alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CAP CANAL

CAP CANAL

Manville Rd.

Reservation Rd.

Mile Wide Rd.

Trico Rd.

Pump Station Rd.

El Tiro Rd.

Trico-Marana Rd.

Sasco Rd.

Anway Rd.

Avra Valley Rd.

Silverbell Rd.

Curtis Rd.

Picacho Hwy.

Baumgartner Rd.

Cripple Creek Rd. Coachway Rd.

Aries Dr.

Sunland Gin Rd.

Greene Reservoir Rd.

Sandario Rd.

Twin Peaks Rd.

TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION BOUNDARY

TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION BOUNDARY

TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION BOUNDARY

TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION BOUNDARY

Saguaro

National

Park

R6E R7E R8E R9E R10E

T11S T10S T9S T12S

T13S T14S

R11E

Pinal County

Pima County

Pan Quemado Site

Confidence Peak

No warranty is made by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the use

of this map for purposes not intended by BLM, or to the accuracy,

reliability, or completeness of the information shown. Spatial

information may not meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This

information may be updated without notification.

Universal Tranverse Mercator

Zone 12, Units Meters

Clark 1866 Spheroid

NAD27 Datum

Map 2-18

Data Source:

Utility and Corridor Alternatives: BLM 2005

Base Information: BLM 2003

Quadrangle Image: U.S. Geological Survey 1977 Tucson

P:\BLM\Ironwood\GIS\Plots\RMP_EIS\Chapter_2\Lands_Realty_AltD.pdf

Location in Arizona

Ironwood Forest National Monument

Draft RMP/EIS

and Right-of-Way

Authorizations

Alternative D

0 1 2 4 Miles

0 2 4 8 Kilometers

CAP Canal

River

General Reference

Planning Area

Ironwood Forest National Monument

County Boundaries

Main public access routes to monument. County administered

roads connecting monument travel route system to public

highways.

Interstate 10

Legend

Note:

 Land use allocations, designations, and management 

 prescriptions apply only to public lands administered

 by the BLM. If non-Federal lands are acquired, they

 would be managed according to the allocations

 depicted on the map.

Corridor 1

Corridor 2

Corridor 3

Utility Corridor

Utility Corridor - Underground Only

Communication Site

Reference Information

Existing Electrical Transmission Line

Existing Natural Gas Pipeline

Surface Management

American Indian Reservation

Military Reservations

State Trust Lands

State, County, City; Wildlife, Park and Outdoor Recreation

Areas

Private

Bureau of Land Management

Pima County

National Park Service

Bureau of Reclamation

Utility Corridors
EE-RM-03-630 COMMENT 03

-#3 

United States Government Department of Energy 

Memorandum 

DATE: January 28, 2003 

REPLY TO: Brian Card, EE-2J 

SUBJECT: DOE Request for Further HID and ERlBR Lamp data 

TO: Joe Howley, NEMA/GE 

Thanks for meeting with us on January 21 st. We thank you for the data NEMA has 

provided and will provide to the Department - it is essential for us to arrive at infonned 

decisions. During the meeting, we verbally requested additional data summarized 

below (this includes additional data identified after the meeting that would be useful.) 

HID 

• The data provided earlier gave 1.8 million MV lamps in 2000, the data provided 

on the 21 5t was 2.6 million in 200 1 (a 44% increase). Can you provide some 

insight into this? What are expectations for the future increase/decrease for MY? 

• Can you provide the breakdown in for HID in 200 1 for MV, MH, HPS annual 

sales? 

• Can you provide trend data for intervening years (1994-2000) for Mercury Vapor 

Lamps for the breakdowns you provided for 200 1, DOE is especially interested in 

"Medium Based - All" and "175 Watt - Mogul Based". What is the trend is 

looking like (straight-line curve or is there a plateau occurring)? 

• In what markets do you see the Mercury Vapor persisting? 

• Does the HID and MY lamps data provided by NEMA include imports? If not, 

what percent of total U.S. sales does this account for? For the portion that are 

imports where are these lamps coming from? 

• For the decline in MV is this a reduction in sales ofMV or a decline in NEMA 

member's share of that market? 

• Can you provide any insight into what breakout is for the 175 Watt (cobra, dusk to 

dawn, and what else)? 

• Can you provide any indication for the MH what percent are pulse start? 

• For the medium base MY lamps can you describe the applications (landscape, 

explosion proof, and what else)? 

• Could NEMA poll two or three major commercial fixture manufacturers on the 

percent of mercury vapor fixtures shipped for the following categories: down 

lights, recessed lensed, low bay, high bay, flood lights, wall packs, garage fixtures, 

area/parking (post mounted), street lights, and dusk to dawn? 

