alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

APR 2 7 ~

OFF~ OF

AIR AND RADIATION

Mr. Russell McCallister

U.S. Department of Energy

Carlsbad Field Office

P.O. Box 3090

Carlsbad, NM 88221

Dear Mr. McCallister:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed the information

provided by the Department of Energy (DOE), in an April 18, 2006 letter, forwarding a

supplemental calibration report for the Waste Receiving and Processing (WRAP)

Facility, Gamma Energy Assay (GEA) System Unit B, at Hanford. EPA previously

approved this GEA System in August 2002 (Docket No. A98-49, II-A4-25).

EP A's review of the supplemental calibration report for this equipment, found the

document to be technically acceptable. During our review, EP A identified two comments

on the report. These comments were discussed on April 18, 2006 with you and

representatives of the Hanford Site. During that conversation, EP A and DOE agreed that

these comments should be addressed. On April 25, 2006 you provided the modified

pages of the document. These change pages adequately addressed our comments.

Please contact Rajani Joglekar (202-343-9462) or Ed Feltcom (202-343-9422) if you

have any questions.

Sincerely,

..::~~~:~t~~~tfJ~a)C£,'I~.,Z~~~l~ ~

Sharon White, Acting Director

Center for Federal Regulations

Radiation Protection Division

cc (Electronic Distribution):

A. Holland, CBFO

K. Watso~ CBFO

D. Moody, CBFO

iIl"""'~I-\UnLi. i ji--."tJII.~w

Recycl8dlRecyclabie e Prlnled wiIh Vegetable 011 Bued.. 00 100% PosOInsuNf, P~ aDW18 Free Recycled Pap8f'
#### § 18a.3 Delegation to the Chief Medical Director.

The Chief Medical Director is delegated responsibility for obtaining evidence of voluntary compliance implementing the provisions of Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964, in connection with payments to State homes, with State home facilities for furnishing nursing home care, and from recognized national organizations whose representatives are afforded space and office facilities in field facilities under jurisdiction of the Chief Medical Director.

[35 FR 10759, July 2, 1970, as amended at 51 FR 10386, Mar. 26, 1986]
§ 18.434 Education setting. ( a ) *Academic setting.* A recipient shall educate, or shall provide for the education of, each qualified handicapped person in its jurisdiction with persons who are not handicapped to the maximum extent appropriate to the needs of the handicapped person. A recipient shall place a handicapped person in the regular educational environment operated by the recipient unless it is demonstrated by the recipient that the education of the person in the regular environment with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. In deciding whether to place a person in a setting other than the regular educational environment, a recipient shall consider the proximity of the alternate setting to the person's home.
( b ) *Nonacademic settings.* In providing or arranging for the provision of nonacademic and extracurricular services and activities, a recipient shall ensure that handicapped persons participate with nonhandicapped persons in those activities and services to the maximum extent appropriate to the needs of the handicapped person in question.
( c ) *Comparable facilities.* If a recipient in compliance with paragraph (a) of this section operates a facility that is identifiable as being for handicapped persons, the recipient shall ensure that the facility and the services and activities provided in that facility are comparable to the other facilities, services, and activities of the recipient.
Exhibit 31.2
I, William R. Sprow, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Sentex SensingTechnology, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterlyreport;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of thisquarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and
c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of theEvaluation Date;
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internalcontrols which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for theregistrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls;and
6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in thisquarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internalcontrols or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controlssubsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any correctiveactions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
Date: October 5, 2004
/s/ William R. Sprow, Chief Financial Officer
Point Source component adjustment of Area Source Emissions

Emissions from Point sources may be included in estimates arrived at using the Area source modelpotentially double counting these sourcesThe following sources' emissions for SCC 405xx codes were subtracted from the Area Source Category Graphic ArtsArea Code SCC category = 405xxEmissions from Clark Public Utilities boiler (103xx External Combustion Boilers) was considered to be insignificant and no adjustment to the area source category was made

VOC NOx

TPY lb/day TPY lb/day

2002

405 PETROLEUM AND SOLVENT EVAPORATION - PRINTING/PUBLISHING40500401 Tetra Pak Materials LP 1.0 5.2 large point sourc40500401 Tetra Pak Materials LP 1.5 8.3 large point sourc40500433 The Columbian 5.8 31.5 large point sourc40500811 Tetra Pak Materials LP 2.1 11.7 large point sourc40588801 The Columbian 5.8 31.5 large point sourc40588801 Bemis Company, Inc. 7.4 40.5 small point sourc

