alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 112
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 112 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 112.54 What treatment processes are acceptable for a biological soil amendment of animal origin that I apply in the growing of covered produce? Each of the following treatment processes are acceptable for a biological soil amendment of animal origin that you apply in the growing of covered produce, provided that the resulting biological soil amendments are applied in accordance with the applicable requirements of § 112.56: ( a ) A scientifically valid controlled physical process (*e.g.,* thermal), chemical process (*e.g.,* high alkaline pH), biological process (*e.g.,* composting), or a combination of scientifically valid controlled physical, chemical and/or biological processes that has been validated to satisfy the microbial standard in § 112.55(a) for *Listeria monocytogenes* (*L. monocytogenes*), *Salmonella* species, and *E. coli* O157:H7; or
( b ) A scientifically valid controlled physical, chemical, or biological process, or a combination of scientifically valid controlled physical, chemical, and/or biological processes, that has been validated to satisfy the microbial standard in § 112.55(b) for *Salmonella* species and fecal coliforms. Examples of scientifically valid controlled biological (*e.g.,* composting) processes that meet the microbial standard in § 112.55(b) include: ( 1 ) Static composting that maintains aerobic (*i.e.,* oxygenated) conditions at a minimum of 131 °F (55 °C) for 3 consecutive days and is followed by adequate curing; and
( 2 ) Turned composting that maintains aerobic conditions at a minimum of 131 °F (55 °C) for 15 days (which do not have to be consecutive), with a minimum of five turnings, and is followed by adequate curing.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 9, 2010

d0830 

# Order

September 9, 2010

141134

PATRICE ANN TURKETTE,Plaintiff/CounterDefendant/Appellee,

v SC: 141134 COA: 287695 Grand Traverse CC: JEFFREY JOSEPH TURKETT E, 07-005262-DMDefendant/CounterPlaintiff/Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e February 23, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 430 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 430

     Expressing support for the designation of Journeyman Lineman 
                            Recognition Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              July 6, 2017

Ms. Sanchez (for herself, Mr. McKinley, Mr. Norcross, Ms. DelBene, Mr. 
 Young of Alaska, Mr. Larsen of Washington, Mr. Garamendi, Mr. Johnson 
   of Georgia, Ms. DeLauro, Mr. Pocan, and Mr. Lynch) submitted the 
following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                                Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
     Expressing support for the designation of Journeyman Lineman 
                            Recognition Day.

Whereas journeymen linemen provide a vital service on a daily basis;
Whereas journeyman linemen put their lives on the line every day to assure safe 
        and reliable power for the American people;
Whereas journeyman linemen work at heights and in close proximity to energized 
        electric lines, and in emergencies they often work extremely long hours 
        under sometimes dangerous conditions to restore power;
Whereas Henry Miller, the first elected president of the International 
        Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, was killed on July 10, 1896, at just 
        38 years old;
Whereas Henry Miller died of injuries sustained while troubleshooting an 
        electrical outage; and
Whereas there should be a day to honor those industry first responders who have 
        given their lives in the line of duty along with those who provide 
        skillful service in times of local or national crisis: Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) supports the designation of Journeyman Lineman 
        Recognition Day;
            (2) honors and recognizes the contributions of the 
        countless individuals who often place themselves in harm's way 
        to serve their communities; and
            (3) encourages the people of the United States to observe 
        Journeyman Lineman Recognition Day with appropriate reflection.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 11
                                                                      ----------

                    COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS (LOSS)

                           National Datacomputer, Inc.
          Statement recomputation of net (loss) income per common share
                                  (Unaudited)

<TABLE><CAPTION>
                                                                      March 31,        March 31,
                                                                        2001              2000
                                                                    ------------------------------
<S>                                                                <C>              <C>
Net (loss) income, as reported                                      $    (475,446)   $     104,287

Preferred stock preference items:

Interest on Series B, C, D and F convertible preferred stock        $     (69,375)   $     (95,880)
                                                                    -------------    -------------

Total preferred stock preference item                               $     (69,375)   $     (95,880)

Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders               $    (544,821)   $       8,407

Weighted average shares outstanding:

A. Shares attributable to common stock outstanding                      5,382,540        4,128,018
B. Shares attributable to convertible preferred stock outstanding            --               --
C. Shares attributable to common stock options and warrants
            pursuant to APB 15, paragraph 38 (a)                             --               --
                                                                    -------------    -------------
Weighted average shares outstanding                                     5,382,540        4,128,018
                                                                    =============    =============

Net loss per share                                                  $       (0.10)   $        0.00
                                                                    =============    =============

</TABLE>
38343.

#### McBRIDE v. THE STATE.

Townsend, Judge.

1. On a charge of possessing non-tax-paid liquor, testimony that the defendant was seen at night removing a bottle buried in a field near a fence; that when accosted he fled and the bottle dropped and was broken, that the place where the bottle was broken was wet, that the officers recovei'ed it and found it to- be a brown bottle like a Clorox bottle, without tax stamps; that the contents “smelled like non-tax-paid whisky” and “smelled like the regular old moonshine whisky,” and that in the same general locality where the defendant was seen to pick up the bottle that was broken, the officers dug up five other jars containing non-tax-paid whisky, is sufficient evidence on which to base a conviction. *Daniels v. State,*95 Ga. App. 862 (99 S. E. 2d 292).

