alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
-  Home 
-  About 
-  Working with PHMSA 
-  Pipeline Grants 

# In This Section

                      -  Pipeline Grants Program Overview 
                      -  Technical Assistant Grants (TAG) 
                      -  Pipeline Safety Base Grants 
                      -  One Call Grants 
                      -  Pipeline Emergency Response Grants 
                      -  Research & Development Awards 
                      -  Competitive Academic Agreement Program 
                      -  State Damage Prevention Grants 
                      -  Pipeline Safety Underground Natural Gas Storage Grants 
                      -  Natural Gas Distribution Infrastructure Safety and Modernization Grant Program (NGDISM) 

## Contact Us

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation1200 New Jersey Avenue, SEWashington, DC20590United States

**Phone:**202-366-4433****Fax:**202-366-3666**

If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.

# Pipeline Emergency Response Grant (PERG)

### Overview

The Pipeline Emergency Response Grant (PERG) program focuses on incidents response activities related to the transportation of gas or hazardous liquids by pipelines in high consequence areas (HCAs). HCAs are defined in section 192.903 and 195.450 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. Funding under this award is critical to ensuring the safe transportation of hazardous materials by training emergency responders to respond to pipeline incidents. PHMSA's goal is to ensure that responders who receive training under the grant will have the ability to protect nearby persons, property, and the environment from the effects of pipeline accidents or incidents involving the transportation of hazardous materials.

### Award Eligibility

The PERG is open to state, county, and local governments. For-profit entities are not eligible.

### Award Funding Information

Funding may be used for training individuals with statutory responsibility to respond to pipeline incidents in HCAs. Applicants must include a plan for training responders in underserved communities who are affected by pipeline incidents.

All training activities must have a pipeline transportation tie-in. Eligible activities include but are not limited to:
                      - Pipeline emergency response planning, training, and exercises,
                      - Pipeline Emergency Responder Initiative (PERI) development and training,
                      - Pipeline leak recognition and release evacuation training,
                      - Development and maintenance of pipeline training curriculum, and
                      - Training props, equipment, and supplies.

Subject to the availability of funds, the number of awards will depend on the quality and number of applications received and the dollar amounts requested.

Listing of grant award is available:
                      - 2022-2023

2024 Pipeline Emergency Response Grant Opportunity Posting

For additional questions or information, email: PERG@dot.gov
EX-34.2


(logo) pwc


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


To the Board of Directors and shareholders of CoreLogic, Inc.:


We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on
Assessment of Compliance, that CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc.
(the "Company"), an indirect subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc. complied with the
servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange
Commission's Regulation AB for all loans for commercial mortgage loan
outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the commercial tax service
provider (the "Platform"), as of December 31, 2013 and for the year then ended,
only including 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(v), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(2)(vii),
1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii) and 1122(d)(4)(xiii), which the Company has
determined are applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with
respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance
with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
management's assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance
with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as
we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing
of selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining
whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the
applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected
servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this
report. Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from
errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have
affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during
the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal
determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2013 for all loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing
customers for which the Company served as the commercial tax service provider is
fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


February 14, 2014


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1800, Dallas, Texas 75201
T: (214) 999-1400, F: (214) 754-7991, www.pwc.com/us
#### § 114.15 Disposal of unsatisfactory products and byproducts.

All biological products found to be unsatisfactory for marketing, all biological products which have become worthless subsequent to the expiration date, all refuse, other materials deemed unsatisfactory for production purposes, all carcasses (part or whole) of production or test animals, and any undesirable byproducts of manufacture shall be disposed of as may be required by the Administrator.

[41 FR 44687, Oct. 12, 1976, as amended at 56 FR 66784, Dec. 26, 1991]
#### § 9002.5 Fund.

