alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
OSWER/OSRTI Washington, DC 20460


### ATIONAL RIORITIES IST 

## N P L (NPL) ***Final Site *** September 2010 

### BLACK RIVER PCB S Jefferson County , New York

 **Site Location :**  The Black River PCBs site is located in northern New York State, east of Watertown , NY

.

 **Site History:** The Black River PCBs site c onsists of PCB

- contaminated sediment that was at least in part the result of wastewater discharge from the Carthage/West Carthage Water Pollution Control Facility ( i.e., the sewage treatment plant [STP])

. Historical information indicates that tanneries, p aper mills, and other industries have operated along the Black River in the Villages of Carthage and West Carthage since the 1890s. Two active paper mills, one inactive paper mill, a machine shop, the Carthage/West Carthage STP, and a hydroelectric power plant are currently located along the Black River in the Villages of Carthage and West Carthage.
 **Site Contamination/Contaminants:** The source under consideration consists of PCB

- contaminated wastewater discharge from the Carthage/West Carthage STP. The STP treats industrial and municipal wastewaters from the surrounding area and discharges its effluent to the Black River

. The haza rdous substances affecting the effluent and downstream sediments are PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) . Sampling and analysis by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) in 1998 showed the presence of PCBs in wastewater at the Carthage/West Carthage STP . A naly tical results indicated PCB s in both paper mill and municipal wastewaters

.
 **Potential Impacts on Surrounding Community/Environment :**  E ffluent samples collected by NYSDEC in 1997 and 1999, and the sediment sample s collected by EPA in June 2009, docum ent PCB contamination of the Black River fishery

.  **Response Activities (to date):** In June 2009 , EPA completed extensive sediment sampling and confirmed the presence of PCBs downstream of the past and present paper mills and the STP

.
 **Need for NPL Listing:** The S tate of New York referred th e site to EPA because the PCB contamination warrants furthe r investigation

. E PA received a letter of support for placing this site on the NPL from the s tate

.

[The description of the site (release) is based on information availabl e at the time the site was evaluated with the HRS. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination.]
For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, incl uding general information regarding the effects of exposure to these substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs ca n be found on the Internet at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq. html or by telephone at 1

- 888

- 42

- ATSDR or 1

- 888

- 422

- 8737.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1861 

To stop motorcycle checkpoint funding, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2013 

Mr. SENSENBRENNER (for himself, Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina, Mr. RYAN

of Wisconsin, Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan, Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois, Mr. 

HULTGREN, Mr. JONES, Mr. DUFFY, Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkansas, and Mr. 

TERRY) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To stop motorcycle checkpoint funding, and for other 

purposes. 

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 ‘‘Stop Motorcycle 

5 Checkpoint Funding Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. GRANT RESTRICTION. 

7 The Secretary of Transportation may not provide a 

8 grant or any funds to a State, county, town, or township, 

9 Indian tribe, municipal or other local government to be 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1861 IH

1 used for any program to check helmet usage or create 

2 checkpoints for an operator of motorcycle or passenger on 

3 a motorcycle. 

4 SEC. 3. MOTORCYCLE SAFETY. 

5 Section 153 of title 23, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) in the section heading by striking ‘‘and 

8 motorcycle helmets’’; 

9 (2) in subsection (a) by striking ‘‘such fiscal 

10 year—’’ and everything that follows through ‘‘(2) a 

11 law’’ and inserting ‘‘such fiscal year a law’’; 

12 (3) in subsection (b) by striking ‘‘State laws’’ 

13 each place it appears and inserting ‘‘a State law’’; 

14 and 

15 (4) in subsection (f) by amending paragraphs 

16 (2) and (3) to read as follows: 

17 ‘‘(2) SECOND-YEAR GRANTS.—A State is eligi18 ble for a grant under this section in a fiscal year 

19 succeeding the first fiscal year in which a State re20 ceives a grant under this section only if the State in 

21 the preceding fiscal year had in effect at all times 

22 a State law described in subsection (a) and achieved 

23 a rate of compliance with such law of not less than 

24 50 percent. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1861 IH

1 ‘‘(3) THIRD-YEAR GRANTS.—A State is eligible 

2 for a grant under this section in a fiscal year suc3 ceeding the second fiscal year in which a State re4 ceives a grant under this section only if the State in 

5 the preceding fiscal year had in effect at all times 

6 a State law described in subsection (a) and achieved 

7 a rate of compliance with such law of not less than 

8 70 percent.’’. 

9 SEC. 4. HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS. 

10 Section 402(a)(2)(A) of title 23, United States Code, 

11 is amended by striking clause (iv) and inserting the fol12 lowing: 

13 ‘‘(iv) to prevent accidents in order to 

14 reduce injuries and deaths resulting from 

15 accidents involving motor vehicles and mo16 torcycles;’’. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
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-AK

RICHARD KEITH WILLIAMS,

Defendant.

________________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before Court on Doc. 1198, Motion for Extension of Time to File

Response, filed by the Government. In the motion, the Government requests an additional thirty

days in which to respond to Defendant Williams’ motion for sentence reduction. The

Government’s motion is granted, and the Government shall file its response on or before

November 30, 2007.

DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of October, 2007

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:88-cr-01007-MW-GRJ Document 1199 Filed 10/25/07 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)

I, Randolph Gress,
certify that:

1. the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 (the Report), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Innophos, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided Innophos, Inc. and will be retained by Innophos, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to
update the foregoing certification except as required by law.

Date: May 14, 2007



/s/ RANDOLPH GRESSRandolph GressChief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to the requirements of 18
U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as a part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2209 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2209

 To establish a chain of command for Army National Military Cemeteries.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 2013

 Mr. Wittman introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
   Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on 
 Veterans' Affairs, 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 establish a chain of command for Army National Military Cemeteries.

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

SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF CHAIN OF COMMAND FOR ARMY NATIONAL MILITARY 
              CEMETERIES.

    (a) Military Chain of Command Required.--The Secretary of the Army 
shall establish a chain of command for the Army National Military 
Cemeteries, to include a military commander of the Army National 
Military Cemeteries to replace the current civilian director upon the 
termination of the tenure of the director.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 4724(a)(1) of title 10, United 
States Code, is amended by striking ``who shall meet'' and inserting 
``who is a commissioned officer and meets''.
                                 <all>
```
2005-1930.

#### Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Bailey.

This cause is pending before the court on the report of the Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law. On February 8, 2006, respondent filed a motion for Supreme Court of Ohio to take judicial notice. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by this court that the motion is denied.
#### The State ex rel. Araps, Appellant, *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio, Appellee.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Araps v. Indus. Comm.*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 114.]

(No. 97-829

Submitted July 15, 1998

Decided September 16, 1998.)

*115
      *Shapiro, Kendis & Associates Co., L.P.A.,*and *Rachel B. Jaffy,*for appellant.

*Betty D. Montgomery,*Attorney General, and *Cecille Caluya Harris,*Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals.

Moyer, C.J., Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

Douglas and Resnick, JJ., dissent.

F.E. Sweeney, J., dissents.

Alice Robie Resnick, J.,

dissenting. I would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and order relief consistent with *State ex rel. Gay v. Mihm*(1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 315, 626 N.E.2d 666.

Douglas, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:88-cr-01007-MP-AK-2

WILLIE BUD REED, JR,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 1411, Motion to Adopt Co-Defendant Rochell’s

Old Law Rule 35(a) by Willie Bud Reed, Jr. Defendant’s motion fails to adequately explain the

relief that is sought. Accordingly, defendant’s motion, Doc. 1411, is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of August, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:88-cr-01007-MW-GRJ Document 1413 Filed 08/29/11 Page 1 of 1
# C_2022036DE.01006201.xml

| 24.1.2022 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 36/62 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2022

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 36/62

---

Berichtigung des Einnahmen- und Ausgabenplans der Exekutivagentur Verbraucher, Gesundheit, Landwirtschaft und Lebensmittel für das Haushaltsjahr 2021

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 315 vom 6. August 2021
  )

(2022/C 36/13)

Im Inhalt und auf Seite 1:

Anstatt:

| „2021/C 315/01 — | Einnahmen- und Ausgabenplan der Exekutivagentur Verbraucher, Gesundheit, Landwirtschaft und Lebensmittel für das Haushaltsjahr 2021“ |
| --- | --- |

„2021/C 315/01 —

muss es heißen:

| „2021/C 315/01 — | Einnahmen- und Ausgabenplan der Europäischen Exekutivagentur für Gesundheit und Digitales für das Haushaltsjahr 2021“. |
| --- | --- |

„2021/C 315/01 —

---
#### Diane Elkan et al., Plaintiffs, v Simon Arredondo et al., Defendants. Luby Volkswagen, Inc., Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v Volkswagenwerk A. G., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant, and Klippan G. M. B. H. Hamburg, Third-Party Defendant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered September 12, 1979, reversed, on the law, and the motion of third-party defendant-appellant Volkswagenwerk A. G. to dismiss the third-party complaint of defendant third-party plaintiff Luby Volkswagen, Inc., against that third-party defendant-appellant granted, with costs. Plaintiffs husband and wife Elkan were injured when their Volkswagen auto was in collision with another, driven by defendant Arredondo, against whom they instituted suit. Claiming that failure of the seat belt system had contributed to their injuries, they joined as defendants Luby Volkswagen, Inc., seller of the car, and Volkswagen of America, Inc., distributor. Luby, as third-party plaintiff, in turn, sued the vehicle’s manufacturer, Volkswagenwerk A. G., and Klippan G. M. B. H., manufacturer of the belt, claiming that eventually liability would be fastened upon these third-party defendant manufacturers. After discovery had taken place, Volkswagenwerk moved for summary judgment dismissing Luby’s third-party complaint. Calling the movant’s proof ''inconclusive” as to negligence or strict products liability, Special Term denied the motion. The evidence revealed by the depositions points clearly to complete absence of liability on the part of the car’s maker. Mr. Elkan stated that he had bought the 1971 *756vehicle in 1975 from Luby; that its interior was in poor shape; that there were no seat belts then; that the mechanism of a door was defective; that Luby fixed the door and installed seat belts before Elkan took the car. Luby’s internal repair orders verified that it had made the repair to the door and installed the belts. Thus, it makes no difference that the deposition of another witness is to the effect that 1971 Volkswagens were imported complete with seat belts: Luby’s intervening act of installation of new belts clears the manufacturer of any suspicion of a contributory defect on its part. The motion should have been granted on this rather conclusive proof, supplied actually by the party it defeats. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Birns, Sandler, Markewich and Carro, JJ.
#### § 27.89 Expenses; inspection; sampling.

Expense of inspection and sampling, the preparation of the samples and the delivery of such samples in accordance with § 27.24, shall be borne by the party requesting the classification of the cotton involved. When a review of classification or a Micronaire determination is requested and samples of the cotton involved are not in possession of a Marketing Services Office, the expense of inspection, sampling, preparation of samples, and delivery of the samples to the Marketing Services Office shall be borne by the party requesting the service.

[48 FR 49213, Oct. 25, 1983]
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification of CFO 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 on Form 10-Q of KapStone Paper and Packaging Corporation for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Andrea K. Tarbox, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of KapStone Paper and Packaging Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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, as amended; and

 

(2)                                  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of KapStone Paper and Packaging Corporation.

 
| Dated:   May 2, 2011 |   |   |                                       |
|---------------------------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|                      |   |   |                                       |
|                      |   | By:    | /s/ Andrea K. Tarbox                       |
|                      |   |   | Andrea K. Tarbox                           |
|                      |   |   | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
#### § 29.9262 Issuance of certificates.

A “Tobacco Classification Certificate” may be issued upon request of an applicant for nonquota tobacco certified in accordance with § 29.9261. The Tobacco Classification Certificate will be supplied by the inspection office.
Order filed November 6, 2012

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 12

- 00892

- CV

____________ HARSADBHAI AND DHARMISHTHA PATEL , Appellants

V.
HARRIS COUNTY APPRAI SAL DISTRICT AND THE APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD OF HARRIS COUN TY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, Appellee s

On Appeal from the 125th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010

- 68741



### O R D E R The notice of appeal in this case was filed September 24, 2012. To date, the filing fee of $175.00 has not been paid. No eviden ce that appellant s have established indigence
has been filed. See Tex. R. App . P

. 20.1. Therefore, the court issues the following order.
Appellant s are ordered to pay the filing fee in the amount of $175.00 to the Clerk
of this court on or before Novemb er 21, 2012. See Tex. R. App . P. 5. If appellant s fail to timely pay the filing fee in accordance with this order, the appeal will be dismissed.

PER CURIAM
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 1:91-cr-01032-MP-AK

JOHN COLLIER WIMS,

Defendant.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 778, the Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge, recommending that Mr. Wims' § 2255 motion be denied. Previously, Mr.

Wims was given the chance to make Apprendi arguments to the Eleventh Circuit, but the

Eleventh Circuit, applying a plain error test, held that his sentence should not be vacated. Mr.

Wims now argues that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to argue constructive

amendment of the indictment when he was sentenced for drug quantities that were not charged in

the indictment. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that although counsel did not use the

term "constructive amendment" she clearly communicated the issue to the panel, using the very

cases defendant now relies upon. Accordingly, she was not ineffective in this way.

Appellate counsel also raised the issue of whether Mr. Wims was improperly being held

responsible for a large single conspiracy when there really were many smaller conspiracies most

of which did not involve Mr. Wims. Since that argument was made, the Court agrees that the

issue was raised and rejected by the Eleventh Circuit and cannot be the basis of an

ineffectiveness claim. 

Finally, the bulk of Mr. Wims' written objections to the Report and Recommendation is

Case 1:91-cr-01032-MW-GRJ Document 781 Filed 01/04/06 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 1:91-cr-01032-MP-AK

that Booker and Blakely should apply retroactively to cases on collateral attack. However, this

argument has been expressly rejected by the Eleventh Circuit in Varela v. United States, 400

F.3d 864 (11th Cir. 2005)("Therefore, as the Supreme Court concluded in Schriro, we conclude

that Booker's constitutional rule falls squarely under the category of new rules of criminal

procedure that do not apply retroactively to § 2255 cases on collateral review."). 

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted and

incorporated herein.

2. This action is DISMISSED, and the clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 4th day of January, 2006

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:91-cr-01032-MW-GRJ Document 781 Filed 01/04/06 Page 2 of 2
#### § 28.55 Issuance of memoranda and certificates.

As soon as practicable after the classification of cotton has been completed by a Classing Office, there shall be issued a cotton class memorandum or certificate of the appropriate kind showing the results of such classification. Upon request from an applicant, classification results may be issued in preliminary form on record sheets.

[52 FR 30882, Aug. 18, 1987]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                      1,107,100
<SECURITIES>                                3,499,300
<RECEIVABLES>                                 179,600
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            4,786,000
<PP&E>                                     18,058,500
<DEPRECIATION>                              4,177,200
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             18,680,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         795,900
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                 17,807,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               18,680,000
<SALES>                                             0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            2,528,900
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 663,800
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              102,700
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             56,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             1,277,800
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         1,277,800
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                1,277,800
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    2.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    2.00
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.4
  REVOLVING CREDIT SUPPLEMENT
 THIS
SUPPLEMENT FARM CREDIT SERVICES OF AMERICA, PCA ABE FAIRMONT, LLC, Fairmont, Nebraska
 SECTION 1 . The Revolving Credit Facility.
 SECTION 2 Purpose.
 SECTION 3. Term.
 SECTION 4. Interest.
 (A) One-Month LIBOR Index Rate.




---



##### 



-2- 
  (B) Quoted
Rate.
 (C) LIBOR.




---



##### 



-3- 
  SECTION 5. Promissory Note.
 SECTION 6. Security.
 SECTION 7. Commitment Fee.
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
 FARM CREDIT SERVICES OF AMERICA, PCA
    
    
    
    ABE FAIRMONT, LLCBy: ADVANCED BIOENERGY, LLCits sole memberBy:
    
    /s/ Kathryn Frahm
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Richard PetersonTitle:
    
    VP Credit
    
    
    
    Title:
    
    CEO/CFONT 4-28-11
#### Andrew Vogel, an Infant, by His Mother and Natural Guardian, Marilyn Vogel, et al., Respondents, v Jewish Hospital and Medical Center of Brooklyn, Defendant, and Arthur Ruby et al., Appellants.

Order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 9, 1979, affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements (see *Anker v Brodnitz,*98 Mise 2d 148, affd 73 AD2d 589). Mangano, J. P., Gulotta, Cohalan and Gibbons, JJ., concur.