alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
-----John Humes <JHumes@HEPN.com> wrote: -----

To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA From: John Humes <JHumes@HEPN.com> Date: 07/08/2010 03:58PM cc: Michalene Reilly <mreilly@HEPN.com>, Lo n Petts <lpetts@HEPN.com>, Brenton Fender <BFender@HEPN.com> Subject: Request for extension to answer Steam Electric ICR Questionnaire



### Ms. Alicea-Virella,

DELIVERED ELECTRONICALLY AND BY CERTIFIED MAIL

RE: Request for Extension for St eam Electric Power Generating Industry ICR

Merom Generating Station, NPDES Permit No. IN0050296

Plant ID 03719

Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc. is requesting an extension for completing the Steam Electric Power Generating Industry information collection request (ICR) questionnaire for our Merom Generating Station. Hoosier Energy is the generation and tr ansmissions cooperative which serves the rural areas of central and southern Indiana through 18 rural electric distribution cooperatives. As a small cooperat ively owned electric powe r generator, our small environmental staff is working on the many initiatives coming out of the Environmental Protection Agency for Steam Electric generators.

The Merom Station is required to complete the long er Version I of the questionnaire. In order to accomplish completion of Version 1, a significant amount of time and effort is required. In addition, there are several technical questions for which we need clarification before we can be sure we have answered all sectio n of the questionnaire properly an d plan to seek guidance from technical staff at the agen cy in the near future.

The Merom Station does not have ponds or impoundments in the classic sense as we understand the focus of the ICR (ash ponds). Instead it has a dry ash handling system and a wastewater treatment system of synthetically lined earthen basins (see attachment). In addition we have earthen lined stormwater basi ns which do capture stormwater and ash from our on-site landfill. 

### Pa g e 1 of 2

8/24/2011 about:blan kThese issues are causing uncertai nties in answering Parts D and F. We are formulating a series of questions for your technical assistance staff and will submit them as soon as possible. For these reasons, we believe 90 days does not provid e adequate time to respond to the information request. We intend to complete the question naire as quickly as possible, but request an extension of 60 days to insure we can meet the required deadline.

It should be noted that we are also completi ng an ICR questionnaire for our Frank E. Ratts Generating Station, (Plant ID 02314) and we an ticipate submitting it within the 90 day timeframe.



### If you have comments or questions, please contact me or Mr. Lon Petts at 812-876-2021.

John Humes

Environmental Specialist

Hoosier Energy REC, Inc.

812-876-0374 

### Pa g e 2 of 2

8/24/2011 about:blan k
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED BYSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of RockwoodSpecialties Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Seifi Ghasemi, Chairman andChief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

1.             TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.             Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: May 15, 2006 | /s/ SEIFI GHASEMI                    |
|-------------------------|--------------------------------------|
|                    | Seifi Ghasemi                        |
|                    | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |

 

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Companyfor purposes of Section 18 or any other provision of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended.

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 or otherdocument authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature thatappears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statementrequired by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

 

----
Before the First Division,

October 27, 1948

No. 52638.

protest 134612-K (New York).

#### Baron & Arnof, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of leather cuff links the same in all material respects as those the subject of *United States*v. *Heinrich, Herrmann & Weiss*(30 C. C. P. A. 47, C. A. D. 213) and Abstract 47986. Accepting this stipulation as a statement of fact the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of Marlin Business Services Corp.
 Date: August 5, 2008
 /s/ Daniel P. DyerDaniel P. DyerChief Executive Officer/s/ Lynne C. WilsonLynne C. WilsonChief Financial Officer &Senior Vice President
(Principal Financial Officer)
SCPW-15-0000193 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

LILY TAI NOMURA, Petitioner,

vs. THE HONORABLE MICHAEL K. TANIGAWA, JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI # I, Respondent Judge, and ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF CENTURY CENTER, INC., DANNY ROBERTS; MICHAEL SPENCER; SAMANTHA COOK; ALETTA FLEISCHINGER; KAYLA FERNANDEZ; KAYCEE HABAN; ALIX LUNSFORD; HANS BRODO; LILY LUM; CHRISTOPHER SCHULTE; LYLE NAM PAK; TOM SALT; LOGAN CROWLEY; ERIN BARASKY; JOHN DOES 1-50; and JANE DOES 1-50, Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CIV. NO. 1RC14-1-7636)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (By: Reck tenwald, C.J., Nak ayama, Mc Kenna, Po llack, an d Wilson, JJ.)

Upon consideration of Petitioner Lily Tai Nomura’s “Motion for Reconsideration of the Order Denying Petition for Writ of Mandamus,” filed on April 8, 2015 (“Motion”), the declaration attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-15-0000193 20-APR-2015 10:33 AMand the record, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, April 20, 2015. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson

2
#### Catharine M. *Raymond v.*Joseph Husson and others.

