alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Plant Actual Clinker**  **(White Report) (yr)** **Actual Nox Actual Sox** **Projected Clinker** **Projected NOx Projected NOx** **Projected SOx Projected SOx** **NOx Reductions** **SO2**

**Reductions (000 TPY)**  **(TPY) (TPY)**  **(000 TPY) (TPY)**  **lb/tcli (TPY)**  **lb/tcli** Bessemer K3 254.39 Bessemer K4 369.79 Bessemer Total 624.20 2005 1647.00 919.00 **1,647.0 919.0**  Logansport K1 191.72 1150.31 671.01 243.00 364.50 3.00 425.25 3.50 Logansport K2 192.51 1347.56 924.04 224.00 784.00 7.00 537.60 4.80 Logansport Total 384.20 2005 2497.87 1595.06 467.00 1148.50 962.85 **1,349.4 632.2**  Martinsburg K7-9 615.50 20064088.16 7007.21 Martinsburg K1 Permit Limits 2013.00 1404.00 1776.00 1909.20 2.15 1332.00 1.50 **103.8 72.0**  Permit Limits 2.65 lb/ton1.873 lb/ton Nazareth K1 1076.10 2006 1963.00 1502.00 1347.00 1549.05 2.30 1212.30 1.80 **414.0 289.7**  Speed K1 285.83 1000.40 285.83 325.00 568.75 3.50 162.50 1.00 Speed K2 588.29 1235.41 1000.09 651.00 683.55 2.10 553.35 1.70 Speed Total 874.10 20042235.81 1285.92 976.00 1252.30 715.85 **983.5 570.1**  San Juan K3 581.40 2005 1221.00 348.00 528.00 607.20 2.30 264.00 1.00 **613.8 84.0**  Total 4155.50 13652.84 12657.19 5094.00 6466.25 4487.00 actual - projected 7186.59 8170.19 **5,111.4 2,567.0**  Total reduction Actual 15356.78

**7,678.4**
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 22

- 10461 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus **Hector Moises Andrade Ramirez,** Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:21

- CR

- 286

- 1

**____ __________________________**  Before **Stewart, Duncan,** and **Wilson,** Circuit Judges. **Per Curiam :**  *****
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Hector Moises Andrade Ramirez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Ramirez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the r elevant portions of the record

**_____________________**

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir . R.**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 2, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-10461 Document: 00516633263 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/02/2023No. 22

- 10461

2 reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further res ponsibilities herein, and the appeal is **DISMISSED**

. See **5th Cir. R.**  42.2

. Case: 22-10461 Document: 00516633263 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/02/2023
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-2016 

In Re: STEVEN C. STERLING,

Debtor.

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

STEVEN C. STERLING; LAURA M. STERLING,

Appellants,

v.

LAWRENCE L. ROSEN,

Appellee,

and

HERBERT BESKINS,

Trustee-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District

Judge. (3:07-cv-00039-nkm)

Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 28, 2008
- 2 -

Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven C. Sterling, Laura M. Sterling, Appellants Pro Se. Charles

Albert Price, CREGGER & LAZARUS, Annandale, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Steven C. Sterling and Laura M. Sterling appeal from the

district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order

lifting the automatic stay with respect to his residence. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Sterling v.

Beskins, No. 3:07-cr-00039-nkm (W.D. Va. Oct. 4, 2007). We deny

the Appellants’ motion for preparation of a transcript at

government expense, and 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.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32.2

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 Report of Credex Corporation (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the
capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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 operation of the Company.

Date: March 16, 2011

By: /s/ Steven G. Salmond
    _______________________
    Steven G. Salmond
    Secretary / Treasurer (CFO)


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authentications, 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 Credex Corporation and
will be retained by Credex Corporation and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 23.1


                        CONSENT OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP


We consent to the  incorporation  by reference in  Registration  Statement  Nos.
32-92053,   33-2171,   33-17848  (Post-Effective  Amendment  No.  1),  33-33803,
33-33807,  33-39323, 33-36911, 33-45176, 33-45231, 33-45233, 33-56952, 33-58708,
33-72158,  033-55265  (Post-Effective  Amendment No. 1),  033-60379,  033-63547,
333-11639,  333-15923,  333-29099,  333-70459,  333-74371, 333-34726, 333-44508,
333-50992,  333-59504,  and  333-64988  of 3Com  Corporation  on Form S-8 of our
report dated June 25, 2001, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of 3Com
Corporation for the year ended June 1, 2001.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San Jose, California
August 8, 2001
From: jhhubbardi@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:24:55 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Jimmy Hubbard

Lynn, AR 72440
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

CERTIFICATION 

 

I, Edgar M. (Mac) Bridger, Chief Executive Officer, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Collins & Aikman Floorcoverings, 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, inlight 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 financialcondition, 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 ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

(a) Designed suchdisclosure 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 usby 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 endof the period covered by this 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. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer 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:

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation 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 havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
From: john_damico@ml.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:21:50 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

