alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 117
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

§ 117.285 Grand Canal. ( a ) The draw of the Lansing Island Bridge, mile 0.7, at Indian Harbour Beach, shall open on signal, except that from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., daily, the draw need not open for the passage of vessels and will be untended.
( b ) The draw of the Tortoise Island bridge, mile 2.6, shall open on signal; except that from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. from Sunday evening through Friday morning, the draw shall open on signal if at least 2 hours advance notice is given. From 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. on Friday and Saturday and on evenings immediately preceding Federal holidays, the draw shall open on signal if at least 30 minutes advance notice is given.
[CGD7-92-113, 58 FR 31474, June 3, 1993, as amended by CGD07-98-048, 64 FR 30391, June 8, 1999; USCG-2022-0015, 87 FR 49992, Aug. 15, 2022]
Exhibit 4.9.1

Schedule identifying substantially identical agreements to Lease Subordination Agreement

1.     Open-Ended
Mortgage Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents dated as of December 7, 2001 from Homer City OL1 LLC, as the Owner Lessor to the Bank of
New York, as Security Agent and Mortgagee.

2.     Open-Ended
Mortgage Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents dated as of December 7, 2001 from Homer City OL2 LLC, as the Owner Lessor to the Bank of
New York, as Security Agent and Mortgagee.

3.     Open-Ended
Mortgage Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents dated as of December 7, 2001 from Homer City OL3 LLC, as the Owner Lessor to the Bank of
New York, as Security Agent and Mortgagee.

4.     Open-Ended
Mortgage Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents dated as of December 7, 2001 from Homer City OL4 LLC, as the Owner Lessor to the Bank of
New York, as Security Agent and Mortgagee.

5.     Open-Ended
Mortgage Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents dated as of December 7, 2001 from Homer City OL5 LLC, as the Owner Lessor to the Bank of
New York, as Security Agent and Mortgagee.

6.     Open-Ended
Mortgage Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents dated as of December 7, 2001 from Homer City OL6 LLC, as the Owner Lessor to the Bank of
New York, as Security Agent and Mortgagee.

7.     Open-Ended
Mortgage Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents dated as of December 7, 2001 from Homer City OL7 LLC, as the Owner Lessor to the Bank of
New York, as Security Agent and Mortgagee.

8.     Open-Ended
Mortgage Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents dated as of December 7, 2001 from Homer City OL8 LLC, as the Owner Lessor to the Bank of
New York, as Security Agent and Mortgagee.

---

QuickLinks
OSWER/OSRTI Washington, DC 20460



## N ATIONAL 

## P RIORITIES 

## L IST 

## (NPL)

*** Final Site*** May 20 1 4


### KEDDY MILL Windham, Maine

Cumberland County

 Site Location : Keddy Mill is a 6.9 acre site located at 7 Depot Street in the Little Falls area of the town of Windham, Maine.

 Site History:
Many industrial activities have been conducted on the Keddy Mill site between 1756 and 1997 including, a sawmill, grist and wool carding mill, wood pulp and boxboard manufacturing, steel and fire suppression piping manufacturing, and a small machine shop and equipment storage. Several buildings on the site have been demolished, and the site currently consists of a single abandoned multistoried concrete building. The site has been vacant since 1997.

 Site Contamination/Contaminants:
The primary contaminant of concern at the Keddy Mill si te is p olychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

 Potential Impacts on Surrounding Community/Environment : Contamination from PCBs is widespread throughout the site and inside the abandoned mill building. Rainwater run-off transports PCBs into the adjacent Presumpscot River, potentially contaminating adjacent wetlands. The abandoned building has been vandalized, which indicates that trespassers access the site. Potential contact with PCBs in surface soil and within the mill poses a health threat.

 Response Activi ties (to date):
Two cleanup actions have been performed on the Keddy Mill site by previous owners. The first involved the excavation of 10.88 tons of petroleum contaminated soil in 1997. The second, during May and July 2010, was performed in accordance

with a Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Self Implementing Clean-up Plan (S IC P)

. Only a portion of the SICP was performed

, which included removal of PCB-contaminated fuel oils in remaining piping and PCB-contaminated sludge, dirt, debris and oily materials from within the building. In addition, the current owner has constructed a fence around the site at the request of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to deter trespassers.

