alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Electronic Docket Index for

[EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0621]

Revisions to Implementation Plans, State of California, 

Imperial County Air Pollution Control District

New Source Review Program

I. SIP Submittal Documents

I-A SIP submittal letter from CARB, Rule 204, dated May 26, 2000

I-B SIP submittal letter from CARB, Rule 206, dated February 10, 2014

I-C SIP submittal letter from CARB, Rule 207, dated January 21, 2014

I-D Rule 204 – Applications, adopted September 14, 1999 

I-E Rule 206 – Processing of Applications, adopted October 22, 2013

I-F Rule 207 – New and Modified Stationary Source Review, adopted October 22, 

2013

I-G Draft Staff Report, Rules 207, 206 and 101, dated October 22, 2013

I-H Staff Report, Rule 204, dated August 30, 1999

I-I Rule 206, adopted October 22, 2013 – Strikeout Copy

I-J Rule 207, adopted October 22, 2013 – Strikeout Copy

II. Federal Register Notices1

II-A 37 FR 10842 (May 31, 1972) SIP approval of Rule 103 – Exemptions

II-B 45 FR 74480 (11-10-80) SIP Approval of Rules 207 and 209

II-C 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) Title I General Preamble

II-D 72 FR 9 (January 3, 2007) SIP Approval of Rule 206

II-E 73 FR 8209 (February 13, 2008) Final - Imperial County Ozone nonattainment 

II-F 76 FR 26615 (May 9, 2011) Approval of Rule 202 – Exemptions 

II-G 77 FR 73316 (December 10, 2012) ICAPCD Approved PSD program

II-H 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012)

II-I 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016) PM2.5 SIP Plan Requirements

II-J 81 FR 26697 (May 4, 2016) Ozone Bump-up to Moderate

III.Other Relevant Documents

III-A Submittal Completeness Letter for Rule 207, March 7, 2014 

III-B Submittal Completeness Letter for Rule 206, April 9, 2014

III-C Technical Support Document for ICAPCD Rules 204, 206 & 207, dated 

November 28, 2016

III-D Rule 207 – Standards for Permit to Construct, adopted November 10, 1980

 

1 All Federal Register notices listed after December 31, 1993 are available on-line at: 

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=FR
III-E Rule 206 – Processing of Applications, adopted January 3, 2007 

III-F PM2.5 ARB Annual Report on Fine Particulate Monitoring Program Jan. 2015

III-G ICAPCD 2013 Implementation Plan for 2006 24-hour PM2.5 Nonattainment Area

III-H ICAPCD PM2.5 SIP submittal Staff Report December 2, 2014

III-I ARB Staff Report 8-hr Ozone SIP Emission Inventory Submittal May 23, 2014

IV.EPA Rulemaking Documents

IV-A Federal Register Notice of Proposed Rulemaking dated December 19, 2016 (81

FR 91895)
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED (Pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)**

 

HaroldG. Giomi certifies as follows:

 

1.               I am the Chief Executive Officer of The BankHoldings.

 

2.               The Form 10-Q of The Bank Holdings forthe Quarter Ended March 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the informationcontained in the report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of The BankHoldings.

 

 
| Date:  | May 6,  2008                           |   | /s/ Harold G. Giomi |
|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------|---------------------|
|   | THE BANK HOLDINGS                           |
|   | Harold G. Giomi                             |
|   | Chairman & Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
### §1717. Assignment of benefits; execution, levy, etc., against benefits

The right of any person to any benefit under subchapter I shall not be transferable or assignable at law or in equity except to the United States, and none of the moneys paid or payable (except money paid hereunder as reimbursement for funeral expenses or as reimbursement with respect to payments of workmen's compensation or in the nature of workmen's compensation benefits), or rights existing under said subchapter, shall be subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal process or to the operation of any bankruptcy or insolvency law.

(Dec. 2, 1942, ch. 668, title II, §207, 56 Stat. 1035.)
### §18441. National and international orbital debris mitigation

#### (a) Findings

Congress makes the following findings:

(1) A national and international effort is needed to develop a coordinated approach towards the prevention, negation, and removal of orbital debris.

(2) The guidelines issued by the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee provide a consensus understanding of 10 national space agencies (including NASA) plus the European Space Agency on the necessity of mitigating the creation of space debris and measures for doing so. NASA's participation on the Committee should be robust, and NASA should urge other space-relevant Federal agencies (including the Departments of State, Defense, and Commerce) to work to ensure that their counterpart agencies in foreign governments are aware of these national commitments and the importance in which the United States holds them.

