alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 172

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 172 appear at 61 FR 14482, Apr. 2, 1996; 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; 70 FR 72074, Dec. 1, 2005; and 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

#### § 172.379 Vitamin D2.

Vitamin D2 may be used safely in foods as a nutrient supplement defined under § 170.3(o)(20) of this chapter in accordance with the following prescribed conditions:

(a) Vitamin D2, also known as ergocalciferol, is the chemical 9,10-seco(5Z,7E,22E)-5,7,10(19),22-ergostatetraen-3-ol. Vitamin D2 is produced by ultraviolet irradiation of ergosterol isolated from yeast and is purified by crystallization.

(b) Vitamin D2 meets the specifications of the 2015 Food Chemical Codex, 9th edition (through Third Supplement), effective December 1, 2015, pp. 1260-1261, which is incorporated by reference. The Director of the Office of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain copies from the United States Pharmacopeial Convention, 12601 Twinbrook Pkwy., Rockville, MD 20852 (Internet address *http://www.usp.org*). Copies may be examined at the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, 240-402-7500, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.*

(c) The additive may be used as follows:

| Category of Food | Maximum Levels in Food (as Served) |
| --- | --- |
| Edible plant-based beverages intended as milk alternatives | 84 IU/100 g. |
| Edible plant-based yogurt alternatives | 89 IU/100 g. |
| Soy beverage products | 89 IU/100 g |
| Soy-based butter substitute spreads | 330 IU/100 g |
| Soy-based cheese substitutes and soy-based cheese substitute products | 270 IU/100 g |

[74 FR 11022, Mar. 16, 2009, as amended at 78 FR 71463, Nov. 29, 2013; 81 FR 46581, July 18, 2016; 88 FR 17719, Mar. 24, 2023]
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTE C T IO N AG EN C Y WASH I NGTON, D.C. 20460

Ms. Al ison Castronovo We Energies Environmenta l Department 333 W. Everett Street - A231 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203 Dear Ms . Castronovo: 

## AUG 6 2013 OFFICE OF WATER

The U. .S. Environmental Protection Agen cy (EPA) has received

_ yo ur request f o r plant-specific information , including estimated compliance costs and pollutant removals, related to the proposed revisions to the Effluent Limitations Guidel ines and Standards for the S team E lectric Power Generating Point Source Category (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009- 0819). In response to your request , please tind enclosed a disc containing one file and six attachments for each plant for which costs/removals are being provided. The file and attachments present the input values and the costs and pollutant removals for the requested p l ants, as w e ll as additional information regarding EPA's estimation ofthese values. The EPA is providing costs and pollutant removals for the following plants: • Milwaukee County Power Plant (01412); • Pleasant Prairie Power P l ant (06283); • Port Washington Generating Station (02466) ; • Presque Isle Power Plant (030 15) ; • Oak Creek Power Plant (03709); • E lm Road Generating Station/Oak Creek Expansion Project; and • Valley Power Plant (09047). The inf ormation provided in the enclosed disc may contain information that w a s claimed by your company ' s plants as confidential business information (CBI) in response to the Questionnaire for the Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent Guidelines. The EPA is not resp o nsible for the releas(: of this CBI if you or others in your company provide th ese attachments to other partie s. If you have any questions regarding th ese es tima tes , please contact me at (202) 566 - 1755 or alicea . jezebele@epa. gov . Thank you for your interest in the steam electric eff1uent guidelines rulemakin g process .

Internet Address (URL) • http ://www. epa . gov Recycled/Recyclable • Pnnted with Vegetable 011 Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer. Process Chlorine Free Recycled PaperEnclo sures
## Life Cycle Cost Analysis: Clothes Washers James E.McMahon Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory JEMcMahon@lbl.gov 

### At DOE Workshop, Washington, D.C. July23, 1997

## Ideas foreliminating "black boxes" · Make models as simple as possible * Make copies of models more accessible - available from USDOE or contractor - on World WideWeb 

### * Make models easierto use - Graphical user interface - Develop detailed documentation 

### * Conducttraining workshops - central location (e.g., publicworkshop) - on-site at stakeholder location - computer link or - videoconference EnergyAnalysis Program

## Life Cycle Cost includes: * Appliance price (+ installation cost) * Operating expenses - energy - water and sewage - maintenance - service * Lifetime * Discount rate EnergyAnalysis Program ' i1

### Uncertainty analysisrr * Identify key uncertainties and variabilities - uncertainty: incomplete information - variability: range of values 

