alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: Nizich, Sharon [mailto:Nizich.Sharon@epa.gov]

Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 12:11 PM

To: Susan Miller <SMiller@bia.org>

Cc: Raymond, Gabrielle <graymond@rti.org>; Sroka, Kristin <ksroka@rti.org> ; Holloway,

Thomas C. (Tom) <tcholloway@rti.org>

Subject: RE: Sawdust fired kilns vented to sawdust dryers

Let me discuss with the team. Thanks.

Sharon Nizich

US EPA

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Sector Policies and Programs Division/SPPD

RTP NC 27711

(919) 541 2825

From: Susan Miller [ mailto:SMiller@bia.org ]

Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 11:36 AM

To: Nizich, Sharon

Subject: Sawdust fired kilns vented to sawdust dryers

I had a question from a sawdust

- fired kiln operator about how the MACT would apply

- and I would

like to run it by you to see how you interpret it

- and ask that it is clarified in the final rule.

If a sawdust

- fired kiln operator tests both stacks, do they then combine the two stack resul ts and

demonstrate compliance once? This seems to make the most sense since there is only one brick

throughput to divide the total by to get lb/ton values. Combining them and demonstrating

compliance once also seems to fit the rule language of Table 1 th at speaks to “including all

process streams” as opposed to “each” stream meeting it individually. If you did treat them

individually, the “product” for the sawdust dryer would be the tonnage of sawdust, which does not

seem to meet the intent of the rule

- or the basis for any limits.

We are working on a few things that we will be sending you next week

- some more specific

concerns/questions about the metal and mercury numbers.

Have a great weekend!

sus

Susan J Miller

Vice President, Environment, Health & Safety

Brick Industry Association

311 South Academy Street

Cary, North Carolina 27511919 380

- 2191

smiller@bia.org

When you talk, you are only repeating what you already know; but when you listen, you may learn

something new.

- Dalai Lama
98- 835.

#### State v. Ferguson.

Franklin App. No. 97APA05-674. Reported at 82 Ohio St.3d 1452, 695 N.E.2d 265. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.

Moyer, C.J., Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., dissent.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 244 

To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of a hydroelectric 

project in the State of Wyoming. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2005 

Mr. THOMAS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To extend the deadline for commencement of construction 

of a hydroelectric project in the State of Wyoming. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF TIME FOR THE FEDERAL EN4 ERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION HYDRO5 ELECTRIC PROJECT. 

6 Notwithstanding the time period specified in section 

7 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that would 

8 otherwise apply to the Federal Energy Regulatory Com9 mission project numbered 1651, the Commission may, at 

10 the request of the licensee for the project, and after rea-
2 

•S 244 IS 

1 sonable notice, in accordance with the good faith, due dili2 gence, and public interest requirements of that section and 

3 the Commission’s procedures under that section, extend 

4 the time period during which the licensee is required to 

5 commence the construction of the project for 3 consecutive 

6 2-year periods from the date of the expiration of the exten7 sion originally issued by the Commission. 

Æ
§ 4284.12 Reporting requirements. Grantees must submit the following to USDA: ( a ) A “Financial Status Report” listing expenditures according to agreed upon budget categories, on a semi-annual basis. Reporting periods end as identified in the grant agreement or applicable program attachment. Reports are due 30 days after the reporting period ends. Failure to submit the required reports within the specified time frame is considered cause for suspension or termination of the grant.
( b ) Semi-annual performance reports that compare accomplishments to the objectives stated in the proposal. Identify all tasks completed to date and provide documentation supporting the reported results. If the original schedule provided in the work plan is not being met, the report should discuss the problems or delays that may affect completion of the project. Objectives for the next reporting period should be listed. Compliance with any special condition on the use of award funds should be discussed. Reports are due as provided in paragraph (a) of this section. The supporting documentation for completed tasks include, but are not limited to, feasibility studies, marketing plans, business plans, articles of incorporation and bylaws and an accounting of how working capital funds were spent.
( c ) Final project performance reports, inclusive of supporting documentation. The final performance report is due within 30 days of the completion of the project.
[69 FR 23425, Apr. 29, 2004, as amended at 79 FR 76017, Dec. 19, 2014]
p 0 cf-^ a ^ 2^.-%- (f71^, 