BR/ER 

• Can you provide us with the average wattage in the breakdowns you provided (BR 

30 85 watt, BR30 less than 66 watt, etc.)? 

• In the BR/P ARlB-PAR, BR Lamps, what is the market trend (what areas are 
EE-RM-03-630 COMMENT 03

growing/declining). Data points in the 10 previous years would be helpful. 

• What is the current and historical numbers for HIR (halogen infrared). Is this 

included in "Halogen PAR38" and "Halogen PAR30"? 

Cc: Bryan Berringer 

Ronald Lewis 

Craig Updyke
### UNITED STATES NAVY

- MARINE CORPS

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Before

K.J. BRUBAKER, B.T. PALMER, D.A. NORKIN

Appellate Military Judges

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

SERGIO J. UBILES

PRIVATE FIRST CLASS (E

- 2), U.S. MARINE CORPS

NM CCA 201500390

GENERAL COURT

- MARTIAL

Sentence Adjudged: 3 August2015

. Military Judge: LtCol E.A. Harvey, USMC

. Convening Authority: Commanding General, 1st Marine Logistics

Group, Camp Pendleton, CA

. Staff Judge Advocate's Recommendation: Maj T.B. Merrit t,

Jr., USMC

. For Appellant: CDR Suzanne M. Lachelier, JAGC, USN.

For Appellee: Mr. Brian K. Keller , Esq

.

2 2 March 2016

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

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

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without

assignment of error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved

by the convening authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military

Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c).

For the Cour t

R.H. TROIDL

Clerk of Court
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1418 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1418

  To provide for the holding of court at Natchez, Mississippi, in the 
 same manner as court is held at Vicksburg, Mississippi, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 22, 1999

  Mr. Cochran introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide for the holding of court at Natchez, Mississippi, in the 
 same manner as court is held at Vicksburg, Mississippi, and for other 
                               purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. HOLDING OF COURT AT NATCHEZ, MISSISSIPPI.

