alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 507.20 Water supply and plumbing. ( a ) The following apply to the water supply: ( 1 ) Water must be adequate for the operations and must be derived from an adequate source;
( 2 ) Running water at a suitable temperature, and under suitable pressure as needed, must be provided in all areas where required for the manufacturing, processing, packing, or holding of animal food, for the cleaning of equipment, utensils, and animal food-packaging materials, or for employee hand-washing facilities;
( 3 ) Water that contacts animal food, animal food-contact surfaces, or animal food-packaging materials must be safe for its intended use; and
( 4 ) Water may be reused for washing, rinsing, or conveying animal food if it does not increase the level of contamination of the animal food.
( b ) Plumbing must be designed, installed, and maintained to: ( 1 ) Carry adequate quantities of water to required locations throughout the plant;
( 2 ) Properly convey sewage and liquid disposable waste from the plant;
( 3 ) Avoid being a source of contamination to animal food, water supplies, equipment, or utensils, or creating an unsanitary condition;
( 4 ) Provide adequate floor drainage in all areas where floors are subject to flooding-type cleaning or where normal operations release or discharge water or other liquid waste on the floor; and
( 5 ) Ensure that there is no backflow from, or cross-connection between, piping systems that discharge waste water or sewage and piping systems that carry water for animal food or animal food manufacturing.
( c ) Sewage and liquid disposal waste must be disposed of through an adequate sewerage system or through other adequate means.
( d ) Each plant must provide employees with adequate, readily accessible toilet facilities. Toilet facilities must be kept clean and must not be a potential source of contamination of animal food, animal food-contact surfaces, or animal food-packaging materials.
( e ) Each plant must provide hand-washing facilities designed to ensure that an employee's hands are not a potential source of contamination of animal food, animal food-contact surfaces, or animal food-packaging materials.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 8, 2011 

0228 

Order 

 

March 8, 2011 

142122 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 142122 

 COA: 300053 

Kent CC: 09-002014-FC 

DARRYL EDWARD CHANEY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 15, 2010 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996, AND THE RELATED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS THEN ENDED, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          11,381
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,798
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,528
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                97,056
<PP&E>                                          14,572
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,672
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 208,953
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           75,589
<BONDS>                                         67,922
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           126
<OTHER-SE>                                      55,887
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   208,953
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               219,827
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  196,630
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,203
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 19,741
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,121
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             11,620
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,620
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .91
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .91
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 189
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 189 appear at 61 FR 14482, Apr. 2, 1996; 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; and 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005.

§ 189.240 Lead solders. ( a ) Lead solders are alloys of metals that include lead and are used in the construction of metal food cans.
( b ) Food packaged in any container that makes use of lead in can solder is deemed to be adulterated in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, based upon an order published in the Federal Register of June 27, 1995.
[60 FR 33109, June 27, 1995]
§ 20.83 Disclosure required by court order. ( a ) Records of the Food and Drug Administration which the Commissioner has determined are not available for public disclosure, in the form of a regulation published or cross-referenced in this part, shall nevertheless be made available for public disclosure in compliance with a final court order requiring such disclosure.
( b ) Where the Food and Drug Administration record ordered disclosed under paragraph (a) of this section is a record about an individual that is not available for public disclosure under § 20.63, the Food and Drug Administration shall attempt to notify the individual who is the subject of the record of the disclosure, by sending a notice to the individual's last known address.
( c ) Paragraph (b) of this section shall not apply where the name or other personal identifying information is deleted prior to disclosure.
[42 FR 15616, Mar. 22, 1977, as amended at 68 FR 25287, May 12, 2003]
# EUR-Lex - 31994D0965 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31994D0965

**94/965/EC: Commission Decision of 28 December 1994 amending Decision 93/52/EEC to take account of the situation in Finland with regard to brucellosis (B. melitensis) **

*
Official Journal L 371 , 31/12/1994 P. 0031 - 0031 Finnish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 64 P. 0247 Swedish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 64 P. 0247 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 28 December 1994 amending Decision 93/52/EEC to take account of the situation in Finland with regard to brucellosis (B. melitensis) (94/965/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Decision 93/52/EEC recording the compliance by certain Member States or regions with the requirements relating to brucellosis (B. melitensis) and according them the status of a Member State or region officially free of the disease (1), as amended by Annex I (V) (E) (2) (35) to the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Kingdom of Norway, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the European Union is founded, and in particular Article 2a thereof,

