State Office Building, 1000 S.W. Jackson, 

Topeka, to consider the adoption of the proposed State of Kansas Coal Combustion Residuals 

Part 256 Plan. 

On April 17, 2015, EPA published recently adopted regulations in 40 CFR Parts 257 and 261 

related to the “Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities” (the CCR rule).

The proposed plan demonstrates KDHE’s intent and approach to assess compliance with and 

enforce the CCR rule in Kansas. This plan also addresses the original requirements of Part 256 

solid waste management plans by explaining how existing state laws and regulations have 

accomplished the 35-year-old goals required in those plans. This plan cites existing KDHE laws, 

regulations, and permit conditions that authorize KDHE to assess compliance and enforcement 

related to all aspects of the CCR rule. In addition, it explains the state’s intention to adopt the 

specific CCR regulations by reference over the next 12 to 18 months to more directly address all 

requirements.

All interested parties may submit written comments prior to 5 p.m. September 28 to Christine 

Mennicke, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Bureau of Waste Management, 1000 

SW Jackson, Suite 320, Topeka, 66612, by fax to (785) 296-8909, or by e-mail to 

cmennicke@kdheks.gov. 

During the hearing, all interested parties will be given a reasonable opportunity to present 

their views orally on the proposed regulations as well as an opportunity to submit their written 
comments. In order to give all parties an opportunity to present their views, it may be necessary 

to require each participant to limit any oral presentation to an appropriate timeframe.

A copy of the proposed plan may be obtained on the BWM website at 

www.kdheks.gov/waste/ or by contacting Christine Mennicke at (785) 296-0724 or 

cmennicke@kdheks.gov. Questions pertaining to the proposed plan should be directed to 

Christine Mennicke.

Any individual with a disability may request accommodation in order to participate in the 

public hearing and may request the proposed plan in an accessible format. Requests for 

accommodation to participate in the hearing should be made at least five working days in 

advance of the hearing by contacting Christine Mennicke.

Susan Mosier, MD

Secretary

Kansas Department of Health and Environment
§ 212.41 Rentals and production royalty on oil and gas leases. ( a ) A lessee shall pay, in advance, beginning with the effective date of the lease, an annual rental of $2.00 per acre or fraction of an acre or such other greater amount as prescribed in the lease. This rental shall not be credited against production royalty nor shall the rental be prorated or refunded because of surrender or cancellation.
( b ) The Secretary shall not approve leases with a royalty rate less than 16- 2 ⁄ 3 percent of the amount or value of production produced and sold from the lease unless a lower royalty rate is agreed to by the Indian mineral owner and is found to be in the best interest of the Indian mineral owner. Such approval may only be granted by the area director if the approving official is the superintendent and the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs if the approving official is the area director.
( c ) Value of lease production for royalty purposes shall be determined in accordance with applicable lease provisions and regulations in 30 CFR chapter II, subchapters A and C. If the valuation provisions in the lease are inconsistent with the regulations in 30 CFR chapter II, subchapters A and C, the lease provisions shall govern.
• • Ir

to a voluntary dismissal of this appeal. Cause appearing, we

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED. 1

cc: Hon. Patrick Flanagan, District Judge Washoe County Alternate Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk James Lowell Venable

'Because no remittitur will issue in this matter, see NRAP 42(b), the one-year period for filing a post-conviction habeas corpus petition under NRS 34.726(1) shall commence to run from the date of this order.

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 2
§ 162.231 How can the land be used under an agricultural lease? ( a ) An agricultural lease must describe the authorized uses of the leased premises. Any use of the leased premises for an unauthorized purpose, or a failure by the tenant to maintain continuous operations throughout the lease term, will be treated as a lease violation under § 162.251 of this subpart.
( b ) An agricultural lease must require that farming and grazing operations be conducted in accordance with recognized principles of sustained yield management, integrated resource management planning, sound conservation practices, and other community goals as expressed in applicable tribal laws, leasing policies, or agricultural resource management plans. Appropriate stipulations or conservation plans must be developed and incorporated in all agricultural leases.
#### John W. Castle v. Frederick C. Pearson.

Motion granted, with ten dollars costs.
EXHIBIT 32. - Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
            Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.


                    CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 on Form 10-QSB of Australian-Canadian
Oil Royalties Ltd. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended March 31,
2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), Andre Sakhai, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, and Bernard Lipton, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of their knowledge, 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 represents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
      Company.


Dated: May 8, 2008                      /s/ ANDRE SAKHAI
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Andre Sakhai, President &
                                        Chief Executive Officer



Dated: May 8, 2008                      /s/ BERNARD LIPTON
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Bernard Lipton, Chief Financial Officer



This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
### §1507. Recommendation of status of death

(a) Requirements Relating to Recommendation.—A board appointed under section 1503, 1504, or 1505 of this title may not recommend that a person be declared dead unless—

(1) credible evidence exists to suggest that the person is dead;

(2) the United States possesses no credible evidence that suggests that the person is alive; and

(3) representatives of the United States—

(A) have made a complete search of the area where the person was last seen (unless, after making a good faith effort to obtain access to such area, such representatives are not granted such access); and

(B) have examined the records of the government or entity having control over the area where the person was last seen (unless, after making a good faith effort to obtain access to such records, such representatives are not granted such access).

