alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 15.2**

 

August 3, 2004 

 

The Premcor Refining Group Inc. 

1700 East Putnam Avenue, Suite 400

Old Greenwich, CT 06870 

 

We have made a review, in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited interim financial information ofThe Premcor Refining Group Inc. and subsidiaries for the periods ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, as indicated in our report dated August 3, 2004; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information. 

 

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, is incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-111240 on Form S-3. 

 

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statementprepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act. 

 

*Deloitte & Touche LLP*

Stamford, Connecticut
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-7822

DONALD HARDING,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

DEAN R. WALKER, Superintendent,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief

District Judge. (CA-00-140-5-1-MU)

Submitted: June 21, 2001 Decided: June 27, 2001

Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Donald Harding, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Wallace-Smith, Assistant

Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Donald Harding seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West

1994 & Supp. 2000). 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 Harding v. Walker, No. CA-00-

140-5-1-MU (W.D.N.C. Dec. 6, 2000). We also deny Harding’s motion

to compel preparation of a trial transcript. 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
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Family Unification Program      

# Family Unification Program

Eligibility: Youth aged 18-21 who have aged out of foster care	Focus: Housing

The Family Unification Program provides Housing Choice Vouchers to communities to help assist in the transition of youth out of foster care. The Public Housing Authority administers the vouchers and the child welfare agency provides supportive services to youth. Vouchers are used to provide rental assistance to youth aged 18 to 21 who transition from foster care or who leave foster care at age 16 or older. The voucher subsidizes the rent of eligible youth for up to eighteen months.

http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/hcv/family
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6910

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JOHNEY FREEMAN, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CR-88-76; CA-97-409-2) Submitted: August 26, 2004 Decided: September 3, 2004 Before WIDENER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Johney Freeman, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Joseph Seidel, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).PER CURIAM: Johney Freeman seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion filed in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) action. The court dismissed the action as successive. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363, 368-69 (4th Cir. 2004) (holding that appeal from the denial of a Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion in a habeas action requires a certificate of appealablity). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Freeman has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability. To the extent Freeman’s notice of appeal and informal brief could be construed as a motion for authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, we deny such authorization. United States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 124 S. Ct. 496 (2003). We dispense with oral argument because the- 3 - facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Learn More About Positive Youth Development      

# Learn More About Positive Youth Development

Learn more about Positive Youth Development with this resource by RHY. Positive Youth Development (PYD) 101 Online is a series of short courses intended to introduce PYD to new youth work professionals, volunteers, and advocates.

https://www.rhyttac.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=495%3Apyd-101-online-courses&catid=27%3Arhy-resources&Itemid=125
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

34 36 38 40 42 

### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 06/19 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 19 Jun 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.44 N 77.04 WMeters AGL
#### § 1209.5 Department.

*Department* means the United States Department of Agriculture.
J~~jED STqT~S 

A '2 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

o ~ Q WASHINGTON, D.C . 20460 

F $ ~o 

rqC PRO 

NOV O U W 

I 2009 

The Honorable Janice Brewer 

Governor of Arizona 

1700 West Washington Street 

Phoenix, Arizona 94105 

Dear Governor Brewer: 

THE ADMINISTRATOR 

Thank you for your comments on U.S. EPA's Advanced Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (ANPR) on Assessment of Anticipated Visibility Improvements at 

Surrounding Class I Areas and Cost Effectiveness of Best Available Retrofit Technology 

(BART) for Four Corners Power Plant (FCPP) and Navajo Generating Station (NGS), 

published on August 28, 2009 . We will place your comments into the official EPA 

docket, and will give your comments serious consideration as we move through the 

BART determination process . 

EPA Region 9 is responsible for meeting the requirements of the Regional Haze 

Rule and reducing visibility-impairing pollutants from the power plants within the 

Navajo Nation that are affecting multiple national parks and wilderness areas, including 

the Grand Canyon in Arizona. In making our future BART determination, we must 

consider five factors: the costs of compliance (i .e . cost effectiveness), energy and non-air 

quality impacts of compliance, existing pollution control equipment, the remaining useful 

life of the source, and the degree of visibility improvement. 

The ANPR presents a comparison of the technical analyses for the cost 

effectiveness and visibility improvement submitted by the Arizona Public Service (APS) 

and Salt River Project (SRP) for their respective power plants on the Navajo Nation, and 

EPA's own analysis . While EPA agreed with much of the information provided by the 

utilities, there were some areas of disagreement. In the ANPR, EPA presents its own 

technical analysis and explains the areas of disagreement. The ANPR requests comment 

on all the technical analyses provided for the two factors. 

After we receive and review all the comments on the ANPR, EPA Region 9 will 

prepare a proposed rulemaking that will address all five factors and present and explain 

our BART determination. We will have a lengthy public comment period and hold 

public hearings given the interest in and importance of the proposal . We also assure you 

that we will consult with tribes throughout the rulemaking process giving ample 

opportunity for all affected tribes to present their views on EPA's actions . Once we have 

completed the proposal process, we will respond to all comments received when making 

a final BART determination . 

Internet Address (URL) 9 http //www.epa .gov 

Recycled/Recyclable 0 Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper 
Again, thank you for sharing your comments and concerns. If you have further 

questions or concerns please contact me, or your staff may call Sarah Hospodor-Pallone, 

Deputy Associate Administrator for Intergovernmental Relations, at 202-564-7178. 

