alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
MAY 14 aoW 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Hazardous Waste Manifem ProvSsi for Reject4 Sbipmexm and Residues > -. 

TO: 

Matt Hale. Dk&x Ti!&- h-dRegional Waste Division Directors 

Regions I-X 

On Maroh 4,2005, EPA promulgated a final rule which establishl new regulations for 

the Unifom Hazardous Waste ManiW system, inoIudingpevi~ the dest fbm usedto 

trrrck~~waste&omage~assitetothe~t,storageotdispod~ty~7O 

Bed. Reg. 10776). The revisions announced in that rule strjtldardized the content and appearance 

of the dest form and conthuati~n sheet (Formg 870042 aad a), made the fcm avdable 

bm EPA-qpuved sowms, d adopted new pracedutesfor traoldng specific types of waste 

shipments. We believe the $e manifest form has worked extmnellg well since the September 5, 

2006 effective date, although there is ene issue that wanants ~larification regarding a provision 

id the final rule. 

Speci6dyt tbe regulated cammunity and State waste management oEckb have asked 

for cWcation nqpdq fhermnifd providow at 40 CPR 4% 264.72(fXl) rmd 265.72(9(1), 

wBich address sitdons where a dmipated facility nee&@ return rejmedwastes or residues to 

the generator. In these cam, the desiited facility prejm&s anew manifest form to accompany 

therejected waste back to the gemator. At is.sue is what Momation should be entered in Item 

5 of the manifest form (Wemmtores Name and bfdbg . Ourintmtioniathefinal 

rule was to require the designated facility to put its own inh5 sinceitarigbtm 

the shipzaant of rejected waste, aad provide the 's infodon in Iten 8 

~Designnted Fdty Name and Sife Address''). &mh ra expW in tb preamble to 

the May 22,2001, proposed rule (66 Fed. Reg. 28240). Hdwever, the the mle Mvertdy 

req~thedesi~fiaoilit~rtoenta.the~fsdd~~addressh1~5 ofthe 

wxdkt. Wewillco~thisenorintheP~~butit~taketImetodoso. 

Meanwhile, you should consider maaifests as compl~ with our regulations if designated 

facilda enter their own Mdon in Item 5 in cases oflieiwtd shimneats. We atlso 

emurage states that are adopting the reddona to the ~p&to~~~ese 

changes now ratk than modify their rules later. 
The approach described above will provide i$e most sbightfod ftd&--to-g=atOr 

tracking of wwte sb&m&s. It ab mare c1dy PfoVkies for fore. ImpKataaf CQ*O~ that 

the returd shipment back to the gsnmtor was skwsfdly completed. Please note. that this 

memo does not address rll-load rejections at the facility that om while the transporter is 

preseFlt- rejections can be handledusing the original dest form rather than a new 

maaifsst farm. 

cc: Rm Enforcement Managers, Regions I - X
Exhibit 99.1
    Statement Furnished by CEO Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
                       Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350



                                  EXHIBIT 99.1

STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002,
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

     The undersigned, Barry E. Backhaus, is the President and Chief Executive
Officer of First Federal Bankshares, Inc. (the "Company").

     This statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the
Company of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2002 (the "Report").

     By execution of this statement, I certify that:

     A)   the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or
          78o(d)) and

     B)   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company as of the dates and for the periods covered by the
          Report.

     This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so
that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not intended that this
statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended.



November 13, 2002                                     /s/ Barry E. Backhaus
-----------------                                     ---------------------
Dated                                                 Barry E. Backhaus
**Exhibit 12.1**

Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

(dollars in thousands)
| ** **                          | ** ** | **Nine Months Ended  September 30,** | ** ** | **Year Ended December 31,** | ** ** |
|-------------------------------------|------------|-----------------------------------------------------|------------|--------------------------------------------|------------|
| ** **                          | ** ** | **2006**                                            | ** ** | **2005**                                   | ** ** | **2005** | ** ** | **2004** | ** ** | **2003** | ** ** | **2002** | ** ** | **2001** | ** ** |
| ** **                          | ** ** | **(Restated)**                                      | ** ** | ** **                                 | ** ** | **(Restated)** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** |
| ** **                          | ** ** | ** **                                          | ** ** | ** **                                 | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** |
| Earnings:                           |       |                                                |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Net income                          |       | $                                                   | 38,563     |                                       | $          | 43,019 |   | $ | 63,912 |   | $ | 56,742 |   | $ | 45,874 |   | $ | 50,184 |   | $ | 17,018 |   |
| Fixed charges                       |       | 34,751                                              |       | 34,585                                     |       | 46,633 |   | 41,836 |   | 37,899 |   | 30,210 |   | 7,334 |   |
| Adjusted  earnings                  |       | $                                                   | 73,314     |                                       | $          | 77,604 |   | $ | 110,545 |   | $ | 98,578 |   | $ | 83,773 |   | $ | 80,394 |   | $ | 24,352 |   |
|                                |       |                                                |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Fixed charges:                      |       |                                                |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Interest expense                    |       | $                                                   | 34,751     |                                       | $          | 34,585 |   | $ | 46,633 |   | $ | 41,836 |   | $ | 37,899 |   | $ | 30,210 |   | $ | 7,334 |   |
| Ratio of earnings to fixed  charges |       | 2.1                                                 | x          | 2.2                                        | x          | 2.4 | x | 2.4 | x | 2.2 | x | 2.7 | x | 3.3 | x |