Whereas, with a view to its accession, the status of Finland with regard to brucellosis (B. melitensis) should be assessed and fixed;

Whereas brucellosis has been compulsorily notifiable in Finland for at least five years; whereas there have been no officially confirmed cases for at least five years and vaccination has been prohibited for at least three years; whereas it should therefore be recorded that Finland complies with the requirements laid down in Annex A (1) (II) (1) (b) to Council Directive 91/68/EEC of 28 January 1991 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in ovine and caprine animals (2);

Whereas, therefore, the status of Finland as a Member State officially free of brucellosis (B. melitensis) should be recognized from 1 January 1995;

Whereas, with respect to the obligations regarding serological checks to be carried out, the provisions of Annex A (1) (II) (2) (i) to Directive 91/68/EEC are to be reviewed before 1 January 1995; whereas the maintenance of Finland's status must take account of the results of that review,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Commission Decision 93/52/EEC the following line is hereby added to Annex I under 'Member State':

'- Finland'.

Article 2

This Decision shall take effect subject to and on the date of the entry into force of the Treaty of Accession of Norway, Austria, Finland and Sweden.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 28 December 1994.

For the Commission

René STEICHEN

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 13, 21. 1. 1993, p. 14.(2) OJ No L 46, 19. 2. 1991, p. 19.
1 The Honorable Nanette K. Laughrey, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 04-3718

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Christopher W. Middaugh, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: September 7, 2005 Filed: September 22, 2005

___________ Before ARNOLD, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Christopher Middaugh appeals the sentence the district court 1 imposed following revocation of his probation. Middaugh originally pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9), and was sentenced in January 2003 to 5 years probation. In November 2004 the district court revoked Middaugh’s probation and sentenced him to 15 months imprisonment and 2 years supervised release, after Middaugh stipulated that he had violated the conditions of his probation.-2- On appeal, Middaugh argues that the district court lacked jurisdiction to accept his guilty plea to the underlying firearm offense (as to which he now denies guilt), that the court should have granted his revocation-hearing request for reappointment of counsel, and that defense counsel at both his underlying criminal proceedings and the revocation proceedings were ineffective. These arguments fail. Middaugh is foreclosed from attacking his firearm conviction in this appeal, seeUnited States v. Simmons , 812 F.2d 561, 563 (9th Cir. 1987) (appeal from probation revocation is not proper avenue for collateral attack on underlying conviction); he waived the reappointment issue by explicitly accepting his present counsel at the revocation hearing, see United States v. Tulk , 171 F.3d 596, 600 (8th Cir. 1999) (issue waived below is not reviewed, even for plain error); and his ineffective-assistance claims are not properly before us, see United States v. Hughes , 330 F.3d 1068, 1069 (8th Cir. 2003) (claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are generally deferred to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceedings unless miscarriage of justice would obviously result, or outcome would be inconsistent with substantial justice). Accordingly, we affirm, and we also grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2012-NM-101-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

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

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

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 ( ) explain NO (X)
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 18

- 00501

- CR

B OBBY L

YNN R ACHAL

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from

C riminal District Court No. 3

of Tarr ant County (1525613D)

November 14, 2019

Opinion by Justice Womack

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgmen t s . It is ordered that the judgment s of the

tria l court are affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Dana Womack

Justice Dana Womack
November 18, 2013 Director, Chemical Control Division US Environmental Protection Agency Office ofPollution Prevention and Toxics EPAEast Room4146 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 

### Re: EPA- HQ - OPPT- 2003 - 0012 DuPont Chemicals and Fluoroproducts Chambers Works Deepwater, NJ 08023 CBIC Control Number 

# 357065

,...., c::,:) 

# - (,.,!.) % 

## Sl N 0 

### DuPont ChambersWorks NJPDES PermitNo. NJ0005100 PFOA Data Submittal- OutfallDSN662 Weekly Grab Samples October2013 SampleData 

### ~ 

### 0 .... Dear Chemical Control Division: Attachedplease find summaries ofPFOA analytical results for the DuPont Chambers Works weekly grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662A in October 2013. In accordance with the current site NJPDES permit (NJ0005100, effective September2011), these results are provided to NJDEP on a monthlybasis via electronic discharge monitoring reports. The enclosures include two paper and two electronic copies ofthe analytical results from this monitoring period. Please note that these results reflect a new reporting limitprotocol adopted byDuPont for PFOA. Beginning with samples collected during October 2013, laboratories have beenrequested to report PFOA results to a limit ofquantitation (LOQ) that is established at the low level concentration standard. The LOQreported for subject sample results is the same LOQ reported during the last several months.



