alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Need to return call by / at/between and . Signature: ___________________________ 

Project No.: 0172.07.005.504 DISTRIBUTION 

Page _1_ of __1_

Project Name: 304(m) Annual Review 

TELEPHONE CALL RECORD 

 Outgoing Call 

Date: 3/17/2010 Time: 10:40 am EST 

Company Name: TCEQ – Water Permitting Authority 

Contact Name: Philip Urbany 

Phone No.: 512-239-4542 

Name: Elizabeth Sabol Eastern Research Group 

GENERAL SUBJECT : Flows reported to DMR in 2008 

 

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN 

I called the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Water Permitting Authority, on March 17, 

2010, to speak with Chris Linendoll. An operator answered and directed me to Phillip Ubrany to answer my 

questions regarding flows reported for Bayview Detention Center WWTF (TX0056821). I left a message for 

Mr. Urbany identifying myself and why I was calling. Mr. Urbany returned my phone call on Wednesday, 

March 17, 2010, at 11:30 am. We briefly discussed flows and chlorine discharges reported to DMR in 2008. 

Mr. Urbnay explained that facility is a publically owned treatment facility. He stated that the permit limit for 

chlorine is 4 mg/L. Mr. Urbany then explained that the problem with the data was a missing decimal or unit for 

the flow. He stated that the permit limit for the facility is 0.16 MGD, and that a facility this size is incapable of 

having flows anywhere close to 700 MGD. He stated that decimals should be listed as GPD, not MGD. 

Mr. Urbany also explained the 75/90 rule that TCEQ enforces. This rule states that when a facility reaches 75 

percent of the permitted flow, for three consecutive months, a plan for expansion must be initiated. When a 

facility reaches 90 percent of the permitted flow, they must initiate the expansion plan. Mr. Urbany stated that

this facility was not detected as one reaching 75 percent of the permitted flow.
### [§873. Renumbered §872]
EXHIBIT 32
  Certification Pursuant to
 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
 as Adopted Pursuant to
 Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 This certification is not deemed filed pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and does not constitute a part of the Annual Report of Hypercom Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”).
 
 In connection with the Report, we, Philippe Tartavull, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Thomas B. Sabol, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, respectively, that:
 
 (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Dated: March 10, 2011
By:
/s/ Philippe TartavullPhilippe TartavullChief Executive OfficerDated: March 10, 2011
By:
/s/ Thomas B. SabolThomas B. SabolChief Financial Officer
(No. 1157

Claimant awarded $486.25.)

#### Egyptian Transportation System, a Corporation, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed March 29, 1927.*

License *fee*— when *refund may he made.*When a mistake is made in computing the weight of motor vehicles upon which the tax is assessed, and the tax is paid, claimant is entitled to a refund of the excess tax paid.

E. M. Spiller, for claimant.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General ; Merrill F. Wehmhoff, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Justice Leech

delivered the opinion of the court:

The claimant, the Egyptian Transportation System, a corporation, of Marion, Illinois, filed a declaration, in which they allege that for a period long preceding the dates of all matters hereinafter stated they were a corporation, created, organized and doing business under the laws of the State of Illinois, engaged in the business of transporting passengers by busses along and over certain public highways in the State of Illinois; that in accordance with Section 9a of the Motor Vehicle Law of the State of Illinois for the year 1926, said company, on July 24, 1926, paid to the Secretary of State of the State of Illinois the sum of $2,584.00, and on July 30, 1926, the sum of $12.70, making a total payment of $2,596.70; that in computing the weights of the busses owned and operated by said transportation company a mistake was made therein, and as a result of said error an excess tax in the sum of $486.25 was paid, and that there is due claimant said sum of $486.25. A demurrer was filed by the Attorney General of the State of Illinois, which, as a matter of law, is sustained.

A letter from the Secretary of State and recommendation from the Attorney .General indicate that claimant is entitled to be reimbursed for this sum of money, and we accordingly award claifuant the sum of $486.25.
1

The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-2090

___________

Tasha R. Thomas, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

Sprint Spectrum, doing business as *

Sprint PCS; William Ersey, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: December 5, 2003

Filed: December 15, 2003

___________

Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM

Tasha R. Thomas appeals the district court’s1

 adverse grant of summary

judgment in her employment-discrimination action. Having carefully reviewed the

record, we conclude summary judgment was proper for the reasons explained by the

district court. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
Editorial Note on Part 134
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 134.1205 Dismissal. ( a ) The Judge must dismiss the appeal if: ( 1 ) The appeal is beyond OHA's jurisdiction as set forth under § 134.1201;
( 2 ) The appeal is untimely under § 134.1202;
( 3 ) The appellant lacks standing to appeal under § 134.1203; or
( 4 ) The appeal is premature because SBA has not yet made a final SBA loan review decision.
( b ) The Judge may dismiss the appeal in accordance with § 134.1204(b) or (c)(3), or if the appeal does not, on its face, allege specific facts that if proven to be true, warrant reversal or remand of the final SBA loan review decision.
### §14. Assistant director of bureau; appointment; duties

There shall be in the Women's Bureau an assistant director, to be appointed by the Secretary of Labor, who shall perform such duties as shall be prescribed by the director and approved by the Secretary of Labor.

