alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STAKEHOLDER ANNOUNCEMENT

USDA Seeks Applications for 17th Year of Rural Broadband Loan Program

Loans Will Focus on Bringing e-Connectivity to Rural Communities

WASHINGTON, April 17, 2018 – U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue today announced that USDA is 

accepting applications for loans under its long-standing Rural Broadband Access Loan and Loan Guarantee 

Program to extend broadband infrastructure in eligible rural communities. USDA has supported broadband 

infrastructure projects through this program since it was created in the 2002 Farm Bill and reauthorized under 

the 2014 Farm Bill.

The Agency has also announced that it is revising the process in which applications will be accepted under the 

program. Since the passage of the 2014 Farm Bill, the Agency has only accepted applications according to 

discrete application windows. However, USDA has determined that the use of application windows has not 

effectively supported its mission to finance improved broadband service in rural areas. As a result, USDA will 

now accept applications on a rolling basis throughout FY 2018. This will give the Agency the ability to request 

additional information and modifications to submitted applications whenever necessary.

USDA plans to make more than $100 million available through The Rural Broadband Access Loan and Loan 

Guarantee Program. Loan applications ranging from $100,000 to $25 million will be processed on a first come, 

first served basis. USDA will review and rank applications every 90 days through Sept. 30, 2018. Funding 

priority will be given to applicants that propose to serve the highest percentage of unserved households.

Funds must be used to provide broadband service at a minimum rate-of-data transmission of 25 megabits 

downstream and 3 megabits upstream. These are the benchmark speeds the Federal Communications 

Commission has adopted for broadband connectivity.

Applications must be submitted online at https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/rd-apply. For details, see 

page 13225 of the March 28 Federal Register.

#

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES


CENTERTRUST RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE III, LLC (Nevada)

KING MINERAL, LLC (California)

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE I, LLC (Delaware)

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE II, LLC (Delaware)

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE III, LLC (Delaware)

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE IV, LLC (Delaware)

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE V, LLC (Delaware)

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE VI, LLC (Delaware)

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE VII, LLC (Delaware)

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE IX, LLC

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE 10, LLC

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE 11, LLC

CT RETAIL PROPERTIES FINANCE 12, LLC

CT OPERATING PARTNERSHIP, LP (California)

HAAGEN CENTRAL (California)

VERMONT-SLAUSON SHOPPING CENTER, LTD (California)

WILLOWBROOK CENTER PARTNESHIP (California)
* 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.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-11221

Summary Calendar

 

JOHNNY SPENCER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

ADVANCED TELEMARKETING CORP., 

Defendant-Appellee.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:97-CV-1225-G

 

June 26, 1998

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Johnny Spencer appeals the dismissal without prejudice of

his age and disability discrimination action for failure to

prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 41(b).

The evidence on record shows that Spencer did not comply

with the magistrate judge’s orders requiring him to notify the

court of any address change. As a result, the district court 
2

could not schedule a hearing to inquire into the factual and

legal basis for his claim, in accordance with Spears v. McCotter,

766 F.2d 179, 181-82 (5th Cir. 1985) (establishing courtroom

hearing as substitute for motion for more definite statement in

pro se cases), overruled on other grounds sub nom. Neitzke v.

Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989).

AFFIRMED.
§ 590.410 Egg products required to be labeled. ( a ) ( 1 ) Packaged egg products that require special handling to maintain their wholesome condition must have the statement “Keep Refrigerated,” “Keep Frozen,” “Perishable Keep Under Refrigeration,” or such similar statement prominently displayed on the principal display panel.
( 2 ) Egg products that are distributed frozen and thawed prior to or during display for sale at retail must bear the statement “Keep Frozen” on the shipping container. Consumer-sized containers for such egg products must bear the statement “Previously Handled Frozen for Your Protection, Refreeze or Keep Refrigerated.”
( 3 ) The labels of packages of egg products produced from shell eggs that have been treated with ionizing radiation must reflect that treatment in the ingredient statement on the finished product labeling.
( b ) Containers, portable tanks, and bulk shipments of edible egg products produced in official plants must be labeled in accordance with §§ 590.411 through 590.415 and must bear the official identification shown in Figure 1 of § 590.413.
( c ) Bulk shipments of unpasteurized egg products and microbial pathogen-positive egg products produced in official plants must bear a label containing the words “date of loading,” followed by a suitable space in which the date the container, tanker truck, or portable tank is loaded must be inserted. The label must be conspicuously located and printed and affixed on material that cannot be detached or effaced due to exposure to weather. Before the truck or tank is removed from the place where it is unloaded, the carrier must remove or obliterate the label. Such shipments must also bear the official identification shown in Figure 2 of § 590.415.
[85 FR 68676, Oct. 29, 2020]
# C_2011252EN.01005804.xml

| 27.8.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/58 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.8.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/58

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 12 July 2011 — Geradon v Council

(Case F-102/10) (1)

1

2011/C 252/133

Language of the case: French

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 30, 29.1.2011, p. 64.