John D'Amico

Saint Johns, FL 32259
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsCalculated Low-Speed Steady and Time-Dependent Aerodynamic Derivatives for Some Airfoils Using a Discrete Vortex MethodThis paper contains a collection of some results of four individual studies presenting calculated numerical values for airfoil aerodynamic stability derivatives in unseparated inviscid incompressible flow due separately to angle-of-attack, pitch rate, flap deflection, and airfoil camber using a discrete vortex method. Both steady conditions and oscillatory motion were considered. Variables include the number of vortices representing the airfoil, the pitch axis / moment center chordwise location, flap chord to airfoil chord ratio, and circular or parabolic arc camber. Comparisons with some experimental and other theoretical information are included. The calculated aerodynamic numerical results obtained using a limited number of vortices provided in each study compared favorably with thin airfoil theory predictions. Of particular interest are those aerodynamic results calculated herein (such as induced drag) that are not readily available elsewhere.Document ID20160001631Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsRiley, Donald R.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredFebruary 5, 2016Publication DateDecember 1, 2015Subject CategoryFluid Mechanics And ThermodynamicsReport/Patent NumberL-20616NF1676L-22665NASA/TM-2015-218998Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 432938.11.01.07.43.40.17Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20160001631.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel, Thyroid Cancer and other Malignancies in Belarus, November 9, 2023, 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., National Cancer Institute Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W608, Rockville, Maryland 20850 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on August 30, 2023, FR Doc. 2023-18703, 88 FR 59930.                

This notice is being amended to change the meeting title from National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel Thyroid Cancer and other Malignancies in Belarus to National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel Cancer and Other Health Effects Following Chernobyl Accident. The meeting location, date and time will stay the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

Dated: September 20, 2023.

Melanie J. Pantoja, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-20866 Filed 9-25-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
From: difrans@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:57:29 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Mary DiFrancesco

Parker, CO 80134
Santa Monica Airport Office ofthe Director 3223 Donald Douglas Loop South Suite 3 Santa Monica, CA 90405

(310) 458-8591 FPJ<(310) 572-4495 City of Santa Monica<lll
April 14, 2008 AIR GROUP INC 7426 HAYVENHURST AVE VAN NUYS CA 91406-2803
Re: Santa Monica Airport
- Implementation of Ban on Category C and DAircraft. Dear Santa Monica Airport User: On March 25, 2008 the Santa Monica City Council adopted an ordinance restricting aircraft operations atthe Santa Monica Municipal Airport (SMO) to aircraft designated bythe Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as CategoryA and B aircraft. The Santa Monica· Airport is designed to handle such aircraft, which haveapproach speeds of lessthan 121 knots. Operations by Category Cand Daircraft are prohibited bythe ordinance. The new ordinance will go into effect onApril 24, 2008, afterwhich only aircraft in the FAA designated A & B categories will be allowed to operate at SMO. Attached foryour reference isatable explaining FAA aircraft approach speed categories. Also you can visit the following FAA linkto determine which category your aircraft falls under: http://www.faa.gov/airports airtraffic/airports/construction/aircraft char database/. Note: In general, the new ordinance provides that, except in the case of a bona fide emergency, no person operating acategory C or 0 aircraft, as defined by FAA's standards, shall land or depart from the Santa Monica Municipal Airport after April 

### 23, 2008. Penalties for violation of the Ordinance include misdemeanor prosecution with punlshment of afine not greater than One Thousand Dollars 

### ($1,000) or imprisonment in the County Jail for not more than six months, or both. The Ordinance is available for vieWing at www.smgov.net or www.santamonicaairport.org (airport website). Users of Santa Monica Airport, who utilize fractional share aircraft, maywant to consult with their fractional share operators. As noted on theirwebsites, the following fractional operators allowtheir participants to change to aircraft in compliant categories: Net jets: http://www.netjets.comlThe%20NetJets%20Program/netjetsprogram overview.asp Flexjet: http://www.f1exjet.comlhome.html; and Flight Options: http://www.fIightoptions.com/aboutoverview.html

Over Please 

### EXHIBIT



# I Ci9I also advisethat you periodically checkthe Santa Monica Airport's internet site at

www.santamonicaairport.org for updates.

. ' 

# Aincere,

~ Robert , nmborn Air it Director Santa MonicaAirport



### FAA Designated Approach Categories
According to FAAAdvisory Circular 150/5300-13,Airport Design, an aircraft's approach category isbased upon 1.3times its stall speed atthe aircraft's maximum certificated weight. Thefive approach categories used are asfollows: Category A: Speed lessthan 91 knots Category B: Speed 91 knots or more but lessthantzt knots Category C: Speed 121 knots or morel but lessthan 141 knots Category D: Speed 141 knots ormore, but lessthan 166 knots Category E: Speed greater than 166knots
#### E. Frank Coe, Appellant, v. William Tough, Respondent.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Bockes, J.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted
Pursuant

To Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Intelsat Corporation (the Company) hereby certifies that to such officers
knowledge, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |  |  |                                          
|--------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------
|Date: August 12, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ MICHAEL MCDONNELL                    
|                      |  |  |  | Michael McDonnell Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not
being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.