alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
MEMORANDUM

TO: Record

FROM: Brent Ruminski, ERG

DATE: 10 December 2012

SUBJECT: 2012 International Water Conference Materials

On November 4th through the 8th, EPA attended the 2012 International Water Conference 

in San Antonio, TX. The conference materials in the following table are provided as attachments:
Memorandum

10 December 2012

Page 2 of 3

Attachment 

Number

Presentation 

File Name

Presenter Name and 

Affiliation Presentation Title Abstract

1 IWC 12-21 Avijit Dey, Bechtel Corporation Overview of Produced Water and EOR Water 

Treatment

This presentation provides general information on 

shale gas wastewater quality and treatment of oil 

and gas wastewater.

2 IWC 12-53 Mark Galimberti

VSep – New Logic Research,

State College, PA

Treatment of Flowback – Shale Plays This presentation summarizes pilot test results of a 

treating Marcellus shale gas flowback using 

Nanofiltration called VSep.

3 IWC 12-54 Chuck Kozora & Robert Bealko Field Operation Results for Treatment of Frac 

Water with Aquatech’s MoVap a Mobile 

Industrial Distillation

This presentation summarizes pilot test results of 

treating Marcellus shale gas wastewater using a 

mobile evaporation/condensation treatment unit 

from AquaTech called MoVap.

4 IWC 12-56 James Silva, GE Global 

Research Center

Shale Gas Produced Water Pretreatment for 

Barium and Radium Removal

This presentation investigates the economics of 

shale gas wastewater pretreatment for barium and 

radium removal prior to evaporation/condensation 

treatment.

5 IWC 12-69 Timothy S. Keizer, An Ecolab 

Company

Opportunities for Treatment and Reuse of Acid 

Mine Drainage and Produced Water in Oil and 

Gas Shale

This presentation summarizes bench test results of 

treating Marcellus shale gas produced water using 

Nanofiltration.

6 IWC 12-72 Timothy Keister, ProChemTech 

International, Inc.

Sequential Precipitation - Fractional

Crystallization Treatment of Marcellus Shale 

Flowback and Production Wastewaters

This presentation investigates the economics of 

treating Marcellus shale gas wastewater chemical 

precipitation followed by fractional crystallization.
Memorandum

10 December 2012

Page 3 of 3

ATTACHMENTS
FY 2022 AGENCY FINANCIAL REPORT 157 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OTHER INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)

he Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, as amended, requires agencies to make 

regular and consistent inflationary adjustments of civil monetary penalties to maintain their deterrent effect. To 

improve compliance with the act, and in response to multiple audits and recommendations, agencies should report 

annually in the Other Information section the most recent inflationary adjustments to civil monetary penalties to ensure 

penalty adjustments are both timely and accurate.

Location for Penalty Update Details:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/04/20/2022-08222/adjustment-of-civil-monetary-penalties-for-inflation

Table 15

Penalty Authority Date of Previous 

Adjustment

Date of Current 

Adjustment

Current Penalty 

Level

Failure to provide information for cost of higher education 20 USC 

1015(c)(5) 02-03-21 04-20-22 $ 42,163

Failure to provide information regarding teacherpreparation programs20 USC 

1022d(a)(3) 02-03-21 04-20-22 35,119

Violation of Title IV of the HEA 20 USC 1082(g) 02-03-21 04-20-22 62,689

Violation of Title IV of the HEA 20 USC 

1094(c)(3)(B) 02-03-21 04-20-22 62,689

Failure to disclose information to minor children and parents 20 USC 

1228c(c)(2)(E) 02-03-21 04-20-22 1,850

Improper lobbying for government grants and contracts

31 USC 

1352(c)(1) and 

c(2)(A)

02-03-21 04-20-22 22,021 to 220,213

False claims and statements 31 USC 3802(a)(1) 

and (a)(2) 02-03-21 04-20-22 12,537

Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustment for Inflation
#### GROVER A. HESTER v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, N.C. FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, ROBERT S. LOWERY and KEY AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATES

249A97

(Filed 7 November 1997)

Insurance § 571 (NCI4th)— automobile liability insurance— furnished for regular use — exclusion from coverage

An exclusion in a personal automobile liability policy for a vehicle not named in the policy but furnished for the regular use of the named insured precluded liability coverage for the named insured while operating a vehicle provided by his employer for his regular use even though the policy provided operator coverage for the named insured and any family member “for the ' .. use of any auto.”

Am Jur 2d, Automobile Insurance § 244.

When is automobile furnished or available for regular use within “drive other car” coverage of automobile liability policy. 8 ALR4th 387.

