alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 600.30 Cost sharing. In addition to the requirements of § 600.123, § 600.224, or § 600.313, the following requirements apply to research, development, demonstration and commercial application activities projects: ( a ) Cost sharing is required for most financial assistance awards for research, development, demonstration and commercial applications activities initiated after the enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 on August 8, 2005. This requirement does not apply to: ( 1 ) An award under the small business innovation research program or the small business technology transfer program; or
( 2 ) A program with cost sharing requirements defined by other than Section 988 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 including other sections of the 2005 Act and the Energy Policy Act of 1992.
( b ) A cost share of at least 20 percent of the cost of the activity is required for research and development except where: ( 1 ) A research or development activity of a basic or fundamental nature has been excluded by an appropriate officer of the Department, generally an Under Secretary; or
( 2 ) The Secretary has determined it is necessary and appropriate to reduce or eliminate the cost sharing requirement for a research and development activity of an applied nature.
( c ) A cost share of at least 50 percent of the cost of a demonstration or commercial application program or activity is required unless the Secretary has determined it is necessary and appropriate to reduce the cost sharing requirements, taking into consideration any technological risk relating to the activity.
( d ) Cost share shall be provided by non-Federal funds unless otherwise authorized by statute. In calculating the amount of the non-Federal contribution: ( 1 ) Base the non-Federal contribution on total project costs, including the cost of work where funds are provided directly to a partner, consortium member or subrecipient, such as a Federally Funded Research and Development Center;
( 2 ) Include the following costs as allowable in accordance with the applicable cost principles: ( i ) Cash;
( ii ) Personnel costs;
( iii ) The value of a service, other resource, or third party in-kind contribution determined in accordance with the applicable circular of the Office of Management and Budget;
( iv ) Indirect costs or facilities and administrative costs; and/or
( v ) Any funds received under the power program of the Tennessee Valley Authority (except to the extent that such funds are made available under an annual appropriation Act);
( 3 ) Exclude the following costs: ( i ) Revenues or royalties from the prospective operation of an activity beyond the time considered in the award;
( ii ) Proceeds from the prospective sale of an asset of an activity; or
( iii ) Other appropriated Federal funds.
( iv ) Repayment of the Federal share of a cost-shared activity under Section 988 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 shall not be a condition of the award.
[74 FR 44277, Aug. 28, 2009]
**Puerto Rico**

**Puerto Rico 03 San Juan**
|   |   Prudential Asset Resources Prudential Mortgage Capital Company2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2500, Dallas TX 75201Tel 214 777-4500 A business of Prudential Financial, Inc. |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| RE:  | Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through, WFRBS 2013-C12Period:   March 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013 |
|-----------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |                             |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------|
|   |   |                             |   |
|   |   | /s/ Hal Collett             |   |
|   |   | Hal Collett                 |   |
|   |   | President and Managing Director  |   |
|   |   | Prudential Asset Resources, Inc. |   |
# EUR-Lex - 31988D0201 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31988D0201

**88/201/EEC: Commission Decision of 18 February 1988 approving the plan relating to the examination for hormone residues submitted by Spain (Only the Spanish text is authentic) **

*
Official Journal L 094 , 12/04/1988 P. 0027 - 0027 *

*****

COMMISSION DECISION

of 18 February 1988

approving the plan relating to the examination for hormone residues submitted by Spain

(Only the Spanish text is authentic)

(88/201/EEC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 86/469/EEC of 16 September 1986 concerning examination of animals and fresh meat for the presence of residues (1), and in particular Article 4 thereof,

Whereas, by document of 3 September 1987, Spain sent the Commission a plan setting out the national measures taken on the examination for residues of the substances referred to in Annex I (A), Groups I and II to Directive 86/469/EEC;

Whereas examination of this plan, as modified, has shown that it conforms to the provisions laid down in Directive 86/469/EEC, and in particular Article 4 (1) thereof;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The plan relating to the examination for residues of the substances referred to in Annex I (A), Groups I and II to Directive 86/469/EEC submitted by Spain is hereby approved.

Article 2

Spain shall adopt the necessary laws, regulations and administrative provisions for the implementation of the plan referred to in Article 1.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Spain.

Done at Brussels, 18 February 1988.