(b) Submittal of Information on Death.—If a board appointed under section 1503, 1504, or 1505 of this title makes a recommendation that a missing person be declared dead, the board shall include in the report of the board with respect to the person under that section the following:

(1) A detailed description of the location where the death occurred.

(2) A statement of the date on which the death occurred.

(3) A description of the location of the body, if recovered.

(4) If the body has been recovered and is not identifiable through visual means, a certification by a forensic pathologist that the body recovered is that of the missing person. In determining whether to make such a certification, the forensic pathologist shall consider, as determined necessary by the Secretary of the military department concerned, additional evidence and information provided by appropriate specialists in forensic medicine or other appropriate medical sciences.

(Added Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title V, §569(b)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 347; amended Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title V, §578(e), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2537; Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title V, §599(c), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1768.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1997—Subsec. (b)(3), (4). Pub. L. 105–85 added pars. (3) and (4).

1996—Subsec. (b)(3), (4). Pub. L. 104–201 struck out pars. (3) and (4) which read as follows:

"(3) A description of the location of the body, if recovered.

"(4) If the body has been recovered and is not identifiable through visual means, a certification by a practitioner of an appropriate forensic science that the body recovered is that of the missing person."
#### State of Nebraska, appellee, v. Benjamin David Ens, appellant.

229 N. W. 2d 208

Filed May 22, 1975.

No. 39838.

T. Clement Gaughan and Richard L. Goos, for appellant.

Paul L. Douglas, Attorney General, and Marilyn B. Hutchinson, for appellee.

Heard before White, C. J., Spencer, Boslaugh, McCown, Newton, Clinton, and Brodkey, JJ.

Spencer, J.

Defendant appeals from a conviction on a plea of nolo contendere to an amended information of assault with intent to rape. Defendant was sentenced to 2 years in the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex. He here contends the sentence is excessive and the trial court erred in not finding him a proper subject for probation. We affirm.

Defendant was originally charged with the felony offense of incest. On September 20, 1974, pursuant to a plea bargain, he was arraigned on an amended information charging assault with intent to commit rape. His plea of nolo contendere was accepted by the court. The penalty for this offense is imprisonment in the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex for not more than 15 nor less than 2 years. Defendant was given the minimum sentence of 2 years.

Did the trial court err in not placing defendant on probation? Defendant is 38 years of age, a high school *853graduate, twice divorced, and the father of four daughters. He was originally charged with incest with his oldest daughter who was 15. As a result of a plea bargain, he was permitted to plead to this lesser offense on which he received the minimum penalty. In imposing sentence and denying probation in a criminal case, the judgment of the District Court will not be disturbed on appeal unless the record shows an abuse of discretion. State v. Heckathorn (1973), 190 Neb. 418, 208 N. W. 2d 689. Our review of the record and the presentence report sustains the conclusion that the trial court did not abuse its discretion.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

WELLS FARGO BANK, NA 

 v. 

JOHN DOE, ROBIN NIXON AND 

RAYMOND PRATT 

PETITION OF: ROBIN NIXON 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 76 EM 2014 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 8th day of August, 2014, the Petition for Review is DENIED.
#### City of Chicago *v.*Andrew Garrison.

New *trial—verdict against the evidence.*In this case the evidence was very conflicting, and it was only claimed that the preponderance was against the verdict, which the court refused to disturb as being against the weight of the testimony.

Writ of Error to the Superior Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Judge, presiding.

This was an action brought by Garrison against the city of Chicago. A trial resulted in a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The city thereupon sued out a writ of error.

Mr. S. A. Irvin, for the plaintiff in error.

*517Mr. Andrew Garrison, *pro se.*

Mr. Justice Lawrence

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was an action brought by the appellee against the city of Chicago, to recover damages for injuries received in falling from certain steps that were a part of the sidewalk. Mo question of law is made upon the record, and the counsel for appellant asks a reversal solely on the ground that the preponderance of evidence, as counsel insists, shows the sidewalk was not unsafe, or, if it was, that the city had neither actual nor constructive notice of that fact, and that the plaintiff himself was guilty of carelessness.

As to the last point, we need only say there was not the slightest evidence of want of ordinary care on the part of the plaintiff.

As to the other points, the evidence is admitted by the counsel for the city to be very contradictory, and' it is only claimed that the preponderance was- for the defense. It would answer no good purpose to review it in detail. We have examined it with care, and find it conflicting to such a degree that we can not reverse the judgment and direct a new trial without disregarding the established rules of the court in regard to the respect due to the verdicts of juries in cases of contradictory testimony. We are very far from being able to say the verdict was against the weight of evidence.

