alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §221. Accounts and records of business; punishment for failure to keep

Every packer, any swine contractor, and any live poultry dealer, stockyard owner, market agency, and dealer shall keep such accounts, records, and memoranda as fully and correctly disclose all transactions involved in his business, including the true ownership of such business by stockholding or otherwise. Whenever the Secretary finds that the accounts, records, and memoranda of any such person do not fully and correctly disclose all transactions involved in his business, the Secretary may prescribe the manner and form in which such accounts, records, and memoranda shall be kept, and thereafter any such person who fails to keep such accounts, records, and memoranda in the manner and form prescribed or approved by the Secretary shall upon conviction be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(Aug. 15, 1921, ch. 64, title IV, §401, 42 Stat. 168; Aug. 15, 1921, ch. 64, title V, §503, as added Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 532, 49 Stat. 649; Pub. L. 100–173, §6, Nov. 23, 1987, 101 Stat. 918; Pub. L. 107–171, title X, §10502(b)(2)(C), May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 510.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2002—Pub. L. 107–171 inserted "any swine contractor, and" after "packer,".

1987—Pub. L. 100–173 substituted ", any live poultry dealer," for "or any live poultry dealer or handler,".

1935—Act Aug. 15, 1921, title V, §503, as added Aug. 14, 1935, inserted "or any live poultry dealer or handler" after "packer" wherever appearing.

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

#### Effective Date of 1987 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–173 effective 90 days after Nov. 23, 1987, see section 12 of Pub. L. 100–173, set out as a note under section 182 of this title.

#### Liens or Security Interests Against Livestock; Interagency Task Force To Recommend Method of Providing Information to Purchasers; Report to Congress

Pub. L. 95–409, §2, Oct. 2, 1978, 92 Stat. 887, required the Secretary of Agriculture to appoint a task force to recommend methods of providing information to purchasers of livestock concerning the existence of a lien or security interest against livestock and to submit a report to Congress not later than Feb. 1, 1979.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         463,238
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,555
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     43,931
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               528,881
<PP&E>                                       5,972,990
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,105,168
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,449,796
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          208,026
<BONDS>                                      1,284,675
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,957,095
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,449,796
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,980,665
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  869,464
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               936,472
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             123,416
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,089,393
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,089,393
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,089,393
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   154.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   154.33


</TABLE>
No. 723.

#### Alfred J. Keppelmann et al., Executors and Trustees, etc. *v.*A. Mitchell Palmer, as Alien Property Custodian.

March 22, 1920.

*Mr. Edward M. Colie*for petitioners.

*Mr. Assistant Attorney General Spettacy*for respondent..

Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Court of Chancery of the State of New Jersey denied.
§ 339.5 Designation procedures. ( a ) The proposing component will prepare a designation request for guidance documents. Designation requests must include the following information: ( 1 ) A summary of the guidance document; and
( 2 ) The component's recommended designation of “not significant,” “significant,” or “economically significant,” as well as a justification for that designation.
( b ) The appropriate DoD or OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer will seek a significance determination from OIRA for guidance documents in the same manner as for rulemakings. OIRA review will occur prior to the publishing of guidance documents, and with sufficient time to allow OIRA to review the designation request and the guidance document to determine if it meets the definition of “significant” or “economically significant” under Executive Order 13891.
( c ) Prior to being published, guidance documents determined to be “significant” or “economically significant” are subject to formal review and interagency coordination by OIRA. The OIRA review, to include interagency coordination, is to be consistent with Executive Order 12866.
( d ) Significant guidance documents (see § 339.7 of this part) must be reviewed and approved by the Department's Regulatory Policy Officer before OIRA formally reviews them.
( e ) Once the OMB/OIRA has cleared a guidance document for publication, the appropriate DoD or OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer will coordinate the guidance document with the Defense Office of Prepublication and Security Review (DOPSR). The FRLO will notify the component of DOPSR's approval and that the guidance document can be approved for Federal Register publication or signed for placement on the central website.
### §1738g. Enterprise for the Americas environmental funds

#### (a) Establishment

An eligible country shall, under the terms of an environmental framework agreement entered into under section 1738f of this title, establish an Environmental Fund to receive payments in local currency pursuant to section 1738f(b)(1) of this title.

