alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES
                SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                      Washington, D.C.  20549


                             FORM 8-K

                          CURRENT REPORT


               Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
                  Securities Exchange Act of 1934


                  Date of Report:  June 14, 2004
         (Date of Earliest Event Reported:  June 14, 2004)




                        EL PASO CGP COMPANY
      (Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)


     Delaware             1-7176             74-1734212
  (State or other    (Commission File     (I.R.S. Employer
  jurisdiction of         Number)       Identification No.)
 incorporation or
   organization)


                         El Paso Building
                       1001 Louisiana Street
                       Houston, Texas 77002
        (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)



 Registrant's telephone number, including area code (713) 420-2600



Item 5.  Other Events and Regulation FD Disclosure
         -----------------------------------------
     On  June  14,  2004, our parent company, El Paso  Corporation,
announced  that  the  Master Settlement Agreement  related  to  the
western  energy  crisis became effective on  June  11,  2004.   The
Master  Settlement Agreement resolves the principal litigation  and
claims  against El Paso Corporation and certain of its subsidiaries
relating to the sale or delivery of natural gas and electricity  in
the  Western  United States.  In July 2004, El Paso will  make  the
first  of  40  semi-annual payments to the settlement parties  that
will  total  approximately $876 million  over  the  length  of  the
obligation.   Our subsidiary, El Paso Production  Oil  &  Gas  USA,
L.P.,  has  pledged approximately 213 billion cubic feet equivalent
of  proved natural gas and oil reserves located in south  Texas  as
collateral  for  these payments.  A copy of this press  release  is
attached as Exhibit 99.A and is incorporated herein by reference.


Item 7.  Financial Statements and Exhibits
         ---------------------------------
         (c)  Exhibits.

              Exhibit
               Number      Description
              -------      -----------
                99.A       Press Release dated June 14, 2004.






                            SIGNATURES

     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934,  the  registrant has duly caused this report to be signed  on
its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.


                              EL PASO CGP COMPANY



                              By:   /s/Jeffrey I. Beason
                                 ----------------------------
                                      Jeffrey I. Beason
                                    Senior Vice President
                                        and Controller
                                (Principal Accounting Officer)


Dated:  June 14, 2004


                           EXHIBIT INDEX

     Exhibit
     Number       Description
     -------      -----------
      99.A        Press Release dated June 14, 2004.
#### § 300.27 Wool products containing superimposed or added fibers.

Where a wool product is made wholly of one fiber or a blend of fibers with the exception of an additional fiber in minor proportion superimposed or added in certain separate and distinct areas or sections for reinforcing or other useful purposes, the product may be designated according to the fiber content of the principal fiber or blend of fibers, with an excepting naming the superimposed or added fiber, giving the percentage thereof in relation to the total fiber weight of the principal fiber or blend of fibers, and indicating the area or section which contains the superimposed or added fiber. An example of this type of fiber content disclosure, as applied to products having reinforcing fibers added to a particular area or section, is as follows:

55% Recycled Wool

45% Rayon

Except 5% Nylon added to toe and heel

[29 FR 6626, May 21, 1964, as amended at 45 FR 44262, July 1, 1980]
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





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Edgewater Foods International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending November 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert Saunders, Chief Executive 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated.