Part of order denying motion in reference to sheriff’s bills affirmed, with costs and disbursements. Opinion by Barnard, P. J.
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than April 10, 2007.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City**                     (Donna J. Ward, Assistant Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:                

*1. William Scott Martin Trust and William S. Martin*, Miami Beach, Florida, as trustee; to acquire control of Green Country Bancorporation, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire control of The First State Bank, both in Ketchum, Oklahoma.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March 21, 2007.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. E7-5437 Filed 3-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6558
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ERNEST A. WILLIAMS, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District Judge. (CR-92-113-MU, CA-96-66-3-MU) Submitted: October 17, 1996 Decided: October 24, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ernest A. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C. F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Williams , Nos. CR-92-113- MU; CA-96-66-3-MU (W.D.N.C. Mar. 8, 1996). 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
Archive

U.S. Dept. of Commerce
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/LPS2925 lost

The target resource for this PURL can no longer be traced. The following is a list of the targets this PURL was previously assigned to.

Powered by the Federal Depository Library Program.                A service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Miguel Rivera, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 166]

—Judgment, Su*194preme Court, Bronx County (George Covington, J.), rendered December *22,*1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of robbery in the first degree and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 81⁄3 to 25 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence. There is no legal requirement that defendant personally possess and use a weapon in the course of a robbery. The evidence established that defendant intentionally aided (Penal Law § 20.00) members of his group who seized one victim’s operable gun and used it against both victims in stealing property (Penal Law § 160.15 [2]).

Defendant’s claim of repugnant verdicts is without merit *{People v Tucker,*55 NY2d 1). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Kupferman and Mazzarelli, JJ.
-81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

 37

 38

 39

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲

▲ ▲

▲ 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

06/27

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 27 Jun 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.86 N 77.06 W Meters AGL
No. 54741.

#### M. W. Kellogg Research Lab. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 148274-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
(V. *D.*48)

Entry No. 757105.

#### Mutual Buying Syndicate, Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided July 25, 1957)

*Brooks & Brooks*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

This is a valuation proceeding which arose by reason of a judgment rendered by the first division of this court in the case of *Compass Instrument & Optical*Co. *et al.*v. *United States,*34 Cust. Ct. 341, Abstract 58974. By that judgment under the terms of the statute (28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d)) the matter was remanded to a single judge to “determine the proper dutiable value of the merchandise.” The proceeding before me has been abandoned by counsel for the importer. It is, therefore, dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of Marlin Business Services Corp.Date: May 4, 2007
 /s/ Daniel P. DyerDaniel P. DyerChief Executive Officer/s/ Lynne C. WilsonLynne C. WilsonChief Financial Officer &Senior Vice President
(Principal Financial Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8336 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8336

   To amend title 10, United States Code, to establish a counseling 
pathway in the Transition Assistance Program for members of the reserve 
                    components of the Armed Forces.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 10, 2024

 Ms. McClellan (for herself, Mr. Kelly of Mississippi, Ms. Norton, Ms. 
Omar, Ms. Moore of Wisconsin, Mr. Thanedar, Ms. Wexton, Mr. Moylan, Ms. 
   Salinas, Mr. Davis of North Carolina, Mr. Levin, Ms. Williams of 
 Georgia, Ms. Spanberger, and Mr. Van Orden) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 10, United States Code, to establish a counseling 
pathway in the Transition Assistance Program for members of the reserve 
                    components of the Armed Forces.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF COUNSELING PATHWAY IN THE TRANSITION 
              ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR MEMBERS OF THE RESERVE COMPONENTS 
              OF THE ARMED FORCES.

