alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EPA-560-F-08-294 brownfields September 2008

at-a-glance

Lewiston, Maine BATES MILL COMPLEX Assessment Grant 

Former Mill Complex Redeveloped for Light Industrial Use, 

with a 300,000 Square Foot Convention Center Planned

ADDRESS: 15-28 Canal Street, Lewiston, ME 04240 

PROPERTY SIZE: 10 Acres 

FORMER USE: Textile Mill 

CURRENT USES: Tenants include large corporations, an education 

center, other non-profits, and a restaurant. 

EPA GRANT RECIPIENT: PROJECT PARTNERS: 

City of Lewiston received 

a $200,000 Brownfields 

Assessment Grant and 

$300,000 in Supplemental 

Assistance funding 

Lewiston Mill Redevelopment Corporation; 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development; Economic Development 

Administration; U.S. Department of 

Agriculture; private industry 

For additional data and geographic information for this and 

other Brownfields Grants, please visit EPA’s: 

Envirofacts - www.epa.gov/enviro/html/bms/bms_query.html 

Enviromapper - www.epa.gov/enviro/bf 

PROJECT BACKGROUND: 

Lewiston’s Bates Mill was once the largest employer in Maine, with activity dating back to the mid-1850s. The 

enormous textile complex served as both the geographic and cultural center of downtown Lewiston, as most of its 

workers lived and shopped within walking distance. The gradual decline of the textile industry led to the mill’s closure 

and abandonment. By the time the city took ownership of the 10-acre site, Lewiston’s poverty rate had climbed as high 

as 50 percent. 

KEY ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

• Created a plan to redevelop the historic site into a modern office and light 

industrial complex 

• Cleaned up Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOCs) 

• Leveraged a total of $35.7 million toward cleanup and redevelopment efforts 

• Leveraged more than 1,200 jobs through the completion of redevelopment 

OUTCOME: 

The Bates Mill site provides prime office and light industrial space with the 

interiors and exteriors of the buildings preserving the historical setting with large 

windows, exposed beam, and brick exteriors. The Grantee leveraged a total of 

$35.7 million for cleanup and redevelopment and leveraged more than 1,200 

jobs through completion of redevelopment. Future plans for the site include 

utilizing a 300,000 square foot mill building for convention space, expanding arts 

and entertainment venues along the adjacent canal, and creating pedestrian paths 

to the nearby river and a local recreational park. The newly restored Bates Mill Complex

 in Lewiston, Maine. 

FOR MORE INFORMATION: Visit the EPA Brownfields Web site at http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/ or call EPA Region 1 at (617) 918-1424
----

----

First California Financial Group, Inc. 10-K/A
| 1.     | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of First California Financial Group, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2012; and |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                     |

| 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 in order 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. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                  |
|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   | /s/ C. G. Kum                         |
|   | C. G. Kum                             |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

----
§ 270.9 How will we redistribute funds if that becomes necessary? ( a ) If we cannot distribute the funds as specified in § 270.8, we will reallocate any undistributed funds among the measures listed in § 270.4.
( b ) If we still cannot distribute funds within the bonus year, they will remain available for distribution in the next bonus year, to the extent authorized by law.
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.                  

###### International Trade Commission

# ACTION:

Withdrawal of notice of determination. 

# SUMMARY:

The U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission) is withdrawing the notice of determination in Investigation Nos. AA1921-197 (Second Review); 701-TA-319, 320, 325-327, 348, and 350 (Second Review); and 731-TA-573, 574, 576, 578, 582-587, 612, and 614-618 (Second Review). This action is being taken because the notice was released in error. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    On December 28, 2006 (71 FR 78222), the Commission published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     detailing its determination in Investigation Nos. AA1921-197 (Second Review); 701-TA-319, 320, 325-327, 348 and 350 (Second Review); and 731-TA-573, 574, 576, 578, 582-587, 612, and 614-618 (Second Review): Certain Carbon Steel Products from Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom. The                     **Federal Register**                     notice was issued inadvertently, prior to notification of the U.S. Department of Commerce by the Commission of the Commission's determination. A notice detailing the Commission's determination will be published at a later date.                 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Szustakowski (202-205-3188) or Douglas Corkran (202-205-3057). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: December 28, 2006. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 06-9982 Filed 12-28-06; 4:10 pm] 

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
No. 2955.