# Sin~~r~:~~



# cYv~ Albert Patrick O'Neill UnitManager-Site Manufacturing Systems/Fluoroproducts DuPont Chambers Works APO/clc EnclosuresCopy to: Document Control Office US Environmental Protection Agency Office ofPollution Prevention and Toxics EPAEast Room6428 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Ms. Susan Rosenwinkel (cover letter only) Principal Environmental Engineer NJDEP Division ofWater Quality Bureau ofPoint Source Permitting - Region 2 401 E. State Street P.O. Box029 Trenton, NJ 08625-0029

**-~---** iAnalyte PFOA Sample ID Date Top (ft) Total

(T)/ Bottom (ft) units

Diss. (D) Duplicate# ug/L

T 662-GRAB 662-GRAB 10/7/13

10/14/13

0

0

0

0

1

1 2.68

4.48 Summary of Analytical Results 662 - October 2013 662-GRAB 662-GRAB 10/21/13

10/28/13

0

0

0

0

1

1 2.72

2.38 PFOA = Perfluorooctanoic Acid ug/L = micrograms per Liter ug/L =micrograms per liter or parts per billion (ppb)
LOQ = limit of quantification = 0.1 00 ug/L Samples were analyzed by Critical Path Services LLC. Reported results represent a single analysis, except for the sample collected on 1 0/28/13. Acceptable

precision was obtained and the reported result for the sample collected on 1 0/28/13 represents the average of lab duplicate results.

The NJDEP lab certification number for Critical Path Services LLC is PA072.

<and NO= Non detect at stated reporting limit Page 1 of 1 Copy of cwk 662 grab results_oct13.xls:Sheet1 11/15/2013 2:32PM
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
FRANK CALAPRISTI , AND OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant

- Appellee

______________________

2022

- 1080

______________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:18

- cv

- 00612

- TMD, Judge Thompson M. Dietz.

______________________
JUDGMENT

______________________

D OUGLAS E. M C K INLEY , J R ., Law Office of Douglas E. McKinley, Jr., Kennewick, WA, argued for plaintiff

- appellant.

A LBERT S. I AROSSI , Commercial Litigation Branch,Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washin gton, DC, argued for defendant

- appellee. Also represented by B RIAN M. B OYNTON , S TEVEN J OHN G ILLINGHAM , P ATRICIA M. M C C ARTHY

.

______________________ Case: 22-1080 Document: 34 Page: 1 Filed: 11/03/2022T HIS C AUSE ha ving been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (M OORE , Chief Judge

, L OURIE and P ROST , Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed . Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

November 3, 2022 Date /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court Case: 22-1080 Document: 34 Page: 2 Filed: 11/03/2022
12/03/2012 08:15 4252271007 ANM7 PAGE 02/03

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 

### n 12 13 14 15 

### :t6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 .5l 52 53 ROBERT SPlTZER FAA OFFICE OF REGIONAL COUNSEJ

.. 1601 LIND AVE. 1 SW RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057 TELEPHONE: 425/227·1417 FACSIMILE: 425/227-1007 

### UNITED STATES OFAMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

· OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, D.C.

In the Matter of: Sky West Airlines, Inc. FAA DOCKET Not Assigned 

### FAA Case No. 2011NM060063 FDMS Nos. FAA-2012-0873 Judge Richard C. Good\Vin

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE



### PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned attorney hereby enters his Notice of Appearance**~d** 

### directs 

### that all corresponden.ce be 

### sen.tto:

Robert Spitzer · Office ofRegional CoWlsel Federal 

### Aviation Administration 1601 Lind Avenue SW Renton, W A

. 98057 Phone: (425) 227-1417 Facsimile: (425) 227-1007

DATED this 3rd day ofDecember, 2012.