    Section 104(b)(3) of title 28, United States Code, is amended in 
the second sentence by striking all beginning with the colon through 
``United States''.
                                 <all>
```
### Memorandum

Date: August 6, 2010

Subject: Capital costs for wet scrubber

From: K. Barnett, EPA M. Laney, RTI

To: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0051

The cost impacts estimated for the May 6, 2009 proposed NESHAP for portland cement manufacturing included the cost of wet scrubbers. Costs for wet scrubbers were estimated using the cost equations described in the Marc h 10, 2009 Andover Technology Partners memorandum. Capital costs were determined to be proportional to the kiln exhaust gas flow rate and, in 2005 dollars, were expressed by the following algorithm:

CC(2005) = $8650*DSCFM 0.6 

### (Eq. 1)

Where:

CC = capital cost

DSCFM = dry standard cubic feet per minute

Note that the costs are a function of the flowrate raised to the 0.6 power, which accounts for efficiencies of scale for larger scrubbers.

In response to comments on the proposal costs, re visions were made to the costs equations for
wet scrubbers and are described in a Fe bruary 26, 2010 memorandum by Andover Technology Partners. The new capital cost e quation expressed as a function of exhaust gas flowrate is as
follows:

CC (2005) = $107*DSCFM (Eq. 2)

Note that this cost algorithm does not include the 0.6 scaling factor because it was considered likely that wet scrubbers would be installed prim arily on precalciner kilns of a size that would make the algorithm a reasonable estimator of capital costs for most kilns that would be retrofitted
with wet scrubbers.

To test the effect of the scaling factor on capit al costs versus capital costs without scaling, we developed an equation for a 1 million tpy kiln with a cost of $22 million based on costs that was

available for a known scrubber. On this basi s, we developed the following algorithm:

CC = 14398 * DSCFM 0.6 

### (Eq. 3)

### To illustrate the effects, we estimated the costs of various size kilns. For kilns producing clinker between about 500,000 tpy and 1,500,000 tpy, the use of capital cost scaling does not make a big difference, but beyond those ranges, the differences can be significant. See Table 1. In order to
account for the distribution in k iln sizes, capital costs were es timated using the capital cost scaling equation (Eq. 3)

Table 1. Comparison of Capital Cost with and without Scaling Factor

Kiln Size

(TPY) Kiln Size (TPD) Kiln Gas Flow (DSCFM) (69*TPD Clinker)* Wet Scrubber Capital Cost, ($) (107*DSCFM)* Wet Scrubber Capital

Cost Using Scaling factor ($) (14398*DSCFM^0.6)
150,000 457 31,507 3,371,233 7,200,210
500,000 1,522 105,023 11,237,443 14,827,653
750,000 2,283 157,534 16,856,164 18,911,551
1,000,000 3,044 210,046 22,474,886 22,474,519
1,500,000 4,566 315,068 33,712,329 28,664,552
2,000,000 6,088 420,091 44,949,772 34,065,000 *Andover, Wet Scrubber Cost Algorithm, February 26, 2010
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. 

STAKEHOLDER ANNOUNCEMENT 

USDA Seeks Applications for Loans and Grants for Rural Economic Development and Job 

Creation Projects 

 WASHINGTON, May 22, 2018 – Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development Anne Hazlett today 

announced that USDA is seeking applications for projects that promote economic development and create jobs 

in rural areas. 

 Funding is being provided under USDA’s Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant (REDLG) Program.

The goal of this program is to support rural projects through local utility organizations. USDA provides zerointerest loans to local utilities which they, in turn, pass through to local businesses (ultimate recipients) for 

projects that will create and retain employment in rural areas. The maximum loan is $2 million. The maximum 

grant is $300,000. 

 Applications are due June 30, 2018, and should be sent to the USDA Rural Development State Office where 

the project is located. Additional information on how to apply is available on page 23625 of the May 22 Federal 

Register. 

 USDA encourages applications that will support recommendations made in the report to the President from 

the Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity to help improve life in rural America. Applicants are 

encouraged to consider projects that provide measurable results in helping rural communities build robust and 

sustainable economies through strategic investments in infrastructure, partnerships and innovation. Key 

strategies include: 

 Achieving e-Connectivity for Rural America 

 Developing the Rural Economy 

 Harnessing Technological Innovation 

 Supporting a Rural Workforce 

 Improving Quality of Life   

#
STAKEHOLDER ANNOUNCEMENT

USDA Seeks Applications to Develop Biorefineries and Increase Availability of 

Biobased Products

WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2020 – United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Deputy Under Secretary 

for Rural Development Bette Brand today announced that the department is accepting applications for funding 

to develop, construct or retrofit commercial-scale biorefineries. 

USDA is making the funding available through the Biorefinery, Renewable Chemical, and Biobased Products 

Manufacturing Assistance Program. The funding also may be used to convert renewable chemicals and other 

biobased outputs of biorefineries into end-user products on a commercial scale.

These loan guarantees are intended to create jobs and diversify markets for agricultural and forestry products 

and agricultural waste material. They also increase the energy independence of the United States; and promote 

resource conservation, public health and the environment.

The Department is announcing two separate application cycles. Applications must be submitted to the USDA 

Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Program Processing Division by 4:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), 

October 1, and by 4:30 p.m. EDT April 1, 2021. Application materials can be obtained from the Department’s

website.

USDA encourages applications that will support recommendations made in the Report to the President of the 

United States from the Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity (PDF, 5.4 MB) to help improve life in 

rural America. Applicants are encouraged to consider projects that provide measurable results in helping rural 

communities build robust and sustainable economies through strategic investments in infrastructure, 

partnerships and innovation. Key strategies include:

• Achieving e-Connectivity for Rural America

• Developing the Rural Economy

• Harnessing Technological Innovation

• Supporting a Rural Workforce

• Improving Quality of Life

For additional information, please see page 59281 of the September 21 Federal Register. 

If you’d like to subscribe to USDA Rural Development updates, visit our GovDelivery subscriber page.

#

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender
#### The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, *v.*Edward Milton John, Defendant-Appellant.

(No. 12513;

Fourth District

December 17, 1974.

Kenneth L. Jones and Lynn Sara Frackman, both of the State Appellate Defender’s Office, of Chicago, for appellant.

Basil G. Greanias, State’s Attorney, of Decatur (Jerry Finney, Assistant State’s Attorney, of counsel), for the People.

Opinion by

Mr. JUSTICE CRAVEN.
-  Home 
-  Regulations 

# In This Section

                      -  PHMSA Rules 
                      -  Hazardous Materials Approvals and Permits 
                      -  Notices and Advisory Bulletins 
                      -  Pipeline Special Permits & State Waivers 

# 49 CFR Parts 100-199

PHMSA has published several Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) documents on regulatory topics. Please review our FAQ documents here: https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/about-phmsa/phmsa-faqs.