*59Decided June 22, 1960

Rehearing denied July 6, 1960.

*Casey Thigpen,*for plaintiff in error.

*Thomas A. Hutcheson, Solicitor,*contra.

2. A charge that the jury should give such weight and credit as it deserves to the defendant’s statement or any part of it “that you believe to be the truth," and would be authorized to accept it in preference to the sworn testimony in the case “provided you believe it to be the truth” is not reversible error, where full instructions are given with respect to the effect to be given the defendant’s statement. *Dowdell v. State,*194 Ga. 578 (2) (22 S. E. 2d 310); *Allen v. State,*194 Ga. 430 (2) (22 S. E. 2d 65).

The trial court did not err in denying the motion for new trial as amended.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Gardner, P. J., Carlisle and Frankum, JJ., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           6,309
<SECURITIES>                                    32,926
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,814
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (615)
<INVENTORY>                                        632
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                61,724
<PP&E>                                          10,665
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,718)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  74,350
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,883
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            23
<OTHER-SE>                                      58,880
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    74,350
<SALES>                                         49,689
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                49,689
<CGS>                                           20,232
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   20,232
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                24,188
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 438
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,511
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,766
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,745
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,745
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.19
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 289 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 289

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                        April 28, 2017.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 99) making further 
continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2017, and for other purposes. All 
points of order against consideration of the joint resolution are waived. The 
joint resolution shall be considered as read. All points of order against 
provisions in the joint resolution are waived. The previous question shall be 
considered as ordered on the joint resolution and on any amendment thereto to 
final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee 
on Appropriations; and (2) one motion to recommit.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
§ 133.134 Cream cheese with other foods. ( a ) *Description.* Cream cheese with other foods is the class of foods prepared by mixing, with or without the aid of heat, cream cheese with one or a mixture of two or more types of foods (except other cheeses) listed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, in an amount sufficient to differentiate the mixture from cream cheese. One or more of the other optional ingredients in paragraph (b)(2) of this section may be used. The maximum moisture content of the mixture is 60 percent by weight. The minimum milkfat is 33 percent by weight of the cream cheese and in no case less than 27 percent of the finished food. The moisture and fat contents will be determined by the methods described in § 133.5, except that the method for determination of fat content is not applicable when the added food contains fat.
( b ) *Optional ingredients.* The following safe and suitable optional ingredients may be used: ( 1 ) *Foods.* Properly prepared fresh, cooked, canned, or dried fruits or vegetables; cooked or canned meats, relishes, pickles, or other suitable foods.
( 2 ) *Other optional ingredients.* ( i ) Stabilizers, in a total amount not to exceed 0.8 percent, with or without the addition of dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate in a maximum amount of 0.5 percent of the weight of the stabilizer(s) used.
( ii ) Coloring.
( c ) *Nomenclature.* The name of the food is “cream cheese with ______” or, alternatively, “cream cheese and ______”, the blank being filled in with the name of the foods used in order of predominance by weight.
( d ) *Label declaration.* Each of the ingredients used in the food shall be declared on the label as required by the applicable sections of parts 101 and 130 of this chapter, except that: ( 1 ) Enzymes of animal, plant, or microbial origin may be declared as “enzymes”; and
( 2 ) The dairy ingredients may be declared, in descending order of predominance, by the use of the terms “milkfat and nonfat milk” or “nonfat milk and milkfat”, as appropriate.
[54 FR 32053, Aug. 4, 1989, as amended at 58 FR 2893, Jan. 6, 1993]
§ 1107.62 Electronic submission. ( a ) *Electronic format requirement.* Applicants submitting any documents to the Agency under this part must provide all required information to FDA using the Agency's electronic system, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section. The SE Report and all supporting information must be in an electronic format that FDA can process, read, review, and archive.
( b ) *Waivers from electronic format requirement.* An applicant may submit a written request that is legible and written in English, to the Center for Tobacco Products asking that FDA waive the requirement for electronic format and content. Waivers will be granted if use of electronic means is not reasonable for the person requesting the waiver. To request a waiver, applicants can send the written request to the address included on our website (*www.fda.gov/tobaccoproducts*). The request must include the following information: ( 1 ) The name and address of the applicant, list of individuals authorized for the applicant to serve as the contact person, and contact information including an email address. If the applicant has submitted an SE Report previously, the regulatory correspondence must also include any identifying information for the previous submission.
( 2 ) A statement that creation and/or submission of information in electronic format is not reasonable for the person requesting the waiver, and an explanation of why creation and/or submission in electronic format is not reasonable. This statement must be signed by the applicant or by an employee of the applicant who is authorized to make the declaration on behalf of the applicant.
( c ) *Paper submission.* An applicant who has obtained a waiver from filing electronically must send a written SE Report through the Document Control Center to the address provided in the FDA documentation granting the waiver.
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 1 (Monday, January 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 84-85]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-33130]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Notice of Environmental Impact Statement; Withdrawal

