alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Douglas \V Domenech 

Secretary of Natura! Resources 

TO: 

COPIES: 

FROM: 

SUBJECT: 

DATE: 

COMl'v10NWEALTH a/VIRGINIA 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMElVTAL vvnu 

Street address: 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219 

lv/ailing address: P.O, Box 1105. Richmond, Virginia 2321 g 

TDD (804) 698-402! 

ww\-v.deq. virginia.gov 

Regional Directors, Director - Air Permits, Director - Air Compliance, 

Director - Data Analysis and Planning, Director - Regulatory Affairs, 

Air Permit Managers, Air Compliance Managers 

Richard F. Weeks, Chief Deputy Director 

James J. Golden, Deputy Director for Program Development 

Michael G. Dowd - Director, Air Division A C 

Air Guidance Memo No. APG-308: 

David K_ Paylur 

Director 

(B(}4) 69R-4000 

i ~80()~592~5482 

Interpretation of9 VAC 5-80-1695 F. - Exemption of Alternative Fuels under 

MajorNSR 

March 24,2011 

Summary: This document clarifies the implementation of the exemption for alternative fuels 

found in 9 V AC 5-80-1695 (Article 8 - Major New Source Review (NSR)) and 9 V AC 5-80-

2140 (Article 9 - Nonattainment NSR). 

Background: In 2008, the Virginia General Assembly added § 1 0.1322.4 (Permit modifications 

for alternative fuels or raw materials) to the Virginia Air Pollution Control Law. This section 

allows a company to make a fuel switch to a demonstrated cleaner fuel without going through the 

permitting process. This rule permits this change only to the extent federal law or regulation 

allow. 

Interpretation: This document clarifies that the exemption from permitting for use of alternative 

fuels DOES NOT allow a source to bypass the Major NSR process. As clearly stated in 

§ 10.1322.4 of the Virginia Code: 

"Unless required by jederallaw or regulation, no additional permit or permit 

modification shall be required by the Board for the use, by any source, of an alternative 

fuel or raw material. " 
The federal Major NSR regulations, which have been adopted by Virginia in Chapter 80 Articles 

8 and 9 of the Virginia Air Pollution Control Board Regulations, establish an applicability 

process that a source is required to use to determine whether a permit or permit modification is 

required. This process includes establishing baseline actual emissions and determining if a 

significant increase and a significant net increase in emissions will occur as a result of the change 

in the process. A fuel switch would be considered such a change. The exemption stated in 9 

V AC 5-80- 1695 and in 9 V AC 5-80-2140 does not allow a source to bypass the federally 

required applicability process which has been incorporated into the Virginia regulations. Any 

source switching to an alternative fuel, including those listed in § 1 0.1322.4 of the Virginia Code, 

are still required to make an applicability determination under the Virginia Major NSR 

regulations and to obtain a permit or permit modification if needed.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with thereport of Prospect Medical Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended June 30, 2005 (the “Report”), I, Mike Heather, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| August 12, 2005 | /s/ MIKE HEATHER                             |
|----------------------|----------------------------------------------|
|                 | **Mike Heather****Chief Financial  Officer** |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-1591 BABATUNDE FADAHUNSI, a/k/a Tunde Fadahunsi, Petitioner, versus U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A70-506-964) Submitted: November 10, 1997 Decided: December 15, 1997 Before WIDENER, ERVIN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Babatunde Fadahunsi, Appellant Pro Se. Karen Fletcher Torstenson, Karen Ann Hunold, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Babatunde Fadahunsi petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge's denial of his motion to reopen deportation proceedings. Our review of the record discloses that there was no abuse of discretion in the Board's decision. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Fadahunsi v. INS , No. A70-506-964 (B.I.A. Apr. 11, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
U.S.Deportment

of Transportation federal Aviation Administration

April 26, 2010
Donna DeBuhr Engineering Specialist Cessna Aircraft Company One Cessna Boulevard P.O. Box 7704 Wichita, Kansas 67277-7704
Dear Ms. DeBuhr: Transport Airplane Directorate 1601 Lind Ave. SW. Renton, Washington 98057-3356