#### H. E. Harmes *v.*The State.

Disorderly House—Fact Case.—A house is not necessarily a disorderly house -within the meaning of the statute because it is resorted to by-prostitutes and vagabonds. The proof in this case shows that the accused was the proprietor of a combined retail grocery establishment and beer saloon, and that prostitutes and vagabonds resorted to that establishment for the purpose of buying and drinking beer. *Held,*insufficient to support a conviction for ’‘keeping a disorderly house.”

Appeal from the County Court of Bowie. Tried below before the Hon. S. D. Lary, County Judge.

*191Opinion delivered October 20, 1888.

This conviction was for keeping a disorderly house, and the penalty assessed against the appellant was a fine of one hundred dollars.

The proof, both for the State and the defense, established that the defendant was the proprietor of a combined retail grocery store and beer saloon, situated in a suburb of the city ■of Texarkana, in Bowie county, which' suburb was known as “Vinegar Hill.” That place was resorted to daily by prostitutes for the purchase of beer, sometimes by the drink, and sometimes by the bucketful. The same class of persons often purchased groceries at the same place, and respectable people, male and female, often visited the said establishment to purchase supplies, groceries, etc. Beer was sold to whoever would buy, and customers of all classes were free to drink beer on the premises, and to remain on the premises as long as they pleased. One of the defendant’s established rules was to expel noisy and turbulent persons from the place, and one witness testified to one occasion on which the rule was enforced.

R. *D.*Harrell, for appellant.

*W. L. Davidson,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Hurt, Judge.

This court, in McElhenny v. The State, 12 Texas Court of Appeals, 231, held that “it is not every house to which prostitutes and vagabonds resort that thereby becomes a disorderly house within the meaning and intent of article 396 of the Penal Code.” In this case, as in that cited, the evidence shows that defendant was engaged in carrying on a legitimate business. That prostitutes and vagabonds resorted to that house for the purpose of buying and drinking beer, does not bring the place within the inhibition of the statute.

Because the evidence does not warrant the conviction, the ' judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

*Reversed and remanded.*
<PAGE>


                                                                    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 on Form 10-K of Smoky Market Foods, Inc.
(the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward
C. Feintech, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(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 material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Edward C. Feintech
----------------------
Edward C. Feintech
Chief Executive Officer
May 14, 2009
---

---

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302(a)
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Joseph Postbinder, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly
report on Form 10-QSB of Defense Industries International, Inc.;

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  officers  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 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) [Reserved]

(c) 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 report based on such evaluation; and

(d) 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 (the  registrant's  fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has  materially  affected,  or is
reasonably  likely to materially  affect,  the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's  other
 certifying  officers and 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 function):

(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: June 1, 2006

|/s/ Joseph Postbinder
Joseph PostbinderChief Executive Officer
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 20 - 0132

_________________ BRYCE EVERETT PETERSON,

Petitioner and Appellant, v. ST ATE OF MONTANA,

Respondent and Appellee. O R D E R

_________________ Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for submission on briefs to a five - justice panel of this Court. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to Bryce Everett Peterson, to all counsel of record and to the Honorable Howard F. Recht , District Judge . For the Court,

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 26 2021

05/26/2021
Case Number: DA 20-0132
BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) • A13-I4 

Audit Division Recommendation ) 

Memorandum on the Freedom's Defense ) 

Fund(FDF) ) 

CERTIFICATION 

I, Dayna C. Brown, Secretary and Clerk of the Federal Election 

Commission, do hereby certify that on October 23,2017, the Commission 

decided by a vote of 5-0 to approve the Audit Division Recommendation 

Memorandum on the Freedom's Defense Fund (FDF), as recommended in the 

Memorandum from the Chief Compliance Officer and the Audit Division dated 

October 6,2017. 

