alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81993-81998]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32755]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal No. 10-62]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 
601-3740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a copy of a letter to the 
Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 10-62 with 
attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of 
Technology.

    Dated: December 23, 2010.
Morgan F. Park,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-6-P

[[Page 81994]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29DE10.000


[[Page 81995]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29DE10.001


[[Page 81996]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29DE10.002


[[Page 81997]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29DE10.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29DE10.005


[[Page 81998]]


[FR Doc. 2010-32755 Filed 12-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 112 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Homeland Security 

in the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2017 

Mr. MCCAUL (for himself and Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on 

Homeland Security in the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES. 

3 For the expenses of the Committee on Homeland Se4 curity (hereafter in this resolution referred to as the 

5 ‘‘Committee’’), including the expenses of all staff salaries, 

6 there shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts of the 

7 House of Representatives for committee salaries and ex8 penses, not more than $15,007,846 for the One Hundred 

9 Fifteenth Congress. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 112 IH 

1 SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS. 

2 Of the amount specified in section 1— 

3 (1) not more than $7,503,923 shall be available 

4 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at 

5 noon on January 3, 2017, and ending immediately 

6 before noon on January 3, 2018; and 

7 (2) not more than $7,503,923 shall be available 

8 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at 

9 noon on January 3, 2018, and ending immediately 

10 before noon on January 3, 2019. 

11 SEC. 3. VOUCHERS. 

12 Payments under this resolution shall be made on 

13 vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the 

14 Chairman of the Committee, and approved in the manner 

15 directed by the Committee on House Administration. 

16 SEC. 4. REGULATIONS. 

17 Amounts made available under this resolution shall 

18 be expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by 

19 the Committee on House Administration. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### § 3186.30 What policies and procedures must I follow?

(a) *General.* You must follow the policies and procedures specified in applicable sections of the OMB guidance in Subparts A through F of [2 CFR part 182](/on/2024-09-17/title-2/part-182), as implemented by this part.

(b) *Specific sections of OMB guidance that this part supplements.* In implementing the OMB guidance in [2 CFR part 182](/on/2024-09-17/title-2/part-182), this part supplements four sections of the guidance, as shown in the following table. For each of those sections, you must follow the policies and procedures in the OMB guidance, as supplemented by this part.

| Section of OMB guidance | Section in this part where supplemented | What the supplementation clarifies |
| --- | --- | --- |
| (1) [2 CFR 182.225(a)](/on/2024-09-17/title-2/section-182.225#p-182.225(a)) | § 3186.225 | Whom in the IMLS a recipient other than an individual must notify if an employee is convicted for a violation of a criminal drug statute in the workplace. |
| (2) [2 CFR 182.300(b)](/on/2024-09-17/title-2/section-182.300#p-182.300(b)) | § 3186.300 | Whom in the IMLS a recipient who is an individual must notify if he or she is convicted of a criminal drug offense resulting from a violation occurring during the conduct of any award activity. |
| (3) [2 CFR 182.500](/on/2024-09-17/title-2/section-182.500) | § 3186.500 | Who in the IMLS is authorized to determine that a recipient other than an individual is in violation of the requirements of [2 CFR part 182](/on/2024-09-17/title-2/part-182), as implemented by this part. |
| (4) [2 CFR 182.505](/on/2024-09-17/title-2/section-182.505) | § 3186.505 | Who in the IMLS is authorized to determine that a recipient who is an individual is in violation of the requirements of [2 CFR part 182](/on/2024-09-17/title-2/part-182), as implemented by this part. |

(c) *Sections of the OMB guidance that this part does not supplement.* For any section of OMB guidance in Subparts A through F of [2 CFR part 182](/on/2024-09-17/title-2/part-182) that is not listed in [paragraph (b)](/on/2024-09-17/title-2/section-3186.30#p-3186.30(b)) of this section, IMLS policies and procedures are the same as those in the OMB guidance.
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATIONS

Pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350



The undersigned hereby certifies that
(i) the foregoing quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A filed by Fountain Powerboat Industries, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                       |  |                                      
|---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: October 12, 2005 |  | /s/ Reginald M. Fountain, Jr.        
|                       |  | Reginald M. Fountain, Jr.            
|                       |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                       | 
|Date: October 12, 2005 |  | /s/ Irving L. Smith                  
|                       |  | Irving L. Smith                      
|                       |  | Chief Financial Officer
From: Dennis Murr [mailto:DMurr@barr.com]

Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 1:21 PM

To: Wickman, Trent R -FS

Subject: Pelletizing Furnace - Grate Kiln Design

Trent,

The first two papers (Recent Design and New Design) are papers that explain the evolution of the Grate

Kiln design. The third paper (NSPC Heat Recoup) is a paper that is the result of a design change with

reduction in fuel consumption. The fourth paper is the report on the ported kiln installation at Minntac

which is their answer to another design change to reduce fuel consumption. The last paper in a sales

pitch by Metso for your information. This sales pitch is different than our white paper prepared in 2007

for Essar Steel Minnesota.

The Minntac facility if I remember right has five pelletizing furnaces (line 3 in step 1, line 4 & 5 in step 2,

and line 6 & 7 in step 3). Lines 6 & 7 in step 3 are the only lines converted with the ported kiln design

change. Lines 4 & 5 in step 2 has the high temperature recoup design change. Line 3 in step 1 did not

have the recoup design change several years back and I do not know at present is that design change

was ever made.

I hope this series of email will give you a insight into pelletizing furnaces that you were looking for.

Cheers!

Dennis Murr

BS Metallurgical Engineering

Hibbing office: 218.262.8627

cell: 763.213.9698

dmurr @ barr

. com

www

. barr

. com

Recent Design

- Gate Kiln.pd f Kiln.pd New Design

- Ported Kiln.pd f Kiln.pd NSPC Heat Recoup.pd f Recoup.pd Ported Kiln

- Minntac.pd f Minntac.pd

Grate_Kiln_Benef its_rev_01.ppt
### SAGEMAP: A web-based spatial dataset for sage grouse and sagebrush steppe management in the Intermountain West

By: Steven T. Knick**Linda Schueck

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/fs12402

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (570 KB pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 250 (Thursday, December 30, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82372-82373]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32936]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

Vanderbilt University, et al.; Notice of Consolidated Decision on 
Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Electron Microscopes

    This is a decision consolidated pursuant to Section 6(c) of the 
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 
(Pub. L. 89-651, as amended by Pub. L. 106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR 
part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. 
in Room 3720, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.

    Docket Number: 10-065. Applicant: Vanderbilt University, Nashville, 
TN 37235. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, 
Czech Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 75 FR 73034, November 29, 
2010.

    Docket Number: 10-066. Applicant: Vanderbilt University, Nashville, 
TN 37235. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: JEOL Limited, 
Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 75 FR 73034, November 29, 2010.

    Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of 
equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such 
purposes as these instruments are intended to be used, was being 
manufactured in the United States at the time the instruments were 
ordered. Reasons: Each foreign instrument is an electron microscope and 
is intended for research or scientific educational uses requiring an 
electron microscope. We know of no electron microscope, or any other 
instrument suited to these purposes, which was being manufactured in 
the United States at the time of order of each instrument.

[[Page 82373]]