Virgima, EvehA, ML Iroa, Gilbert aad sunoundSag business communities 

403 First Street North 

Virginia, MN 55792 

(218)741-2717 (218)749-4913 Fax 

Promoting business through education and advocacy 

to advance the prosperity of the region 

October 28,2011 

Mr. Dennis DeVaney, Chief 

Essential Air Service Division 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

X-53 Room W86-308 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue Southeast 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Mr. DeVaney, 

On behalf of the Board of Directors of the Laurentian Chamber of Commerce, I am 

strongly advcKsating your consideration to accept the first option for service firom Delta 

Airlines, Inc., which provides for 14 round-trip flights weekly with CRJ-200 aircraft. 

Our chamber represents the business interests of nearly 300 members and conservatively 

some 8000 employees from Hibbing to the west and Ely to the east. 

^3 

r*j ' 

P' 

TT 

cn 

CD 

' ^ r> r;V ? 

fr^i --^-r'n 

:^.~H—-f 

i50 0 

C/ J 

Investors and other personnel with important roles in our developing industries utilize the 

local airport for the convenience of these daily flights Regional sales representatives and 

others executives are utilizing the service for one day business trips to the area. The 

numbers of seats being booked through the airport clearly confirm the viability of 

maintaining weekly flights. 

The hub's proximity of less than thirty minutes to most areas of the Iron Range and the 

Quad cities also affords travelers the opportunity to sightsee and experience the area 

while on business here. Range Regional Airport provides a positive economic impact to 

the entire region; the potential for significant loss of revenues to the areadiat would 

accompany a reduced flight schedule must be recognized. 

Thank you for your time and your thoughtful consideration. 

JimCurrie 

President 

Laurentian Chamber of Commerce
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2416 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to expand the scope of programs 

of education for which accelerated payments of educational assistance 

under the Montgomery GI Bill may be used, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 15, 2006 

Mr. BURNS (for himself and Mr. PRYOR) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to expand the scope 

of programs of education for which accelerated payments 

of educational assistance under the Montgomery GI Bill 

may be used, 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 ‘‘Veterans Employment 

5 and Training Act of 2006’’. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•S 2416 IS

1 SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF EDUCATION PROGRAMS ELIGIBLE 

2 FOR ACCELERATED PAYMENT OF EDU3 CATIONAL ASSISTANCE UNDER THE MONT4 GOMERY GI BILL. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (b) of section 3014A 

6 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking 

7 paragraph (1) and inserting the following new paragraph 

8 (1): 

9 ‘‘(1) enrolled in either— 

10 ‘‘(A) an approved program of education 

11 that leads to employment in a high technology 

12 occupation in a high technology industry (as de13 termined pursuant to regulations prescribed by 

14 the Secretary); or 

15 ‘‘(B) an approved program of education 

16 lasting less than two years that leads to em17 ployment in a sector of the economy, as identi18 fied by the Department of Labor, that— 

19 ‘‘(i) is projected to— 

20 ‘‘(I) experience a substantial in21 crease in the number of jobs; or 

22 ‘‘(II) positively affect the growth 

23 of another sector of the economy; or 

24 ‘‘(ii) consists of existing or emerging 

25 businesses that are being transformed by 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
3 

•S 2416 IS

1 technology and innovation and require new 

2 skills for workers; and’’. 

3 (b) CONFORMING EXPANSION OF PROGRAM OF EDU4 CATION.—Such section is further amended— 

5 (1) by redesignating subsection (g) as sub6 section (h); and 

7 (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the fol8 lowing new subsection (g): 

9 ‘‘(g) For purposes of this section, a program of edu10 cation includes a program of education (as defined in sec11 tion 3002(3) of this title) pursued at a tribally controlled 

12 college or university (as such term is defined in section 

13 2 of the Tribally Controlled College or University Assist14 ance Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 1801).’’. 

15 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

16 (1) HEADING AMENDMENT.—The heading of 

17 such section is amended to read as follows: 

18 ‘‘§ 3014A. Accelerated payment of basic educational 

19 assistance’’. 