 

----
§ 801.22 Rights of examinee—general. ( a ) Pursuant to section 8(b) of the Act, the limited exemption in section 7(d) of the Act for ongoing investigations, and the security service and controlled substance exemptions in 7(e) and (f) of the Act (described in § 801.12, 801.13, and 801.14 of this part) shall not apply unless all of the requirements set forth in this section and §§ 801.23 through 801.25 of this part are met.
( b ) During all phases of the polygraph testing the person being examined has the following rights: ( 1 ) The examinee may terminate the test at any time.
( 2 ) The examinee may not be asked any questions in a degrading or unnecessarily intrusive manner.
( 3 ) The examinee may not be asked any questions dealing with: ( i ) Religious beliefs or affiliations;
( ii ) Beliefs or opinions regarding racial matters;
( iii ) Political beliefs or affiliations;
( iv ) Sexual preferences or behavior; or
( v ) Beliefs, affiliations, opinions, or lawful activities concerning unions or labor organizations.
( 4 ) The examinee may not be subjected to a test when there is sufficient written evidence by a physician that the examinee is suffering from any medical or psychological condition or undergoing any treatment that might cause abnormal responses during the actual testing phase. “Sufficient written evidence” shall constitute, at a minimum, a statement by a physician specifically describing the examinee's medical or psychological condition or treatment and the basis for the physician's opinion that the condition or treatment might result in such abnormal responses.
( 5 ) An employee or prospective employee who exercises the right to terminate the test, or who for medical reasons with sufficient supporting evidence is not administered the test, shall be subject to adverse employment action only on the same basis as one who refuses to take a polygraph test, as described in §§ 801.20 and 801.21 of this part.
( c ) Any polygraph examination shall consist of one or more pretest phases, actual testing phases, and post-test phases, which must be conducted in accordance with the rights of examinees described in §§ 801.23 through 801.25 of this part.
**Exhibit 12.1**

 

Computation ofRatio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

(dollars inthousands)

 
| ** **                          | ** ** | **Nine Months Ended  September 30,** | ** ** | **Year Ended December 31,** | ** ** |
|-------------------------------------|------------|-----------------------------------------------------|------------|--------------------------------------------|------------|
| ** **                          | ** ** | **2008**                                            | ** ** | **2007**                                   | ** ** | **2007** | ** ** | **2006** | ** ** | **2005** | ** ** | **2004** | ** ** | **2003** | ** ** |
| Earnings:                           |       |                                                |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Net income                          |       | $                                                   | 74,143     |                                       | $          | 58,784 |   | $ | 85,303 |   | $ | 66,101 |   | $ | 63,912 |   | $ | 56,742 |   | $ | 45,874 |   |
| Fixed charges                       |       | 28,934                                              |       | 28,276                                     |       | 37,755 |   | 47,020 |   | 46,633 |   | 41,836 |   | 37,899 |   |
| Adjusted  earnings                  |       | $                                                   | 103,077    |                                       | $          | 87,060 |   | $ | 123,058 |   | $ | 113,121 |   | $ | 110,545 |   | $ | 98,578 |   | $ | 83,773 |   |
|                                |       |                                                |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Fixed charges:                      |       |                                                |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Interest expense                    |       | $                                                   | 28,934     |                                       | $          | 28,276 |   | $ | 37,755 |   | $ | 47,020 |   | $ | 46,633 |   | $ | 41,836 |   | $ | 37,899 |   |
| Ratio of  earnings to fixed charges |       | 3.6x                                                |       | 3.1x                                       |       | 3.3x | ** ** | 2.4x |   | 2.4x |   | 2.4x |   | 2.2x |   |

 

----
#### § 780.903 General scope of exemption.

