alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM GATEWAY,
INC.'S CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,
2000 AND THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         732,261
<SECURITIES>                                   206,688
<RECEIVABLES>                                  672,054
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (13,377)
<INVENTORY>                                    210,351
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,279,812
<PP&E>                                       1,208,780
<DEPRECIATION>                                 387,599
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,077,043
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,582,455
<BONDS>                                          1,286
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,224
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,339,327
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,077,043
<SALES>                                      4,479,759
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,479,759
<CGS>                                        3,453,293
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,453,293
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 9,394
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 786
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                399,490
<INCOME-TAX>                                   141,819
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            257,671
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   257,671
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.80
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.78


</TABLE>
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION III

801 Warrenville Road

Lisle IL 60532

No. III-00-43 August 8, 2000

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630)829-9663/e-mail: rjs2@nrc.gov

Pam Alloway-Mueller (630)829-9662/e-mail: pla@nrc.gov

NRC TO MEET WITH USEC OFFICIALS AUGUST 14 TO DISCUSS

PLANNED PORTSMOUTH PLANT CLOSURE

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet with U.S. Enrichment Corporation officials

August 14 in Piketon, Ohio, to discuss the planned shutdown of uranium enrichment activities at the

Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant and the transfer of regulatory oversight from the NRC to the

Department of Energy.

The meeting will be at 2:30 p.m. EDT at Ohio State University’s Piketon Research and

Extension Center, 1864 Shyville Road in Piketon. The meeting will be open to public observation.

NRC staff members will be available after the meeting to answer questions.

U.S. Enrichment Corporation announced in June that production would continue at both the

Portsmouth plant and the Paducah, Kentucky, Gaseous Diffusion Plant until June 2001. By that date,

USEC anticipates it will close the Portsmouth enrichment operations after having upgraded the

Paducah plant to produce customer-ready enriched uranium. Enriched uranium is used by most

nuclear power plants to generate electricity. Currently, uranium enriched at Paducah needs to be

further enriched at Portsmouth before it can be converted to usable fuel for nuclear power plants.

NRC staff, including the two resident inspectors at the plant, will continue to monitor plant

activities until regulatory jurisdiction transfers back to the Department of Energy. USEC officials have

said they anticipate the transfer would occur by June 2002. USEC would continue to operate the

Portsmouth product transfer facility over the next four or five years until a similar facility would

become available at Paducah.

#####
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 21.1

                   LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES AS OF APRIL 10, 2001

   As of April 10, 2001, our listing of subsidiaries is as follows:

   Barbeques Galore Limited
   whose controlled entities are:
     Barbeques Galore (Aust) Pty Limited
     whose controlled entities are:
               Galore Pty Limited
               The Galore Group (International) Pty Limited
               whole controlled entity is:
                     The Galore Group (U.S.A.), Inc.
                     whose controlled entities are:
                           Barbeques Galore, Inc.
                           Barbeques Galore Online, Inc., (formerly Pool Patio
                           'N Things, Inc.)
     Barbeques Galore Services Pty Limited
     whose controlled entities are:
               Cook-on-Gas Products (Australia) Pty Limited
               whose controlled entities are:
                     Bosmana Pty Limited
                     Cougar Leisure Products Pty Limited
               G.L.G. Australia Pty Limited
               whose controlled entities are:
                     Australian Enamellers Pty Limited
                     Douglas Manufacturing Pty Limited
                     Park-Tec Engineering Pty Limited
               Pricotech Leisure Brands Pty Limited
               Redgun Pty Limited
     Galore Group Nominees Pty Limited
     Vilbrent Pty Limited

   (a): All the abovementioned subsidiaries are incorporated in Australia with
the exception of:
            The Galore Group (U.S.A.), Inc;
            Barbeques Galore, Inc; and
            Barbeques Galore Online, Inc., (formerly Pool Patio 'N Things,
            Inc.)
      which are incorporated in the United States of America.

   (b): All the abovementioned subsidiaries have ordinary shares as issued
share capital and are 100% owned.
AAM-2011-1362 December 23, 2011

Exemption No. 10419 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-1362

Mr. Mark Nelson Substance Prevention/Abuse Program Manager Hawk Aviation, Inc.

51601 Forest Boulevard Rush City, MN 55069

Dear Mr. Nelson:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated December 6, 2011 you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Hawk Aviation (Hawk) for an ex emption from § 120.1(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow Hawk to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Hawk.

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135 operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two testing programs into one would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level of safety to that provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs.2

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703;

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby grant Hawk Aviation, Inc. an exemption from 14 CFR § 120.1(a) to the extent necessary to allow Hawk to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program, subject to the conditions and limitations described

below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. Employees of Hawk Aviation are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol program must be implemented under the auspices of the Hawk Aviation part 135 operation, not under part 91.