### * Estimate ranges ratherthan pointvalues - minimum, likeliest, maximum values 

### * Express output as ranges - (e.g., percent ofconsumers having lower life cycle cost) 

### * Conduct scenario ("what-if') analysis - (e.g., future energy prices) EnergyAnalysis Program
#### § 205.1 Scope.

This part applies to any person, partnership, corporation, or business firm in a State engaging in the wholesale distribution of human prescription drugs in interstate commerce.
# AVS

Quality Management System Title: Domestic Change Worksheet QPM# AIR-ANM-030-F4 Date: December 17, 2008 Revision 

### 1 

## Record ofContacts FDMS Docket No_FAA~:2.biO_ 

# D<09~~~

_

______ E

__ .__ ----- 

# FE -----.--- With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed 

### (i.g., ATA, RAA, ALPA, etc.)?

Organization Perso~ Contacted Date 

# , August 31. 2009 Boeing J.B. Zundel! (FA~ letter 140S-09-208a) I

UNCONTROLLED COPY WHEN DOWNLOADED Check the Master Ust to Verify That This isIhelcorrect Revision Before Use
U. S. Department of Homeland Security 

 

 Office for Domestic Preparedness

 Washington, D.C. 20531 

ODP Information Bulletin 

No. 108 April 15, 2004

TO: All State Administrative Agency Heads 

 All State Administrative Agency Points of Contact 

 

FROM: C. Suzanne Mencer 

 Director

SUBJECT: Additional Guidance on Obligation of Critical Infrastructure Protection 

Funds to Local Units of Government. 

The Office for Domestic Preparedness has recently received requests from several SAAs 

seeking clarification on obligation of Critical Infrastructure funds to local units of 

government for FY 2003 State Homeland Security Grant Program Part II (SHSGP II) and 

FY 2004 State Homeland Grant Program (HSGP). 

As noted in the FY 2003 SHSGP II solicitation guidance, 50% of funds from the Critical 

Infrastructure Protection (CIP) allocation must be obligated to local communities. States 

were required to certify in a faxback worksheet that funds were obligated to local 

jurisdictions within 45 days of the grant award date. If states have already obligated 50% 

of funds, then they have met the obligation requirement. If at least 50% of CIP funds 

have not been obligated to local jurisdictions, SAAs must complete these obligations as 

soon as possible. ODP will be contacting SAAs in the near future to verify compliance in 

cases where current records do not reflect that at least 50% of funds have been obligated 

to local jurisdictions. 

With regard to FY 2004 HSGP, 80% of funds must be obligated to local units of 

government within 60 days of the grant award date. States are reminded that if a state 

chooses to utilize up to 25% of the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program for 

periods of DHS-declared heightened threat, the 80% obligation to local units of

government still applies. 

For the purposes of allocating and obligating CIP funds, states and territories are advised 

to utilize past budgets and disbursements as guides to help determine expenses for future 

periods of DHS-declared heightened threat. 

Questions may be directed to your ODP Preparedness Officer at (800) 368-6498. Thank 

you for your continued efforts and cooperation.
Editorial Note on Part 184
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 184 appear at 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; and 81 FR 49897, July 29, 2016.

§ 184.1199 Calcium gluconate. ( a ) Calcium gluconate ([CH2OH(CHOH)4COO]2Ca, CAS Reg. No. 299-28-5) is the calcium salt of gluconic acid which may be produced by neutralization of gluconic acid with lime or calcium carbonate.
( b ) The ingredient meets the specifications of the Food Chemicals Codex, 3d Ed. (1981), p. 51, which is incorporated by reference. Copies are available from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20418, or available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .*
( c ) The ingredient is used as a firming agent as defined in § 170.3(o)(10) of this chapter; formulation aid as defined in § 170.3(o)(14) of this chapter; sequestrant as defined in § 170.3(o)(26) of this chapter; stabilizer or thickener as defined in § 170.3(o)(28) of this chapter; and texturizer as defined in § 170.3(o)(32) of this chapter.
( d ) The ingredient is used in foods at levels not to exceed current good manufacturing practices in accordance with § 184.1(b)(1). Current good manufacturing practices result in a maximum level, as served, of 1.75 percent for baked goods as defined in § 170.3(n)(1) of this chapter; 0.4 percent for dairy product analogs as defined in § 170.3(n)(10) of this chapter; 4.5 percent for gelatins and puddings as defined in § 170.3(n)(22) of this chapter; and 0.01 percent for sugar substitutes as defined in § 170.3(n)(42) of this chapter.
( e ) Prior sanctions for this ingredient different from the uses established in this section do not exist or have been waived.
[47 FR 27808, June 25, 1982]
### Geology and water resources of a portion of the Missouri River valley in northeastern Nebraska