Date:  January 16, 2007



/s/  Robert Saunders

Robert Saunders,

Chief Executive Officer
#### Bertha Rembaugh, as Trustee, etc., Respondent, v. Salim Ghiz and Others, Appellants.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred.
§ 165.14 Procedures applicable to the payment of awards. ( a ) A recipient of a whistleblower award is entitled to payment on the award only to the extent that the monetary sanction upon which the award is based is collected in the Commission judicial or administrative action or in a related action.
( b ) Payment of a whistleblower award for a monetary sanction collected in a Commission action or related action shall be made within a reasonable time following the later of: ( 1 ) The date on which the monetary sanction is collected; or
( 2 ) The completion of the appeals process for all whistleblower award claims arising from: ( i ) The Notice of Covered Action, in the case of any payment of an award for a monetary sanction collected in a covered judicial or administrative action; or
( ii ) The related action, in the case of any payment of an award for a monetary sanction collected in a related action.
( c ) If there are insufficient amounts available in the Fund to pay the entire amount of an award payment within a reasonable period of time from the time for payment specified by paragraph (b) of this section, then subject to the following terms, the balance of the payment shall be paid when amounts become available in the Fund, as follows: ( 1 ) Where multiple whistleblowers are owed payments from the Fund based on awards that do not arise from the same Notice of Covered Action (or related action), priority in making these payments will be determined based upon the date that the Final Order of the Commission is made. If two or more of these Final Orders of the Commission are entered on the same date, then those whistleblowers owed payments will be paid on a pro rata basis until sufficient amounts become available in the Fund to pay their entire payments.
( 2 ) Where multiple whistleblowers are owed payments from the Fund based on awards that arise from the same Notice of Covered Action (or related action), they will share the same payment priority and will be paid on a pro rata basis until sufficient amounts become available in the Fund to pay their entire payments.
### **CHAPTER 148—WINDSTORM IMPACT REDUCTION**

Sec.
15701.
Findings.
15702.
Definitions.
15703.
National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program.
15704.
National Advisory Committee on Windstorm Impact Reduction.
15705.
Savings clause.
15706.
Authorization of appropriations.
15707.
Coordination.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6071

EARL S. COUSINS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL

OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-97-

1075-L)

Submitted: March 23, 1999 Decided: March 31, 1999

Before HAMILTON, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Earl S. Cousins, Appellant Pro Se. Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Earl S. Cousins appeals the district court’s order denying

his § 2254 petition. We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Cousins v. Corcoran, No. CA-97-