(June 5, 1920, ch. 248, §3, 41 Stat. 987.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Words "who shall receive an annual compensation of $5,000 and" were omitted in view of the Classification Acts. See sections 5101 et seq. and 5331 et seq. of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of functions of other officers, employees, and agencies of Department of Labor, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of Labor, with power to delegate, see Reorg. Plan No. 6 of 1950, §§1, 2, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1263, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
```

[Federal Register: December 20, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 243)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 79327-79328]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20de10-22]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2010-0909; FRL-9240-9]

 
Finding of Substantial Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call 
for Utah State Implementation Plan Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of the comment period.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is extending the comment period for a document published 
on November 19, 2010 (75 FR 70888). In the November 19, 2010 document, 
EPA proposed a finding that the Utah State Implementation Plan (SIP) is 
substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the national ambient air 
quality standards (NAAQS) or to otherwise comply with the requirements 
of the Clean Air Act (CAA), based on Utah's rule R307-107, which 
exempts emissions during unavoidable breakdowns from compliance with 
emission limitations. At the request of several commentors, EPA is 
extending the comment period through January 3, 2011.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 3, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2010-0909, by one of the following methods:
    http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 
instructions for submitting comments.

[[Page 79328]]

     E-mail: russ.tim@epa.gov.
     Fax: (303) 312-6064 (please alert the individual listed in 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
     Mail: Callie Videtich, Director, Air Program, 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 
Wynkoop St., Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
     Hand Delivery: Callie Videtich, Director, Air Program, 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 
Wynkoop St., Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only 
accepted Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal 
holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed 
information.
     For additional information on submitting comments, see the 
November 19, 2010 (75 FR 70888) proposed rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Russ, Air Program, Mail Code 8P-
AR, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop St., 
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, phone (303) 312-6479, or e-mail 
russ.tim@epa.gov.

    Dated: December 13, 2010.
Judith Wong,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2010-31892 Filed 12-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
§ 3832.21 How do I locate a lode or placer mining claim? ( a ) *Lode claims.* ( 1 ) Your lode claim is not valid until you have made a discovery.
( 2 ) *Locating a lode claim.* You may locate a lode claim for a mineral that: ( i ) Occurs as veins, lodes, ledges, or other rock in place;
( ii ) Contains base and precious metals, gems and semi-precious stones, and certain industrial minerals, including but not limited to gold, silver, cinnabar, lead, tin, copper, zinc, fluorite, barite, or other valuable deposits; and
( iii ) Does not occur as bedded rock (stratiform deposits such as gypsum or limestone) or is not a deposit of placer, alluvial (deposited by water), eluvial (deposited by wind), colluvial (deposited by gravity), or aqueous origin.
( 3 ) *Establishing extralateral rights.* If the minerals are contained within a vein, lode, or ledge and the vein, lode, or ledge extends through the endlines of your lode claim, you have extra-lateral rights to pursue the down-dip extension of the vein, lode, or ledge to the point where the vein, lode, or ledge intersects a vertical plain projected parallel to the end lines and outside the sideline boundaries of your lode claim if— ( i ) The top or apex of the vein, lode, or ledge lies on or under the surface within the interior boundaries of the lode claim; and
( ii ) The long axis, and therefore the side lines, of the lode claim are substantially parallel to the course of the vein, lode, or ledge.
( 4 ) *Preserving extralateral rights.* In order to preserve your extralateral rights, you should determine, if possible, the general course of the vein in either direction from the point of discovery in order to mark the correct boundaries of the claim. You should expose the vein, lode, or ledge by— ( i ) Tracing the vein or lode on the surface; or
( ii ) Drilling a hole, sinking a shaft, or running a tunnel or drift to a sufficient depth.
( b ) *Placer claims.* ( 1 ) Your placer claim is not valid until you have made a discovery.
( 2 ) Each 10-acre aliquot part of your placer claim must be mineral-in-character.
( 3 ) You may locate a placer claim for minerals that are— ( i ) River sands or gravels bearing gold or valuable detrital minerals;
( ii ) Hosted in soils, alluvium (deposited by water), eluvium (deposited by wind), colluvium (deposited by gravity), talus, or other rock not in its original place;
( iii ) Bedded gypsum, limestone, cinders, pumice, and similar mineral deposits; or
( iv ) Mineral-bearing brine (water saturated or strongly impregnated with salts and containing ancillary locatable minerals) not subject to the mineral leasing acts where a mineral subject to the General Mining Law can be extracted as the primary valuable mineral.
( 4 ) Building stone deposits must by law be located as placer mining claims (30 U.S.C. 161). If you have located a building stone placer claim, the lands on which you located the claim must be chiefly valuable for mining building stone.
#### § 107.570 [Reserved]
PUBLIC LAW 109–24—JULY 12, 2005 119 STAT. 367

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 324:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 151 (2005):

Feb. 15, considered and passed House.

June 29, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 109–24

109th Congress

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 321 Montgomery Road in Altamonte Springs, Florida, as the ‘‘Arthur Stacey Mastrapa

Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

321 Montgomery Road in Altamonte Springs, Florida, shall be

known and designated as the ‘‘Arthur Stacey Mastrapa Post Office

Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Arthur

Stacey Mastrapa Post Office Building’’.

Approved July 12, 2005.

July 12, 2005

[H.R. 324]
Exhibit
32(b)





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, OF THE


CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Rocky Brands, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James
E. McDonald, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial 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 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.




/s/ James E. McDonaldJames E. McDonald, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerOctober
      30, 2009
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 23

**Question 23:** Will all of the libraries of reference data and the procedures for gamma-ray spectrometry software or appendices that contain 10 CFR Part 20 MPCs have to be changed?

**Answer:** Yes. 

(Reference: Part 20 Appendix B)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, November 24, 2017
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [FEMA-1549-DR]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Alabama (FEMA-1549-DR), dated September 15, 2004, and related determinations.

# DATES:

Effective October 8, 2004.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Alabama is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of September 15, 2004:

Cleburne County for Public Assistance.

Colbert, Cullman, Dale, Dekalb, Franklin, Lamar, Lawrence, Lee, Marion, Marshall, Pike, Tallapoosa, and Winston Counties for Public Assistance (already designated for Individual Assistance.)

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs, 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program)

Michael D. Brown, 

Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of Homeland Security.

[FR Doc. 04-23323 Filed 10-18-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
#### Russell Foland, Suing on Behalf of Himself, etc., Appellant, v. George J. Gould, Respondent, Impleaded with Others.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to plaintiff to amend on payment of costs. No opinion. Present— Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clarke, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 5224 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 5224

 To exclude from gross income certain assistance provided to farmers, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 8, 2022

  Mr. Booker (for himself, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Warnock, and Ms. Smith) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
                          Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To exclude from gross income certain assistance provided to farmers, 
                        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 ``Family Farmer and Rancher Tax 
Fairness Act of 2022''.

SEC. 2. TAX TREATMENT OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS, ETC.

    For purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, in the case of 
any payment described in section 1006(e) of the American Rescue Plan 
Act of 2021 (as amended by section 22007 of Public Law 117-169) or 
section 22006 of Public Law 117-169--
            (1) such payment shall not be included in the gross income 
        of the person on whose behalf, or to whom, such payment is 
        made,
            (2) no deduction shall be denied, no tax attribute shall be 
        reduced, and no basis increase shall be denied, by reason of 
        the exclusion from gross income provided by paragraph (1), and
            (3) in the case of a partnership or S corporation on whose 
        behalf, or to whom, such a payment is made--
                    (A) any amount excluded from income by reason of 
                paragraph (1) shall be treated as tax exempt income for 
                purposes of sections 705 and 1366 of such Code, and
                    (B) except as provided by the Secretary of the 
                Treasury (or the Secretary's delegate), any increase in 
                the adjusted basis of a partner's interest in a 
                partnership under section 705 of such Code with respect 
                to any amount described in subparagraph (A) shall equal 
                the partner's distributive share of deductions 
                resulting from interest that is part of such payment 
                and the partner's share, as determined under section 
                752 of such Code, of principal that is part of such 
                payment.
                                 <all>
```
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