1

---
#### Michael F. McKenna, Jr., as Administrator, etc., of James McKenna, Deceased, Appellant, v. New Amsterdam Gas Company, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. (Houghton, J., dissenting.)
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 11, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 73611]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29644]

========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 11, 2012 / 
Notices

[[Page 73611]]

 AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Notice of Public Information Collection Requirements Submitted to 
OMB for Review

SUMMARY: U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has 
submitted the following information collection to OMB for review and 
clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. 
Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of 
having their full effect if received within 30 days of this 
notification. Comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for USAID, 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB), Washington, DC 20503. Copies of submission may be 
obtained by calling (202) 712-1365.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    OMB Number: OMB 0412-XXXX.
    Form Number: N/A.
    Title: Web site Modernization Pop-up Survey.
    Type of Submission: A New Information Collection.
    Purpose: Improving agency programs requires ongoing assessment of 
service delivery, by which we mean systematic review of the operation 
of a program compared to a set of explicit or implicit standards, as a 
means of contributing to the continuous improvement of the program. The 
Agency will collect, analyze, and interpret information gathered 
through this generic clearance to identify strengths and weaknesses of 
current services and make improvements in service delivery based on 
feedback. The solicitation of feedback will target areas such as: 
Timeliness, appropriateness, accuracy of information, courtesy, 
efficiency of service delivery, and resolution of issues with service 
delivery. Responses will be assessed to plan and inform efforts to 
improve or maintain the quality of service offered to the public. If 
this information is not collected, vital feedback from customers and 
stakeholders on the Agency's services will be unavailable.

Annual Reporting Burden

    Respondents: 500.
    Total annual responses: 500.
    Total annual hours requested: 41 hours.