#### (b) Investment

Amounts deposited into an Environmental Fund shall be invested until disbursed. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any return on such investment may be retained by the Environmental Fund and need not be deposited to the account of the Commodity Credit Corporation and may be retained without further appropriation by Congress.

(July 10, 1954, ch. 469, title VI, §608, as added Pub. L. 101–624, title XV, §1512, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3660.)
### §509. Repealed. Pub. L. 104–127, title II, §262, Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 973

Section, Pub. L. 98–180, title II, §214, as added Pub. L. 101–624, title XV, §1557, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3699; amended Pub. L. 102–237, title III, §337, Dec. 13, 1991, 105 Stat. 1859, provided for reporting requirements relating to tobacco.
Costs ($/

PORTLAND CEMENT PLANTS THAT ARE SMALL BUS

AUGUST 6, 2010

Rule Plant ID Kiln type

Clinker

Productio

(tpy)

Annualized Control

n Area/Majo

Status

r

NHW/HW WS ACI RTO/WS D

FINAL Phoenix Cement AZ204 PC 1,176,166 area per ISIS NHW 0 1,070,311 0 

PROPOSAL Phoenix Cement AZ204 PC 1,005,308 Area NHW 0 1,050,546 0 

FINAL Armstrong Cement PA101 W 145,505 Area NHW 0 132,410 0 

PA102 W 145,505 Area NHW 0 132,410 0 

PROPOSAL Armstrong Cement PA101 W 157,630 Area NHW 660,367 164,724 0 

PA102 W 157,630 Area NHW 660,367 164,724 0 

FINAL Monarch Cement KS401 PC 432,106 Major per ISIS NHW 1,905,162 393,216 0 

KS402 PC 339,512 Major per ISIS NHW 1,649,425 308,956 0 

PROPOSAL Monarch Cement KS401 PC 313,056 Major NHW 702,355 327,144 0 

KS402 PC 554,462 Major NHW 970,973 579,413 0 

Continental MO301 and MO302 are hazardous waste kilns and not subject to the NESHAP.
Total per

facility

($/yr)

1,225,1311,181,903

574,459

1,999,4904,566,3992,929,194
### §4535. Petition and review; enforcement; investigations

The provisions of sections 4509, 4510, and 4511 of this title shall apply, except when inconsistent with this subchapter, to the Institute, the board, the persons subject to the order issued under section 4533(b) of this title, the jurisdiction of district courts of the United States, and the authority of the Secretary under this subchapter in the same manner as such sections apply with respect to subchapter I.

(Pub. L. 98–180, title I, §134, as added Pub. L. 99–198, title I, §121, Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1371.)
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 10102 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.

LAKEITH DONTRELL OFFORD , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:15

- CR

- 470

- 1

Before JOLLY, O WEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Lakeith Dontrell Offord has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Offord h a s not filed a respo nse. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 22, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 17-10102 Document: 00514358061 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/22/2018No. 17

- 10102

2 issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 17-10102 Document: 00514358061 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/22/2018
http://www.dec.ny.gov/enb/20111228_reg6.html#640580000300379