#### Contact Us

Thing to Do

# Snowplay in the Manzanita Lake Area

Lassen Volcanic National Park
#### In the Matter of the Construction of the Will of Cornelia C. F. Horsford, Deceased. In the Matter of the Construction of the Will of Phoebe G. Horsford, Deceased. Ruth D. Fiske, as Ancillary Executrix and Trustee under the Will of Augustus H. Fiske, Deceased, et al., Appellants; Gardiner H. Fiske, as Sole Surviving Executor under the Will of Cornelia C. F. Horsford, Deceased, et al., Respondents.

Appeal from a' decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Suffolk County, construing, in consolidated proceedings, the wills of Phoebe G. and Cornelia C. F. Horsford, both deceased. Decree, insofar as appealed from, unanimously affirmed, with costs to all parties filing briefs, payable out of the estate of Cornelia C. F. Horsford, deceased. No opinion. Present — ’Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
###### Editorial Note on Part 124

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 124 appear at 72 FR 50040, Aug. 30, 2007, and 76 FR 8253, Feb. 11, 2011.

#### § 124.205 Can an applicant ask SBA to reconsider SBA's initial decision to decline its application?

There is no reconsideration process for applications that have been declined. An applicant which has been declined may file an appeal with SBA's Office of Hearings and Appeals pursuant to § 124.206, or reapply to the program pursuant to § 124.207.

[85 FR 66185, Oct. 16, 2020]
#### Anna J. Fulton v. Permilla A. Bunt, Impleaded.

Motion granted, with ten dollars costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.