(3) Key components of such an approach should include—

(A) a process for debris prevention through agreements regarding spacecraft design, operations, and end-of-life disposition plans to minimize orbiting vehicles or elements which are nonfunctional;

(B) the development of a robust Space Situational Awareness network that can identify potential collisions and provide sufficient trajectory and orbital data to enable avoidance maneuvers;

(C) the interagency development of an overall strategy for review by the President, with recommendations for proposed international collaborative efforts to address this challenge.

#### (b) International discussion

#### (1) In general

The Administrator shall, in consultation with such other departments and agencies of the Federal Government as the Administrator considers appropriate, continue and strengthen discussions with the representatives of other space-faring countries, within the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee and elsewhere, to deal with this orbital debris mitigation.

#### (2) Interagency effort

For purposes of carrying out this subsection, the Director of OSTP, in coordination with the Director of the National Security Council and using the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology coordinating mechanism, shall develop an overall strategy for review by the President, with recommendations for proposed international collaborative efforts to address this challenge.

(Pub. L. 111–267, title XII, §1202, Oct. 11, 2010, 124 Stat. 2841.)
### §16413. National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies

The Secretary shall support the ongoing activities of and explore opportunities for expansion of the National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies to carry out research, education, and training activities to facilitate the improvement of energy efficiency, indoor environmental quality, and security of industrial, commercial, residential, and public buildings.

(Pub. L. 109–58, title XI, §1104, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 939.)
§ 18.03 Delegation of authority. ( a ) The Commission hereby delegates, until the Commission orders otherwise, the authority to make special calls on traders for information as set forth in §§ 18.00 and 18.05 to the Director of the Division of Enforcement, or such other employee or employees as the Director may designate.
( b ) The Commission hereby delegates, until the Commission orders otherwise, the authority to make special calls for information as set forth in § 18.04 to the Director of the Division of Data to be exercised by the Director, in consultation with the Director of the Division of Market Oversight, or such other employee or employees as the Directors each may designate.
( c ) The Directors of the Division of Enforcement and Division of Data may submit to the Commission for its consideration any matter which has been delegated in this section.
( d ) Nothing in this section prohibits the Commission, at its election, from exercising the authority delegated in this section.
[82 FR 28768, June 26, 2017, as amended at 89 FR 71810, Sept. 4, 2024]
in this court in compliance with NRAP 21. Because we lack jurisdiction, 

we 

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.' 

P‘arraguirre Cherry 

cc: Hon. Jerome Polaha, District Judge 

Law Offices of Curtis B. Coulter 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Washoe County District Attorney 

Washoe District Court Clerk 

"The Honorable James H. Hardesty, Justice, voluntarily recused 

himself from participating in this appeal. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) I947A 

2
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Jesse Dimas Alvarado v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-14-00857-CR

Trial court case number: 1410607

Trial court: 185th District Court of Harris County

This appeal was set to be submitted on June 9, 2015. The day before submission, on June 8, 

2015, the State filed its third motion for extension of time to file its brief. The State has 

previously received two extensions to file its brief. In this third request, the State requests until 

July 10, 2015 to file its brief. 

The State’s motion is denied, in part, and granted, in part. The State’s brief is due on or before 

June 22, 2015. No further extensions will be granted. 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Laura Carter Higley

Acting individually 

Date: June 11, 2015
EXHIBIT 32.1


Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer


of CNA Financial Corporation


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350


(As adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)


The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of CNA Financial Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge:


|  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|• | the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter endedJune 30, 2011filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

|  |                                                                                                                                                     
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|• | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: August 2, 2011


/s/ Thomas F. MotamedThomas F. MotamedChief Executive Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### Lisa Tanner, Appellant, v Peggy Florian, Formerly Known as Peggy Southwell, Respondent.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[821 NYS2d 509]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Edward D. Carni, J.), entered June 17, 2005 in a personal injury action. The order denied plaintiff’s motion to set aside the jury verdict and for a directed verdict on the issues of negligence and proximate cause.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed without costs *(see Smith v Catholic Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn & Queens,*155 AD2d 435 [1989]; *see also*CPLR 5501 [a] [1]). Present — Gorski, J.P., Martoche, Smith and Pine, JJ.
PGI 234.005 General requirements.

PGI 234.005-1 Competition.