    Date: December 4, 2012.
Lynn Winston,
Chief, Information and Records Division, U.S. Agency for International 
Development.
[FR Doc. 2012-29644 Filed 12-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6116-01-M
```
### §94a. Repealed. June 25, 1948, ch. 646, §39, 62 Stat. 992, eff. Sept. 1, 1948

Section, act July 12, 1882, ch. 290, §4, 22 Stat. 163, related to jurisdiction and venue. See sections 1348 and 1394 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-13-0182 SAT Date: 1/4/2013 Print Date: 2/4/2013

Related cases : Health related cases:

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 2 3

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 1 2 1 Linear 2 3 1 Branched

Exposure Based Review : Health: Ecotox: N o Routes of exposure : Health: Dermal Inhalation Ecotox: All releases to water Fate: ; Keywords : Keywords: IRR/CORR-S,E,L,MM; AQUATOX Summary of Assessment :
Fate : Fate Summary: P-13-0180-5 FATE: Estimations for
Liquid with MP < 25 C (E) log Kow = 5.97 (E); S = Dispersible /0.3 mg/L at 25 C (E) VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E) BP > 400 C (E) H < 1.00E-8 (E)log Koc = 5.04 (E) log Fish BCF = 2.2 (E) log Fish BAF = 2.7 (E) POTW removal (%) = 90 via sorption and biodeg Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = Linear wk; Highly branched ≥ mo Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strong PBT Potential: Linear P1B2; Highly branched P2B3 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl

Health : Health Summary: Absorption is poor from the skin, moderate from the GI tract, and good from the lung (analog). Concern for severe irritation and possible corrosion from the amines.

Ecotox : Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 0.93 daphnid 48-h LC50 0.16 green algal 96-h EC50 0.058 fish

_ chronic value 0.01 daphnid

_ chronic value 0.018
algal

_ chronic value 0.028
Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for Aliphatic Amines, Amides; SAR class = Amides; log Kow = 4.9; S = 0.002 g/L at 20 C, dispersible; p H7; liquid with unknown mp (P); effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and measured concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) 1

SARs Aliphatic Amines, Amides SAR Class Amides Ecotox Category Aliphatic Amines
Ecotox Factors Comments:SAT Chair: L Keifer 564-8916
Editorial Note on Part 28
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 28 appear at 76 FR 76873, Dec. 9, 2011.

§ 28.58 Transcript. ( a ) *Preparation.* A verbatim record made under supervision of the administrative judge shall be kept of every hearing and shall be the sole official record of the proceeding. Upon request, a copy of a transcript of the hearing shall be made available to each party. Additional copies of the transcript shall be made available to a party upon payment of costs. Exceptions to the payment requirement may be granted for good cause shown. A motion for an exception shall be made in writing and accompanied by an affidavit setting forth the reasons for the request and shall be granted upon a showing of good cause. Requests for copies of transcripts shall be directed to the Clerk of the Board. The Clerk of the Board may, by agreement with the person making the request, make arrangements with the official hearing reporter for required services to be charged to the requester.
( b ) *Corrections.* Corrections to the official transcript will be permitted. Motions for correction must be submitted within 30 days of service of the transcript upon the party. Corrections of the official transcript will be permitted only when errors of substance are involved and only upon approval of the administrative judge. The administrative judge may make changes at any time with notice to the parties.
March 10, 2015

Mr. Dean D'Eugenio

1212 East Joppa Road

Towson MD 21286

Dear Mr. D'Eugenio :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It

explains why we cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can n o t Process Your Request

We entered your February 9 , 2015 , exemption request on behalf of Allied Remodeling of

Central Maryland into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

- 0299 ) , but we are unable to process

your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of

§ 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us al l of

the following:

• The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief

.

• Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

W hat You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Nia Daniels

Program Analyst , Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
#### § 381.140 Relabeling poultry products.

When it is claimed by the operator of an official establishment that some of its labeled poultry product, which has been transported to a location other than an official establishment, is in need of relabeling because the labeling has become mutilated or damaged, or for some other reason needs relabeling, the requests for relabeling the poultry product shall be sent to the Administrator and accompanied with a statement of the reasons therefor and the quantity of labeling required. Labeling material intended for relabeling inspected and passed product shall not be transported from an official establishment until permission has been received from the Administrator. The relabeling of inspected and passed product with official labels shall be done under the supervision of an inspector pursuant to the regulations in part 362 of this chapter. The establishment shall reimburse the Inspection Service for any cost involved in supervising the relabeling of such product as provided in said regulations.
Order filed, March 26, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00074-CV

____________

JAMES NEZAT, Appellant

V.

TUCKER ENERGY SERVICES, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 270th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2009-44349

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due March 4, 2013. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. 

The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not 

been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Judith Kulhanek, the substitute court reporter, to file the record 

in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
§ 166.7 Cooking standards. ( a ) Garbage shall be heated throughout at boiling (212 °F. or 100 °C. at sea level) for 30 (thirty) minutes.
( b ) Garbage shall be agitated during cooking, except in steam cooking equipment, to ensure that the prescribed cooking temperature is maintained throughout the cooking container for the prescribed length of time.
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 10:25 AM

To: 'apurwin@helinet.com'

Cc: Pappas, Rob (FAA); Pearson, Lakisha (FAA); Cooper, Thuy (FAA)

Subject: Request for Additional Information

Dear Mr. Purwin: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-0785). 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 Headquarters or electronically via e-mail to nia.daniels@faa.gov. 

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

the following: size and maximum weight (include payload) and whether the aircraft is fixed wing or 

rotorcraft. 

 List the aircraft’s cruise speed. 

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

aircraft manual. 

 Describe the proximity of the proposed operations to airports. 

 Your petition references a pre-flight inspection. Describe the process used to determine if the UAS is 

airworthy and in safe condition for operation in the NAS. This can be provided in the petition from an 

aircraft flight manual, a maintenance and inspection manual, or similar document. 

 Your petition references a flight operation and procedure manual, however it was not submitted for the 

record. Please provide a copy of the manual. 

NOTE: The Aircraft Flight Manual and Maintenance and Inspection Manual may be separate documents or 

combined in a single document. 

Please provide the additional information by December 22, 2014. 

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

Sincerely, 

Nia Daniels, ARM‐108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591
2

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov
Exhibit 12.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Marc Beuls, the Chief Executive Officer of Millicom International Cellular S.A., certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F as amended by this Form 20-F/A of Millicom International Cellular S.A.;

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

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

4.     The
company's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:



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



|Date: June 30, 2004 |  |     |  |               |  |                        
|------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------- |  | -----------------------
|                    |  | By: |  | /s/MARC BEULS
|                    |  |     |  | Name:         |  | Marc Beuls             
|                    |  |     |  | Title:        |  | Chief Executive Officer

Exh 12.1-1

---



QuickLinks
§ 590.910 Eligibility of foreign countries for importation of egg products into the United States. ( a ) Whenever it is determined by the Administrator that the system of egg products inspection maintained by any foreign country is such that the egg products produced in such country are processed, labeled, and packaged in accordance with, and otherwise comply with, the standards of the Act and these regulations including, but not limited to the same sanitary, processing, facility requirements, and Government inspection as required in §§ 590.500 through 590.580 applicable to inspected articles produced within the United States, notice of that fact will be given according to paragraph (b) of this section. Thereafter, egg products from such countries shall be eligible for importation into the United States subject to the provisions of this part and other applicable laws and regulations. Such product must meet, to the extent applicable, the same standards and requirements that apply to comparable domestic product as set forth in these regulations. Egg products from foreign countries not deemed eligible in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section are not eligible for importation into the United States, except as provided by § 590.960. In determining if the inspection system of a foreign country is the equivalent of the system maintained in the United States, the Administrator shall review the inspection regulations of the foreign country and make a survey to determine the manner in which the inspection systems are administered within the foreign country. After approval of the inspection system of a foreign country, the Administrator may, as often and to the extent deemed necessary, authorize representatives of the Department to review the system to determine that it is maintained in such a manner as to be the equivalent of the system maintained by the United States.
( b ) A list of countries eligible to export egg products to the United States is maintained at *http://www.fsis.usda.gov/importlibrary .*