This section of the website provides the ability to find regulations information including regulations parts, content of sections, and interpretations for regulations sections. Below is a list of parts, identified by the part number and subject. To browse sections by part, click on the subject link below. You will be taken to the eCFR website to view sections for a part.

A written regulatory interpretation, response to a question, or an opinion concerning a pipeline safety issue may be obtained by submitting a written request to the Office of Pipeline Safety (PHP–30), PHMSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–0001 or at the email address: pipeline_interp_submittal@dot.gov. In addition to email address, the requestor must include his or her return address and should also include a daytime telephone number. Requests should be submitted at least 120 days before the time the requestor needs a response.

Note: electronic submission is provided as alternative to the 49 CFR Part 190.11(b) mail-in requirement.

The eCFR is also searchable by keyword and other available options on the eCFR website. To search and browse regulations using the eCFR website, use the link below. For assistance, please send an email to PHMSA.Webmaster@dot.gov.

Search the eCFR

# 

# Pagination

-  «« First 
-  ‹‹ Previous 
- …
-  5 
-  6 
-  7 
-  8 
-  9 
-  10 
-  11 
-  12 
-  13 
- …
-  ›Next › 
-  »Last »
#### § 354.129 General.

The carcasses or parts of carcasses of all rabbits inspected at an official establishment and found at the time of post-mortem inspection, or at any subsequent inspection, to be affected with any of the diseases or conditions named in other sections in this part, shall be disposed of in accordance with the section pertaining to the disease or condition. Owing to the fact that it is impracticable to formulate rules for each specific disease or condition and to designate at just what stage a disease process results in an unwholesome product, the decision as to the disposal of all carcasses, parts, or organs not specifically covered by the regulations, or by instructions of the Administrator issued pursuant thereto, shall be left to the inspector in charge, and if the inspector in charge is in doubt concerning the disposition to be made, specimens from such carcasses shall be forwarded to the laboratory for diagnosis.
# C_2010246EN.01002801.xml

| 11.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 246/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 246/28

---

Action brought on 5 July 2010 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-321/10)

()

2010/C 246/47

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: A. Alcover San Pedro and J. Sénéchal, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE), (1) or in any event by not communicating such measures to the Commission, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE), (1) or in any event by not communicating such measures to the Commission, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| — | order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposing Directive 2007/2/EC expired on 14 May 2009. As at the date on which the present action was brought, the defendant had not yet adopted all the measures necessary to transpose the directive or, in any event, had not communicated those measures to the Commission.

---

(1)  OJ 2007 L 108, p. 1.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from SEC Form
10-QSB and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                        $693,726
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                        $792,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                    $0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    $0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         $0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                        $183,414
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                          $183,414
<LOANS>                                     $5,709,000
<ALLOWANCE>                                    $32,700
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              $7,459,631
<DEPOSITS>                                  $5,032,763
<SHORT-TERM>                                        $0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                           $190,559
<LONG-TERM>                                   $600,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               $0
<PREFERRED>                                         $0
<COMMON>                                          $990
<OTHER-SE>                                  $1,635,319
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              $7,459,631
<INTEREST-LOAN>                               $251,857
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               $2,635
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               $28,953
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                              $283,445
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                            $142,474
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            $161,872
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                         $121,573
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       $0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  $0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                $90,190
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                $34,639
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     $34,639
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     $0
<CHANGES>                                           $0
<NET-INCOME>                                   $26,348
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       $0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       $0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.00
<LOANS-NON>                                         $0
<LOANS-PAST>                                  $202,385
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    $0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                     $0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               $32,700
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       $0
<RECOVERIES>                                        $0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              $32,700
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           $32,700
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 $0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             $0
        

</TABLE>
§ 11.40 Prohibitions and requirements concerning persons involved in transportation of certain horses. ( a ) Each person who ships, transports, or otherwise moves, or delivers or receives for movement, any horse with reason to believe such horse may be shown, exhibited, sold or auctioned at any horse show, horse exhibition, or horse sale or auction, shall allow and assist in the inspection of such horse at any such show, exhibition, sale, or auction to determine compliance with the Act as provided in § 11.4 of the regulations and shall furnish to any APHIS representatives upon his request the following information: ( 1 ) Name and address (including street address, post office box, and ZIP code) of the horse owner and of the shipper, if different from the owner or trainer.
( 2 ) Name and address (including street address, post office box, and ZIP code) of the horse trainer.
( 3 ) Name and address (including street address, post office box, and ZIP code) of the carrier transporting the horse, and of the driver of the means of conveyance used.
( 4 ) Origin of the shipment and date thereof, and,
( 5 ) Destination of shipment.
( b ) [Reserved]
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0056) [44 FR 25179, Apr. 27, 1979, as amended at 48 FR 57471, Dec. 30, 1983; 56 FR 13750, Apr. 4, 1991]