Commissioners Goodman, Hunter, Petersen, Walther, and Weintraub voted 

afhimatively for the decision. 

Attest: 

Date Dayna C. Brown 

Secretary and Clerk of the Commission
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 HC Innovations, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Kenneth Lamé, Chairman of the Board
and Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(1) The Annual
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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.

|                      |                                                          
|--------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March
 26, 2009 | By: /s/
 Kenneth Lamé                                    
|                      | Kenneth Lamé                                             
|                      | Chairman of
 the Board and Acting Chief Executive Officer

A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

---
§ 233.25 Retrospective budgeting; computing the assistance payment after the initial one or two months. The State plan shall provide: ( a ) After the initial one or two payment months of assistance under § 233.24, the amount of each subsequent month's payment shall be computed retrospectively, i.e., shall be based on earned and unearned income received in the corresponding budget month.
( b ) In these subsequent months, other factors of need which affect the amount of the assistance payment may also be based on circumstances in the corresponding budget month, or they may be based on circumstances in the payment month.
( c ) For the first month in which retrospective budgeting is used, a State shall not consider income received by the recipient before the date of application. When a person reapplies during the same month in which a termination became effective, the State may consider income received before the date of application.
[44 FR 26083, May 4, 1979]
OFFlCEOFTHEAlTORNEY GENERALOFTEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable Harry 3. Sohulz 

County Attorney 

Live Oak County 

oeorge west, 'i'smu 

Dear 81rr 

has been roes1 

ha intereat uf 

0 au6Uef8 Biver 

a River Con86r-~, 

ion M ibtrfat . 

aatlng aa apinlon, 

the rallorimg questioat 

on Distrlot a8 ,#ey deem proper in 

ttesrs oi flood watrol on the Rneaea 

Vur6uant to the above order, X, ae Ccmnt~ 

Attorney, here been requested to write ytm for an 

opinion on the 1egalit.y~ of tho above appropriat%on.* 
Ronorable Harry J. Schulz, June 8, 1939, page $2 

The ,Nuecea River Coneervatlon and Reclamation Diatrlct is a governmantel agenoy end body politic and oorporate wlth the power of governing end with delegated 

authority. Such district was created by Acts of 1995, Fortyfourth Legislature, First Called ~saion, page 1660, Chaptar 

427. Te have read the Act very oarafully and nowhere In the 

Act do we find where the Leglalatura gave the oomiasfonars* 

court8 of the various oountlea in the district the powar to 

grant loans or advance money to the Reclamation Dlatrlot. 

Furthermore, there are 88rersl oountias in the dIstriot and when this money is turned over to the offlosrs of 

the district to be used in the m&tar of blood oontral as 

tbs Nueaes Biver, It Is not osly possible but probable that 

theMnay would be erpendad in another oounty. The money 

aan appropriated would be oompletaly out or the bands of the 

nommlasioners and would be aontrollad by the oiiiosra oi tha 

.~Peolsmstion Distriot, whiah is In itself & '(pnarmantal 

agenay, 

It has long bean sssousoad in Texas that -ssioners~ oourts sre aourta o?Umitad jurisd.lotloninj$st their 

.uuthority 43rtena8 only to~Mttsrs psrtsisi~-to,thslir raspaatits aoxuities and that their powaqs am,onIy those akprassly or 

ixpliadly oonfarmd npon them by law.. Amar~aaan Soraty~Cmgmty 

T. Hill County, 267 8. 111. 265; Xl Paso tr Xlam 106“Sr 9. (2d) 

598; &ward T. Henderson County, lid 8. XI (?!&?9; Xill 

County T. Bryant and Euffman, 264 8. W. 820; Comds8ioness* 

cool-t t. wallaaoa, 1s s. wq 0%) sss. <'., 

In the last oasa oited in anpport of this proposItIon 

the aourt tiaid: 

The aomni~7sioners~ court 18 a oreattm of tbs 

Stats Constltutlomsnd its powers are lim$tad asd 

oontrollad by the Constitution ssd the.laws as 

passad by tha legislatura.* 

In view or the authorities olted above, the oommissiosera* oourt would have to have aosm express or implied authority 

to appropriate money from the general fund of a oounty to a 

River Consarration aml Raolamation Dlatrlot to be mad by It8 

orri0ers. 
Fionorsble Harry J. Schulz, June 8, 1939, psga #3 

7re have made an exhsustlve search of the Constitution and the Statutes of Texas, Including the Act oraating 

this district, and have found no express or implied authority anywhere for the comiasioners* court to make such 

appropriation. 

