alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Indian Affairs 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of amendment to approved Tribal-State compact. 

# SUMMARY:

                        Pursuant to section 11 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, Pub. L. 100-497, 25 U.S.C. 2710, the Secretary of the Interior shall publish, in the                         **Federal Register**                        , notice of approved Tribal-State Compacts for the purpose of engaging in Class III gaming activities on Indian lands. The Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior, through his delegated authority, has approved Amendment IV to the Tribal-State Compact for Regulation of Class III Gaming Between the Burns—Paiute Tribe and the State of Oregon, which was executed on March 31, 2000.                     

# DATES:

This action is effective May 31, 2000. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George T. Skibine, Director, Office of Indian Gaming Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, DC 20240, (202) 219-4066. 

Dated: May 18, 2000. 

Kevin Gover. 

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 00-13494 Filed 5-30-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-02-P
§ 780.318 Exemption for nonlocal minors. ( a ) Section 13(a)(6)(D) of the 1966 Amendments to the Fair Labor Standards Act exempts from the minimum wage and overtime provisions “any employee employed in agriculture * * * if such employee (other than an employee described in clause (C) of this subsection): ( 1 ) Is 16 years of age or under and is employed as a hand harvest laborer, is paid on a piece rate basis in an operation which has been, and is customarily and generally recognized as having been, paid on a piece rate basis in the region of employment,
( 2 ) is employed on the same farm as his parent of persons standing in the place of his parent, and
( 3 ) is paid at the same piece rate as employees over age 16 are paid on the same farm.”
( b ) It is clear from the legislative history of the amendments that the exemption was intended to apply, where the other specific tests are met, only to minors 16 years of age or under who are not “local” in the sense that they are away from their permanent home when employed in agriculture. Specifically the exemption was intended to apply in the case of the children of migrants who typically accompany their parents in harvesting and other agricultural work. (S. Rept. No. 1487, 89th Cong., second sess., to accompany H.R. 13712, pp. 9 and 10)
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

December 29, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

132289 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 132289 

 COA: 260031 

Washtenaw CC: 03-000370-FC 

ROBERT LAWRENCE WILKENS, JR., 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 8, 2006 

judgment 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. 

t1218 

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. 

December 29, 2006 

 Clerk
IIA 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 27 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative 

to the line item veto. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 11, 2007 

Mrs. DOLE introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States relative to the line item veto. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 

8 States within seven years after the date of its submission 

9 by the Congress: 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•SJ 27 IS 

1 ‘‘ARTICLE— 

2 ‘‘SECTION 1. The President may reduce or disapprove 

3 any appropriation in any bill, order, resolution, or vote, 

4 which is presented to the President under section 7 of Ar5 ticle I. 

6 ‘‘SECTION 2. Any legislation that the President ap7 proves and signs, after being amended pursuant to section 

8 1, shall become law as so modified. 

9 ‘‘The President shall return those portions of the leg10 islation that contain reduced or disapproved appropria11 tions with objections to the House where such legislation 

12 originated. 

13 ‘‘Congress may separately consider any reduced or 

14 disapproved appropriations in the manner prescribed 

15 under section 7 of Article I for bills disapproved by the 

16 President. 

17 ‘‘SECTION 3. This article shall take effect on the first 

18 day of the first session of Congress beginning after the 

19 date of ratification.’’. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
§ 801.10 Exclusion for public sector employers. ( a ) Section 7(a) provides an exclusion from the Act's coverage for the United States Government, any State or local government, or any political subdivision of a State or local government, acting in the capacity of an employer. This exclusion from the Act also extends to any interstate governmental agency.
( b ) The term *United States Government* means any agency or instrumentality, civilian or military, of the executive, legislative, or judicial branches of the Federal Government, and includes independent agencies, wholly-owned government corporations, and nonappropriated fund instrumentalities.
( c ) The term *any political subdivision of a State or local government* means any entity which is either. ( 1 ) Created directly by a state or local government, or
( 2 ) Administered by individuals who are responsible to public officials (*i.e.*, appointed by an elected public official(s) and/or subject to removal procedures for public officials, or to the general electorate.
( d ) This exclusion from the Act applies only to the Federal, State, and local government entity with respect to its own public employees. Except as provided in sections 7 (b) and (c) of the Act, and § 801.11 of the regulations, this exclusion does not extend to contractors or nongovernmental agents of a government entity, nor does it extend to government entities with respect to employees of a private employer with which the government entity has a contractual or other business relationship.
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 337 

Authorizing the Committee on Rules and Administration to prepare a revised 

edition of the Standing Rules of the Senate as a Senate document. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 28, 2007 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. BENNETT) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the Committee on Rules and Administration to 

prepare a revised edition of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate as a Senate document. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. PRINTING THE STANDING RULES OF THE SEN3 ATE. 