1075-L (D. Md. Jan. 5, 1999). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
```

[115th Congress Public Law 340]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 132 STAT. 5038]]

Public Law 115-340
115th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 122 W. Goodwin Street, Pleasanton, Texas, as the ``Pleasanton Veterans 
         Post Office''. <<NOTE: Dec. 21, 2018 -  [H.R. 1210]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PLEASANTON VETERANS POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 122 W. Goodwin Street, Pleasanton, Texas, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Pleasanton Veterans Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Pleasanton 
Veterans Post Office''.

    Approved December 21, 2018.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 1210:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018):
            Nov. 29, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 12, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
5307.470  Statutory Requirements       (a) See MP5301.601(a)(i).     **Parent topic:** Subpart 5307.4 - EQUIPMENT LEASE OR PURCHASE
### §1856d. Funds

(a) Funds available to any agency head for fire protection on installations or in connection with activities under the jurisdiction of such agency may be used to carry out the purposes of this subchapter. All sums received by any agency head for fire protection rendered pursuant to this subchapter shall be covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.

(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), all sums received as reimbursements for costs incurred by any Department of Defense or Department of Agriculture activity for fire protection rendered pursuant to this subchapter shall be credited to the same appropriation or fund from which the expenses were paid or, if the period of availability for obligation for that appropriation has expired, to the appropriation or fund that is currently available to the activity for the same purpose. Amounts so credited shall be subject to the same provisions and restrictions as the appropriation or account to which credited.

(May 27, 1955, ch. 105, §5, 69 Stat. 67; Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title X, §1080, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 335; Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title III, §364(a), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1380; Pub. L. 113–79, title VIII, §8304(f), Feb. 7, 2014, 128 Stat. 924.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2014—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 113–79 inserted "or Department of Agriculture" after "Department of Defense".

2011—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 112–81 amended subsec. (b) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (b) read as follows: "Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), all sums received for any Department of Defense activity for fire protection rendered pursuant to this subchapter shall be credited to the appropriation fund or account from which the expenses were paid. Amounts so credited shall be merged with funds in such appropriation fund or account and shall be available for the same purposes and subject to the same limitations as the funds with which the funds are merged."

2008—Pub. L. 110–181 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a) and added subsec. (b).

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2011 Amendment

Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title III, §364(b), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1380, provided that: "The amendment made by subsection (a) [amending this section] shall apply with respect to reimbursements for expenditures of funds appropriated after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 31, 2011]."
§ 239.63 Form ID, uniform application for access codes to file on EDGAR. Form ID must be filed by registrants, third party filers, or their agents, to request the following access codes to permit filing on EDGAR: ( a ) Central Index Key (CIK)—uniquely identifies each filer, filing agent, and training agent.
( b ) CIK Confirmation Code (CCC)—used in the header of a filing in conjunction with the CIK of the filer to ensure that the filing has been authorized by the filer.
( c ) Password (PW)—allows a filer, filing agent or training agent to log on to the EDGAR system, submit filings, and change its CCC.
( d ) Password Modification Authorization Code (PMAC)—allows a filer, filing agent or training agent to change its Password.
[69 FR 22710, Apr. 26, 2004] Editorial Note
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations affecting Form ID, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov .*
### Part A—AMBER Alert
#### Mrs. C. W. Kennedy, Defendant in Error, v. Great lakes Dredge & Dock Company, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 20,457.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

Shipping, § *7*****—when recovery allowed for the loss of personal effects.*The judment below is affirmed for the reason stated in *Kennedy v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Go.,*No. 20,456, *ante,*p. 585.

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. George J. Cowing, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1914.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed March 8, 1915.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Mrs. C. W. Kennedy against the Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company to recover the value of personal effects lost in the collision of a steamer • and a scow in tow of defendant’s tug.

Plaintiff in this case is the wife of C. W. Kennedy, defendant in error in *Kennedy v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co.*(No. 20,456), *ante,*p. 585, and the collision out of which the two actions arose and the facts involved are the same.

To reverse a judgment for plaintiff for $225, defendant prosecutes this writ of error.

Kremer & Greenfield, for plaintiff in error.

Menz I. Rosenbaum and Maurice Alschuler, for defendant in error.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of the Workmen’s Compensation Board et al., Arising Out of the Death of Cornelius Brosman, Respondents, against R. Jacobs et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

*700Present — Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Bergan and Coon, JJ.
1 

# Memo

To: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-20 10-0799 From: Joseph McDonald CC: Ed Nam, U.S. EPA-OTAQ-ASD Date: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 Re: Nelson, Santini and Barnes 2009 EVS-24 Paper