Sincerely,
#### Rose W. Lynn, as Administratrix of the Estate of Lours Lynn, Deceased, Appellant, v. City of New York, Defendant, and Jerome L. Jacoby, Respondent.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered November 17, 1965, reversed, on the law, and new trial granted as against defendant Jacoby, with costs to abide the event. No questions of fact have been considered. Plaintiff’s proof established a prima facie ease requiring submission to the jury. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document





































 



 
 

  Exhibit 10.50    
    


 
    ADDENDUM TO ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AGREEMENT    
    


        This Addendum (the "Addendum") is entered into effective as of January 1, 2013, by and between NORTH CAROLINA RADIATION THERAPY
MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC., a North Carolina limited liability company ("MANAGEMENT SERVICES") and RADIATION THERAPY ASSOCIATES OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, P.A., a North Carolina professional
corporation (the "PA"). This Addendum amends Section 3.1 of the Administrative Services Agreement dated January 1, 2002 between the parties (the "Agreement") to adjust the monthly
Service Fee payable at the rate of $600.00 per external beam treatment billed as paid in 2012 to a monthly Service Fee payable at the rate of $530.00 per external beam treatment billed (currently CPT
codes 77372, 77373, 77401 - 77416, 77418 and 77781-77784) and replaces the Addendum of that same Section dated January 1, 2012. The parties acknowledge
that Management Services neither provides direct marketing services currently under the Agreement nor does this Amendment provide for Management Services to provide direct marketing services. 


        From
and after the date hereof, Section 3.1 shall read as follows: 



        3.1.    Service Fee.    For the services to be provided hereunder by MANAGEMENT SERVICES, the PC shall pay to
MANAGEMENT SERVICES a monthly Service Fee at the rate of $530.00 per external beam treatment billed (currently CPT codes 77372, 77373, 77401 - 77416, 77418 and
77781-77784). The parties agree that the Service Fee represents the fair market value of the services provided by MANAGEMENT SERVICES hereunder and that the parties shall meet annually to
reevaluate the value of services provided by MANAGEMENT SERVICES and shall establish the fair market value thereof for purposes of this Section 3.1. 



 






					
	Accepted:	 	NORTH CAROLINA RADIATION THERAPY MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.
	

 	
 	
By:	
 	
/s/ BRYAN J. CAREY






  Bryan J. Carey
 Vice President
	
 Accepted:	
 	
RADIATION THERAPY ASSOCIATES OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, P.A.
	

 	
 	
By:	
 	
/s/ DANIEL E. DOSORETZ, M.D.






  Daniel E. Dosoretz, M.D.
 Vice President




 

 








QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.50


ADDENDUM TO ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AGREEMENT
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Guidance on Voluntary use of Race to Achieve Diversity and Avoid Racial Isolation in Elementary and Secondary Schools      

# Guidance on Voluntary use of Race to Achieve Diversity and Avoid Racial Isolation in Elementary and Secondary Schools

The United States Department of Education (ED) and the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) collectively issued this guidance to explain how, within existing law, elementary and secondary schools can voluntarily consider race to achieve diversity and avoid racial isolation.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/guidance-ese-201111.html
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification of the 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 of Warner Music Group Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period endedMarch 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Edgar Bronfman, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

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

Dated: May 10,2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                APR-2-2000
<CASH>                                      16,300,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                              192,000,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 5,200,000
<INVENTORY>                                111,100,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           347,900,000
<PP&E>                                     596,800,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             143,300,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,498,300,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      357,500,000
<BONDS>                                    347,800,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    16,600,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 487,400,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             1,498,300,000
<SALES>                                    239,100,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           239,100,000
<CGS>                                      196,900,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              239,700,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               100,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,600,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (6,100,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (3,800,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,300,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              1,500,000
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,800,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.22)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.b



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 Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Myron L. Caldwell, Chief Financial Officer of Duke
Energy Ohio, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, 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 result of operations of Duke Energy Ohio, Inc.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                         
|---------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    MYRON L.
CALDWELL                                 
|Myron L. CaldwellChief Financial OfficerNovember 17, 2006
#### § 1001.32 Other reports.

In addition to the reports required pursuant to §§ 1001.30 and 1001.31, each handler shall report any information the market administrator deems necessary to verify or establish each handler's obligation under the order.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1121 

To prohibit a moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 21, 2023 

Mr. DUNCAN (for himself, Mr. RESCHENTHALER, Mr. PERRY, Mr. ESTES, Mr. 

WEBER of Texas, Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. BIGGS, Mr. NORMAN, Mr. JACKSON of Texas, Mr. CARL, Mr. STAUBER, Mr. KUSTOFF, 

Mr. ARMSTRONG, Mr. WOMACK, Mr. FINSTAD, Mrs. BOEBERT, Mr. 

OGLES, Mr. VALADAO, Mrs. LESKO, Mr. BABIN, Mr. BOST, and Mr. 

BALDERSON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on 

Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To prohibit a moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting American 

5 Energy Production Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROTECTING AMERICAN ENERGY PRODUCTION. 

7 (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con8 gress that States should maintain primacy for the regulaVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:13 Mar 11, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1121.IH H1121

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1121 IH

1 tion of hydraulic fracturing for oil and natural gas produc2 tion on State and private lands. 

3 (b) PROHIBITION ON DECLARATION OF A MORATO4 RIUM ON HYDRAULIC FRACTURING.—Notwithstanding 

5 any other provision of law, the President may not declare 

6 a moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing unless 

7 such moratorium is authorized by an Act of Congress. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS