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 Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

The Glenn/Colusa County Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) met in Willows, California. Agenda items covered include: (1) Introductions, (2) Approval of Minutes, (3) Public Comment, (4) Project Proposals/Possible Action, (5) General Discussion, (6) Plan Schedule for the Next Year, (7) Next Agenda.

# DATES:

The meeting was held on September 25, 2006, from 1:30 p.m. and ended at approximately 4:30 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting was held at the Mendocino National Forest Supervisor's Office, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., CA 95988. Individuals who wished to speak or propose agenda items sent their names and proposals to Janet Flanagan, Acting DFO, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., Willows, CA 95988.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Bobbin Gaddini, Committee Coordinator, USDA, Mendocino National Forest, Grindstone Ranger District, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., Willows, CA 95939. (530) 934-1268; E-mail                         *ggaddini@fs.fed.us.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting was open to the public. Committee discussion was limited to Forest Service staff and Committee members. However, persons who wished to bring matters to the attention of the Committee filed written statements with the Committee staff before or after the meeting. Public input sessions were provided and individuals who made written requests by September 23, 2006 had the opportunity to address the committee at those sessions.

Dated: September 21, 2006.

Janet Flanagan,

Acting Designated Federal Official.

[FR Doc. 06-8327 Filed 9-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

ERIN PICHE-PITTS, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-1303 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed February 1, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Mark Carpanini, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Pamela H. Izakowitz, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Marilyn Muir Beccue, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, KHOUZAM, and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
RE: EGU MACT - preamble 

 Higgins, Cortney 

 to: 

 RobertJ Wayland 

 12/16/2011 06:54 PM 

 Cc: 

 Bill Maxwell, Ron Evans 

 Hide Details 

From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> 

 

To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

 

Cc: Bill Maxwell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Those are the last of the edits on the preamble. I’m about to send some 

tweaks on Chapter 6, and I think with that we will have given you all of 

our comments on what we’ve received today. 

 

From: Higgins, Cortney 

Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 6:52 PM 

To: Bob Wayland (Wayland.Robertj@epamail.epa.gov) 

Cc: Maxwell.Bill@epamail.epa.gov; Ron Evans (Evans.Ron@epamail.epa.gov) 

Subject: RE: EGU MACT - preamble 

 

Hi Bob, 

Here are additional comments on that same section, on top of what I sent 

at 6 pm. 

 

From: Higgins, Cortney 

Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 5:54 PM 

To: Bob Wayland (Wayland.Robertj@epamail.epa.gov) 

Cc: Maxwell.Bill@epamail.epa.gov 

Subject: EGU MACT - preamble 

 

Hi Bob, 

Those edits on that response to comments is attached – I think we also 

have a few comments on the employment section – those should be ready in 

15 minutes. In the meantime, this is one sentence a reviewer didn’t 

understand and hoped you could clarify: 

 

During sustained periods of excess unemployment, the opportunity cost of 

labor required by regulated sectors to bring their facilities into 

compliance with an environmental regulation may be lower than it would be 

during a period of full employment (particularly if regulated industries 

employ otherwise idled labor to design, fabricate, or install the 

pollution control equipment required under this final rule).
EXHIBIT 31.2





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO


SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Jason Smart, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Makeover Corporation of America;




2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;




3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;




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




a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;


b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report based on such evaluation; and


c. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and




5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):


a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and


b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.




Date: August 16, 2010
By:
/s/ Jason SmartJason SmartChief Accounting Officer
§ 1211.115 Assurance required. ( a ) *General.* Either at the application stage or the award stage, Federal agencies must ensure that applications for Federal financial assistance or awards of Federal financial assistance contain, be accompanied by, or be covered by a specifically identified assurance from the applicant or recipient, satisfactory to the designated agency official, that each education program or activity operated by the applicant or recipient and to which these Title IX regulations apply will be operated in compliance with these Title IX regulations. An assurance of compliance with these Title IX regulations shall not be satisfactory to the designated agency official if the applicant or recipient to whom such assurance applies fails to commit itself to take whatever remedial action is necessary in accordance with § 1211.110(a) to eliminate existing discrimination on the basis of sex or to eliminate the effects of past discrimination whether occurring prior to or subsequent to the submission to the designated agency official of such assurance.
( b ) *Duration of obligation.* ( 1 ) In the case of Federal financial assistance extended to provide real property or structures thereon, such assurance shall obligate the recipient or, in the case of a subsequent transfer, the transferee, for the period during which the real property or structures are used to provide an education program or activity.
( 2 ) In the case of Federal financial assistance extended to provide personal property, such assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which it retains ownership or possession of the property.
( 3 ) In all other cases such assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended.
( c ) *Form.* ( 1 ) The assurances required by paragraph (a) of this section, which may be included as part of a document that addresses other assurances or obligations, shall include that the applicant or recipient will comply with all applicable Federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. These include but are not limited to: Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681-1683, 1685-1688).
( 2 ) The designated agency official will specify the extent to which such assurances will be required of the applicant's or recipient's subgrantees, contractors, subcontractors, transferees, or successors in interest.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit



## FILED

January 20, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-10272

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TYRAY ANTWON DRONES, also known as

Tyray Antwoon Drones,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:02-CR-64-1-Y

Before GARWOOD, DEMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Tyray Antwon Drones pleaded guilty to assault of a federal law

enforcement agent causing bodily injury in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 111. Drones argues that the district court erred in applying

U.S.S.G. § 2A2.2, the aggravated assault guideline, to determine

his base offense level. Drones further argues that the district2

court erred in enhancing his sentence pursuant to § 2A2.2(b)(2)(C)

on t he ground that the use of a dangerous weapon had been

threatened.

This court re views the district court’s findings of fact at

sentencing for clear error and its appl ication of the sentencing

guidelines de novo. United States v. Anderson , 174 F.3d 515, 524

(5th Cir. 1999). Because Drones’s assault involved both the

presence of a dangerous weapon, Michael Duncan’s service firearm,

and the intent to cause bodily injury with that weapon, the

district court did not clearly err in finding that his offense

constituted aggravated assault. S ee § 2A2.2, comment. (n.1). The

district court could (and did) properly infer Drones’s intent to do

bodily harm with Duncan’s firearm from Drones’s actions – lunging

at Duncan, hi tting Duncan about the head, and grabbing Duncan’s

firearm with both hands in an attem pt to gain control of the

weapon, in addition to Drones’s initial attack upon Steven Steele.

See United States v. Morris , 131 F.3d 1136, 1138 (5th Cir. 1997).

Although Drones disputes the district court’s finding that he

attempted to wrestle the firearm away from Duncan, he has failed to

produce any evidence to the con trary to demonstrate that the

presentence report was inaccurate. S ee United States v. Brown

, 54

F.3d 234, 242 (5th Cir. 1995); United States v. Lage

, 183 F.3d 374,

3 83 (5th Cir. 1995). Thus, applying § 2A2.2 to set the base

offense level was proper. Because Drones threatened the use of a3

dangerous weapon by attempting to gain control of Duncan’s firearm,

the district court did not err in enhancing Drones’s sentence in

accordance with § 2A2.2(b)(2)(C).

AFFIRMED.
# EUR-Lex - 12006M036 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12006M036

**Treaty on European Union (consolidated version) - Title VI - Provisions on police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Article 36 **

*
Official Journal C 321 E , 29/12/2006 P. 0028 - 0028 Official Journal C 325 , 24/12/2002 P. 0025 - Consolidated version Official Journal C 340 , 10/11/1997 P. 0166 - Consolidated version Official Journal C 191 , 29/07/1992 P. 0062 *

Article 36

1. A Coordinating Committee shall be set up consisting of senior officials. In addition to its coordinating role, it shall be the task of the Committee to:

- give opinions for the attention of the Council, either at the Council's request or on its own initiative,

- contribute, without prejudice to Article 207 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to the preparation of the Council's discussions in the areas referred to in Article 29.

2. The Commission shall be fully associated with the work in the areas referred to in this title.

--------------------------------------------------
# EUR-Lex - 12003TN12/13/E - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12003TN12/13/E

**Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the European Union is founded - Annex XII: List referred to in Article 24 of the Act of Accession: Poland - 13. Environment - E. Nuclear safety and radiation protection **

*
Official Journal L 236 , 23/09/2003 P. 0902 - 0902 *

E. NUCLEAR SAFETY AND RADIATION PROTECTION

31997 L 0043: Council Directive 97/43/Euratom of 30 June 1997 on health protection of individuals against the dangers of ionising radiation in relation to medical exposure, and repealing Directive 84/466/Euratom (OJ L 180, 9.7.1997, p. 22).