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of withdrawal of intent to prepare an environmental 
impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 
Prescott National Forest, is withdrawing the March 2, 2010, Federal 
Register notice (75 FR 9388) which announced their intent to prepare an 
Environmental Impact Statement in accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act,

[[Page 85]]

42 U.S.C. 4321 (NEPA), to analyze the environmental impacts of 
vegetation management treatments in the Prescott Basin area. The 
original proposal included vegetation treatments to reduce fuels 
exceeding 9'' in diameter in Mexican Spotted Owl (MSO) Protected 
Activity Centers. This proposal would have been in conflict with the 
MSO recovery guidelines that had been incorporated into the Prescott 
National Forest's Land and Resource Management Plan. Subsequently the 
Forest Service entered into a new consultation with the United States 
Fish and Wildlife Service regarding the MSO and other threatened or 
endangered species. During this period of re-consultation, the 
responsible official on Prescott National Forest has determined that it 
would be unwise to pursue such vegetation treatments that could result 
in a negative impact to the MSO. Without these treatments in MSO 
protected activity centers, it was recognized that significant impacts 
to the environment would be highly unlikely, and therefore an 
Environmental Impact Statement would probably not be required and an 
Environmental Assessment would be prepared.

DATES: This withdrawal of the Notice of Intent is effective on the date 
of this publication in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: USDA Forest Service, Prescott National Forest, 344 S Cortez 
St., Prescott, AZ 86303.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jodi Wetzstein, Prescott National 
Forest Silviculturalist; 928-443-8041.

    Dated: December 20, 2010.
Thomas Klabunde,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2010-33130 Filed 12-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
Estimated Costs: 

Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

(e.g., Inspection, propeller, appliance) Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor+ u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered and close-up) our) Products 

Inspection and I parts replacement 4.0 .-!•: I Iii lr; 111: 46 I . ' ,. ,-.,, 

Prorated parts' cost 

based on average 

'.)·,.I life limit reduction 1.' '"' $66,000 ,, i• ii,JII ',ill 46 

of 44% across 15 

I oarts per engine 

ij 1111 il ;,il (I I ' 

·:1 Ill:· L) !II,' ,, ' " 

:) Ill'• !! Ill) I, I, " 

II it '1 II !Iii ,, .. 

.;, li(J <I iii; li oJI) 

.11!11 1: ill! ''ill, 

il,:lli li Ill.' ·. ,I ill, 

!1,11(,1 " I iii I l]l; 

111:•.1 " In I ., li•.· ' II· it! I " l,i\1 !1 I!<,' 

11,11.'1 (,'<hI ·. ',·,; 

11,1,}·:1 ' ,;;: :; 1,11 

11,11:1 !I l)il , '· ,:I 

II !iii ;,_,::1 l, "" 

. li,l'i) ,, !Hi II'Jij 

" !ill " ,li) ,, ''· t:. "" ,, ;;, ''"' 

' ,Jii 'Ill.' 

The knovvn number of products in compliance: 0 

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $3,051,640 

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $0 

On-Condition Costs: 

Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product 

(e.g., Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hour) 

replacement) testing, and close- up) 

0 ·. '•::1 

I I• ' 

" 
[

;

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: 

Is the AD significant? 

YES' 0 NO [S;i 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act: 

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No 

YES 0 NO [S;I 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: 

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? 

YES' 0 NO [S;i 

*Explanation:
H. Res. 504 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

September 7, 2017. 

Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, 

declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole 

House on the state of the Union for further consideration of 

the bill (H.R. 3354) making appropriations for the Department of the Interior, environment, and related agencies for 

the fiscal year ending September 30, 2018, and for other purposes. 

SEC. 2. (a) No further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in order except those printed in the report of the 

Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution, and 

available pro forma amendments described in section 4 of 

House Resolution 500. 

(b) Each further amendment printed in the report of the 

Committee on Rules shall be considered only in the order 

printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be de-
2 

•HRES 504 EH 

batable for the time specified in the report equally divided 

and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be 

withdrawn by the proponent at any time before action thereon, shall not be subject to amendment except amendments 

described in section 4 of House Resolution 500, and shall not 

be subject to a demand for division of the question in the 

House or in the Committee of the Whole. 

(c) All points of order against further amendments 

printed in the report of the Committee on Rules or against 

amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution 

are waived. 

SEC. 3. It shall be in order at any time for the chair of 

the Committee on Appropriations or his designee to offer 

amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 

this resolution not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc 

offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, 

shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 

Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees, 

shall not be subject to amendment except amendments described in section 4 of House Resolution 500, and shall not 

be subject to a demand for division of the question in the 

House or in the Committee of the Whole. 
3 

•HRES 504 EH 

SEC. 4. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 

amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill, as 

amended, to the House with such further amendments as 

may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to 

final passage without intervening motion except one motion 

to recommit with or without instructions. 

Attest: 

Clerk.