4 (a) AUTHORIZATIONS.—The Committee on Rules and 

5 Administration shall prepare a revised edition of the 

6 Standing Rules of the Senate and such standing rules 

7 shall be printed as a Senate document. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•SRES 337 ATS 

1 (b) ADDITIONAL COPIES.—In addition to the usual 

2 number, 2,500 additional copies shall be printed for use 

3 by the Committee on Rules and Administration. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
6H 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 23-0439

LVNV FUNDING, LLC,

 Plaintiff and Appellee,

 v.

TANA TOREN WOEPPEL,

 Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

This appeal being subject to M.R.App.P. 7, and the parties having failed to jointly 

and timely select a mediator under M.R.App.P., 7(4),(c),

IT IS ORDERED THAT Karl K. Rudbach, whose name appears next on the list 

of attorneys desiring appointment as mediators for Money Judgments appeals which is 

maintained pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appointed to conduct the 

mediation process required by M.R.App.P., 7(5), and 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 

7(5)(d) shall run from the date of this order of appointment.

A true copy of this order is being mailed to counsel of record for the parties, or to 

the parties individually if not represented by counsel, on the date hereof.

DATED this September 21, 2023.

Bowen Greenwood, Clerk of the Supreme Court

c: Tana Toren Woeppel, tanatorenwoeppel@yahoo.com

Brian Anthony Chou, bchou@messerlikramer.com

Marcus Sean Boston, mboston@messerlikramer.com

Karl K. Rudbach; karl@ramlowrudbach.com

09/21/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0439
### Artesian water in the Malabar coastal plain of southern Kerala, India

By: George C. TaylorP.K. Ghosh

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1608D

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (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.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Gencor
Industries, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materials respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|/s/ E.J. Elliott                    
|E.J. Elliott                        
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
|                                    
|December 22, 2010                   



|                                            
|--------------------------------------------
|/s/ Marc G. Elliott                         
|Marc G. Elliott                             
|President and Acting Chief Financial Officer
|                                            
|December 22, 2010
#### § 784.114 Application of exemptions on a workweek basis.

The general rule that the unit of time to be used in determining the application of the exemption to an employee is the workweek (see *Overnight Motor Transportation Co.* v. *Missel,* 316 U.S. 572; *Mitchell* v. *Stinson,* 217 F. 2d 210; *Mitchell* v. *Hunt.* 263 F. 2d 913; *Puerto Rico Tobacco Marketing Co-op. Ass'n.* v. *McComb,* 181 F. 2d 697). Thus, the workweek is the unit of time to be taken as the standard in determining the applicability to an employee of section 13(a)(5) or section 13(b)(4) (*Mitchell* v. *Stinson,* supra). An employee's workweek is a fixed and regularly recurring period of 168 hours—seven consecutive 24-hour periods. It may begin at an hour of any day set by the employer and need not coincide with the calendar week. Once the workweek has been set it commences each succeeding week on the same day and at the same hour. Changing the workweek for the purpose of escaping the requirements of the Act is not permitted. If in any workweek an employee does only exempt work he is exempt from the wage and hours provisions of the Act during that workweek, irrespective of the nature of his work in any other workweek or workweeks. An employee may thus be exempt in one workweek and not the next (see *Mitchell* v. *Stinson,* supra). But the burden of effecting segregation between exempt and nonexempt work as between particular workweeks is on the employer (see *Tobin* v. *Blue Channel Corp.,* 198 F. 2d 245).
1

Ogulei, David

From: Ogulei, David

Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:42 PM

To: fpi_market@fpi-inc.com

Subject: Ambient and Stack Metals Monitoring

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is looking for information on commercially available stack and 

ambient continuous emissions monitoring equipment for heavy metals such as mercury, arsenic, lead, 

cadmium, chromium and others. Do you currently manufacture and/or sell such monitoring equipment? If

so, are you currently marketing such monitoring equipment in the United States? If you have any helpful 

information regarding commercially available continuous metals monitors, would you please share that 

information with me? 