*Fund* means the Presidential Election Campaign Fund established by 26 U.S.C. 9006(a).
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6297

JEFFREY ALLEN THOMAS, Petitioner - Appellant,
versus S. K. YOUNG, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge. (CA-04-390-7-GEC) Submitted: June 30, 2005 Decided: July 27, 2005 Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeffrey Allen Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Christopher Galanides, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Jeffrey Allen Thomas, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 338 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Thomas has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny the motions for appointment of counsel and to proceed at government expense, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 42 (Thursday, March 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 11813]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4729]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1071-1072 (Review)]


Magnesium From China and Russia

Determinations

    On the basis of the record \1\ developed in the subject five-year 
reviews, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) 
determines, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
U.S.C. 1675(c)), that revocation of the antidumping duty order on 
magnesium from China would be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States 
within a reasonably foreseeable time. The Commission also 
determines,\2\ pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
U.S.C. 1675(c)), that revocation of the antidumping duty order on 
magnesium from Russia would not be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States 
within a reasonably foreseeable time.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).
    \2\ Commissioner Charlotte R. Lane dissenting.
    \3\ Commissioner Dean A. Pinkert did not participate in these 
reviews.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    The Commission instituted these reviews on March 1, 2010 (75 FR 
9252) and determined on June 4, 2010 that it would conduct full reviews 
(75 FR 35086, June 21, 2010). Notice of the scheduling of the 
Commission's reviews and of a public hearing to be held in connection 
therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of 
the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and 
by publishing the notice in the Federal Register on August 10, 2010 (75 
FR 48360). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on December 7, 2010, 
and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear 
in person or by counsel.
    The Commission transmitted its determinations in these reviews to 
the Secretary of Commerce on February 24, 2011. The views of the 
Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4214 (February 2011), 
entitled Magnesium from China and Russia: Investigation Nos.731-TA-
1071-1072 (Review).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: February 24, 2011.
William R. Bishop,
Hearings and Meetings Coordinator.
[FR Doc. 2011-4729 Filed 3-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
#### § 2.34 [Reserved]
In the Missouri Court of Appeals

Eastern District

JUNE 3, 2014

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 

84.16(b) OR RULE 30.25(b).

1. ED99590 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V JOHN KING, APP

2. ED99723 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V SANTANA BALL, APP

3. ED99947 CHAVEZ FOSTER, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

4. ED100112 DAVID ATER, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

5. ED100175 QUINTIN C. GRAY, SR., APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

6. ED100261 GEORGE M. KNIEST, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

7. ED100358 STEVEN E. MURPHY, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

8. ED100389 BRANDON T. LEE, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

9. ED100611 ARLANDO VAIL, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

CORRECTION(S):

1. ED100114 STEVE HIBBS, APP V. BRIAN BERGER, ET AL, RES
§ 5.27 Requests for an accounting of record disclosures. ( a ) *How made and addressed.* Except where accountings of disclosures are not required to be kept (as stated in paragraph (b)(1) of this section), an individual may make a request for an accounting of any disclosure that has been made by the Department to another person, organization, or agency of any record about the requester. This accounting contains the date, nature, and purpose of each disclosure, as well as the name and address of the person, organization, or agency to which the disclosure was made. A request for an accounting should identify each record in question and should be made by writing directly to the Department component that maintains the record, following the procedures in § 5.21.
( b ) *Where accountings are not required.* Components are not required to provide accountings to the requester where they relate to: ( 1 ) Disclosures for which accountings are, by statute (5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(1)), not required to be kept, such as disclosures that are made to officers and employees within the agency and disclosures that are required to be made under the FOIA, or for records covered by the JRA;
( 2 ) Disclosures made to law enforcement agencies for authorized law enforcement activities in response to written requests from those law enforcement agencies specifying the law enforcement activities for which the disclosures are sought; or
( 3 ) Disclosures made from systems of records that have been exempted from accounting requirements by a rulemaking pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) or (k).
( c ) *Appeals.* A requester may appeal a denial of a request for an accounting to the Component Appeals Officer or the DHS Office of the General Counsel or its designee in the same manner as a denial of a request for access to records (*see* § 5.25) and the same procedures will be followed.
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.