By way of derogation from Article 8 of Directive 97/43/Euratom, the provisions on radiological equipment shall not apply in Poland until 31 December 2006. Such equipment shall not be placed on the market of other Member States.

--------------------------------------------------
# EUR-Lex - 12004V174 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12004V174

**Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe - PART III — THE POLICIES AND FUNCTIONING OF THE UNION - TITLE III — INTERNAL POLICIES AND ACTION - CHAPTER I — INTERNAL MARKET - Section 7 — Common provisions - Article III-174 **

*
Official Journal 310 , 16/12/2004 P. 0075 - 0075 *

Article III-174

Where the Commission finds that a difference between the provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States is distorting the conditions of competition in the internal market and that the resultant distortion needs to be eliminated, it shall consult the Member States concerned.

If such consultation does not result in agreement, European framework laws shall establish the measures necessary to eliminate the distortion in question. Any other appropriate measures provided for in the Constitution may be adopted.

--------------------------------------------------
UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. GE R AR DO GA R C I A- AN T ON I O, D e f

e n d an t - A p p e llan t. N o. 09- 10084 D. C . No . 2 : 0 8 - C R - 0 1 2 0 8 - MHM D is tr ic t o f

A r iz o n a , P h o e n ix ORDER

B efo re: B . F L E T C H E R , C L IF T O N , an dB E A , C i rcu i tJu d g es C ouns e l f

orappe l l antha s f

i l e d abr i e f

s t a t i ng tha the f

i nds no m e r i t or i ous i s s ue s f orr e vi e w a nd am ot i on t o w i thdr aw a s c ouns e l of r e c or d pur s uantt o A n ders v . Ca lifo rn ia , 386 U . S . 738 ( 1967) . N o pr o s e s uppl e m e nt a l br i e f ora ns w e r i ng br i e f ha s be e n f

i l e d. O u rin d e p e n d e n t r e v ie w o f th e r e c o r d , s e e P e n s o n v . O h io , 488 U . S . 75, 83- 8 4 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , d is c lo s e s th e f o llo w in g p o te n tia llya r g u ab le is s u e f o rd ir e c t ap p e a l: D oe s G a r c i a - A nt oni o’ s pr i orc onvi c t i on unde rC a l i f orni aP e na l C ode s e c t i on 28 8(c) qu al i fyas a c ri m e of vi ol ence w arrant i ng a s i xt ee n-l eveli ncre as e und er U. S. S. G. § 2 L1 . 2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A) ( i i ) ? See U n i ted Sta tes v. Ca stro , 6 0 7 F .3 d5 6 6 , 5 6 7 ( 9 th C i r . 2010) , w hi c h w a s f i l e d a f t e rbr i e f i ng w a s c om pl e t e d. C ouns e l ’ s m ot i on t o w i thdr aw i s de ni e d. 

# FI LED APR11 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 10084 2 T he A n ders bri ef

fi l ed D ec em ber 21, 20 09 i s s tri cken. C ou nselm aybri ef any i ss ues dee m ed approp ri at e, bu ti n p art i cul arshal l addres s the i ss ue i dent i fi ed ab o v e . A p p e llan t’s r e p la c e m e n t o p e n in g b r ie f a n da n ys up p le m e n t to th e e x c e rp ts of r e c or d f i l e d D e c e m be r23, 2009 a r e due June 6, 2011; appe l l e e ’ s br i e f i s due Jul y6, 2011; the opt i ona l r e pl ybr i e f i s due w i thi n 14 da y s a f t e rs e rvi c e of ap p e lle e ’s b r ie f

. T he cl erk shal l se rve acopy of thi s orderon appel l antpers on al l y, as w el l as o n ap p e l l e e J a m e s Kn ap p , As s i s t an tU. S . Att o rn e y , U. S . Att o rn e y ’ s Of f i c e , T wo R e na i s s a nc e S qua r e , 40 N . C e ntr a l A ve . S t e . 1200, P hoe ni x, A r i z ona85004- 4408. T h is p an e l d o e s n o t r e ta in ju r is d ic tio n o v e rth e ap p e a l.
Case 16-25471 Doc 5 Filed 08/09/16 Entered 08/09/16 08:47:03 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
Case 16-25471 Doc 5 Filed 08/09/16 Entered 08/09/16 08:47:03 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
§ 92.3 Applicability and scope. ( a ) *In general.* The regulations in this part apply to all eligible persons harvesting migratory birds and their eggs for subsistence purposes in Alaska between the dates of March 10 and September 1. The provisions in this part do not replace or alter the regulations set forth in part 20 of this chapter, which relate to the hunting of migratory game birds and crows during the regular open season from September 1 through March 10. The provisions set forth in this part implement the exception to the closed season, which authorizes the taking of migratory birds in Alaska for subsistence purposes between March 10 and September 1.
( b ) *Land ownership.* This part does not alter the legal authorities of Federal and State land managing agencies or the legal rights of private land owners to close their respective lands to the taking of migratory birds.
( c ) *Federal public lands.* The provisions of this part are in addition to, and do not supersede, any other provision of law or regulation pertaining to national wildlife refuges or other federally managed lands.
( d ) *Migratory bird permits.* The provisions of this part do not alter the terms of any permit or other authorization issued pursuant to part 21 of this chapter.
( e ) *State laws for the protection of migratory birds.* No statute or regulation of the State of Alaska relieves a person from the restrictions, conditions, and requirements contained in this part. Nothing in this part, however, prevents the State of Alaska from making and enforcing laws or regulations that are consistent with the regulations in this part, the conventions between the United States and any foreign country for the protection of migratory birds, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and that give further protection to migratory birds.
§ 86.13 What operational and design features must a facility have where a BIG-funded facility is located? ( a ) At project completion, a facility where a BIG-funded facility is located must: ( 1 ) Be open to eligible users and operated and maintained for its intended purpose for its useful life;
( 2 ) Clearly designate eligible uses and inform the public of restrictions;
( 3 ) Offer security, safety, and service for eligible users and vessels;
( 4 ) Be accessible by eligible vessels on navigable waters;
( 5 ) Allow public access as described at § 86.92;
( 6 ) Have docking or mooring sites with water access at least 6 feet deep at the lowest tide or fluctuation, unless the facility qualifies under paragraph (c) of this section; and
( 7 ) Have an operational pumpout station if: ( i ) Eligible vessels stay overnight; and
( ii ) Available pumpout service is not located within 2 nautical miles; or
( iii ) State or local laws require one on site.
( b ) We will waive the pumpout requirement if you show in the grant application the inability to install a pumpout. ( 1 ) We will review your request and will grant the waiver if you present circumstances that show: ( i ) A hardship due to lack of utilities or other difficult obstacles, such as a BIG-funded facility on an island with no power or a remote location where the equipment cannot be serviced or maintained regularly;
( ii ) State or local law does not allow septic-waste disposal facilities at the location;
( iii ) You are in the process of applying for a CVA grant for the same award year as the BIG grant to install a pumpout station as part of the BIG-funded facility; or
( iv ) You have received a CVA grant and will install a pumpout station as part of the BIG-funded facility on or before the time the BIG-funded facility is completed.
( 2 ) When we waive the pumpout requirement, the BIG-funded facility must inform boaters: ( i ) They are required to properly treat or dispose of septic waste; and
( ii ) Where they can find information that will direct them to nearby pumpout stations.
( 3 ) If we deny your request, we will follow the process described in the annual NOFO.
( 4 ) If you seek an allowance based on this paragraph, you must include supporting information in the grant application as described at § 86.43(n)(1).
( c ) We will allow water access at a depth less than 6 feet if you can show that the BIG-funded facility will serve its intended purpose for typical eligible users that visit that location.
( d ) Any of these design features may already be part of the facility, or be funded through another source, and need not be included as part of the BIG project.
§ 80.1 What does this part do? This part of the Code of Federal Regulations tells States how they may: ( a ) Use revenues derived from State hunting and fishing licenses in compliance with the Acts.
( b ) Receive annual apportionments from the Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Fund (16 U.S.C. 669(b)), if authorized, and the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund (26 U.S.C 9504).
( c ) Receive financial assistance from the Wildlife Restoration program, the Basic Hunter Education and Safety subprogram, and the Enhanced Hunter Education and Safety grant program, if authorized.
( d ) Receive financial assistance from the Sport Fish Restoration program, the Recreational Boating Access subprogram, the Aquatic Resources Education subprogram, and the Outreach and Communications subprogram.
( e ) Comply with the requirements of the Acts.