Thank you. 

David Ogulei, Ph.D., P.E. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 5 | Air & Radiation Division | AR-18J 

77 West Jackson Blvd. | Chicago, Illinois 60604 

Phone: (312) 353-0987 | Fax: (312) 692-2080 

Ogulei.David@epa.gov
Original

No. 7152

#### *In re*Petition of Dover Police Department

June 30, 1975

*Douglas C. Gray,*city attorney, orally for the Police Department.

*Walter A. Calderwood,*by letter, in support of the petition.

*Anthony A. McManus,*by letter and orally, against the petition.

*Arnold P. Hanson,*by letter, against the petition.

*William P. Shea, T. Casey Moher, Philip C. Keefe*and *Samuel L. Hays,*orally, against the petition.

Memorandum Opinion

Petition seeking the approval of this court of an order subject to such approval made by the Justice of the Dover District Court ( *Calderwood,*J.), which granted a petition of the Dover Police Department for the adoption of a rule of court permitting the use of closed circuit television cameras and audio equipment within the district courtroom. The petition alleged that “in order to assist in, and improve upon the security of the district court” such equipment is to be used by members of the police department to monitor “activity during court sessions”. This use is to be made subject to certain “provisions” contained in the petition.

The use sought to be approved comes within the inherent power of the judiciary over the operation of its courts. *See*ABA Code of *379Judicial Conduct 3A (2) and (7) (1974); Supreme Court Rule 25, RSA 490:App. R 25 3A (7) (Supp. 1973). The general use of television cameras and audio equipment in courtrooms during trials has been the subject of much debate with divergent conclusions. In answer to a request to continue this same use of such equipment for security purposes, this court on June 7, 1974, stated: “we note that Supreme Court Rule 25, Canon 3A 7 (b) prohibits television in the courtroom unless ‘authorized by rules of court’... we think it would be wise to discontinue the same until such time as rules are studied, adopted and approved.” *See*Rule 1.4, Rules of The District and Municipal Courts (1975).

It is generally agreed that a most important factor in the effectiveness of rules of court is uniformity in their operation. Our legislature recognized this when it created an administrative committee of the district and municipal courts. RSA 502-A: 18. One of the important functions conferred on this committee was “to recommend uniform rules, practices and procedures for conducting the business of said courts.” *Id.*The judges of these courts themselves subscribed to this same need of uniformity when they formed an association to discuss their mutual problems.

Accordingly, we are of the opinion that we should withhold action on the present petition until a study is made of this subject by the administrative committee of the district and municipal courts (RSA 502-A: 18) in conjunction with a committee named by the New Hampshire Judges Association and until a report is filed with this court. Meanwhile, security of the courtrooms can be insured by the presence of a police officer as is the usual custom.

*So ordered.*
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer of

HORIZON BANCORPORATION, INC.

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
(Adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

The undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Horizon Bancorporation, Inc., hereby certifies that:

1. Horizon Bancorporation, Inc's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2005, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Horizon Bancorporation, Inc.

/S/ Kathleen M. JepsonKathleen M. Jepson
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
November 14, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       9,473,490
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      18,700,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 81,584,860
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      25,471,429
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        25,816,834
<LOANS>                                    393,908,986
<ALLOWANCE>                                  2,729,910
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             560,351,333
<DEPOSITS>                                 400,493,233
<SHORT-TERM>                                11,296,581
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          8,734,136
<LONG-TERM>                                 95,500,818
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,850,113
<OTHER-SE>                                  41,476,452
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             560,351,333
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             24,044,530
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            5,527,153
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               152,805
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            29,724,488
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          13,037,947
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          18,068,297
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       11,656,191
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  255,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             10,001,518
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,440,792
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   3,458,713
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,458,713
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.20
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.99
<LOANS-NON>                                  1,031,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                   332,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               444,101
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 76,407
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             2,607,167
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  199,192
<RECOVERIES>                                    66,934
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,729,910
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         2,729,910
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>