By: George E. Condra

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp215

#### Links

- More information:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (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.
Editorial Note on Part 117
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 117.305 General requirements applying to records. Records must: ( a ) Be kept as original records, true copies (such as photocopies, pictures, scanned copies, microfilm, microfiche, or other accurate reproductions of the original records), or electronic records;
( b ) Contain the actual values and observations obtained during monitoring and, as appropriate, during verification activities;
( c ) Be accurate, indelible, and legible;
( d ) Be created concurrently with performance of the activity documented;
( e ) Be as detailed as necessary to provide history of work performed; and
( f ) Include: ( 1 ) Information adequate to identify the plant or facility (*e.g.,* the name, and when necessary, the location of the plant or facility);
( 2 ) The date and, when appropriate, the time of the activity documented;
( 3 ) The signature or initials of the person performing the activity; and
( 4 ) Where appropriate, the identity of the product and the lot code, if any.
( g ) Records that are established or maintained to satisfy the requirements of this part and that meet the definition of electronic records in § 11.3(b)(6) of this chapter are exempt from the requirements of part 11 of this chapter. Records that satisfy the requirements of this part, but that also are required under other applicable statutory provisions or regulations, remain subject to part 11 of this chapter.
#### § 1312.01 Scope of part 1312.

Procedures governing the importation, exportation, transshipment and intransit shipment of controlled substances pursuant to section 1002, 1003, and 1004 of the Act (21 U.S.C. 952, 953, and 954) are governed generally by those sections and specifically by the sections of this part.
#### CHEROKEE INTERMARRIAGE CASES. RED BIRD ET AL., CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES BY BLOOD, v. THE UNITED STATES. FITE ET AL., INTERMARRIED WHITE PERSONS CLAIMING TO BE ENTITLED TO CITIZENSHIP IN THE CHEROKEE NATION, v. THE UNITED STATES. PERSONS CLAIMING RIGHTS IN THE CHEROKEE NATION BY INTERMARRIAGE v. THE UNITED STATES.

[40 C. Cls. R., 411; 203 U. S. R., 76.]

*On the claimants’ Appeals.*

The subject-matter of this suit consists of 4,420,076 acres of land in the Cherokee country about to be allotted in severalty among the Cherokee people. The principal question involved is as to the right of white persons intermarried with Cherokee citizens to share in the allotment, either as Cherokee citizens or as communal owners.

The court below decides:

1. Under the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of *The Cherokee Nation*v. *Journeyoake*(155 U. S. R., 196, 208) the lands now to be allotted among the Cherokees are not communal property, but constitute the public domain of the nation.

2. In this public domain all Cherokees by blood and those whites by intermarriage who became citizens prior to the 1st November, 1875, are equally interested and have equal per capita rights in the allotment of those lands.

*5263. Tiie rights and privileges of those intermarried white citizens whose marriages with persons of Cherokee blood were subsequent to the 1st November, 1876, do not extend to a right of soil or interest in1 the vested funds of the nation, and they are not entitled to share in the allotment of the public domain unless they paid into the National Treasury $500 each.

1. Those white citizens who, subsequent to marriage with persons of Cherokee blood, have married persons not of Cherokee blood, and those white men who, being husbands of women of Cherokee blood, have abandoned their wives, are not citizens of the Cherokee Nation, and are not entitled to participate in the allotment.

5. Office found is a proceeding preliminary to the eviction of an alien in possession who would be entitled to hold if he were not an alien. It is nothing more than a form of action. In the cases of the intermarried whites the loss of citizenship is- a matter of defence, and need not be established by office found.

The decree of the court below is affirmed.

November 5, 1906.

Mr. Chief Justice Fuller

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court
I am writing regarding the Grant application by the Rhode Island Airport Corporation to take part in the 

Small Community Air Service Development Program. Please incorporate these comments, as 

appropriate, in objection to that application:

New England Airlines has been offering scheduled, frequent, daily, year-round service to the Block Island 

Community for forty-two years. This service includes 24-hour emergency medical transportation for 

Island residents and visitors. The profitable but short summer/tourist season allows us to self-subsidize 

the full year-around service to this Island Community. Any service that would dilute this seasonal 

market would, without question, jeopardize the year-round regular and “life-line” service we provide.

Passengers who need to travel through the Providence airport currently have three travel options to and 

from Block Island:

1. A direct, convenient charter flight with either New England Airlines or any one of the several 

other local-area charter operators.

2. Ground transportation to connect with our frequent (hourly-shuttle) flights– ten-minute flights 

between Westerly, RI and Block Island.

3. Ground transportation to the frequent, seasonal ferry service. (Ferries run about every hour 

during the summer season)

Air Flamenco provides a very similar service to Culebra, year-round, including emergency 24 hour 

medical transport in cooperation with the local government and medical facility.