We have received your petition, dated March I, 2010. Inthat letter, you requested an exemption from the requirements ofTitle 14,Code ofFederal Regulations (14 CFR) 25.1447(c)(I) and 25.841(b)(6) forCessna Model 680 airplanes. In a follow up email to Robert Hetlman, dated April 15,2010, you clanfied that Cessna seeks an exemption for §25.1447(c)(I) only, and that §25.841(b)(6) would be addressed with an equivalent level of safety (ELOS) finding.

Your request, which we sent tothe Department ofTransportation's Federal Document Management System on your behalf, will be processed by this office. Please refer toDocket No. FAA-2010-0290.

We have deternlined that good cause exists forwaiving the publication and COllll11ent procedures included in 14CFR part 11. Although we have waived the publication and comment period pursuant to yourpetition, you should not conStrue this action tobe tacit approval ofyour request. We will consider the facts and circJmstances contained inyour petition and will make every effort to process itin an expeditit,us manner.
Ifyou have any questions or concerns regarding your petition orthe petition process, please contact Robert Hettman, (425) 227-2683, robert.hettman@famgov. 

# Tn,ty-(c 

# JJ 

# JJr9- 0
Maria G. Delgado Transport Standards Staff Transport Airplane Directorate Aircraft Certification Service

[type the blame line here, ifany]
**Exhibit 21.01**

 

UFP Technologies, Inc. (“UFPT”) wholly owns the following companies:

 

1.               Moulded Fibre Technology, Inc. (“MFT”), a Maine company

2.               Simco Industries, Inc. (“Simco”), a Michigan company

3.               Simco Automotive Trim, Inc. (“SAT”), a Michigan company (wholly-owned by Simco)

4.               Stephenson & Lawyer, Inc. (“S&L”), a Michigan company

5.               Patterson Properties Corporation, a Michigan company (wholly-owned by S&L)

 

1

----
121 STAT. 88 PUBLIC LAW 110–22—MAY 3, 2007

Public Law 110–22

110th Congress

An Act

To amend title 18, United States Code, to strengthen prohibitions against animal

fighting, 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. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Animal Fighting Prohibition

Enforcement Act of 2007’’.

SEC. 2. ENFORCEMENT OF ANIMAL FIGHTING PROHIBITIONS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 3 of title 18, United States Code,

is amended by adding at the end the following:

‘‘§ 49. Enforcement of animal fighting prohibitions

‘‘Whoever violates subsection (a), (b), (c), or (e) of section 26

of the Animal Welfare Act shall be fined under this title, imprisoned

for not more than 3 years, or both, for each violation.’’.

(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents for such

chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section

48 the following:

‘‘49. Enforcement of animal fighting prohibitions.’’.

SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE ANIMAL WELFARE ACT.

Section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2156) is

amended—

(1) in subsection (c), by striking ‘‘interstate instrumentality’’

and inserting ‘‘instrumentality of interstate commerce for

commercial speech’’;

(2) in subsection (d), by striking ‘‘such subsections’’ and

inserting ‘‘such subsection’’;

(3) by striking subsection (e) and inserting the following:

‘‘(e) It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly sell,

buy, transport, or deliver in interstate or foreign commerce a knife,

a gaff, or any other sharp instrument attached, or designed or

intended to be attached, to the leg of a bird for use in an animal

fighting venture.’’;

(4) in subsection (g)—

(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘or animals, such

as waterfowl, bird, raccoon, or fox hunting’’; and

(B) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:

‘‘(3) the term ‘instrumentality of interstate commerce’

means any written, wire, radio, television or other form of

Animal Fighting

Prohibition

Enforcement Act

of 2007.

