alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 223 (Friday, November 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 70911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29357]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Agency Holding The Meetings: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
    The following notice of scheduled meetings is published pursuant to 
the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-
409, 5 U.S.C. 552b.

Times and Dates: The Commission has scheduled three meetings for the 
following dates:
    December 1 from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
    December 9 from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
    December 16 from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

Place: Three Lafayette Center, 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 
Lobby Level Hearing Room (Room 1000).

Status: Open.

Matters To Be Considered: The Commission has scheduled these meetings 
to consider the issuance of various proposed rules. Agendas for each of 
the scheduled meetings will be made available to the public and posted 
on the Commission's Web site at http:[sol][sol]www.cftc.gov at least 
seven (7) days prior to the meeting. In the event that the times or 
dates of the meetings change, an announcement of the change, along with 
the new time and place of the meeting will be posted on the 
Commission's Web site.

Additional Information: Meeting Cancellation.
    The Commission has canceled the meeting scheduled for November 30, 
2010.

Contact Person For More Information: David A. Stawick, Secretary of the 
Commission, 202-418-5071.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-29357 Filed 11-17-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
#### § 29.1073 Type 14.

That type of flue-cured tobacco commonly known as Southern Flue-cured, produced principally in the southern section of Georgia, in northern Florida, and to some extent in Alabama.

[42 FR 21092, Apr. 25, 1977. Redesignated at 47 FR 51721, Nov. 17, 1982, 48 FR 29671, June 28, 1983, 49 FR 16756, Apr. 20, 1984, and 51 FR 25027, July 10, 1986]
§ 245.3 Eligibility standards and criteria. ( a ) Each State agency, or FNSRO where applicable, shall by July 1 of each year announce family-size income standards to be used by local educational agencies, as defined in § 245.2, under the jurisdiction of such State agency, or FNSRO where applicable, in making eligibility determinations for free or reduced price meals and for free milk. Such family size income standards for free and reduced price meals and for free milk shall be in accordance with Income Eligibility Guidelines published by the Department by notice in the Federal Register.
( b ) Each participating local educational agency and all participating schools under its jurisdiction must adhere to the eligibility criteria specified in this part. Local educational agencies must include these eligibility criteria in their policy statement as required under § 245.10 and it must be publicly announced in accordance with the provisions of § 245.5. Additionally, each State agency, or FNSRO where applicable, must require that local educational agencies accept as income eligible for free meals and free milk, children who are categorically eligible for those benefits based on documentation of eligibility, as specified in § 245.6 (b).
( c ) Each School Food Authority shall serve free and reduced price meals or free milk in the respective programs to children eligible under its eligibility criteria. When a child is not a member of a family (as defined in § 245.2), the child shall be considered a family of one. In any school which participates in more than one of the child nutrition programs, eligibility shall be applied uniformly so that eligible children receive the same benefits in each program. If a child transfers from one school to another school under the jurisdiction of the same School Food Authority, his eligibility for free or reduced price meals or for free milk, if previously established, shall be transferred to, and honored by, the receiving school if it participates in the National School Lunch Program, School Breakfast Program, Special Milk Program and the School Food Authority has elected to provide free milk, or is a commodity-only school.
(Sec. 8, Pub. L. 95-627, 92 Stat. 3623 (42 U.S.C. 1758); sec. 5, Pub. L. 95-627, 92 Stat. 3619 (42 U.S.C. 1772); 42 U.S.C. 1785, 1766, 1772, 1773(e), sec. 203, Pub. L. 96-499, 94 Stat. 2599; secs. 807 and 808, Pub. L. 97-35, 95 Stat. 521-535, 42 U.S.C. 1772, 1784, 1760; sec. 803, Pub. L. 97-35, 95 Stat. 521-535 (42 U.S.C. 1758))
[Amdt. 8, 40 FR 57207, Dec. 8, 1975; 40 FR 58281, Dec. 16, 1975, as amended by Amdt. 10, 41 FR 28783, July 13, 1976; Amdt. 13, 44 FR 33049, June 8, 1979; 47 FR 31852, July 23, 1982; 72 FR 63793, Nov. 13, 2007; 76 FR 22800, Apr. 25, 2011]
TTM Waste Water Treatment Systems

Each TTM printed circuit board manufacturing facility has an on-site waste water 

treatment (WWT) system for metals removal from both rinse waters and spent baths. 

These treatment systems are the traditional pH adjustment using sodium hydroxide to a 

nominal pH 8-9 range, acceptable for discharge under permit pursuant to the local 

pretreatment program to the municipal POTW (Publicly Owned Treatment Works). In 

addition to pH adjustment, a chelate breaking reagent such as DTC (sodium dimethyl 

dithiocarbamate) or polysulfide is used to precipitate the chelated copper in the 

tetraamine copper dichloride (TACD) and other chelated copper sources. 