Parent topic: PGI Part 234 - MAJOR SYSTEMACQUISITION
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A (the "Report") under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 of Narrowstep Inc. (the "Company"), I, David
McCourt, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. Section 78m(a) or 78o(d); and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


       Dated: June 20, 2007                /s/ David McCourt
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           David McCourt
                                           Chief Executive Officer
### §1787. Repealed. Pub. L. 104–193, title VII, §730, Aug. 22, 1996, 110 Stat. 2305

Section, Pub. L. 89–642, §18, as added Pub. L. 94–105, §23, Oct. 7, 1975, 89 Stat. 528, authorized appropriations and directed Secretary to make cash grants for nutrition education.
### §14040. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 14040 was editorially reclassified as section 12410 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
§ 201.55 Further proceedings. ( a ) Ordinarily, the determination of an award will be made on the basis of the written record. However, on request of either the applicant or counsel for the Office or Division of the Commission, or on his or her own initiative, the administrative law judge may order further proceedings, such as an informal conference, oral argument, additional written submissions or, as to issues other than substantial justification (such as the applicant's eligibility or substantiation of fees and expenses) an evidentiary hearing. The administrative law judge may order all proceedings that are otherwise available under § 201.221 and § 201.222(a). Such further proceedings shall be held only when necessary for full and fair resolution of the issues arising from the application, and shall be conducted as promptly as possible. Whether or not the Commission's position was substantially justified shall be determined on the basis of the administrative record, as a whole, which is made in the adversary adjudication for which fees and other expenses are sought.
( b ) A request for further proceedings under this section shall specifically identify the information sought or the disputed issues and shall explain why the additional proceedings are necessary to resolve the issues.
[47 FR 610, Jan. 6, 1982, as amended at 54 FR 53052, Dec. 27, 1989; 70 FR 72569, Dec. 5, 2005]
<PAGE>

                  Exhibit 23.3 - Consent of Murtha Cullina LLP


                               MURTHA CULLINA LLP
                                   CITYPLACE I
                                185 ASYLUM STREET
                        HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06103-3469
                            TELEPHONE (860) 240-6000
                            FACSIMILE (860) 240-6150




Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Judiciary Plaza
Washington, D.C.  20549


         Re:  Coastal Caribbean Oils & Minerals Ltd.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

We hereby consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Legal Matters"
in the prospectus  constituting a part of the registration statement on Form S-1
relating to 12,016,907 shares of common stock of Coastal Caribbean Oils &
Minerals, Ltd., a Bermuda corporation.


                                    Very truly yours,

                                    MURTHA CULLINA LLP



                                    By: /s/ Timothy L. Largay
                                            Timothy L. Largay
                                            A Partner


Hartford, Connecticut
September 6, 2000
### §18322. Space Launch System as follow-on launch vehicle to the Space Shuttle

#### (a) United States policy

It is the policy of the United States that NASA develop a Space Launch System as a follow-on to the Space Shuttle that can access cis-lunar space and the regions of space beyond low-Earth orbit in order to enable the United States to participate in global efforts to access and develop this increasingly strategic region.

#### (b) Initiation of development

#### (1) In general

The Administrator shall, as soon as practicable after October 11, 2010, initiate development of a Space Launch System meeting the minimum capabilities requirements specified in subsection (c).

#### (2) Modification of current contracts

In order to limit NASA's termination liability costs and support critical capabilities, the Administrator shall, to the extent practicable, extend or modify existing vehicle development and associated contracts necessary to meet the requirements in paragraph (1), including contracts for ground testing of solid rocket motors, if necessary, to ensure their availability for development of the Space Launch System.

#### (c) Minimum capability requirements

(1) In general.—The Space Launch System developed pursuant to subsection (b) shall be designed to have, at a minimum, the following:

(A) The initial capability of the core elements, without an upper stage, of lifting payloads weighing between 70 tons and 100 tons into low-Earth orbit in preparation for transit for missions beyond low-Earth orbit.

(B) The capability to carry an integrated upper Earth departure stage bringing the total lift capability of the Space Launch System to 130 tons or more.

(C) The capability to lift the multipurpose crew vehicle.

(D) The capability to serve as a backup system for supplying and supporting ISS cargo requirements or crew delivery requirements not otherwise met by available commercial or partner-supplied vehicles.

(2) Flexibility.—The Space Launch System shall be designed from inception as a fully-integrated vehicle capable of carrying a total payload of 130 tons or more into low-Earth orbit in preparation for transit for missions beyond low-Earth orbit. The Space Launch System shall, to the extent practicable, incorporate capabilities for evolutionary growth to carry heavier payloads. Developmental work and testing of the core elements and the upper stage should proceed in parallel subject to appropriations. Priority should be placed on the core elements with the goal for operational capability for the core elements not later than December 31, 2016.

(3) Transition needs.—The Administrator shall ensure critical skills and capabilities are retained, modified, and developed, as appropriate, in areas related to solid and liquid engines, large diameter fuel tanks, rocket propulsion, and other ground test capabilities for an effective transition to the follow-on Space Launch System.

(4) The capacity for efficient and timely evolution, including the incorporation of new technologies, competition of sub-elements, and commercial operations.