Applicant: Alcoa Inc 201 Isabella St Pittsburgh, PA 15212 -5858 Facility: Alcoa Massena Operations (West Plant) Park Ave E Massena, NY 13662 Application ID: 6-4058-00003/00379 Permit(s) Applied for: Article 19 Air State Facility Project is Located: St Lawrence County Project Description: The Department has prepared a draft permit and ha s made a tentative determination to issue an Article 19 Air Pollution Control of the Environmental Conservation Law, an Air State Facility Permit, for the facility located at Alcoa Massena Operations West Plan t, Park Avenue East, Massena, NY 13662. The Alcoa West Plant is su bject to the provision s under 6 NYCRR Part 249. The requirements under this regulation seeks to apply Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) to specific facilities on a case-by-case basis in order to reduce the regional haze associated with the emissions of Sulfur dioxide, Oxides of Nitrogen and particulates with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 microns (PM- 10). This permit contains the conditions with the associated emissions limits determined to be BART level for the effected sources for the above pollutants. This permit will be incorporated into Alcoa's Air Title V Facility permit within 18 months. As required under Part 249, each BART determination such as the BART determination discussed in this Notice, will also be submitted to the USEPA for approval as a revision to the SIP. Availability of Application Documents:Filed application documents, and Department draf t permits where applicable, are available for inspection during normal business hours at the a ddress of the contact person. To ensure timely service at the time of inspecti on, it is recommended that an ap pointment be made with the contact person. State Environmental Quality Re view (SEQR) Determination: Project is not subject to SEQR because it is a Type II action. SEQR Lead Agency: None Designated State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) Determination: The proposed activity is not subject to review in accordance with SHPA . The permit type is exempt or the activity is being reviewed in accordance with federal historic preservation regulations. Coastal Management: This project is not located in a Coastal Manage ment area and is not subj ect to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act. Opportunity for Public Comment: Comments on this project must be submitted in writing to the Contact Person no later than Jan 27, 2012

. Contact: Lawrence R Ambeau NYSDEC Region 6 Headquarters State Office Building - 317 Washington St Watertown, NY 13601 (315)785-2245 r6dep@gw.dec.state.ny.us
# agenda

EPA SNAP Meeting
4/14/2014

10a.m.

- 11a.m.

Meeting called by : NAFEM

Attendees : Charlie Souhadra , NAFEM; Annie McCarthy, NAFEM; Mary Dane, Traulsen; Charlie Hon, True; NAFEM

MEMBER TBD; COMPLIANCE? TBD; EPA Staffers: Cindy Newberg; Margaret Sheppard; Drusilla Hufford

Please read : Meeting Materials

Please bring : Be prepared to discuss the timeline and conditions w/ your company; NAFEM staff will bring leave

behinds

10 a.m.

– 10:10 a.m. Introductions

Introduce NAFEM as an organization

Introduce Members

Introduce other Stakeholders in Attendance

Introduce Compliance if in attendance Location TBD

Material/Supplier Discussion

Availability of Refrigerants

New Material/Components Needed

Finding a Supplier

Diversity of components needed for each
product

Price Adjustments

Timeline Discussion

Developing/Finding Components

Changes to Plants

Design Changes Due to Pressure Differences and
Safety Needs

Compliance Timeline

Overlap with Other Regulations

DOE Energy Efficiency Regulations

Issues with Energy Efficiency Regulation Product

# agenda

Requirements and SNAP Regulation

Requirements

[Wrap

- up]

Go ove r leave behinds :

Specifically commercial kitchen layout and
difficulty incorporating new refrigerants with
temperature and space needs

Additional Information: TBD w/ group discussions
### §8320. Expansion of Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service activities

#### (a) In general

The Secretary of Agriculture (referred to in this section as the "Secretary") may utilize existing authorities to give high priority to enhancing and expanding the capacity of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service to conduct activities to—

(1) increase the inspection capacity of the Service at international points of origin;

(2) improve surveillance at ports of entry and customs;

(3) enhance methods of protecting against the introduction of plant and animal disease organisms by terrorists;

(4) develop new and improve existing strategies and technologies for dealing with intentional outbreaks of plant and animal disease arising from acts of terrorism or from unintentional introduction, including—

(A) establishing cooperative agreements among Veterinary Services of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, State animal health commissions and regulatory agencies for livestock and poultry health, and private veterinary practitioners to enhance the preparedness and ability of Veterinary Services and the commissions and agencies to respond to outbreaks of such animal diseases; and

(B) strengthening planning and coordination with State and local agencies, including—

(i) State animal health commissions and regulatory agencies for livestock and poultry health; and

(ii) State agriculture departments; and

(5) otherwise improve the capacity of the Service to protect against the threat of bioterrorism.