18 USC 1 note.

May 3, 2007

[H.R. 137]

PUBLIC LAW 110–22—MAY 3, 2007 121 STAT. 89

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 137 (S. 261):

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 110–27, Pt. 1 (Comm. on the Judiciary).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007):

Mar. 26, considered and passed House.

Apr. 10, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

communication in, or using a facility of, interstate commerce;’’;

and

(5) by adding at the end the following new subsection:

‘‘(i) The criminal penalties for violations of subsection (a), (b),

(c), or (e) are provided in section 49 of title 18, United States

Code.’’.

Approved May 3, 2007.
U.S. Department 

of Transportation

Federal Aviation 

Administration

Flight Standards Service 

Civil Aviation Registry, AFS-700 

P.O. Box 25504 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125-0504 

(405) 954-3116 

WEB Address: http://registry.faa.gov 

AFS-700-LTR-1 (01/14) 

 

 

 

May 12, 2014 

Mr. Lucas von Fedak 

Aviaservice, LLC 

PO Box 16841 

San Juan PR 00908-6841

Dear Mr. von Fedak: 

This is in response to your petition for exemption sent to the public docket (No. FAA2014-0206) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of 

Aviaservice, LLC (Aviaservice) for an exemption from Subpart C §47.65 of Title 14, 

Code of Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, if granted, would 

allow Aviaservice to obtain a Dealer’s Aircraft Registration Certificate (dealer’s 

certificate) without meeting the U.S. citizenship definition of Title 49 United States Code 

(49 USC) 40102(a)(15) and 14 CFR §47.2. 

As stated in 14 CFR §47.61(b), “A Dealer’s Aircraft Registration Certificate is an 

alternative for the Certificate of Aircraft Registration issued under Subpart B (part 47).” 

Historically, the Civil Aviation Registry, Aircraft Registration Branch (Registry), has 

interpreted this language to mean that in making the decision whether to issue a dealer’s 

certificate, a favorable determination must be made that finds the applicant is also eligible 

for a Certificate of Aircraft Registration (aircraft certificate) under Subpart B of part 47. 

The Registry has consistently applied the same alternative form of registration 

requirement, under Subpart B, when considering petitions for exemption from the U.S. 

citizenship requirement of 14 CFR §47.65. 

Based on Aviaservice’s petition for exemption, it appears you are aware that non-citizen 

limited liability companies are not eligible for a Certificate of Aircraft Registration or a 

Dealer’s Aircraft Registration Certificate, absent the FAA granting an exemption to the 

U.S. citizenship requirement of 14 CFR §47.65. 

With respect to petitions for exemption of the U.S. citizenship requirement of §47.65, it 

has been the historical practice of the Registry to only grant such exemptions when the 

petitioner is a non-citizen corporation. The Registry has granted exemptions to noncitizen corporations because non-citizen corporations are alternatively eligible for 

registration under 14 CFR §47.3(a). Unlike non-citizen corporations, Aviaservice is a 

non-citizen LLC that is not alternatively eligible for registration under 14 CFR §47.3(a). 
2 

Based on our review of your petition for exemption, and the applicable statutes and 

regulations, the issuance of an exemption from the U.S. citizenship requirement of 14 

CFR §47.65, to a non-citizen LLC, would be inconsistent with the Federal Aviation 

Regulations, statutes, and prior practices of the Registry. 

In light of the foregoing, no further action will be taken on your request. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John G. Bent 

Manager, Civil Aviation Registry
#### § 385.1403 Petitions seeking institution of rulemaking proceedings (Rule 1404).

Any person may file a petition requesting the Commission to institute a proceeding for the purpose of issuing statements, rules, or regulations of general applicability and significance designed to implement or interpret law, or to formulate general policy for future effect. No reply to such a petition may be filed. Whether a proceeding shall be instituted as requested is within the discretion of the Commission and the ruling on the petition will be final. In the event a rulemaking proceeding is instituted by the Commission, the procedure to be employed for the taking of evidence or the receipt of views and comments will be designated by Commission order.