A hard copy of the following citation: Nelson, P.A., Santini, D.J., Barnes, J. “Factors De termining the Manufacturin g Costs of Lithium-Ion Batteries for PHEVs,” 24th World Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exposition EVS-24, Stavenger, Norway, May 13-16, 2009 (www.evs24.org). is available within EPA’s Docket Center. This document has been copyrighted and is not available in the electronic docket. Parties that wish to view a hard copy of this document can do so at the at the EPA Docket Center: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA/DC, EPA We st, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566- 1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742. Document Abstract: In this study, we developed a model for calculating the costs of lithium-ion batteries supporting electric drive in light duty passenger vehicles (LDVs). The model calculates the annual materials requirements from design criteria for the battery pack including power, capacity, number of cells, and cell chemistry parameters. The costs of capital equipment, plant area and labor for each step in the manufacturing process were estimated for a baseline plant. These costs are adjusted for each battery pack studied by comparing the processing rate pertinent for each step (area to be coated, number of cells to be tested, etc.) with that of the baseline process and applying correction factors. We applied the cost modelling method to batteries with four lithium-ion cell chemistries and for several levels of capacity and power. For quality assurance purposes, electrode coating thicknesses are limited to 100 microns by the model. The result of this restrict ion is that as the capacity of the cell s is increased to achieve longer range under electric power, the electrode area and the cell power are also increased and the power of the entire battery pack is also increased. In simulations of our reference chemistry for 16, 32 and 48 -km PHEVs there is almost no cost increase for increasing the pack power from 40 to 60kW; for PHEVs with 48- and 64 km electric range, there was almost no additional cost for power up to 90 kW. For a set value of pack energy storage, a small number of high capacity cells are much less expensive to manufacture than a large number of low-capacity cells. The useable fraction of the state-of-charge range for a battery system is shown to be an important cost factor. In view of cost similarities, the choice of cell chemistry will probably depend more on proven safety, reliability, and long life rather than on initial cost.
#### Board of the Black River Regulating District, Appellant, v. Adirondack League Club, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: We think the decision in the former action *(Blade Riv. Regulating Dist.*v. *Adirondack League Club,*307 N. Y. 475), requires us to affirm the judgment dismissing the complaint. In that decision the court said (p. 489): *“*The plaintiffs * '* * are effectively barred from maintaining condemnation proceedings.” We are bound by that decision. All concur. (Appeal from a judgment of Jefferson Special Term, dismissing the proceeding to condemn real property belonging to defendant for the purpose of construction and maintenance of the Panther Mountain Reservoir.) Present — McCurn, P. J., Vaughan, Piper, Wheeler and Van Duser, JJ.
## State of N ew York Su p reme Cou rt, A p p ellate Division Third J u dicial Dep artment Decided and Entered: October 30, 2014 1 06019

________________________________ THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DARRELL McCORKLE, Appellant.

________________________________ Calendar Date: September 16, 2014 Before: Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Garry, Egan Jr. and Lynch, JJ.

__________ Matthew C. Hug, Troy, for appellant, and appellant pro se. Robert M. Carney, District Attorney, Schenectady (Gerald A. Dwyer of counsel), for respondent.

__________ Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Drago, J.), rendered March 8, 2013, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted burglary in the second degree. In satisfaction of a pending 11-count indictment against him, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted burglary in the second degree and waived his right to appeal. Defendant was adjudicated a second felony offender and was sentenced, as agreed, to a prison term of 51⁄2 years to be followed by postrelease supervision of five years. He appealed from the judgment of conviction. Defendant also made a pro se motion to vacate the judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10, which County Court denied without a hearing, and this Court declined to permit an appeal therefrom (2014 NY Slip Op 81478[U] [2014]).-2- 106019

Defense counsel now seeks to be relieved of his assignment of representing defendant on the direct appeal, arguing that there are no nonfrivolous issues that can be raised. After reviewing the record, defense counsel's brief and defendant's pro se submission, we agree. Thus, the judgment of conviction is affirmed and defense counsel's application for leave to withdraw is granted (see People v Ball, 8 AD3d 818, 819 [2004]; People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979, 980 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]; see generally People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633 [2001]). Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Garry, Egan Jr. and Lynch, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
§ 229.1301 (Item 1301) General instructions. ( a ) As used in this section, the term *mining operations* includes operations on all mining properties that a registrant: ( 1 ) Owns or in which it has, or it is probable that it will have, a direct or indirect economic interest;
( 2 ) Operates, or it is probable that it will operate, under a lease or other legal agreement that grants the registrant ownership or similar rights that authorize it, as principal, to sell or otherwise dispose of the mineral; or
( 3 ) Has, or it is probable that it will have, an associated royalty or similar right.
( b ) A registrant must provide the disclosure specified in this subpart if its mining operations are material to its business or financial condition.
( c ) When determining whether its mining operations are material, a registrant must: ( 1 ) Consider both quantitative and qualitative factors, assessed in the context of the registrant's overall business and financial condition;
( 2 ) Aggregate mining operations on all of its mining properties, regardless of the stage of the mining property, and size or type of commodity produced, including coal, metalliferous minerals, industrial materials, and mineral brines; and
( 3 ) Include, for each property, as applicable, all related activities from exploration through extraction to the first point of material external sale, including processing, transportation, and warehousing.
( d ) Upon a determination that its mining operations are material, a registrant must provide summary disclosure concerning all of its mining activities, as specified in § 229.1303, as well as individual property disclosure concerning each of its mining properties that is material to its business or financial condition, as specified in § 229.1304. When providing either summary or individual property disclosure, the registrant: ( 1 ) Should provide an appropriate glossary if the disclosure requires the use of technical terms relating to geology, mining or related matters, which cannot readily be found in conventional dictionaries;
( 2 ) Should not include detailed illustrations and technical reports, full feasibility studies or other highly technical data. The registrant shall, however, furnish such reports and other material supplementally to the staff upon request; and
( 3 ) Should use plain English principles, to the extent practicable, such as those provided in §§ 230.421 and 240.13a-20 of this chapter, to enhance the readability of the disclosure for investors.