I, Helaine M. Kaplan, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on
    Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by
    this report on Form 10-K of the COMM 2012-LC4 Mortgage Trust (the
    "Exchange Act periodic reports");

2.  Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
    whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
    information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
    covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic
    reports;

4.  Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements
    required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except
    as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have
    fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all
    material respects; and

5.  All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
    criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation
    reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
    asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in
    accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
    13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report,
    except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances
    of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in
    this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
Information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:

Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, CWCapital
Asset Management LLC, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank National
Association, as Trustee, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, as Operating
Advisor, CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc., as Servicing
Function Participant, and National Tax Search, LLC, as Servicing Function
Participant.


    Dated:   March 27, 2014


/s/ Helaine M. Kaplan
Helaine M. Kaplan
President
(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
**EXHIBIT
      23.1**








CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








We
  consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
  Form SB-2 (No.'s 333-122338 and 333-127944) of Wits Basin Precious Minerals
  Inc., and subsidiaries of our report dated March 30, 2006, relating to the financial
  statements, which appears on page F-2 of this annual report on Form 10-KSB.




/s/
      Carver Moquist & O’Connor, LLC





Minneapolis,
      Minnesota


March
      30,
      2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM SEC
FORM 10-Q AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO SUCH  FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                      0001005229
<NAME>                  COLUMBUS MCKINNON CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JAN-02-2000
<CASH>                                              14,128
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      134,818
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                        115,020
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   299,708
<PP&E>                                             139,370
<DEPRECIATION>                                      51,634
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     771,732
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              105,435
<BONDS>                                            429,432
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                               149
<OTHER-SE>                                         199,201
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       771,732
<SALES>                                            537,782
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   537,782
<CGS>                                              407,532
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      407,532
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    81,635
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  25,510
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     24,296
<INCOME-TAX>                                        14,136
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 10,160
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        10,160
<EPS-BASIC>                                            .72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .71


</TABLE>
```

[110th Congress Public Law 7]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ007.110]

[[Page 121 STAT. 62]]

Public Law 110-7
110th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  1300 North Frontage Road West in Vail, Colorado, as the ``Gerald R. 
 Ford, Jr. Post Office Building''. <<NOTE: Mar. 7, 2007 -  [H.R. 49]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. GERALD R. FORD, JR. POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1300 North Frontage Road West in Vail, Colorado, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Gerald R. Ford, Jr. Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Gerald R. 
Ford, Jr. Post Office Building''.

    Approved March 7, 2007.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 49:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007):
            Jan. 29, considered and passed House.
            Feb. 17, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
§ 102.12 Designation of principal campaign committee (52 U.S.C. 30102(e)(1) and (3)). ( a ) Each candidate for Federal office (other than a nominee of a political party to the Office of Vice President) shall designate in writing a political committee to serve as his or her principal campaign committee in accordance with 11 CFR 101.1(a) no later than 15 days after becoming a candidate. Each principal campaign committee shall register, designate a depository and report in accordance with 11 CFR parts 102, 103 and 104.
( b ) No political committee may be designated as the principal campaign committee of more than one candidate.
( c ) ( 1 ) No political committee which supports or has supported more than one candidate may be designated as a principal campaign committee, except that, after nomination, a candidate for the office of President of the United States nominated by a political party may designate the national committee of such political party as his or her principal campaign committee. A national committee which is so designated shall maintain separate books of account with respect to its function as a principal campaign committee.
( 2 ) For purposes of 11 CFR 102.12(c), the term *support* does not include contributions by an authorized committee in amounts aggregating $2,000 or less per election to an authorized committee of any other candidate, except that the national committee of a political party which has been designated as the principal campaign committee of that party's Presidential candidate may contribute to another candidate in accordance with 11 CFR part 110.
[45 FR 15104, Mar. 7, 1980, as amended at 71 FR 54899, Sept. 20, 2006]