    Dated: December 22, 2010.
Gregory W. Campbell,
Director, Subsidies Enforcement Office, Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010-32936 Filed 12-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
```
§ 1128.205 Content of FMS Article II. ( a ) *Requirement.* A DoD Component's general terms and conditions must address payment method; payment timing and amounts, which relate to cash management; frequency of payment requests; and matters related to recipients' depositories, including interest earned on advance payments.
( b ) *Award terms and conditions.* A DoD Component's general terms and conditions must include the wording appendix B to this part provides for FMS Article II with appropriate additions, deletions, and substitutions as described in §§ 1128.210 through 1128.220.
PGI 235.010 Scientific and technical reports.       (b) The Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) is responsible for collecting all scientific or technological observations, findings, recommendations, and results derived from DoD endeavors, including both in-house and contracted efforts. The DTIC has eligibility and registration requirements for use of its services. Requests for eligibility and registration information should be addressed to DTIC-BC Registration, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6218, or may be obtained at http://www.dtic.mil.    **Parent topic:** PGI Part 235 - RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING
226 So.2d 925

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Larry ACOSTA and Peter Mule.

No. 50170.

Oct. 15, 1969.

In re: Larry Acosta and Peter Mule applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition.

Writ refused. We find no error or abuse of discretion in the ruling of the trial judge. The Parish Courts of Jefferson Parish are not of equal dignity with the Criminal District Courts of Orleans Parish, and moreover, the prosecution of the charge pending in the Criminal District Court of Orleans Parish, a felony, is entitled to preferential treatment over the prosecution in the Parish Court of Jefferson Parish of a misdemeanor.

McCALEB, J.,

concurs on the ground that the showing made does not warrant the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction. Relators have an adequate remedy by appeal in the event of their conviction.

HAMLIN, J. I agree with McCaleb, J.
EXHIBIT 32.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. SS.1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Accupoll  Holding  Corporation  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period ended  September  30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Craig A. Hewitt, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss.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 Company.

Date:  November 19, 2003

Signed,

/s/ Craig A. Hewitt
--------------------------
Craig A. Hewitt
CFO AccuPoll Holding Corp.

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, an other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required by Section 906,  has been  provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.
#### In the Matter of Mikveh of South Shore Congregation, Inc., Respondent, v Armand A. Granito et al., Appellants, and Leonard Wadler et al., Intervenor-Appellants.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Hempstead which, *inter alia,*denied petitioner’s application for certain variances, the appeal (by permission) is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated June 10, 1980, which, after a hearing, annulled the board’s. determination and remanded the matter to the board for further proceedings. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Petitioner Mikveh of South Shore Congregation, Inc., owns a parcel of real property which is located on Peninsula Boulevard in a residential district of Nassau County. The property is improved with a two-story frame brick, single-family detached dwelling, the interior of which was seriously damaged by fire. It has side yards of 7.4 feet and 8.2 feet. Petitioner proposed to alter the interior of the structure to convert the first floor for use as a mikveh, and the second floor for use as a residence for a caretaker and her family. In furtherance of this plan, petitioner filed two building permit applications, one for a waiver of the off-street parking restrictions and the other for a partial waiver of the 20-foot side yard requirement. When the applications were denied, petitioner appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Hempstead for the same relief. After a public hearing, the board found the proposed use was a religious use, but denied both variances. The side yard variance was denied on the ground that the existing side yards were insufficient for evacuation purposes in the event of a fire, the off-street parking variance was denied because the board felt that parking on the street would present a traffic hazard to other residents who must back out of their driveways. The board also did not find practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship with respect to either application. A review of the present record reveals that Special Term correctly annulled the board’s determination denying the variances for this religious use, as it was not supported by substantial evidence. There was no expert testimony or other “hard evidence” to uphold the board’s finding that a variance of the side yard restrictions would create a fire hazard or that a variance of the off-street parking requirement would create or increase traffic hazards for the other residents in the area, (see *Jewish Reconstructionist Synagogue of North Shore v Incorporated Vil. of Roslyn Harbor,*38 NY2d 283). In any event, potential traffic hazards do not justify the exclusion of a proposed religious use (see *Matter of Westchester Reform Temple v Brown,*22 NY2d 488). However, a prompt hearing as to whether petitioner’s reconstruction of the premises could feasibly eliminate the need for a side yard variance or reduce the extent of the variances required is necessary since petitioner failed to offer evidence on the issue at the hearing (see *Steele v Shultz,*40 AD2d 1027). Lazer, J. P., Cohalan, Martuscello and Weinstein, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 82066]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32801]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation


Change in Discount Rate for Water Resources Planning