The exemption provided by section 13(b)(16) is in two parts, subsection (A), which exempts employees engaged in the described transportation and preparation for transportation of fruits or vegetables, and subsection (B) which exempts employees engaged in the specified transportation of employees who harvest fruits or vegetables. The transportation and preparation for transportation of fruits and vegetables must be from the farm to a place of first processing or first marketing located in the same State where the farm is located; the transportation of harvesters must be between the farm and a place located in the same State as the farm.
#### § 110.126a San Francisco Bay, Calif.

*Richardson Bay Anchorage.* That portion of Richardson Bay, north of a line bearing 257° from Peninsula Point to the shore at Sausalito, except for federally-maintained channels, and all channels approved for private use therein.

Note:

Mariners anchoring in the special anchorage area should consult applicable ordinances of the Richardson Bay Regional Agency and the County of Marin. These ordinances establish requirements on matters including the anchoring of vessels, placement of moorings, and use of anchored and moored vessels within the special anchorage area. Information on these local agency requirements may be obtained from the Richardson Bay Harbor Administrator.

[CGFR 69-109, 34 FR 17771, Nov. 4, 1969, as amended by CGD 78-126, 45 FR 10760, Feb. 19, 1980; CGD11-99-009, 65 FR 20086, Apr. 14, 2000]
(75 South. 1005)

#### FINLEY v. STATE.

(7 Div. 424.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

April 10, 1917.)

Appeal from Shelby County Court; E. S. Dyman, Judge. Nathan Finley was convicted of petit larceny, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Riddle & Ellis,-of Columbiana, for appellant. W. D. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.

SAMFORD, J.

The defendant was tried and convicted in the county court of Shelby county of the offense of petit larceny. The cause was tried by the court without á jury, and from a judgment of conviction the defendant appeals. The only error complained of was the judgment of the court on the evidence. We have carefully considered the evidence, as shown by the bill of exceptions, and. from the evidence, we cannot say the court was in error. There is no error in the record, and the judgment of the lower court is affirmed. Affirmed.
January 14, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

DENNIS WALKER, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00236-CV V.

LARRY SCHION, Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment signed February 28, 2013 in favor 

of appellee Larry Schion, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have 

inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of 

the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellant Dennis Walker to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
SUGGESTED CITATION

National Center for Health Statistics, L. Fingerhut: Changes in

mortality among the elderly, United States, 1940-78, Vita/ and Hea/th

Statistics. Series 3, No. 22. DHHS Pub, No. (PHS) 82-1406. Public

Health Service. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office,

March 1982.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Fingerhut, Lois A.

Changes in mortality among the elderly, United States, 1940-78.

(Vital and haalth statistics. Series 3, Analytical studies ; no. 22)

(DHHS publication ; no. (PHS) 82-1406)

1. Life expectancy–United States. 2. Life expectancy.

3. Mortality–United States. 4. Mortality. 5, Aged-United States.

1. National Center for Health Statistics (U.S. ) II. Title. II 1. series.

IV. Series: DHHS publication ; no. (PHS) 82-1406.

HB1322.3.F56 304.6’4 82-600001

ISBN 0-8406 -0245-6 AACR2
Exhibit 4.56

 

Power of Attorney

 

THIS POWER OF ATTORNEY (hereinafter, the “Power of Attorney”) is executed by               (ID card No.:                       ) as of             and issued to             (ID card No.:                 ) (hereinafter, the “Entrusted Person”).

 

I,                                                                                        , hereby entrust the Entrusted Person with full representative power to exercise the following rights owned by me in the capacity of a shareholder of [VIE] (hereinafter, the “Company”) on my behalf:

 

1.                                      As my representative, to propose to convene and attend Shareholders’ meetings of the Company according to the articles of association of the Company;

 

2.                                      As my representative, to exercise voting rights on all matters requiring discussion or resolutions of the Shareholders’ meetings of the Company, including without limitation, the appointment and election of the Company’s directors and other officers to be appointed and removed by the Shareholders;

 

3.                                      As my representative, to exercise other voting rights of a shareholder as specified in the articles of association of the Company (including any other shareholder voting rights as specified in the amended articles of association).

 

I hereby irrevocably confirm that this Power of Attorney shall continue to be valid until the Shareholder Voting Right Proxy Agreement executed by and between [E-House Entity] (hereinafter, the “[E-House Entity]”), the Company and the Shareholders of the Company as of              expires or is early terminated, unless the [E-House Entity] gives me a direction to replace the Entrusted Person.

 

Authorization is hereby made.