(Pub. L. 111–267, title III, §302, Oct. 11, 2010, 124 Stat. 2814.)
###### Editorial Note on Part 240

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 240 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

#### § 240.11d1-2 Exemption from section 11(d)(1) for certain investment company securities held by broker-dealers as collateral in margin accounts.

Any securities issued by a registered open-end investment company or unit investment trust as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940 shall be exempted from the provisions of section 11(d)(1) with respect to any transaction by a person who is a broker and a dealer who, directly or indirectly, extends or maintains or arranges for the extension or maintenance of credit on such security, provided such security has been owned by the person to whom credit would be provided for more than 30 days, or purchased by such person pursuant to a plan for the automatic reinvestment of the dividends of such company or trust.

(Secs. 2, 3, 11, and 23, Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. 78b, 78c, 78k and 78w)

[49 FR 50174, Dec. 27, 1984]
Editorial Note on Part 200
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 76 FR 60371, Sept. 29, 2011.

§ 200.114 Sanctions. ( a ) *Discipline of persons practicing before the Commission.* The Commission may, to the extent not prohibited by law, censure, suspend, or revoke the privilege to practice before it of any person who makes, or solicits the making of, an unauthorized ex parte communication.
( b ) *Adverse action on claim.* Upon receipt of a communication knowingly made or knowingly caused to be made by a party in violation of this subpart, the Commission, administrative law judge, or other employee presiding at the hearing may, to the extent consistent with the interests of justice and the policy of the underlying statutes, require the party to show cause why his claim or interest in the proceeding should not be dismissed, denied, disregarded, or otherwise adversely affected on account of such violation.
( c ) *Discipline of Commission employees.* The Commission may censure, suspend, or dismiss any Commission employee who violates the prohibitions or requirements of this Code.
[28 FR 4447, May 3, 1963, as amended at 42 FR 14691, Mar. 16, 1977]
Craig T. Enoch Direct: (512) 615

- 120 2 cenoch@enochkever.com

September 8, 2015

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk Supreme Court of Texas 201 W. 14th Street, Room 104 P.O. Box 12248 Austin, Texas 78711

Re: No. 15-0403 ; V irginia O. K insel , as Attorney- in -F act for J. F rank K insel ; J. F rank K

insel , J r .; C arole K. E dwards ; and Catherine K. Collins v. J ackson Walker, LLP ; M. K

eith Branyon; Jane O. L indsey , Individually and as Co-T rustee of the L esey B. K insel Trust; and Robert N. O liver ; In the Supreme Court of Texas.

Dear Mr. Hawthorne:

Petitioners / Cross -Respondents Virginia O. Kinsel, as Attorney

- in

- Fact for J. Frank Kinsel; J. Frank Kinsel, Jr.; Carole K. Edwards; and Catherine K. Collins waive their right to respond to Jane O. Lindsey and Robert N. Oliver ’s Petition for Review at this time, but will respond upon the Court's request.

Sincerely,

/s/ Craig T. Enoch Craig T. Enoch

cc: William L. Kirkman Shelly K. Messerli John H. Cayce, Jr. Marshall M. Searcy, J r. Frank P. Greenhaw IV Matthew D. Stayton FILED 15-0403 9/8/2015 5:12:30 PM tex-6834756 SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE, CLERK
Subpart 5305.1 - DISSEMINATION OF

INFORMATION

Parent topic: Part 5305 - Publicizing Contract Actions

5305.102 Availability of Solicitations.

(a)(5)(iii) See MP5301.601(a)(i).
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 10.4

                              AMENDMENT NO. 2005-1
                                     TO THE
                  RETIREMENT PLAN FOR HOURLY-RATED EMPLOYEES OF
                            ARROW INTERNATIONAL, INC.


        WHEREAS, Arrow International, Inc. (the "Employer") sponsors and
maintains the Retirement Plan for Hourly-Rated Employees of Arrow International,
Inc. (the "Plan"); and

        WHEREAS, the Employer has reserved the right to amend the Plan at any
time pursuant to Section 10.1 of the Plan; and

        WHEREAS, the Employer desires to amend the Plan to comply with the
provisions of section 401(a)(31)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended;

        NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

        1.      Sections 6.3, 7.8(a), 7.8(b), 7.8(d) and H.2(a)(4) of the Plan
are hereby amended by replacing "$5,000" with "$1,000."

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, ARROW INTERNATIONAL, INC. has caused this Amendment
No. 2005-1 to the Plan to be duly executed this ________ day of
___________________________, 2005.


ATTEST:                                 ARROW INTERNATIONAL, INC.



__________________________________      By:_____________________________________