This exemption terminates on January 31, 2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/
James R. Fraser, M.D. Deputy Federal Air Surgeon

Enclosure
§ 1201.103 Placing communications in the record; sanctions. ( a ) Any communication made in violation of § 1201.102 of this part will be made a part of the record. If the communication was oral, a memorandum stating the substance of the discussion will be placed in the record.
( b ) If there has been a violation of § 1201.102 of this part, the judge or the Clerk of the Board, as appropriate, will notify the parties in writing that the regulation has been violated, and will give the parties 10 days to file a response.
( c ) The following sanctions are available: ( 1 ) *Parties.* The offending party may be required to show why, in the interest of justice, the claim or motion should not be dismissed, denied, or otherwise adversely affected.
( 2 ) *Other persons.* The Board may invoke appropriate sanctions against other offending parties.
[54 FR 53504, Dec. 29, 1989, as amended at 70 FR 30609, May 27, 2005]
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-1561-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 Florida (FEMA-1561-DR), dated September 26, 2004, and related determinations. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

October 20, 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 Florida 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 26, 2004: 

Putnam County for Public Assistance (already designated for Individual Assistance). 

Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties for Public Assistance [Categories C-G] (already designated for Public Assistance [Categories A and B], including direct Federal assistance, at 100 percent Federal funding of the total eligible costs for a period of up to 72 hours, and 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. 04-24184 Filed 10-28-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sharon Denise BROWN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-10223.

D.C. No. CR-92-00570-EJG.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 13, 2002 *.

Decided May 24, 2002.

Before FERNANDEZ, WARDLAW and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Sharon Denise Brown, a federal prisoner, appeals the denial of her motion to reduce her 147-month sentence imposed *617following her guilty plea conviction for multiple armed bank robberies, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a), (d), and 924(c). We lack jurisdiction, and dismiss.

Brown contends that Amendment 591 to the Sentencing Guidelines retroactively invalidated all upward adjustments to her base offense level. She is mistaken. Amendment 591 requires reference to the statutory index for the offense of conviction in order to determine the defendant’s base offense level, and does not forbid adjustments based on relevant conduct. *See*U.S.S.G. Amendment 591 (2000) (deleting § IB 1.2, comment, (n.3) and moving consideration of “actual conduct” to U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct)). Brown was sentenced based on the proper base offense level for armed robbery.

The district court ruled that even if Amendment 591 applied and made Brown’s sentence subject to modification, in an exercise of its discretion, it would decline to reduce her sentence. We lack jurisdiction to review this discretionary denial of a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). *See United States v. Lowe,*136 F.3d 1231, 1233 (9th Cir.1998).

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
§ 133.3 Documents and fee to accompany application. ( a ) *Documents.* The application shall be accompanied by: ( 1 ) A status copy of the certificate of registration certified by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office showing title to be presently in the name of the applicant; and
( 2 ) Five copies of this certificate, or of a U.S. Patent and Trademark Office facsimile. The copies may be reproduced privately and shall be on paper approximately 8′′ × 101 ⁄ 2′′ in size. If the certificate consists of two or more pages, the copies may be reproduced on both sides of the paper.
( b ) *Fee.* The application shall be accompanied by a fee of $190 for each trademark to be recorded. However, if the trademark is registered for more than one class of goods (based on the class, or classes, first stated on the certificate of registration, without consideration of any class, or classes, also stated in parentheses) the fee for recordation shall be $190 for each class for which the applicant desires to record the trademark with the United States Customs Service. For example, to secure recordation of a trademark registered for three classes of goods, a fee of $570 is payable. A check or money order shall be made payable to the United States Customs Service.
[T.D. 72-266, 37 FR 20678, Oct. 3, 1972, as amended by T.D. 73-174, 38 FR 16850, June 27, 1973; T.D. 75-160, 40 FR 28790, July 9, 1975; T.D. 84-133, 49 FR 26571, June 28, 1984; T.D. 91-77, 56 FR 46115, Sept. 10, 1991]
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION III

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle, IL 60532

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. III-01-046 October 3, 2001

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630)829-9663/e-mail: rjs2@nrc.gov

Pam Alloway-Mueller (630)829-9662/e-mail: pla@nrc.gov

NRC NAMES NEW SENIOR RESIDENT INSPECTOR

AT PADUCAH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in Lisle, Illinois, have announced the assignment of

Bruce Bartlett as Senior Resident Inspector at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Paducah,

Kentucky.

Bartlett, who began his duties at the Paducah plant September 23, joined the NRC in 1984 as a

Resident Inspector at the Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station, northeast of Burlington, Kansas. In

January of 1988, he was promoted to Senior Resident Inspector at Wolf Creek, and two years later he

was assigned to the Callaway Nuclear Power Plant near Fulton, Missouri, as the Senior Resident

Inspector. In August 1995, he moved to the D.C. Cook Nuclear Power Station near Bridgman,

Michigan, where he worked as a Senior Resident Inspector until assuming his new assignment in

Paducah. 