For the Commission

Frans ANDRIESSEN

Vice-President

(1) OJ No L 275, 26. 9. 1986, p. 36.
FACTS & FIGURES

FSC Facts

To view the latest information about FSC Forest

Management and Chain of Custody certificates, visit the FSC

International site.

FSC Certification Statistics as of February 2016:

• 35,483,824 acres certified in the US

• 163,607,927 acres certified in the US and Canada

• 4,294 companies Chain-of-Custody certified in the US

Downloads

FSC United States

FSC Certified Acres by

State

updated September 2015

PDF, Size: 21,67 KB

Added: Wednesday, 29.08.2012

Updated: Tuesday, 29.09.2015



FSC Acres by State -

Map

April 2013

PDF, Size: 235,58 KB

Added: Tuesday, 14.05.2013



Facts & Figures Page 1 of 2

https://us.fsc.org/en-us/what-we-do/facts-figures 6/22/2016
• 5,225 companies Chain-of-Custody certified in the US and

Canada

General Forest Facts

• Forests cover 30% of global land area

• 70% of terrestrial animals and plants live in forests

• Currently the world’s forests store 283 billion tons of carbon in

their biomass

To learn more about the history of forestry and the changes

in forested acres in the United States, please see the link

here.

© Forest Stewardship Council®· FSC® F000232

Facts & Figures Page 2 of 2

https://us.fsc.org/en-us/what-we-do/facts-figures 6/22/2016
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MIGUEL E. DIAZ,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

RALPH M. DIAZ, Warden; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 14-16520

D.C. No. 1:13-cv-00453-SKO

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Sheila K. Oberto, Magistrate Judge, Presiding** 

Submitted April 13, 2016** 

Before: FARRIS, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. 

Miguel E. Diaz, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various federal

FILED

APR 19 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** Diaz consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(c).

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo,

Hamilton v. Brown, 630 F.3d 889, 892 (9th Cir. 2011) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order)

(dismissal under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)), and we affirm. 

The district court properly dismissed Diaz’s action because Diaz failed to

allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal,

556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient

factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its

face” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Farmer v. Brennan,

511 U.S. 825, 847 (1994) (setting forth requirements for a deliberate indifference

claim); Simmons v. Navajo County, Ariz., 609 F.3d 1011, 1022 (9th Cir. 2010)

(“The [Americans with Disabilities Act] prohibits discrimination because of

disability, not inadequate treatment for disability.”); Rhodes v. Robinson, 408 F.3d

559, 567-68 (9th Cir. 2005) (elements of a retaliation claim in the prison context). 

Because the district court dismissed Diaz’s action for failure to state a claim,

we reject Diaz’s contention that the district court abused its discretion by

dismissing his action for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a court

order.

AFFIRMED. 

2 14-16520
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, James J. Houtz, President of Sionix Corporation, certify that:

         1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Sionix
Corporation:

         2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
quarterly report;

         3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly represent in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

         4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

                  a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during this period in which the quarterly report is being prepared;

                  b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

                  c. presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

         5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent function):

                  a. all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

                  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
internal controls; and

         6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in
this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: May 20, 2004

 /s/ James J. Houtz
 ---------------------------
   James J. Houtz
   President
§ 850.38 Warning signs and labels. ( a ) *Warning signs.* The responsible employer must post warning signs at each access point to a regulated area with the following information: DANGER BERYLLIUM CAN CAUSE LUNG DAMAGE CANCER HAZARD AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL ONLY
( b ) *Warning labels.* ( 1 ) The responsible employer must affix warning labels to all containers of beryllium, beryllium compounds, or beryllium-contaminated clothing, equipment, waste, scrap, or debris.
( 2 ) Warning labels must contain the following information: DANGER CONTAMINATED WITH BERYLLIUM DO NOT REMOVE DUST BY BLOWING OR SHAKING CANCER AND LUNG DISEASE HAZARD
( c ) Warning signs and labels must be in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1200, Hazard Communication.
#### § 715.3 Definition of “Nonrecourse Project-Financed”.