Therefore , you are respeotfully advleed thet It la 

the opinion of this department that auoh appropriation of 

funda by the oommisaioners* oourt ia illegal. 

Trusting that this answers yaw quaation, we ramain 

B 

ATTORNEY CBRlSRAL O? TXAS
Project Name:

File No:

Date: Site Location:

Pilot/Co-Pilot: Position/Title: Reviewed by: Position/Title:

UAS Checklist: (check the box when complete)

Equipment Pre-Flight Checklist

□ Visually inspect airframe

□ Loose/damagedscrews

□ Loose/damaged wiring

□ Loose connections

□ Batteries charged

□ Propellers in good condition

□ Remote control charged

□ Tablet charged

□ Camera/SD card

□ First Aid Kit

□ Glasses

□ High Visibility Vest

□ Hardhat

□ Tools

□ Weather conditions

□ Notify personnel of flight

□ Position UAS in safe area

□ Remote control mode set

□ Calibrate compass

□ Connect ground station

□ Verify GPS status

□ Clear area

□ Arm motors

□ Hover between 3-5 feet

□ Start flight timer

□ Test remote control movements

□ Begin mission

□ Maintain visual contact

Job Steps Potential Hazards Critical Actions to Mitigate Hazards

Flight Operations

Location • Proximity to airports, structures, power lines, etc

• Maintain visual observation of UAS

• High altitude flying reduces battery life

Weather • Monitor weather, and be aware of changing conditions

• Avoid flying during periods of high wind

• Temperature extremes reduce battery life drastically

Malfunctions • Locate areas on flight plan for emergency landings

• Utilize pre-programmed flight modes and return to launch features

Pre-Flight

Safety

Meetings

Injury due to not

understanding the hazards

• Hold a pre-work safety meeting with the crew before any flight operations.

• Carry additional tools, batteries, propellers, first aid kit

Take off/Landing

Possible propeller strike • Be alert and cautious at all times.

• Approach UAS after motors disarmed and powered down.

• Maintain large radius for take/off and landing.

• Never exceed payload capacity

• Never attempt to catch UAS

Fatigue

Exposure to the elements

during long flying hours

• Keep aware of hazards at all times.

• Do not fly for extended times without rest

Communications

Visibility/InclementWeather • Check remote controls, antennas, batteries and radar for weather

Faulty Radios • Carry spare batteries.

• Pre-program ground station for return to launch on radio loss

Emergency • Dial 911

• Hospital Route

Air Traffic

No-Fly zones • http://flysafe.dji.com/no-fly

• https://www.mapbox.com/drone/no-fly/

• http://tfr.faa.gov/tfr2/list.html (FAA temporary flight restriction areas)

• http://flightaware.com/live/ (Live air traffic, weather, and temporary flight restriction

areas)
Flight Plan

Aircraft: Battery #: Departure Time:

Weather: Departure (%): Return Time:

Wind Speed: Return (%): Time Flown:

Mission:

□ Reconnaissance ☐Agriculture Ground Station (yes/no):

□ Mapping/Surveying ☐ Construction Autonomous (yes/no):

□ Search and Rescue ☐Research Elevation:

□ Videography ☐Other: Speed:

Flight Path: (mission details, take off/landing locations, additional comments)

Required Control Measures: (check the box when complete)

□ Conduct a pre-flight safety meeting.

□ Conduct equipment inspection.

□ Perform pre-flight checklist

□ Create flight plan