Appeal by defendant Allstate Insurance Company pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 126 N.C. App. 173, 484 S.E.2d 457 (1997), affirming summary judgment for plaintiff, entered by Duke, J., on 7 March 1996 in Superior Court, Pitt County. Heard in the Supreme Court 15 October 1997.

*Hardee & Hardee, by G. Wayne Hardee and Charles R. Hardee, for plaintiff-appellee.*

*Ward and Smith, RA., by Donald S. Higley, II, and Ryal W. Tayloe, for defendant-appellant Allstate Insurance Company.*

*Speight, Watson and Brewer, by J. Warner Wells, II, and William C. Brewer, Jr., for defendant-appellee N.C. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company.*

*Wallace, Morris, & Barwick, P.A., by Paul A. Rodgman and Elizabeth A. Heath, for defendant-appellee Lowery.*

*346*Battle, Winslow, Scott & Wiley, P.A., by Samuel S. Woodley, Jr., on behalf of the North Carolina Association of Defense Attorneys, amicus curiae.*

*Bailey & Dixon, L.L.P., by David S. Coats, on behalf of Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, amicus curiae.*

PER CURIAM.

For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion by Judge Cozort, *Hester v. Allstate Ins. Co.,*126 N.C. App. 173, 178, 484 S.E.2d 457, 460 (1997), and upon the authority of *N.C. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Warren,*326 N.C. 444, 390 S.E.2d 138 (1990), and *Whaley v. Great Am. Ins. Co.,*259 N.C. 545, 131 S.E.2d 491 (1963), the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the case remanded to that court for further remand to the trial court for entry of summary judgment for defendant Allstate.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.
MEMORANDUM 

TO: Deputy Secretary

FROM: The Secretary

SUBJECT:Delegation *of*Authority 

I. DELEGATION

Under the authority vested in me by section 412 *of*the Department *of*Education Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. §3472, and section 421A(a) *of*the General Education provisions Act (GEPA) , 20 U.S.C. §1231(a), I hereby delegate to you the authority, in accordance with section 431(g) *of*GEPA, 20 U.S.C. §1232(g), to:

(1) Notify the Congressional ~ommittees specified in section 431(g) *of*GEPA whenever the Department cannot comply with a schedule for promulgating final regulations that previously was submit.ted to those committees, and

(2) Submit a new schedule to those committees. 

Unless otherwise noted in future delegations *of*authority, legislative amendments to the authority delegated herein are included within the scope *of*this delegation. 

II. RESERVATIONS 

None. 

III. REDELEGATION 

This authority may not be redelegated. 

Page 2 -Delegation of Authority 

IV. CERTIFICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE 

This delegation is effective upon certification by the Department's Principal Delegation Control Officer and supersedes any previous delegation of this authority. 

____________/s___________ 

         Lamar Alexander

OGC Clearance and Date:  /s/ R. Wexler, 12/13/1991

Certified Date:  1/3/1992

Departmental Delegations Control Officer: /s/ Wilma J. Hodo

Control Number:  EA/EB/131
<PAGE>
                                                     Exhibit 24


                     PP&L RESOURCES, INC.
              PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY

                       1996 ANNUAL REPORT
            TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                        ON FORM 10-K

                       POWER OF ATTORNEY

	The undersigned directors of PP&L Resources, Inc. and 
Pennsylvania Power & Light Company, both Pennsylvania 
corporations, which are to file with the Securities and Exchange 
Commission, Washington, D.C., under the provisions of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, their 1996 Annual 
Report on Form 10-K, do hereby appoint William F. Hecht, Ronald 
E. Hill and Robert J. Grey their true and lawful attorney, and 
each of them their true and lawful attorney, with power to act 
without the other and with full power of substitution and 
resubstitution, to execute for them and in their names said Form 
10-K Report and any and all amendments thereto, whether said 
amendments add to, delete from or otherwise alter said Form 10-K 
Report, or add or withdraw any exhibits or schedules to be filed 
therewith and any and all instruments in connection therewith.  
The undersigned hereby grant to said attorneys and each of them 
full power and authority to do and perform in the name of and on 
behalf of the undersigned, and in any and all capacities, any act 
and thing whatsoever required or necessary to be done in and 
about the premises, as fully and to all intents and purposes as 
the undersigned might do, hereby ratifying and approving the acts 
of said attorneys and each of them.


	IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have hereunto set 
their hands and seals this 26th day of February, 1997.