Air Flamenco, until yesterday, was not aware of this Application or the D.O.T. Program that makes the 

Grant available. New England Airlines was not aware of the existence of this program until only days 

before the application’s submission. To say, as is stated, that New England Airlines is not interested in 

expanding our service to include Providence is NOT TRUE! Given the short notice by the Rhode Island 

Airport Corporation(RIAC) to be a part of this application, it was an impossibility to do so. Cape Air 

management unequivocally stated that they had been working with RIAC for “several years” toward this 

end!

Between Air Flamenco and New England Airlines, we together already operate fifteen of the type 

aircraft that Cape Air proposes to purchase specifically for this service, in addition to a variety of other 

aircraft types.

Please also note that although an application of this nature usually bears more strength when it includes 

backing for this “new” service by local tourism and government entities, there is no such support from 

either Block Island or Culebra.

Respectfully submitted,

William G. Bendokas, President

New England Airlines, Inc.
#### § 20.62 Inter- or intra-agency memoranda or letters.

Interagency or intra-agency memoranda or letters that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the Food and Drug Administration may be withheld from public disclosure except that factual information that is reasonably segregable in accordance with the rule established in § 20.22 is available for public disclosure. The deliberative process privilege shall not apply to records created 25 years or more before the date on which the records were requested.

[87 FR 55913, Sept. 13, 2022]
*\c W. W\ fc\a\ Ww JX^D^^W. twv ) ©0UBT RECEIVED OFCRIMINAL APPEALS IN

"YVWWrtft ^^\S\u^\©v\ ) JUN16 2015

j Ab@IAeosta,Cterf*

(^-OV\V>-vQ FILED IN

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

W t\A^ JUN 19 2075

Abel Acosta, Clerk

x^saVWssu: \jO^>vjW \\Vx_\^ X\csV ^K^S-W^ fc^ \N^o<x
^YvNd\V> ^o^\ovC\vvvn \As ssAoXcmX vtVCNAV^ c-J\\w\f\v»v

VaN\>T^ T^^00\r\\i^ \rv C^,VLC<JV\L>^ Atj^ \V vOvX M^^c Vsj^ft.

°W5 S^wr ^

CO
^3urV\V\ CV)W cX S&jrvAO^.

CjDvxrV ^^AntA^cwX Kfc&su\s X>V"Wu^ ^^.\>^ \V^;

0\ V\rV^\s"^M^^\ X\A\VrV Cxjvv^ ^vx\<\<V\*^X \^\\J\ rv<K

N^yL^oAuK ^v>v -^W. ^^ Wax At^Wxvio ^^VS'

^CS-^h W

0>A
fc^V-*" \

Law Offices of Alex B. Eyssen, pllc

Post Office Box 3321

Abilene, Texas 79604

www.eyssenlaw.com

Alex B.Eyssen Telephone (325) 267-6030

Alex@eyssenlaw.com Facsimile (325)267-6031

August 28, 2012

Daniel Dominguez #1355966

Nathaniel Neal Unit

9055 Spur 5.91

Amarillo, Texas 19107

Re: Cause No.13674-B; State ofTexas vs. Daniel Dominguez

Dear Mr. Dominguez:

I am in receipt of your letter dated August 20, 2012. Please be advised that it is not my custom or

typical practice to respond to each and every letter I receive from my clients. Rather, I generally respond if

and when there is an update.

The issue we are facing is (l) whether any DNA evidence exists that is in possession of the State and

(2) whether any DNA evidence exists from another case.

First, I have requested an official response from the District Attorney. I have been told that the

District Attorney is preparing a response to our request to determine whether any DNA evidence was taken,

preserved, and available for testing. I expect a written response any day. In speaking with the Assistant

District Attorney regarding this matter, I anticipate the response will be to the effect that no DNA evidence

exists. As soon I as receive a response, I will let you know. Given that over 60 days has passed for the State

to respond, I will file a Motion requiring the State to respond if none is received within the next couple of

days.

Second, I have requested that I be permitted to inspect the file related to Cause 5034-CX. That case

file is considered a "closed" file. Thus, I have to obtain permission from the S26th District Court in order to

inspect said file. Prior to being permitted to review the file, the District Judge first has to review the file and

then contact the parties involved to allow them the opportunity to object. This includes the "victim". The

Judge will let me know if and when I can inspect the file. I fully anticipate the Court will allow me to inspect

the file, however, if access is denied, then we can discuss our other remedies to gain access to the information

contained therein.

In addition, I have obtained and reviewed your entire Court file regarding Cause No. 13674-B. For

your convenience, I have enclosed a copy herein.

Abilene Office Anson Office

802 Mulberry 311N. Commercial

Abilene Texas 79601 Anson, Texas 79501