Precipitated copper and other precipitated metals are classified as a F006 listed 

waste, and are then removed via traditional filter press for beneficial recycling of the 

metals contained in the WWT sludge. Treated waste water is monitored in strict 

accordance with the POTW and monitoring results are reported on a monthly or 

quarterly basis as required by each permit.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 1:88-cr-01007-MP-GRJ-3

RUFUS C. ROCHELL, 

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on defendant’s Second Motion for Reconsideration. 

(Doc. 1472). Defendant requests the court to reconsider its October 2, 2012 order denying

defendant’s motion to reconsider the Court’s September 1, 2012 order denying motion for

sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). However, defendant has simultaneously

filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. (See doc.

1473). Despite defendant’s instructions to “hold [the notice of appeal] in abeyance pending a

ruling on his enclosed second motion for reconsideration,” (doc 1473) the Court lacks

jurisdiction to reconsider these issues.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

Defendant’s second motion for reconsideration (doc. 1472) is DENIED for lack of

jurisdiction.

DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of October, 2012

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Andre Lucas, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme *828Court, Queens County, rendered March 21, 1978, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial ordered. Defendant’s position at trial was that at the very time the robbery was alleged to have been committed in the jewelry store, he was taking a reading and mathematics examination at a manpower training center some distance away. The disinterested test examiner testified to that effect, and a handwriting expert identified defendant’s signature on the test answer sheets. In short, defendant strongly contested his identification by interposing an alibi. The trial court’s instructions to the jury on alibi were, however, deficient in at least two ways. First, the words "reasonable doubt” were used in close proximity several times and a confusing distinction was drawn. Although no sentence was incorrect in itself, the jury may well have been confused as to whether the defendant was required to prove the truth of the alibi beyond a reasonable doubt. The possibility of such confusion means the instructions did not meet the critical test: "Whether the jury, hearing the whole charge, would gather from its language the correct rules which should be applied in arriving at decision” *(People v Russell,*266 NY 147, 153). Secondly, the trial court also instructed the jurors that alibi evidence had to be "most carefully scrutinized.” Words of similar import were not used with respect to any other evidence. The instruction was, therefore, plainly prejudicial. As was stated in *People v Cuvilje*(66 AD2d 761, 762), it is doubtful whether it is appropriate to "introduce the concept of 'most careful scrutiny’ for the first and only time in the charge with regard to the alibi defense” (cf. *People v Fludd,*68 AD2d 409). In light of our holding above, we do not pass on the question of whether the court adequately explained the application of the law to the facts (CPL 300.10, subd 2). We have examined defendant’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Damiani, J. P., Titone, Mangano and Gulotta, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Raymond Kavanaugh, Appellant.

Judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered November 2, 1966 on resentence, affirmed, (cf. *Matter of Bretti*v. *Eastman,*16 A D 2d 1027; *People ex rel. Jackson*v. *Weaver,*279 App. Div. 88.) Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Rabin, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.
Literature Review Summary

Chemical Name: Atrazine PC Code: 080803 Purpose of Review (DP Barcode or Litigation): Review for inclusion in the atrazine risk assessment Date of Review: 3/21/16 Summary Syngenta submitted the following list of studies desc ribing the isolation, culturing and testing for atrazine toxicity on the algae Oophila sp., an algae that forms a symbiotic relationship with some salamander species (MRIDs 

### 49639109, 49639110, 4953 5803, 49535801, 49639104 ) . The reviewer read the following study reports provided to the ag ency and considered their science and reported results: Baxter, L.; Brain, R.; Rodriguez-Gil, J.; et al. (2014) Atrazine: Response of the Green Alga Oophila sp., a Salamander Endosymbiont, to a PSII-Inhib itor under Laboratory Conditions. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 33(8):1858-1864. MRID 49535803 Hanson, M.; Rodriquez-Gil, J.; Baxter, L.; et al. (2014) Isolation, Identifica tion, and Optimization of Culturing Conditions of the Alga Oophila sp ., a Salamander Symbiont, for its Use in Toxicity Testing under Laboratory Conditions: Final Re port. Project Number: ATZ2013B, TK0186283. Unpublished study prepared by Univers ity of Guelph. 30p., MRID 49639109 Hanson, M.; Baxter, L.; Rodriquez-Gil, J.; et al. (2014) Characterization of the Response of the Alga Oophila sp ., a Salamander Symbiont, to Atrazine Under Laboratory Conditions: Final Report. Project Number: ATZ2013A, TK0186283. Unpublishe d study prepared by University of Guelph. 52p., MRID 49639110 Hanson, M.; Baxter, L.; Solomon, K. (2015) The Response of the Salamander Ambystoma maculatum and its Egg-Capsule Endosymbiont (t he alga Oophila sp.) to the Photosystem II Inhibitor Atrazine Under Laboratory Condition s: Final Report. Project Number: ATZ2014, TK0224041. Unpublished study prepared by University of Guelph. 103pp. MRID 49639104 Rodriguez-Gil, J.; Baxter, L.; McConkey, B.; et al. (2014) Atrazine: Optimization of Culturing Conditions for Toxicity Testing with the Alga Oophila sp. (Chlorophyceae), An Amphibian Endosymbiont. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 33(11):2566-2575. MRID 49535801

Reviewer Conclusions: These studies are relevant to the potential effects due to atrazine environmental exposures and were submitted to address the identific ation of these effects as a potent ial risk concern in the 2012 SAP Problem Formulation for Atrazine (Oliver et al . 2010). A brief review of the study results indicate that the direct effects on the salamander eggs or algae do not result in more sensitive endpoints and thuswould not contribute new data for refinement of current amphibian or non-vascular plant endpoints used in the risk assessment. Theref ore these studies were not fully re viewed for inclusion in the risk assessment. If, at a later time, these data are to be utilized for regulatory decision making, then a complete review of the studies should be conducted at that time. Primary Reviewer: Frank T. Farruggia, Ph.D. Biologist ERB3

Digitally signed by FRANK FARRUGGIA DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=USEPA, ou=Staff, cn=FRANK FARRUGGIA, dnQualifier=0000048865 Date: 2016.04.29 09:59:24 -04'00'
**EXHIBIT 31.1****Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934**I, Mark R. Holden, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of American Barge Line Company;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:          (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurescontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;          (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and          (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over the financialreporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):          (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and          (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.                        /s/ Mark R. Holden   Mark R. Holden   President and Chief Executive Officer   Date:August 14, 2006
65
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 The undersigned, John M. Fluke, Jr., the Interim Principal
Executive Officer of CellCyte Genetics Corporation, hereby certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q of CellCyte Genetics Corporation, for the quarterly period ended March 31,
2010, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of CellCyte Genetics
Corporation. Date: May
20, 2010. /s/
John M. Fluke, Jr.___John M.
Fluke, Jr.Interim Principal Executive
Officer __________   Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 The undersigned, Randy A. Lieber, the Principal Accounting Officer
of CellCyte Genetics Corporation, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
 Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of CellCyte
Genetics Corporation, for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition
and results of operations of CellCyte Genetics Corporation. Date: May
20, 2010. /s/
Randy A. Lieber___Randy A.
LieberPrincipal Accounting Officer __________
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7511

DOMINIQUE HERMAN ADAMS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BRYAN WATSON, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District 

Judge. (7:10-cv-00383-sgw-mfu)

Submitted: February 28, 2011 Decided: March 9, 2011

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dominique Herman Adams, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Dominique Herman Adams seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254

(West Supp. 2010) motion. The order is not appealable unless a 

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record 

and conclude that Adams has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We deny Adams’ motion for bail pending appeal and 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials
3

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. 

DISMISSED
IIB 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2291 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 15, 2014 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 450 Lexington Avenue in New York, New 

York, as the ‘‘Vincent R. Sombrotto Post Office’’. 

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


tjames on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 2291 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. VINCENT R. SOMBROTTO POST OFFICE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 450 Lexington Avenue in New 

4 York, New York, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘Vincent R. Sombrotto Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Vincent R. Sombrotto 

10 Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 14, 2014. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


tjames on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32








CERTIFICATIONS 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 report of Ridgewood Energy P Fund, LLC (the “Fund”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Fund hereby certifies, 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 Fund.





RIDGEWOOD ENERGY P FUND, LLCDated:
July 30, 2009
By:
/s/

ROBERT E. SWANSONName:

Robert E. SwansonTitle:

Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)Dated:
July 30, 2009
By:
/s/

KATHLEEN P. MCSHERRYName:

Kathleen P. McSherryTitle:

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)





A signed original of this written statement or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to Ridgewood Energy P Fund, LLC and will be retained by Ridgewood Energy P Fund, LLC and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1


Certification Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(18 U.S.C. Section 1350)


In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Noble Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2015 (the “Report”), I, David L. Stover, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify that to my knowledge:


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

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

Date:August 3, 2015/s/ David L. StoverDavid L. StoverChief Executive Officer
#### § 1782.11 Refinancing requirements.

If at any time it appears to the Government that the borrower is able to refinance the amount of the indebtedness then outstanding, in whole or in part, by obtaining a loan for such purposes from responsible cooperative or private credit sources, at reasonable rates and terms, the borrower will, upon request of the Government, apply for and accept such loan in sufficient amount to repay the Government and will take all such actions as may be required in connection with such loan.