20 (2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The item relating 

21 to such section in the table of sections at the begin22 ning of chapter 30 of such title is amended to read 

23 as follows: 

‘‘3014A. Accelerated payment of basic educational assistance.’’. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
#### §§ 4284.963-4284.999 [Reserved]
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 1 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 2 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 3 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 4 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 5 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 6 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 7 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 8 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 9 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 10 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 11 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 12 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 13 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 14 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 15 of 16
Case 5:00-cv-00071-RH Document 1 Filed 03/31/00 Page 16 of 16
3.502-3 Contract clause.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.203-7, Anti-Kickback Procedures, in solicitations

and contracts exceeding $150,000, other than those for commercial products or commercial services

(see part 12).

Parent topic: 3.502 Subcontractor kickbacks.
4.101 Contracting officer’s signature.

Only contracting officers shall sign contracts on behalf of the United States. The contracting

officer’s name and official title shall be typed, stamped, or printed on the contract. The contracting

officer normally signs the contract after it has been signed by the contractor. The contracting officer

shall ensure that the signer(s) have authority to bind the contractor (see specific requirements in

4.102 of this subpart).

Parent topic: Subpart 4.1 - Contract Execution
Editorial Note on Part 3401
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 3401 appear at 76 FR 4806, Jan. 27, 2011.

§ 3401.2 Definitions. As used in this part: ( a ) *Director* means the Director of NIFA and any other officer or employee of the Department of Agriculture to whom the authority involved may be delegated.
( b ) *Department* means the Department of Agriculture.
( c ) *Principal investigator* means a single individual designated by the grantee in the application for funding and approved by the Director who is responsible for the scientific and technical direction of the project.
( d ) *Grantee* means the entity designated in the grant award document as the responsible legal entity to whom a grant is awarded under this part.
( e ) *Research project grant* means the award by the Director of funds to a grantee to assist in meeting the costs of conducting, for the benefit of the public, an identified project which is intended and designed to establish, discover, elucidate, or confirm information or the underlying mechanisms relating to a research program area identified in the annual solicitation of applications.
( f ) *Project* means the particular activity within the scope of one or more of the research program areas identified in the annual solicitation of applications, which is supported by a grant award under this part.
( g ) *Project period* means the total length of time that is approved by the Director for conducting the research project as outlined in an approved application for funding.
( h ) *Budget period* means the interval of time (usually 12 months) into which the project period is divided for budgetary and reporting purposes.
( i ) *Awarding official* means the Director and any other officer or employee of the Department to whom the authority to issue or modify research project grant instruments has been delegated.
( j ) *Peer review group* means an assembled group of experts or consultants qualified by training or experience in particular scientific or technical fields to give expert advice, in accordance with the provisions of this part, on the scientific and technical merit of applications for funding in those fields.
( k ) *Ad hoc reviewers* means experts or consultants qualified by training or experience in particular scientific or technical fields to render special expert advice, whose written evaluations of applications for funding are designed to complement the expertise of the peer review group, in accordance with the provisions of this part, on the scientific or technical merit of applications for Funding in those fields.
( l ) *Research* means any systematic study directed toward new or fuller knowledge and understanding of the subject studied.
( m ) *Methodology* means the project approach to be followed and the resources needed to carry out the project.
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

BRIAN EDWARD GLICK,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 5:20-cv-164-TKW-MJF

CENTURION OF FLORIDA, et al.,

Defendants.

/

ORDER

This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and 

Recommendation. (Doc. 24) and Plaintiff’s objections (Doc. 26). The Court 

reviewed the issues raised in the objections de novo as required by 28 U.S.C. 

§636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), and based on that review, the Court agrees 

with the magistrate judge’s determination that this case should be dismissed because 

Plaintiff’s fourth amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be 

granted. Accordingly, it is 

ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by 

reference in this Order.

Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 26 Filed 11/12/21 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

2. This case is DISMISSED under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and 

1915A(b)(1), for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be 

granted.

3. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close 

the case file.

DONE and ORDERED this 12th day of November, 2021.

T. Kent Wetherell, II 

T. KENT WETHERELL, II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:20-cv-00164-TKW-MJF Document 26 Filed 11/12/21 Page 2 of 2
#### Akron Bar Association *v.*Bonetti.

[Cite as *Akron Bar Assn. v. Bonetti*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 1204.]

(No. 95-1667

Submitted and decided July 22, 1998.)

On Application for Termination of Probation.

On January 10, 1996, this court suspended respondent, Albert E. Bonetti, Jr., a.k.a. Albert Edward Bonetti, Jr., for two years, but suspended both years of the suspension and placed respondent on probation on conditions. On February 27, 1998, respondent filed an application for termination of probation.

The court comes now to consider its order of January 10, 1996, and finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(9).

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED by the court that the probation of Albert E. Bonetti, Jr., a.k.a. Albert Edward Bonetti, Jr., Attorney Registration No. 0038947, last known address in Akron, Ohio, be, and hereby is, terminated.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication.

For earlier case, see *Akron Bar Assn. v. Bonetti*(1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 204, 658 N.E.2d 250.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:95-cr-01027-MP

BRYAN EDMOND HUNT,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 90, Fifth Motion for an Order Instructing Clerk

Not to Destroy Original Transcripts by Bryan Edmond Hunt. On May 29, 2009, this Court

ordered the clerk not to destroy the records in question for at least six months, Doc. 89. This

Court also advised Defendant he could order a transcript of the proceedings the shorthand

records describe from the Clerk’s Office. Ibid. 

Defendant has not availed himself of the opportunity to procure a copy of the records

about which he is so concerned. Instead, he has declared he will continue to file lawsuits “until

Judge Paul is held accountable for his crimes and illicit behavior or I have named every federal

judge in this country as a defendant.” Doc. 90, p. 2. Defendant does not elaborate on his good

faith basis to accuse every federal judge in the country, and does not clarify whether he means

every federal judge in the country at the time he was convicted of lying under oath, or every

federal judge at the time he is to file these various lawsuits. In either event, Defendant has failed

diligently to pursue acquisition of copies of the transcripts in question, has failed to plead an

excuse for that failure to pursue acquisition, and has failed otherwise to demonstrate any
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 1:95-cr-01027-MP

meritorious purpose for the Clerk’s further preservation of these records. Accordingly, this

motion is DENIED. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 7th day of October, 2009

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
**Exhibit
      32**




**CERTIFICATIONS
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Stone Arcade Acquisition Corporation
      (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Roger Stone, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive and Financial
      Officer) of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best
      of
      my knowledge:




(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 the Company for the period
      certified.




Pursuant
      to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, this
      certification is being furnished and is not deemed filed.




Signed
      on
      this 14th day of November, 2005.




/s/
              Roger Stone
              Roger
                Stone
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:99cr45-WS

RENARD MAURICE NEALY, 4:06cv20-WS

Defendant.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 67)

docketed November 30, 2007. The magistrate judge recommends that the defendant's

motion to vacate and set aside sentence be denied. The defendant has filed no

objections to the report and recommendation.

Upon review of the record, this court has determined that the magistrate judge’s

report and recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 67) is hereby

ADOPTED and incorporated by reference into this order.

Case 4:99-cr-00045-WS-WCS Document 68 Filed 01/09/08 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 4:92cr4013-WS

2. The defendant’s motion to vacate and set aside sentence (doc. 64) is hereby

DENIED.

3. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and shall close Case No.

4:06cv20-WS.

DONE AND ORDERED this 9th day of January , 2008.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:99-cr-00045-WS-WCS Document 68 Filed 01/09/08 Page 2 of 2
§ 3201.85 Packing and insulating materials. ( a ) *Definition.* Pre-formed and molded materials that are used to hold package contents in place during shipping or for insulating and sound proofing applications.
( b ) *Minimum biobased content.* The Federal preferred procurement product must have a minimum biobased content of at least 74 percent, which shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon in the finished product.
( c ) *Preference compliance date.* No later than April 4, 2013, procuring agencies, in accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for qualifying biobased packing and insulating materials. By that date, Federal agencies that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing specifications for products to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications require the use of biobased packing and insulating materials.
[77 FR 20289, Apr. 4, 2012]