/s/ E. Allen Deaver         L.S.  /s/ Stuart Heydt               L.S.
E. Allen Deaver                    Stuart Heydt



/s/ William J. Flood        L.S.  /s/ Clifford L. Jones          L.S.
William J. Flood                   Clifford L. Jones



/s/ Elmer D. Gates          L.S.  /s/ Ruth Leventhal             L.S.
Elmer D. Gates                     Ruth Leventhal



/s/ Derek C. Hathaway       L.S.  /s/ Frank A. Long              L.S.
Derek C. Hathaway                  Frank A. Long



/s/ William F. Hecht        L.S.  /s/ Norman Robertson           L.S.
William F. Hecht                   Norman Robertson
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1

89–011 2001

107th Congress, 1st Session – – – – – – – – – – – – – House Document 107–31

OMB FINAL SEQUESTRATION REPORT FOR

FISCAL YEAR 2001

COMMUNICATION

FROM

THE DIRECTOR, THE OFFICE OF

MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

TRANSMITTING

THE FINAL OMB SEQUESTRATION REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT

AND CONGRESS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

JANUARY 30, 2001.—Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on

the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

(1)

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET,

Washington, DC, January 16, 2001.

Hon. J. DENNIS HASTERT,

Speaker of the House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. SPEAKER: Enclosed please find the OMB Final Sequestration Report to the President and Congress for fiscal year 2001,

as required by the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 (BEA), as

amended.

The report provides current estimates of the status of discretionary spending and the discretionary limits. It also provides the

status of pay-as-you-go legislation. Comparisons with the estimates

provided by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office in his

report are also included.

Based on the estimates contained in this report, neither discretionary nor pay-as-you-go sequesters are required.

Sincerely,

JACOB J. LEW,

Director.

Enclosure.

Identical Letter Sent to The President of the United States and

The Honorable Albert Gore.

(3)

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
#### 1252.239-86 Boundary Protection—Trusted Internet Connections.

As prescribed in 1239.7204(k), insert the clause as follows:

# Boundary Protection—Trusted Internet Connections (NOV 2022)

The Contractor shall ensure that Federal information, other than non-sensitive information, being transmitted from Federal government entities to external entities using cloud services is inspected by Trusted internet Connections (TIC) processes or the Contractor shall route all external connections through a Trusted internet Connection (TIC).

(End of clause)
grade_level,n_sch_total,sch_offered_alg,pct_offered_alg8,29385,17323,0.599_or_10,25773,21733,0.84311_or_12,25773,15397,0.597
```

                                                     EXHIBIT 32.1

                   Section 1350 Certification
                 By Principal Executive Officer

     I,  Daniel  Greenberg, certify that the periodic report,  to
which  this  Statement  is  attached,  fully  complies  with  the
requirements  of  Section 13(a) or 15(d) of  the  Securities  and
Exchange  Act  of  1934,  and the information  contained  in  the
periodic  report  to  which this Statement  is  attached,  fairly
present,  in  all material respects, the financial condition  and
results of operations of the registrant.

     A  signed  original  of  this  written  statement  has  been
provided  to the Company and will be retained by the Company  and
furnished to the SEC upon request.

     Dated September 15, 2004

                              /s/ Daniel Greenberg
                              Daniel Greenberg
                              Chief Executive Officer

                                                     EXHIBIT 32.2

                   Section 1350 Certification
                 By Principal Financial Officer

     I,  Craig  R.  Jones, certify that the periodic  report,  to
which  this  Statement  is  attached,  fully  complies  with  the
requirements  of  Section 13(a) or 15(d) of  the  Securities  and
Exchange  Act  of  1934,  and the information  contained  in  the
periodic  report  to  which this Statement  is  attached,  fairly
present,  in  all material respects, the financial condition  and
results of operations of the registrant.

     A  signed  original  of  this  written  statement  has  been
provided  to the Company and will be retained by the Company  and
furnished to the SEC upon request.

     Dated September 15, 2004

                              /s/ Craig R. Jones
                              Craig R. Jones
                              Chief Financial Officer
```
|                       |   |                                                      |
|----------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|                       |   |                                                      |   |
| Date:      August 14, 2009 |   | /s/ Barry      B. Goldstein                          |   |
|                       |   | Barry      B. Goldstein Chief      Executive Officer |   |
|                       |   |                                                      |   |
|                       |   |                                                      |   |
|                       |   | /s/Victor      Brodsky                                    |   |
|                       |   | Victor      BrodskyChief      Financial Officer           |   |
|                       |   |                                                      |   |
**Organizational Directory of the Forest Service
**Last Update:  October 2003**

**This Directory is maintained by Mary Walters of  the WO Human Resources Management staff, HR Technology Branch.  Please  send all editorial changes to Mary at mcwalters@fs.fed.us**
**