*Judgment affirmed,.*
# C_2013127EN.01001501.xml

| 4.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 127/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 127/15

---

Communication from the French Government concerning Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons (1)

1

(Addition to a notice regarding an application for a licence to prospect for oil and gas, designated the ‘Rouffy Licence’)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2013/C 127/05

The area covered by the application for an exclusive licence to prospect for oil and gas, designated the ‘Rouffy Licence’, covering part of the departments of Aisne and Marne, the competition notice for which appeared in the OJ C 47, 19.2.2013, p. 17, does not cover the concession perimeters of ‘Motte Noire’ and ‘Vert-la-Gravelle’, consisting of the meridian and parallel arcs connecting in turn the points defined below by their geographical coordinates in grads, the meridian of origin being the Paris meridian.

| ‘Motte Noire’ concession |
| --- |
| Point | Longitude | Latitude |
| A | 1,82 gr E | 54,38 gr N |
| B | 1,86 gr E | 54,38 gr N |
| C | 1,86 gr E | 54,32 gr N |
| D | 1,82 gr E | 54,32 gr N |

‘Motte Noire’ concession

Point

Longitude

Latitude

A

1,82 gr E

54,38 gr N

B

1,86 gr E

54,38 gr N

C

1,86 gr E

54,32 gr N

D

1,82 gr E

54,32 gr N

The area as defined above is about 16 km2.

2

| ‘Vert-la-Gravelle’ concession |
| --- |
| Point | Longitude | Latitude |
| A | 1,72 gr E | 54,29 gr N |
| B | 1,79 gr E | 54,29 gr N |
| C | 1,79 gr E | 54,24 gr N |
| D | 1,72 gr E | 54,24 gr N |

‘Vert-la-Gravelle’ concession

Point

Longitude

Latitude

A

1,72 gr E

54,29 gr N

B

1,79 gr E

54,29 gr N

C

1,79 gr E

54,24 gr N

D

1,72 gr E

54,24 gr N

The area as defined above is about 23 km2.

2

---

(1)  OJ L 164, 30.6.1994, p. 3.

1

---
### §10171. United States Army Reserve Command

(a) Command.—The United States Army Reserve Command is a separate command of the Army commanded by the Chief of Army Reserve.

(b) Chain of Command.—Except as otherwise prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Army shall prescribe the chain of command for the United States Army Reserve Command.

(c) Assignment of Forces.—The Secretary of the Army—

(1) shall assign to the United States Army Reserve Command all forces of the Army Reserve in the continental United States other than forces assigned to the unified combatant command for special operations forces established pursuant to section 167 of this title; and

(2) except as otherwise directed by the Secretary of Defense in the case of forces assigned to carry out functions of the Secretary of the Army specified in section 7013 of this title, shall assign all such forces of the Army Reserve to the commander of the United States Atlantic Command.

(Added Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title XII, §1211(a)(1), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2689; amended Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §809(a), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1840.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 115–232 substituted "section 7013" for "section 3013".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Feb. 1, 2019, with provision for the coordination of amendments and special rule for certain redesignations, see section 800 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.

#### Implementation Schedule for Reserve Component Commands

Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title XII, §1211(c), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2691, provided that: "Implementation of chapter 1006 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall begin not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Sept. 23, 1996] and shall be completed not later than one year after such date."
### §657. Prohibition on service in the armed forces by individuals convicted of certain sexual offenses

(a) Prohibition on Commissioning or Enlistment.—A person who has been convicted of an offense specified in subsection (b) under Federal or State law may not be processed for commissioning or permitted to enlist in the armed forces.

(b) Covered Offenses.—An offense specified in this subsection is any felony offense as follows:

(1) Rape or sexual assault.

(2) Forcible sodomy.

(3) Incest.

(4) An attempt to commit an offense specified in paragraph (1) through (3), as punishable under applicable Federal or State law.

(Added Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title XVII, §1711(a)(1), Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 962.)
§ 1000.87 How does the AFA specify the services provided, functions performed, and responsibilities assumed by the Tribe/Consortium and those retained by the Secretary? ( a ) The AFA must specify in writing the services, functions, and responsibilities to be assumed by the Tribe/Consortium and the functions, services, and responsibilities to be retained by the Secretary.
( b ) Any division of responsibilities between the Tribe/Consortium and BIA should be clearly stated in writing as part of the AFA. Similarly, when there is a relationship between the program and BIA's residual responsibility, the relationship should be in writing.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Blue Ridge Visits Singapore to Strengthen Multilateral Relationships

By Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Michael Hendricks, USS Blue Ridge Public Affairs

                SINGAPORE  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News/Articles
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 261 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         July 27, 1999.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 2605) making appropriations for energy and water development for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2000, and for other purposes. The first reading 
of the bill shall be dispensed with. Points of order against consideration of 
the bill for failure to comply with clause 4 of rule XIII are waived. General 
debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall be considered 
for amendment under the five-minute rule. Points of order against provisions in 
the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 or clause 5(a) of rule XXI are 
waived except as follows: page 7, line 1, through page 9, line 2; page 36, lines 
21 through 25. During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of 
the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of 
whether the Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in the 
portion of the Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of 
rule XVIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. The Chairman of 
the Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further 
consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any 
amendment; and (2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic voting 
on any postponed question that follows another electronic vote without 
intervening business, provided that the minimum time for electronic voting on 
the first in any series of questions shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of 
consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the 
bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous 
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to 
final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or 
without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```