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of change.

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

SUMMARY: The Water Resources Planning Act of 1965 and the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1974 require an annual determination of a 
discount rate for Federal water resources planning. The discount rate 
for Federal water resources planning for fiscal year 2011 is 4.125 
percent. Discounting is to be used to convert future monetary values to 
present values.

DATES: This discount rate is to be used for the period October 1, 2010, 
through and including September 30, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brooke Miller-Levy, Water and 
Environmental Resources Division, Denver, Colorado 80225; telephone: 
303-445-2889.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the interest 
rate to be used by Federal agencies in the formulation and evaluation 
of plans for water and related land resources is 4.125 percent for 
fiscal year 2011.
    This rate has been computed in accordance with Section 80(a), 
Public Law 93-251 (88 Stat. 34) and 18 CFR 704.39, which: (1) specify 
that the rate will be based upon the average yield during the preceding 
fiscal year on interest-bearing marketable securities of the United 
States which, at the time the computation is made, have terms of 15 
years or more remaining to maturity (average yield is rounded to 
nearest one-eighth percent); and (2) provide that the rate will not be 
raised or lowered more than one-quarter of 1 percent for any year. The 
U.S. Department of the Treasury calculated the specified average to be 
4.1620 percent. This average value is then rounded to the nearest one-
eighth of a point, resulting in 4.125 percent.
    The rate of 4.125 percent will be used by all Federal agencies in 
the formulation and evaluation of water and related land resources 
plans for the purpose of discounting future benefits and computing 
costs or otherwise converting benefits and costs to a common-time 
basis.

    Dated: December 3, 2010.
Roseann Gonzales,
Director, Policy and Administration, Denver Office.
[FR Doc. 2010-32801 Filed 12-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MN-P
Exhibit 10.3 




First Amendment to
Employment Agreement 



        This
First Amendment to Employment Agreement is made effective on the 31st day of July, 2006,
between Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation (“Company”), and Mitchell J. Krebs
(“Employee”). 



        Whereas,
the parties executed an Employment Agreement dated July 1, 2005 (the “Employment
Agreement”), and 



        Whereas,
the Employment Agreement initial term was defined as July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2007,
and 



        Whereas,
the Employment Agreement additionally sets forth a provision for a potential one year
extension during the month of June, 2006 such that the term would once again be for a two
year period, and 



        Whereas,
the parties desire to further extend the term of the Employment Agreement as contemplated
by the Employment Agreement and as set forth below; 



NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of
the mutual promises and covenants herein contained to be kept and performed by the parties
hereto, the parties agree as follows: 



1.    Term of
Employment. The Employment Agreement shall be amended in Section           2 to read
that the term of employment shall be extended to the 30th day of June,           2008,
unless sooner terminated as provided in the Employment Agreement. It is           further
agreed that the Employment Agreement may be further considered for an
          additional one year extension during the month of June, 2007, to the end that
          the parties may be once again bound to a two year duration of the Agreement. It
          is understood, however, that termination can occur in accordance with the
          provisions of paragraph 7 of the Employment Agreement, notwithstanding anything
          to the contrary in this First Amendment to Employment Agreement.  



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have
executed this First Amendment to Employment Agreement as of the day and year first written
above. 



Coeur d’ Alene Mines
Corporation 



By___________________________
Dennis
Wheeler, President and CEO 



_____________________________
Employee
#### Robert O’Leary et al., Appellants, v Williamsburgh General Hospital et al., Respondents.

In a medical malpractice action, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 25, 1979, which dismissed the complaint as being time barred by the three-year Statute of Limitations. Order affirmed, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements. (See *Florio v Cook,*65 AD2d 548, affd 48 NY2d 792; *Merced v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.,*44 NY2d 398.) Damiani, J. P., Gibbons, Rabin and Margett, JJ., concur.