Total subtracted from Graphic Arts Area Source Category 23.5 128.7

2015 Growth Projection

405 PETROLEUM AND SOLVENT EVAPORATION - PRINTING/PUBLISHING40500401 Tetra Pak Materials LP 0.9 4.9 large point sourc40500401 Tetra Pak Materials LP 1.4 7.8 large point sourc40500433 The Columbian 6.8 37.2 large point sourc40500811 Tetra Pak Materials LP 2.0 11.0 large point sourc40588801 The Columbian 6.8 37.2 large point sourc40588801 Bemis Company, Inc. 7.4 40.5 small point sourc

Total subtracted from Graphic Arts Area Source Category 25.3 138.6

2002

103 EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - COMMERCIAL10300603 Clark Public Utilities / River Road Generating Project 0.04 0.22 0.12 0.68 large point sourc

2015 Growth Projection

103 EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - COMMERCIAL10300603 Clark Public Utilities / River Road Generating Project 0.05 0.28 0.16 0.87 large point sourc

Totals from Clark Public Utilities not subtracted from area sourcecategory; determined to be insignificant

WA 2015 PTE W
<PAGE>
                                                                  Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Robert S. Kendall, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Sentex Sensing
Technology, Inc.;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Date:  July 7, 2004

/s/ Robert S. Kendall, Chief Executive Officer
--------------------------------------------------
Signature & Title



                                       12
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2197 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2197

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To modify the boundary of the Hopewell Culture National Historical Park 
             in the State of Ohio, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Hopewell Culture National Historical 
Park Boundary Adjustment Act''.

SEC. 2. BOUNDARY EXPANSION.

    Section 2 of the Act entitled ``An Act to rename and expand the 
boundaries of the Mound City Group National Monument in Ohio'', 
approved May 27, 1992 (106 Stat. 185), is amended--
            (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subsection (a)(3);
            (2) by striking the period at the end of subsection (a)(4) 
        and inserting ``; and'';
            (3) by adding after subsection (a)(4) the following new 
        paragraph:
            ``(5) the map entitled `Hopewell Culture National 
        Historical Park, Ohio Proposed Boundary Adjustment' numbered 
        353/80,049 and dated June, 2006.''; and
            (4) by adding after subsection (d)(2) the following new 
        paragraph:
            ``(3) The Secretary may acquire lands added by subsection 
        (a)(5) only from willing sellers.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 22, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 2197