 

	
 
    	
Name:
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Signature:
    	
/s/
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Date:
EX-10.1











June 7, 2012



Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation


311 Enterprise Drive


Plainsboro, NJ 08536


Attention: Board of Directors;



Peter J. Arduini, President and Chief Executive Officer



Ladies and Gentlemen:



As we have discussed, the following reflects our agreement regarding the termination of my
employment with Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation (the “Company”) and my continued
directorship on the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”):



1. Effective as of June 7, 2012 (the “Effective Date”), my employment with the
Company will terminate and I will cease to serve as Executive Chairman of the Board and as an
officer or employee of the Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates (except to the extent that I
remain an officer by virtue of my position as Chairman of the Board). As of the Effective Date, I
will also cease to serve as a member of any employee benefit plan committee of the Company. I
intend to continue to serve as Chairman and as a member of the Board, and this letter is not a
termination of my Board service as such. I acknowledge and agree that this termination does not
constitute a termination of my employment by the Company without “Cause” or by me for “Good Reason”
for purposes of the Second Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, dated as of July 27, 2004, as
amended, between me and the Company (the “Employment Agreement”) or any other agreement
between me and the Company.



2. As of the Effective Date, the Employment Agreement will automatically terminate and be of
no further force or effect, except for the provisions of the Employment Agreement (including
Section 7 thereof and the rights and obligations described in Section 8.13 thereof) that by their
terms survive the termination of the Employment Agreement and the termination of my employment with
the Company.



3. The Company agrees that my status as a non-employee director of the Company will commence
as of the Effective Date for purposes of any compensation that I may be entitled to receive in my
capacity as a non-employee member of the Board.



Very truly yours,


/s/ Stuart M. Essig


Stuart M. Essig



1



 cc: Richard Gorelick, General Counsel



Acknowledged and Agreed:



INTEGRA LIFESCIENCES HOLDINGS CORPORATION



By: /s/ Peter J. Arduini

Peter J. Arduini

President and Chief Executive Officer





2
#### § 114.50 Right of appeal.

A District Commander's decision to deny a bridge permit application or an application for drawbridge operation regulations may be appealed to the Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard. The appeal must be submitted in writing to the Commandant (CG-BRG), Attn: Office of Bridge Programs, U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7418, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593-7418, within 60 days of the District Commander's decision. The Commandant will take action on the appeal within 90 days of its receipt.

(5 U.S.C. 559; 14 U.S.C. 503; 33 U.S.C. 401, 491, 499, and 525; and 49 CFR 1.46(c) and (q))

[CGD 80-099, 46 FR 38354, July 27, 1981]

###### Editorial Note

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations affecting § 114.50, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 7, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50882

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DEMETRIO ALEMAN-SALAS, 

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas 

USDC No. 1:02-CR-164

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

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Demetrio AlemanSalas raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate

criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance

is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 21

- 00204

- CR

D AVYEON B ATISTE

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Appe al from the 213th District Court

of Tarrant County ( 1606616D )

March 9, 2023

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr

(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 judgment

. It is ordered that the trial court ’ s judgment

is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _ /s/ Elizabeth Kerr

_________________ Justice Elizabeth Kerr
DIU.RICHARDSON Governor DIANE DENISH Lieutenant Governor

July 23, 2010 

### NEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT 

## Air Quality

## Bureau 1301 Siler Road, Building B, Santa Fe, NM 87507-3113 Phone (505) 476-4300 Fax (505) 476-4375 www.nrnenv.state.nm.us

Mr. Tom Diggs, AssociateDirector-Air US EPARegion 6 1445 Ross Avenue Suite 1200 Mail Code: 6PD Dallas, TX75202-2733 Dear Mr. Diggs: RON CURRY Secretary SARAH COTIREU. Deputy Secretary

I am writing to clarify our interpretation of the New Mexico Interstate Transport SIP for Implementation of PM2.5. In that SIP revision, which we submitted in 2007, we committed to follow the PM 1 oSmi-ogate Policy in place at the time. Because ofcourt rulings and resulting adjustments to EPA guidance, you requested that we clarify the reference to the State's application of EPA's interim guidance on use of PM 10 as a smrogate for 

### PM2.s· The New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) requires that applicants include PM2.5 modeling and emissions in PSD and minor source permit applications. New Mexico does not use PM10 as a surrogate for PM2.5 in our permitting programs. The record for the permitting decision includes an explanation of how PM2.5 emissions have been appropriately analyzed and estimated. 

### Ifyou have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (505) 476-4301. Sincerely,

MaryUhl Bureau Chief