    Section 1142(c)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended, in 
the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting ``(including one 
pathway for members of the reserve components)'' after ``military 
department concerned''.
                                 <all>
```
Btate of %ou@ Carolina 

NIKKI R. HALEY 

GOVERNOR 

1205 PENDLETON STREET 

COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA 29201 

February 9,20 1 1 

The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson 

Administrator 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Dear Administrator Jackson, 

It has come to my attention that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may 

soon issue a revised rule making governing cooling water intake structures at existing 

electric generation and manufacturing facilities. I understand that one regulatory option 

EPA may pursue is to mandate that all or some subset of existing facilities be retrofitted 

with closed-cycle cooling systems. As the Governor of South Carolina, I have serious 

concerns with this one-size-fits-all approach, and I urge you instead to establish a 

national regulation that allows for state flexibility through the use of technological 

alternatives and site-specific and cost-benefit analyses. 

As you know, the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires cooling water intake structures at 

power plants and manufacturing facilities to reflect the best technology available for 

minimizing adverse environmental impact. For more than 30 years, EPA and the states 

have worked together to apply this requirement on a site-by-site basis, examining the 

impacts of cooling water intakes on the specific aquatic environment. 

I assure you that the permit writers in South Carolina have significant experience in 

minimizing the adverse environmental impacts that may be associated with cooling water 

intake structures at power plants and manufacturing facilities, as well as in making sound 

decisions that support our aquatic ecosystems. I am concerned that a new mandate from 

EPA would waste state resources by requiring our regulatory officials to revise existing 

permits that already protect the environment-at a time when we are making every effort 

possible to restore economic growth and lower the burden of government. 

In 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the CWA allows for consideration of costs 

and benefits, both in setting national performance standards for cooling water intake 

structures and in issuing variances from those national standards through the use of site- 
specific considerations to ensure protection of the environment. This type of cost-benefit 

analysis is common in the area of environmental regulation. South Carolina supports 

efforts to protect the quality of our waters, and I believe the current regulatory regime has 

been effective in doing so. 

Given the critical role of steam electric generation in meeting the nation's need for 

electricity, I urge the EPA to avoid imposing a new national mandate that could seriously 

impact electricity supply, reliability, and affordability for the residential, business, and 

industrial customers in my state and across the United States. 

Thank you for your personal attention to this important matter 

cc: The Honorable Cass R. Sunstein 

The Honorable Dr. Steven Chu 

Mr. Bill Daley, White House Chief of Staff 

Mr. Jacob J. Lew, Director, Office of Management and Budget
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2565 PLYMOUTH ROAD

ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48105-2498

 

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Emissions Modeling Data Files for the Final Renewable Fuel Standard Rule

FROM: Margaret Zawacki

Assessment and Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality

Marc Houyoux and Rich Mason

Emissions Inventory and Analysis Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards

TO: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0161-DRAFT-3009

DATE: January 13, 2010

The purpose of this memorandum is to transmit data files which were used in the emissions

modeling analyses for the final renewable fuel standard rule. The emissions modeling analyses 

are discussed in Section VI of the preamble, Chapter 3 of the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) 

and in the Emissions Modeling Technical Support Document. Following is a brief description of 

the information contained on the enclosed DVDs.

County/SCC-level delimited summaries for criteria pollutants and (at least) select hazardous air 

pollutants (benzene, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, acrolein, 1,3-butadiene, methanol, 

naphthalene) by emissions modeling sector for the scenarios listed below. Some county-SCC 

summary files include emissions for all HAPs supported by the multi-pollutant CMAQ model. 

Onroad and nonroad mobile summaries are included by month using average day emissions and 

separately with annual totals. For cases (1), (2), (3), and (5), point source inventories are

also provided in the format for the Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) 

modeling system. The point "ORL" format of these datasets can be found online at 

http://www.smoke-model.org/version2.6/html/ch08s02s08.html#d0e43807.

1) 2005 base

2) 2022 AEO baseline

3) 2022 RFS1 baseline

4) 2022 RFS1 sensitivity with headspace profile speciation change (8737B) - July 12-km 

EUS only

5) 2022 RFS2 control case

OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION
6) 2022 RFS2 sensitivity with missing cellulosic plants, nonroad speciation & PFCs 

changes - Jan/April/July/Oct 12-km EUS only 

Attachments
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Request for Dismissal and Order Thereon Sanford v. Denny’s #2156, et al.

 CIV. S-04-1770 LKK CMK

LYNN HUBBARD, III, SBN 69773

SCOTTLYNN J HUBBARD IV, SBN 212970

LAW OFFICES OF LYNN HUBBARD, III

12 WILLIAMSBURG LANE

CHICO, CA 95926

Telephone: (530) 895-3252

Fax: (530) 894-8244

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JAMES SANFORD

HENRY WIRTA, SBN 110097

HARRINGTON FOXX DUBROW & CANTER

650 California Street

San Francisco, CA 94108

Telephone: (415) 288-6600

Facsimile: (415) 288-6618

Attorneys for Defendant

DENNY’S, INC. DBA DENNY’S # 2156

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES SANFORD, 

Plaintiff,

v.

DENNY’S, INC. DBA DENNY’S #2156; and

DOES 1 through 10,

Defendants.

 /

Case No. CIV. S 04-1770 LKK CMK

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL AND

ORDER THEREON 

Case 2:04-cv-01770-LKK -CMK Document 12 Filed 09/14/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Request for Dismissal and Order Thereon Sanford v. Denny’s #2156, et al.

- 2 - CIV. S-04-1770 LKK CMK

TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES:

Pursuant to a SettlementAgreement and Release between plaintiff, James Sanford,

and defendant, Denny’s, Inc. dba Denny’s #2156, the parties hereby request that all parties

be dismissed with prejudice from the above-entitled action.

Dated: September 8, 2005 LAW OFFICES OF LYNN HUBBARD, III

/s/ Scottlynn J. Hubbard, IV

SCOTTLYNN J HUBBARD, IV 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Dated: September 7, 2005 HARRINGTON FOXX DUBROW & CANTER

Signature On File

HENRY WIRTA, ESQ.

Attorneys for Defendant Denny’s, Inc. dba

Denny’s #2156

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the complaint of plaintiff, USDC Case No. CIV.S-04-

1770 LKK CMK is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: September 14, 2005. /s/Lawrence K. Karlton

Lawrence K. Karlton

Senior Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01770-LKK -CMK Document 12 Filed 09/14/05 Page 2 of 2
#### In the Matter of ALFRED F. ORSINI, an attorney at law.

Eor the order: *Mr. David J. Goldberg.*

Eor the respondent: *Mr. Eugene A. Liotta.*

June 4, 1962.

Respondent suspended for six months and until the further order of the court. Opinion reported at 37 *N. J.*500.