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To modify the boundary of the Hopewell Culture National Historical Park 
             in the State of Ohio, and for other purposes.
```
JUDGMENT-MERGER.

[Butler Circuit Court,

April Term, 1885.]

Cox, Smith and Swing, JJ.

#### August Carr v. Beckett.

Judgment on Joint Obligation.

After judgment against two joint makers, a new trial granted to one should be given to both. If otherwise, it will stand as to the other, where he does not complain. But the judgment against one merges the debt, and precludes a subsequent j udgment against the other.

Error to the Circuit Court of Butler county.

Smith, J.

Beckett sued Israel Carr before a justice of the peace on a joint note purporting to be signed by him and Augustus Carr, and recovered a judgment. Israel Carr appealed to the common pleas, where, without objection, Augustus Carr was also made a defendant, and the two jointly filed an answer denying the execution of the note. Trial was had and a verdict rendered against both of the defendants. On a motion for a new trial by both, the verdict was set aside as to Augustus and a new trial granted as to him, and overruled as to Israel and judgment rendered against him on the verdict, and the case continued for trial as to Augustus. At a subsequent term the issue as to Augustus Carr was tried, and a verdict rendered in favor of the plaintiff. Carr moved for a new trial, and in arrest of judgment, on the ground that the judgment at the prior term against *44Israel Carr was a merger of the claim on the note against both makers. The court overruled the motions and rendered judgment on the verdict against Augustus Carr, and he prosecuted his proceeding in error against Beckett alone to reverse that judgment.

F. Vanderveer, for plaintiff in error.

Israel Williams, for defendant in error.

*Held:*That there was error in the judgment against both of the defendants —in this : 1. That on the setting aside of the verdict and the granting of the new trial to one of two makers of a joint note, it should have been done as to the other also, for the reason, that he was entitled to have the case tried as to both at the same time, and that in such case a judgment cannot properly betaken as to one defendant, leaving the action to proceed as to the other. Acker v. Adams & Ford, 23 O. S., 543. But Israel Carr not complaining of such error, the judgment against him stands.

2. That a judgment having been rendered against Israel Carr on the joint note of the two defendants, no subsequent recovery can be had against Augustus Carr. The claim against both on the note was merged into the judgment, and Augustus Carr might afterwards have set up this fact as a defense. But not having done so, and the facts appearing on the record, his motion in arrest of, judgment was proper, and it was error in the court to overrule his motion and to render a judgment against him. Avery v. Vansickle, 35 O. S., 274.

Judgment reversed as to Augustus Carr.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2151 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2151

 To provide technical and other assistance to countries in the Pacific 
 region through the United States Agency for International Development.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 3, 2007

 Mr. Faleomavaega introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide technical and other assistance to countries in the Pacific 
 region through the United States Agency for International Development.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. USAID IN THE PACIFIC REGION.

    (a) In General.--The Administrator of the United States Agency for 
International Development (USAID) shall, upon request by the government 
of a country in the Pacific region, provide to such government 
technical and other assistance.
    (b) Country in the Pacific Region Defined.--In this section, the 
term ``country in the Pacific region'' means any of the following 
countries:
            (1) The Cook Islands.
            (2) The Federated States of Micronesia.
            (3) The Independent State of Samoa.
            (4) The Kingdom of Tonga.
            (5) Niue.
            (6) Papua New Guinea.
            (7) The Republic of Fiji.
            (8) The Republic of Kiribati.
            (9) The Republic of the Marshall Islands.
            (10) The Republic of Nauru.
            (11) The Republic of Palau.
            (12) The Republic of Vanuatu.
            (13) The Solomon Islands.
            (14) Tuvalu.
                                 <all>
```
# ALABAMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

June 28, 2024 CR-2023-0301 Nicholas James Horton v. State of Alabama (Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court: CC-19-4350) 

## NOTICE You are hereby notified that on June 28, 2024, the following action was taken in the above-referenced cause by the Court of Criminal Appeals: Application for Rehearing Overruled.

D. Scott Mitchell, Clerk
MARLON F. KELLY,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-5141

Opinion filed June 9, 2017.

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus -- Original Jurisdiction.

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and M. J. Lord, Assistant Public Defender, 

Tallahassee, for Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of habeas corpus is granted. Petitioner’s sentence is hereby 

vacated, and this matter is remanded for resentencing in accordance with Hatten v. 

State, 203 So. 3d 142 (Fla. 2016).

PETITION GRANTED; REMANDED.

LEWIS, B.L. THOMAS, and ROWE, JJ., CONCUR.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1940 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1940

To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify 
    those classes of individuals born in the United States who are 
         nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 19, 2007

   Mr. Deal of Georgia (for himself, Mr. Bilbray, and Mr. Daniel E. 
    Lungren of California) introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify 
    those classes of individuals born in the United States who are 
         nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Birthright Citizenship Act of 
2007''.

SEC. 2. CITIZENSHIP AT BIRTH FOR CERTAIN PERSONS BORN IN THE UNITED 
              STATES.

    (a) In General.--Section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(8 U.S.C. 1401) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``The 
        following'';
            (2) by redesignating paragraphs (a) through (h) as 
        paragraphs (1) through (8); and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(b) Definition.--Acknowledging the right of birthright 
citizenship established by section 1 of the 14th amendment to the 
Constitution, a person born in the United States shall be considered 
`subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States for purposes of 
subsection (a)(1) if the person is born in the United States of 
parents, one of whom is--
            ``(1) a citizen or national of the United States;
            ``(2) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in 
        the United States whose residence is in the United States; or
            ``(3) an alien performing active service in the armed 
        forces (as defined in section 101 of title 10, United States 
        Code).''.
    (b) Applicability.--The amendment made by subsection (a)(3) shall 
not be construed to affect the citizenship or nationality status of any 
person born before the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```