*Nonrecourse project-financed* means when being financed by any debt, such debt is secured by the assets financed and the revenues received by the facility being financed including, but not limited to, part or all of the revenues received under one or more agreements for the sale of the electric output from the facility, and which neither an electric utility with a retail service territory, nor a public utility as defined by section 201(e) of the Federal Power Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 824(e), if any of its facilities are financed with general credit, is obligated to repay in whole or in part. A commitment to contribute equity or the contribution of equity to a facility by an electric utility shall not be considered an obligation of such utility to repay the debt of a facility. The existence of limited guarantees, commitments to pay for cost overruns, indemnity provisions, or other similar undertakings or assurances by the facility's owners or other project participants will not disqualify a facility from being “nonrecourse project-financed” as long as, at the time of the financing for the facility, the borrower is obligated to make repayment of the term debt from the revenues generated by the facility, rather than from other sources of funds. Projects that are 100 percent equity financed are also considered “nonrecourse project-financed” for purposes of section 416(a)(2)(B).
SERVED JANUARY 11,2010 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATEMFTH^ ^POMIOH 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS ' 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

HELICOPTERS FLITE, INC., 

Respondent. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP09EA0015 

(Civil Penalty Proceeding) 

DMS NO. FAA-2009-0579 

NOTICE OF HEARING 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the hearing in this case will be held on 

January 26, 2010, beginning at 10:00 a.m., local time at the following 

location: 

Cahn Federal Building 

504 Hamilton Street 

AllentownPA 18101 

Allow time to pass through security and note that cameras, including 

cellular telephones incorporating cameras, are not allowed in federal 

courthouses. 

Isaac D. Benkin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment-Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP09EA0015 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000^ 

ONE COPY 

Christopher T. Powell, Jr., Respondent's Counsel 

Powell Law 

527 Linden Street 

Scranton, PA 18503 

TEL: 570-961-0777 

FAX: 570-342-1232 

Helicopters Flite, Inc., Respondent 

190 Decker Lane 

Weatherly, PA 18255 

Zachary M. Berman, Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3258 

FAX: 718-995-5699 

The Honorable Isaac D. Benkin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: Attorney 202-366-0437 

Legal Assistant 202-366-2132 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use tiie following 

address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building— 

Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
Editorial Note on Part 63
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 63 appear at 81 FR 86909, Dec. 2, 2016.

§ 63.332 Representative volume. ( a ) The representative volume is the volume of groundwater that would be withdrawn annually from an aquifer containing less than 10,000 milligrams of total dissolved solids per liter of water to supply a given water demand. DOE must project the concentration of radionuclides released from the Yucca Mountain disposal system that will be in the representative volume. DOE must use the projected concentrations to demonstrate a reasonable expectation that the Yucca Mountain disposal system complies with § 63.331. The DOE must make the following assumptions concerning the representative volume: ( 1 ) It includes the highest concentration level in the plume of contamination in the accessible environment;
( 2 ) Its position and dimensions in the aquifer are determined using average hydrologic characteristics which have cautious, but reasonable, values representative of the aquifers along the radionuclide migration path from the Yucca Mountain repository to the accessible environment as determined by site characterization; and
( 3 ) It contains 3,000 acre-feet of water (about 3,714,450,000 liters or 977,486,000 gallons).
( b ) DOE must use one of two alternative methods for determining the dimensions of the representative volume. The DOE must propose its chosen method, and any underlying assumptions, to NRC for approval. ( 1 ) DOE may calculate the dimensions as a well-capture zone. If DOE uses this approach, it must assume that the: ( i ) Water supply well(s) has (have) characteristics consistent with public water supply wells in the Town of Amargosa Valley, Nevada, for example, well-bore size and length of the screened intervals;
( ii ) Screened interval(s) include(s) the highest concentration in the plume of contamination in the accessible environment; and
( iii ) Pumping rates and the placement of the well(s) must be set to produce an annual withdrawal equal to the representative volume and to tap the highest concentration within the plume of contamination.
( 2 ) DOE may calculate the dimensions as a slice of the plume. If DOE uses this approach, it must: ( i ) Propose, for approval, where the location of the edge of the plume of contamination occurs. For example, the place where the concentration of radionuclides reaches 0.1% of the level of the highest concentration in the accessible environment;
( ii ) Assume that the slice of the plume is perpendicular to the prevalent direction of flow of the aquifer; and
( iii ) Assume that the volume of groundwater contained within the slice of the plume equals the representative volume.
# EUR-Lex - 31986R4068 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31986R4068

**Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 4068/86 of 22 December 1986 adapting the representation and special-duty allowance for the President and members of the Commission and the President, Judges, Advocates-General and Registrar of the Court of Justice **

*
Official Journal L 371 , 31/12/1986 P. 0014 - 0014 *

*****

COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC, EURATOM, ECSC) No 4068/86

of 22 December 1986

adapting the representation and special-duty allowance for the President and members of the Commission and the President, Judges, Advocates-General and Registrar of the Court of Justice

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to Council Regulation No 422/67/EEC - No 5/67/Euratom of 25 July 1967 determining the emoluments of the President and members of the Commission and of the President, Judges, Advocates-General and Registrar of the Court of Justice (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 3678/85 (2), and in particular Article 4 (4) thereof,

Whereas the representation and special-duty allowances provided for under Article 4 (2) and (3) of Regulation No 422/67/EEC - No 5/67/Euratom should be increased,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

With effect from 1 July 1986:

(a) the amounts listed in Article 4 (2) of Regulation No 422/67/EEC - No 5/67/Euratom shall be as follows:

- President: 47 190 Bfrs,

- Vice-President: 30 325 Bfrs,

- Other members: 20 220 Bfrs,

(b) the amounts listed in the first subparagraph of Article 4 (3) of Regulation No 422/67/EEC - No 5/67/Euratom shall be as follows:

- President: 47 190 Bfrs,

- Judge or Advocate-General: 20 220 Bfrs,

- Registrar: 18 440 Bfrs.

(c) the amount listed in the second subparagraph of Article 4 (3) of Regulation No 422/67/EEC - No 5/67/Euratom shall be replaced by the sum of 26 975 Bfrs.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 22 December 1986.

For the Council

The President

G. SHAW

(1) OJ No L 187, 8. 8. 1967, p. 1.

(2) OJ No L 351, 28. 12. 1985, p. 1.
steam_record - Re: FW: Steam Electric Power Information Request - Extension Request 

 

Greetings, 

This e-mail is a confirmation that your extension request for the steam electric effluent 

guidelines questionnaire for JT Deely (Plant ID:04017) and OW Sommers (Plant ID:03141) was 

received. Extension requests will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Please be aware that 

submittal of an extension request to EPA does not alter the due date of your questionnaire 

unless and until EPA agrees to the extension and establishes a new date.

Verification of delivery status of questionnaire package for JK Pruce was forwarded to the 

steam electric helpline. You should hear back from them soon with tracking information.

Sincerely, 

-----"Tieken, Gregg R." <GRTieken@CPSEnergy.com> wrote: ----- 

To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

From: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov>

To: "Tieken, Gregg R." <GRTieken@CPSEnergy.com>

Date: 7/15/2010 7:08 AM

Subject: Re: FW: Steam Electric Power Information Request - Extension Request

Page 1 of 2

file://C:\Documents and Settings\TMedley\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C3EB403D... 8/17/2011
From: "Tieken, Gregg R." <GRTieken@CPSEnergy.com> 

Date: 07/14/2010 06:08PM 

Subject: FW: Steam Electric Power Information Request - Extension Request 

Jezebele Alicea,

City Public Service of San Antonio received Information Collection Requests for the following facilities: 

JT Deely (Plant ID: 04017) and OW Sommers (Plant ID: 03141) facilities. Due to the extent of information 

requested, City Public Service of San Antonio is requesting an extension to complete the questionnaire. The 

plant manager received them in her possession on June 23rd or 24th. According to the FedEx tracking, the 

packages were received in our storeroom on June 21st. This request will be greatly appreciated. 

According to the EPA “Mail List for the Steam Electric Questionnaire” our JK Spruce facility was listed to 

receive version 2. To date, the referenced facility has not received a questionnaire. Please advise on status.

Thanks,

Gregg Tieken

CPS Energy

Manager, Environmental

210-353-2158 Office

210-837-2607 Cell

Page 2 of 2

file://C:\Documents and Settings\TMedley\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C3EB403D... 8/17/2011