----

[Who Maintains This Directory?]***[Fax   Numbers]     *** [National Forest Listing**] *******[**Mailing   Addresses**] *** [**Disclaimer **] *******[**   How to Send Email **]**
National HeadquartersRegion 1-Northern   Region (Montana, northern Idaho, North Dakota, northwestern South Dakota)   Region 2-Rocky Mountain Region (Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska,   South Dakota, eastern Wyoming) Region 3-Southwestern Region (Arizona, New Mexico) Region 4-Intermountain Region (southern Idaho, Nevada,   Utah, western Wyoming) Region 5-Pacific Southwest Region (California, Hawaii,   Guam, Trust Territories of the Pacific Islands) Region 6-Pacific Northwest Region   (Washington, Oregon) Region 8- Southern Region (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida,   Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Puerto   Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virgin Islands, Virginia) Region 9- Eastern Region(Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,   Maine Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire,   New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia,   Wisconsin) Region 10- Alaska RegionInternational Institute of Tropical ForestryNortheastern Area State And Private ForestryForest Products LaboratoryNorth Central Research StationNortheastern Research StationPacific Northwest Research stationPacific Southwest Research   StationRocky Mountain Research StationSouthern Research Station
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6526

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LEROY ANTHONY THOMAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CR-98- 111-HNM, CA-00-3317-HNM) Submitted: June 13, 2002 Decided: June 19, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leroy Anthony Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Clayton White, James Clarke Howard, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Leroy Anthony Thomas seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for production of a certified copy of the jury instructions in relation to his previously adjudicated motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001). Thomas’ § 2255 motion has been finally decided, and he is accordingly not entitled to a transcript of the jury instructions at this juncture. See 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (1994). Thus, we conclude the district court’s denial of Thomas’ motion is proper. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
EXHIBIT
32.1





SECTION
906 SARBANES OXLEY CERTIFICATION





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SS.1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of New Century Companies, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Duquette,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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.





April
      15, 2010
            /s/
      David DuquetteName:
            David
      DuquetteTitle:
            Chief
      Executive Officer andChief
      Financial Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906 has been provided to Company and will be retained by Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### 1513.170 Competition exceptions and justification for sole source simplified acquisition procedures.
(November 30, 1964)

#### Morris Abrams, Appellant, v. Gertrude B. Forman et al., Respondents. Louis Elkies, Appellant, v. Gertrude B. Forman et al., Respondents.

In two actions by different plaintiffs against the same defendants, to rescind for fraudulent misrepresentations, the sale of a portion of a certain interest in an oil and gas lease, and to recover the purchase price thereof, the respective plaintiffs appeal from the separate judgments of the Supreme. Court, Nassau County, each entered July 11, 1963 after a joint nonjury trial, upon the court’s written decision and opinion, dismissing the complaints. Judgments reversed on the law and the facts, with one bill of costs to the plaintiffs jointly, and actions remitted to the trial court: (a) for the purpose of making and entering an appropriate judgment in each action in favor of the respective plaintiffs as demanded in their respective complaints, with costs to each plaintiff; and (b) for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. Findings of fact contained or implicit in the decision and opinion of the court below, insofar as they may be inconsistent herewith, are reversed and new findings are made as indicated herein. Plaintiff Abrams paid $18,000 for the purchase of his interest and plaintiff Elkies paid $21,000 for his interest. The sales were effectuated by the defendant Aberson on behalf of the defendant Gertrude B. Forman and her husband Irving G. Forman (the latter being now deceased, the defendant *825executors representing his estate). On the evidence presented, we find that the statement in the written memorandum dated October 18, 1954, which defendant Aberson gave .to the plaintiffs, contained a false and material representation. It stated that a certain leading engineering company had appraised the oil reserve in the subject land at 13,500,000 barrels, whereas in fact the appraisal showed only a little more than 3,500,000 barrels. The engineer who made the appraisal testified that in 1954 the average price of oil from this site was $3.03 a barrel. We also find that Aberson acted as agent for Mr. and Mrs. Forman; that the plaintiffs relied on the misrepresentation; and consequently that they are entitled to rescission and restitution. The fact that the Formans themselves were innocent of the misrepresentation constitutes no defense for them, since they received the fruits and product of the transaction *(Harriss*v. *Tams,*258 N. Y. 229, 235; *Krumm*v. *Beach,*96 N. Y. 398, 404-405). Although Aberson did not receive the purchase moneys for himself, he was the wrongdoer and as such he may not escape liability for rep airmen t of the purchase moneys. It was not necessary for plaintiffs to establish that the misrepresentation was the sole inducing cause of their entering into the transaction. It was enough that it was an essential cause *(State Street Trust Co.*v. *Ernst,*278 N. Y. 104, 122; *Ochs*v. *Woods,*221 N. Y. 335; *Deyo*v. *Hudson,*225 N. Y. 602, 615; *Strong*v. *Strong,*102 N. Y. 69). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.