#### (b) Automated recordkeeping system

The Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service may implement a central automated recordkeeping system to provide for the reliable tracking of the status of animal and plant shipments, including those shipments on hold at ports of entry and customs. The Secretary shall ensure that such a system shall be fully accessible to or fully integrated with the Food Safety Inspection Service.

#### (c) Authorization of appropriations

There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section, $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, and such sums as may be necessary for each subsequent fiscal year.

(Pub. L. 107–188, title III, §331, June 12, 2002, 116 Stat. 678.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, and not as part of the Animal Health Protection Act which comprises this chapter.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000032379
<NAME> ELIZABETHTOWN WATER COMPANY & SUBSIDIARY

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      630,879
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      7,275
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          50,291
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        31,730
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 720,175
<COMMON>                                        15,741
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      138,724
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             65,374
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 219,839
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           12,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           245,321
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              46,000
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                       30
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 196,985
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  720,175
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       39,204
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                             4,068
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      23,364
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      27,432
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         11,772
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 129
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  11,901
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         4,021
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,880
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        203
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                    7,677
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        13,087
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        3,507
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          16,871
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>All amounts in thousands of dollars.
</FN>


</TABLE>
### §229b. Right to discuss terms of contract

#### (a) Definitions

In this section:

#### (1) Producer

The term "producer" means any person engaged in the raising and caring for livestock or poultry for slaughter.

#### (2) Processor

The term "processor" means any person engaged in the business of obtaining livestock or poultry for the purpose of slaughtering the livestock or poultry.

#### (b) No prohibition of discussion

Notwithstanding a provision in any contract between a producer and a processor for the production of livestock or poultry, or in any marketing agreement between a producer and a processor for the sale of livestock or poultry for a term of 1 year or more, that provides that information contained in the contract is confidential, a party to the contract shall not be prohibited from discussing any terms or details of the contract with—

(1) a Federal or State agency;

(2) a legal adviser to the party;

(3) a lender to the party;

(4) an accountant hired by the party;

(5) an executive or manager of the party;

(6) a landlord of the party; or

(7) a member of the immediate family of the party.

#### (c) Effect on State laws

Subsection (b) does not—

(1) preempt any State law that addresses confidentiality provisions in contracts for the sale or production of livestock or poultry, except any provision of State law that makes lawful a contract provision that prohibits a party from, or limits a party in, engaging in discussion that subsection (b) requires to be permitted; or

(2) deprive any State court of jurisdiction under any such State law.

#### (d) Applicability

This section applies to each contract described in subsection (b) that is entered into, amended, renewed, or extended after May 13, 2002.

(Pub. L. 107–171, title X, §10503, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 510.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, and not as part of the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, which comprises this chapter.
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Stephen F. Smith, Chief Financial Officer of EXCO Resources, Inc.
certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 2 on Form 10-K/A to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of EXCO Resources, Inc.; and
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |                                         
|---------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------
|Date: January 24, 2011 |  | /s/ STEPHEN F. SMITH                    
|                       |  | Stephen F. Smith Chief
Financial Officer
No. 312.

#### John M. Tananevicz *v.*People of the State of Illinois.

Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois.

Motion to dismiss submitted March 8, 1920.

Decided March 15, 1920.

*Per Curiam.*

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of: (1) *Consolidated Turnpike Co.*v. *Norfolk, etc., Ry. Co.,*228 U. S. 326, 334; *St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. Co.*v. *Shepherd,*
      *569240 U. S. 240, 241; *Bilby*v. *Stewart,*246 U. S. 255, 257. (2) *Brolan*v. *United States,*236 U. S. 216, 218; *United Surety Co.*v. *American Fruit Co.,*238 U. S. 140, 142; *Sugarman*v. *United States,*249 U. S. 182, 184. (3) Section 237 of the Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of September 6, 1916, c. 448, § 2, 39 Stat. 726.

*Mr. Emory J. Smith tor*plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Edward J. Brundage*and *Mr. Edward C. Fitch*for defendant in error.