Prior to joining the NRC, Bartlett worked for the Tennessee Valley Authority as a preoperational test engineer at the Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant and as a licensing engineer in

Chattanooga for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Plant. 

Bartlett earned both a bachelorís degree in nuclear engineering and a masterís degree in

engineering management from the University of Missouri in Rolla. Bartlett and his wife Donna live in

the Paducah area.

Bartlett joins Resident Inspector Mary Lynne Thomas at the Paducah plant. They can be

reached at (270) 442-7118.

# # #
Exhibit 32.1
 AMSURG CORP.
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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/ Christopher A. Holden

Christopher A. Holden
President and Chief Executive Officerof the CompanyAugust 5, 2008/s/ Claire M. Gulmi

Claire M. Gulmi

Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officerof the CompanyAugust 5, 2008
soil health

EROSION CONTROL 

ORGANIC MATTER

NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT

CROP ROTATIONS

biodiversity HEDGEROWS & BUFFERS

HABITAT FOR WILDLIFE, POLLINATORS 

AND BENEFICIAL INSECTS

livestock practices 

 PASTURE & GRAZING MANAGEMENT 

DIVERSE PASTURE PLANTINGS

FENCING, WALKWAYS

WATERING FACILITIES

USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service provides 

technical and financial assistance to producers who are 

transitioning from conventional to organic agriculture.

Key areas of conservation assistance that also help meet 

USDA National Organic Program requirements include:

United States

Department of

Agriculture

ASSISTANCE FOR

NRCS PROVIDES FREE ASSISTANCE TO 

ALL AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS. 

TURN OVER TO LEARN MORE.
NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE

TYPES OF ASSISTANCE 

NRCS provides free technical assistance to all agricultural 

producers. Transitioning-to-organic producers are also 

eligible for all NRCS financial assistance programs, though 

the Environmental Quality Incentives Program’s Organic 

Initiative is designed specifically for this purpose. For all 

programs, producers must control or own the land and 

be in compliance with highly erodible land and wetland 

conservation requirements and, in some states, sodsaver 

provisions; additional requirements are unique to each 

program. Learn more at www.nrcs.usda.gov/farmbill.

CONSERVATION ACTIVITY 

PLAN 138

NRCS’ CAP 138 helps transitioning-to-organic producers by 

addressing the natural resource concerns of their operation. 

The CAP must be prepared by a NRCS-certified technical 

service provider (TSP) in order for the producer to receive 

financial and technical assistance from NRCS. 

The Resource Inventory (section one) of the CAP 138, when 

submitted with the Resource Inventory Supplement, contains 

the required components of an Organic System Plan. Current 

National Organic Program regulations do not require the use 

of a specific OSP. The use of the Resource Inventory and the 

Resource Inventory Supplement document for this purpose 

is optional, but producers should check with their organic 

certifier to learn their preference. 

GET STARTED

Producers should visit their local USDA Service 

Center at http://offices.usda.gov to meet with an 

NRCS conservationist, or contact their state office 

to ask for their State organic point of contact 

at www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/

nrcs/main/national/contact/states. 

Contact Us

To receive technical assistance in 

completing CAP 138, producers should 

contact their local NRCS service center, 

at http://offices.usda.gov

To learn more about organics, visit the 

USDA organic website www.usda.gov/

organic, or the NRCS organic website 

www.nrcs.usda.gov/organic

www.nrcs.usda.gov

 @USDA_NRCS

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 03-122 September 24, 2003

NRC APPROVES POWER UPRATE FOR EDWIN HATCH UNITS 1 AND 2

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved a request by the Southern Nuclear

Operating Co. to increase the generating capacity of Units 1 and 2 at the Edwin Hatch nuclear power

facility by 1.5 percent. The NRC staff determined that the licensee could safely increase the power

output of the reactor primarily through increased feedwater flow measurement accuracy.

The power uprate at the plants, located near Baxley, Georgia, increases the generating capacity

for each unit from 2763 to 2804 megawatts thermal, resulting in an output of 935 megawatts electric

for Unit 1 and 950 megawatts electric for Unit 2. The licensee intends to implement the uprate by

November.

NRC previously published a notice about the power uprate application in the Federal Register

providing the public an opportunity to comment or request a hearing. No comments or hearing

requests were received by the NRC.

 The NRC's safety evaluation of the requested power uprate focused on several areas, including

nuclear steam supply systems, instrumentation and control systems, electrical systems, accident

evaluations, radiological consequences, operations, and other technical specification changes.

###