N.OTICE OfAPPEARANCE 

### Respectfully submitted:

Robert Spitzer Attomey 

### Federal Aviation Administration

SkywestAirlines- 20!.1NM060063, F AA-2012-0873 P!igc l of2 ROBERT SPITZER, FAA ATTOitNOCY TEL:**425.227.1.417~** FAX: 425.227.100712/03/2012 08:15

1 2 4252271007 ANM7



### CERTIFICATE OF

### SERVICE

3 

### Ihereby certifY that the foregoing Motion to Consolidate has been served via facsimile and 4 

### certified mail

- Return Receipt Requested 

### this date, to

### the following: 5 6 7 8 9 j,Q 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2l 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 3l 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 .3.9 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 49 49 50 51 52 53 

### The Honorable Richru·d C. Goodwin 

### Office ofHearings, M-20 1200NewJersey Avenue, S.E. East Buildi.ng Ground Floor, 

### Rm El2-320 

### Washington, D.C. 20590 

### TEL: (202) 366-2139 FAX: 

### (202) 366-7536


### Attn: Heru1ng 

### Docket**Clerk~** 

### AGC-430 Wilbur Wlight 

### Building- Suite 2W1000 Federal Aviation Administration 800 

### Independe11.ce Ave. SW. Washington, 

### DC 20591 

### FAX: (202) 493-5142
Todd

### Emerson, Esq. 

### SkyWest 

### Airlines 444 S. River Roa.d St. George, UT 84790 

### TEL: (435) 634-3530 

### FAX: (435)**634~3505**


### DATED 

### this 3rd 

### day ofDecen.1ber, 2012.

### /--~·



### TE RlKIRK Office ofRegional Counsel 

### (ANM-7) Federal Aviation Administration 1601 Lind Ave. SW · Renton, WA 98057 (425) 227-2007 PAGE 03/03

NOTTC.E OF APPEARANCe Skywest Airlines- 2011NM060063,**FM~2012·0873** Page2 of2 R09ERT SPITZER, FAA ATTORNEY TEL: 425.227.1417: PA.X: 425.227.1007
#### § 520.2220 Sulfadimethoxine oral dosage forms.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the use of our reports
(and to all references to our Firm), as it relates to VoiceStream Wireless
Corporation and Subsidiaries, included in or made a part of this registration
statement.

                                        ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Seattle, Washington
December 1, 1999
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2021241DE.01001701.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 8.7.2021 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 241/17 |

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EU) 2019/6 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 11. Dezember 2018 über Tierarzneimittel und zur Aufhebung der Richtlinie 2001/82/EG

(
[Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 4 vom 7. Januar 2019](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2019_004_R_TOC)
)

Seite 60, Artikel 8 Absatz 4

Anstatt:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| „(4) | Absatz 3 des vorliegenden Artikels gilt nicht für Tierarzneimittel, die für Equide bestimmt sind, die in dem in Artikel 114 Absatz 1 Buchstabe c der Verordnung (EU) 2016/429 genannten lebenslangen gültigen Identifizierungsdokument und in allen auf Grundlage jener Verordnung angenommenen Rechtsakten als nicht zur Schlachtung für den menschlichen Verzehr bestimmt deklariert wurden, und deren Wirkstoffe gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 470/2009 und allen anderen auf Grundlage jener Verordnung angenommenen Rechtsakten nicht zulässig sind.“ |

muss es heißen:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| „(4) | Absatz 3 des vorliegenden Artikels gilt nicht für Tierarzneimittel, die für Equide bestimmt sind, die in dem einzigen, lebenslang gültigen Identifizierungsdokument, das in Artikel 114 Absatz 1 Buchstabe c der Verordnung (EU) 2016/429 und in allen auf Grundlage jener Verordnung angenommenen Rechtsakten genannt ist, als nicht zur Schlachtung für den menschlichen Verzehr bestimmt deklariert wurden, und deren Wirkstoffe gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 470/2009 und allen anderen auf Grundlage jener Verordnung angenommenen Rechtsakten nicht zulässig sind.“ |

---
# L_2018088EN.01000701.xml

| 4.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 88/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 88/7

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/483 of 22 March 2018 on the minimum selling price for skimmed milk powder for the 18th partial invitation to tender within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 81 of 23 March 2018
  )

On page 9, recital (3):

for:

| ‘(3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,’, |
| --- | --- |

‘(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,’,

read:

| ‘(3) | The Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit laid down by its Chair,’. |
| --- | --- |

‘(3)

The Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit laid down by its Chair,’.

---