 Need for NPL Listing:
Investigation under a Brownfields grant by the town of Windham determined that the site was too contaminated to be addressed under a Brownfields program, and the state of Maine does not have the resources to address the site under their Uncontrolled Site Program. The EPA has received a letter from the governor of Maine supporting placing the site on the

NPL.

[The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was evaluated with the HRS. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.]

For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to these substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on the Internet

at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/index.asp or by telephone at 1- 888

- 42 -ATSDR or 1- 888

- 422

- 8737.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 107 (Friday, June 2, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 35420]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13877]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

May 26, 2000.
    The Department of the Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 3, 2000, 
to be assured of consideration.

Departmental Offices/Office of International Investment

    OMB Number: 1505-0121.
    Form Number: None.
    Type of Review: Extension.
    Title: Regulations Pertaining to Mergers, Acquisitions and 
Takeovers by Foreign Persons.
    Description: Treasury disseminates to other agencies that are 
members of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States 
(CFIUS) information collected under the regulations from parties 
involved in a foreign acquisition of a U.S. company in order to do a 
national security analysis of the acquisition.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 100.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Respondent: 60 hours.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 6,000 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Lois K. Holland, (202) 622-1563, Departmental 
Offices, Room 2110, 1425 New York Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20220.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt, (202) 395-7860, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.

Lois K. Holland,
Departmental Reports Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-13877 Filed 6-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-25-U
CHOICE MENU 

EXAMPLES

October 2023

By changing from a single 

option menu to a choice menu, 

it is possible to increase meal 

site participation and gain 

more satisfied participants. The 

following choice menu examples 

are from aging nutrition 

programs across the country. 

These examples can serve as 

inspiration on how a choice 

menu could be implemented.

Within this document you will find the 

following choice menu examples:

• The menu from WesleyLife Meals 

on Wheels offers main entrée 

options (A and B) each day as well 

as the option of a Deli Meal, which 

changes each week.

• Milwaukee County Senior Dining

offers several dining options 

including Dine Out for older adult 

community members. Dine Out is a 

restaurant-based dining program 

partnering with local restaurants to 

provide culturally diverse options.

• The City of Santa Clara in California 

offers a changing daily entrée as 

well as two additional entrees that 

rotate weekly.

• City of Surprise, Arizona, Human 

Service & Community Vitality offers 

a choice of Deli sandwich or salad 

or a choice of Chef salad or salad 

several days each week to provide 

variety.

This project was supported in part by grant number 90PPNU0002 from the U.S. Administration for Community Living, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C. 20201. Grantees undertaking projects with government sponsorship are encouraged to 

express freely their findings and conclusions. Points of view or opinions do not, therefore, necessarily represent official ACL policy.
on Wheels
• Milwaukee County Senior Dining
Clara in California
• City of Surprise, Arizona, Human Service & Community Vitality
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 157 (Monday, August 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 50535]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20651]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>12653 and <greek-i>12654]


North Dakota Disaster Number ND-00024

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 4.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of North Dakota (FEMA-1981-DR), dated 06/
24/2011.
    Incident: Flooding.
    Incident Period: 02/14/2011 through 07/20/2011.
    Effective Date: 08/04/2011.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 08/23/2011.
    EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date: 03/21/2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster 
declaration for the State of North Dakota, dated 06/24/2011 is hereby 
amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the 
disaster:

Primary Counties: Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): Benson.
Contiguous Counties: (Economic Injury Loans Only): North Dakota: Eddy, 
Wells.

    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

Joseph P Loddo,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2011-20651 Filed 8-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JULY 21, 2017

NO. 03-14-00712-CR

Anthony Torres, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES PEMBERTON AND FIELD 

MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND 

REMANDED IN PART; AFFIRMED—OPINION BY JUSTICE PEMBERTON

This is an appeal from the judgments of conviction rendered by the district court. Having 

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was reversible error in 

the district court’s judgment of conviction for the offense of sexual assault in a prohibited 

relationship. Therefore, the Court modifies the judgment of conviction for the first-degree 

felony offense of sexual assault in a prohibited relationship to reflect that Torres was convicted 

of the second-degree felony offense of sexual assault, affirms the judgment as modified as to the 

finding of guilt, reverses that part of the judgment imposing sentence, and remands to the district 

court for a new punishment hearing for that offense. The Court further holds that there was no 

error in the court’s judgment of conviction for the offense of prohibited sexual conduct that 

requires reversal. Therefore, the Court affirms the judgment of conviction for the offense of 
prohibited sexual conduct. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no 

adjudication of costs is made.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-23-00568-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF D.J.R., D.J.O. and I.L.A.