[Order 276, at 49 FR 21705, May 23, 1984. Redesignated by Order 606, 64 FR 44405, Aug. 16, 1999]
### SUBCHAPTER LXXXIV—OREGON DUNES NATIONAL RECREATION AREA
### §9711. Gap analysis on availability of snow-related data to assess and predict flood and flood impacts

#### (a) In general

The Administrator, in consultation with the Department of Agriculture, the Department of the Interior, and the Army Corps of Engineers, shall conduct an analysis of gaps in the availability of snow-related data to assess and predict floods and flood impacts, including data on the following:

(1) Snow water equivalent.

(2) Snow depth.

(3) Snowpack temperature.

(4) Snow and mixed-phase precipitation.

(5) Snow melt.

(6) Rain-snow line.

#### (b) Report

Not later than 180 days after December 27, 2022, the Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives a report on—

(1) the findings of the gap analysis required by subsection (a); and

(2) opportunities for additional collaboration among Federal agencies to collect snow-related data to better assess and predict floods and flood impacts.

(Pub. L. 117–316, §16, Dec. 27, 2022, 136 Stat. 4417.)
4x9slimjimtest.qxd 4/13/04 11:21 AM Page 1
Things you should know about

buying medicines from outside

the United States

If you buy foreign medicine from an Internet site, from a storefront business that offers to order medicine for you, or during

visits outside the United States, you are taking a risk. The 

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cannot guarantee the

safety of these medicines.

Q UALITY ASSURANCE CONCERNS. Medicines that have not been

approved for sale in the United States may not have been

m a n u f a c t u red under quality assurance procedures designed to

produce a safe and effective product.

COUNTERFEIT POTENTIAL. Some imported m e d i c i n e s—

even those that bear the name of a U.S.-approved product—

may, in fact, be fake versions that are unsafe or even completely ineffective.

PRESENCE OF UNTESTED SUBSTA N C E S. Some imported

medicines and their ingre d i e n t s , although legal in foreign

c o u n t r i e s , may not have been evaluated for safety and effectiveness in the United States. These products may be addictive or

contain other dangerous ingre d i e n t s .

RISKS OF UNSUPERVISED USE. Some medicines,w h e t h e r

imported or not, a re unsafe when taken without proper medical

s u p e rvision. You may need a medical evaluation to ensure that the

medicine is appropriate for you and your condition. Or, you may

re q u i re medical ch e ckups to make sure that you are taking the

medicine p r o p e r l y, it is working for you, and that you are not having unexpected or life-threatening side effects.

LABELING AND LANGUAGE ISSUES. The medicine’s label,

including instructions for use and possible side effects, may be 

in a language you do not understand and may make medical

claims or suggest specific uses that have not been properly

e valuated for safety and effectiveness.

LACK OF INFORMAT I O N. An imported medicine may lack 

i n f o rmation that you would need to be promptly and corre c t l y

t reated for dangerous side effects caused by the medicine.

Remember, medicines you buy

from outside the U.S. may be

unsafe or ineffective. 

It’s not worth risking your health!

If you have any questions about the use of any medicines,

FDA encourages you to contact your physician, your local

pharmacist, or the board of pharmacy for the state in which

you live.

(FDA) 04-1511A

4x9slimjimtest.qxd 4/13/04 11:21 AM Page 2
EXHIBIT  99.1



Supplemental Segment Information

|In thousands                       | Three Months Ended
April 30, | Year Ended 
April 30,
|---------------------------------- | ---------------------------- | ---------------------
|                                   | 2004                         | 2003                 
|Orders Received:                   |                              |                      
|Sign Making and Specialty Graphics | $  73,297                    | $  70,885            
|Apparel and Flexible Materials     | 44,127                       | 38,922               
|Ophthalmic Lens Processing         | 21,684                       | 21,299               
|                                   | $139,108                     | $131,106             
|                                   | =======                      | =======              









April 30,2004
April 30,2003Backlog:Sign Making and Specialty Graphics
$     537
$     249Apparel and Flexible Materials
30,957
26,205Ophthalmic Lens Processing
4,371
3,258$35,865
$29,712======
======
§ 539.2 Physical, chemical, or biological contaminants. ( a ) Fish and fish products that are contaminated with physical matter are subject to official retention and condemnation.
( b ) Antibiotic or other drug residues in fish tissues must be within applicable tolerances in 21 CFR part 556 or within an applicable import tolerance established under 21 U.S.C. 360b(a)(6).
( c ) Pesticide residues in fish tissues must be within applicable tolerances in 40 CFR part 180.
( d ) Fish or fish products containing violative concentrations of drugs or other chemicals are subject to condemnation.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5079 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to repeal the suspension of 

eligibility for grants, loans, and work assistance for drug-related offenses. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 21, 2020 

Mr. CASEY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to repeal 

the suspension of eligibility for grants, loans, and work 

assistance for drug-related offenses. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Stopping Unfair Col5 lateral Consequences from Ending Student Success Act’’ 

6 or the ‘‘SUCCESS Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 5079 IS

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF SUSPENSION OF ELIGIBILITY UNDER 

2 THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT OF 1965 FOR 

3 GRANTS, LOANS, AND WORK ASSISTANCE FOR 

4 DRUG-RELATED OFFENSES. 

5 (a) REPEAL.—Subsection (r) of section 484 of the 

6 Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1091(r)) is re7 pealed. 

8 (b) REVISION OF FAFSA FORM.—Section 483 of the 

9 Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1090) is 

10 amended by adding at the end the following: 

11 ‘‘(i) CONVICTIONS.—The Secretary shall not include 

12 any question about the conviction of an applicant for the 

13 possession or sale of illegal drugs on the FAFSA (or any 

14 other form developed under subsection (a)).’’. 

15 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—The Higher Edu16 cation Act of 1965 is amended— 

17 (1) in section 428(b)(3) (20 U.S.C. 

18 1078(b)(3))— 

19 (A) in subparagraph (C), by striking 

20 ‘‘485(l)’’ and inserting ‘‘485(k)’’; and 

21 (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking 

22 ‘‘485(l)’’ and inserting ‘‘485(k)’’; 

23 (2) in section 435(d)(5) (20 U.S.C. 

24 1085(d)(5))— 

25 (A) in subparagraph (E), by striking 

26 ‘‘485(l)’’ and inserting ‘‘485(k)’’; and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 5079 IS

1 (B) in subparagraph (F), by striking 

2 ‘‘485(l)’’ and inserting ‘‘485(k)’’; 

3 (3) in section 484 (20 U.S.C. 1091), by redes4 ignating subsections (s) and (t) as subsections (q) 

5 and (r), respectively; 

6 (4) in section 485 (20 U.S.C. 1092)— 

7 (A) by striking subsection (k); and 

8 (B) by redesignating subsections (l) and 

9 (m) as subsections (k) and (l), respectively; and 

10 (5) in section 487(e)(2)(B)(ii)(IV) (20 U.S.C. 

11 1094(e)(2)(B)(ii)(IV)), by striking ‘‘(l) of section 

12 485’’ and inserting ‘‘(k) of section 485’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


The undersigned, Patricia A. Costante, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
The MIIX Group, Incorporated (the "Company"), has executed this certification in
connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the
Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004
(the "Report").

The undersigned hereby certifies that to the best of her knowledge:

          (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 presents, in
                    all material respects, the financial condition and results
                    of operations of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
15th day of November, 2004.


                                   /s/ Patricia A. Costante
                                   --------------------------------------------
                                   Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                   November 15, 2004



                                                                              26