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021-PA-01589

Honorable Raul Perales, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ, JUSTICE CHAPA, AND JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order terminating 

appellants’ parental rights is AFFIRMED. No costs of appeal are assessed against appellants.

SIGNED November 29, 2023.

_____________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
###### Editorial Note on Part 117

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

#### § 117.223 Shaw Cove.

The draw of the Amtrak bridge, mile 0.0 at New London, shall open on signal from December 1 through March 31 from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. From December 1 through March 31 from 5 p.m. to 8 a.m. and on Saturdays and Sundays, the draw shall open on signal if at least eight hours notice is given. From April 1 through November 30 from 5 a.m. to 10 p.m., the draw shall open on signal; and, from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m., the draw shall open on signal if at least one hour notice is given. A delay of up to 10 minutes may be expected if a train is approaching so closely that it may not be safety stopped. When a vessel is in an emergency that may endanger life or property, the draw shall open as soon as possible.

[CGD 82-025, 49 FR 17452, Apr. 24, 1984; 49 FR 43459, Oct. 29, 1984]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                      93,605,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,037,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   562,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            99,086,000
<PP&E>                                      24,468,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,009,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             398,148,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       43,615,000
<BONDS>                                      6,758,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        23,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 326,949,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               398,148,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            23,012,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               50,354,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (83,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               562,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             178,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (26,171,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,088,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (23,083,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (23,083,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (1.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.09)


</TABLE>
### The deep channel and alluvial deposits of the Ohio Valley in Kentucky

By: Eugene H. Walker

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1411

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 6**                            (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.
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-16-0000791 21-DEC-2016 08:47 AM
Detailed 

Agenda 

Training

June 21, 2023
Agenda: 

-Overview

-Review detailed agenda 

-Q&A 
-Meetings focus: updating ACL and 

NRCNA on progress

-Official record of meetings; uploaded to 

official grant file within GrantSolutions

-Due 3 business days in advance of 

meeting

to ACL PO and NRCNA TA Liaison 
Detailed Agenda
Programmatic Updates
Objectives, Key Tasks & Compliance
Future Program Activities
Quantitative Workplan Summary/Goals and 

Objectives
Project Goal and Objectives
Program Challenges
Semi Annual Updates Only
Technical Assistance
A few 

other 

notes.....

● Details! 

● Everything you would like to discuss 

should be in the agenda

● Submit x3 business days ahead of 

call 

● Submission of other materials 

● Workplan 

● NRCNA to share PowerPoint, 

Recording and Gantt Chart Resource
Q&A
_____________

No. 96-1504MN

_____________

Gregory Jaunich, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the District

* of Minnesota.

United States Commodity Futures *

Trading Commission, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

_____________

Submitted: November 20, 1996

 Filed: November 27, 1996

_____________

Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Based on the record before us, we find no error that would require

reversal. We thus affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-8201

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JOEL ANDREW BAYAN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, 

District Judge. (4:08-cr-00128-RBS-JEB-1)

Submitted: February 25, 2010 Decided: March 5, 2010

Before DUNCAN and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joel Andrew Bayan, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Rae McKeel, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Joel Andrew Bayan seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order treating his “supplemental brief” as a successive 28 

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion, and dismissing it on 

that basis. The order is not appealable unless a circuit 

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 

(4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue 

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional 

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the 

district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive 

procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. 

Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. 

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 

683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the 

record and conclude that Bayan has not made the requisite 

showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability 

and dismiss the appeal.

Additionally, we construe Bayan’s notice of appeal and 

informal brief as an application to file a second or successive 

motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. United States v. Winestock, 

340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain 
3

authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner 

must assert claims based on either: (1) newly discovered 

evidence, not previously discoverable by due diligence, that 

would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing 

evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable 

factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense; or 

(2) a new rule of constitutional law, previously unavailable, 

made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral 

review. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255(h) (West Supp. 2009). Bayan’s 

claims do not satisfy either of these criteria. Therefore, we 

deny authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED