alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 59 (Wednesday, March 28, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 14516]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5719]

[[Page 14516]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Notice of Proposed Change to Section IV of the Virginia State 
Technical Guide

AGENCY: Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department 
of Agriculture.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of proposed changes in the Virginia NRCS 
State Technical Guide for review and comment.

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

SUMMARY: It has been determined by the NRCS State Conservationist for 
Virginia that changes must be made in the NRCS State Technical Guide 
specifically in practice standards: 647, Early Successional 
Habitat Development Management, 511, Forage Harvest 
Management, 655, Forest Trails and Landings and 512, 
Pasture and Hay Planting. These practices will be used to plan and 
install conservation practices on cropland, pastureland, woodland, and 
wildlife land.

DATES: Comments will be received for a 30-day period commencing with 
the date of this publication.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Inquire in writing to John A. Bricker, 
State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 
1606 Santa Rosa Road, Suite 209, Richmond, Virginia 23229-5014; 
Telephone number (804) 287-1691; Fax number (804) 287-1737. Copies of 
the practice standards will be made available upon written request to 
the address shown above or on the Virginia NRCS Web site: http://www.va.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/draftstandards.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 343 of the Federal Agriculture 
Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 states that revisions made after 
enactment of the law to NRCS State technical guides used to carry out 
highly erodible land and wetland provisions of the law shall be made 
available for public review and comment. For the next 30 days, the NRCS 
in Virginia will receive comments relative to the proposed changes. 
Following that period, a determination will be made by the NRCS in 
Virginia regarding disposition of those comments and a final 
determination of change will be made to the subject standards.

    Dated: March 26, 2007.
John A. Bricker,
State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 
Richmond, Virginia.
 [FR Doc. E7-5719 Filed 3-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-16-P
```
#### In the Matter of LOUIS KRAEMER, an attorney at law.

June 12, 1967.

Name of respondent stricken from the roll of attorneys at law. Opinion reported at 49 *N. J.*400.
Earth Science Tech, Inc.


2255 Glades Road   Suite# 324A


Boca Raton, FL 33431







A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Earth Science Tech, Inc. was held at the Florida offices of the Corporation at 2255 Glades Road, Boca Raton, Florida 33431 on December 23, 2014 at 2:20 P.M.







The following directors having been present:  Harvey Katz, Chairman.







The meeting was held to approve the following issuance of 5,200,000Preferred Class A  Restricted Stock  on accordance with the  approval of the Resolution “ Section B- Addendum A on July 18, 2014 by the this Board and Majority shareholders into the Minutes: Section B –Addendum is quoted below;







Section...








	B:	Addendum “A: (Revised 7-17-2014)










On March 24, 2014, Ultimate Novelty Sports, Inc. entered into a Founders Agreement with Majorca Group, Ltd., a Marshall Islands Corporation.  The Founder Agreement provides that in exchange for issuance of 25,000,000 of the Company’s common shares, that Majorca Group shall provide services.  After two months of negotiations the following has been accepted:







This addendum is an extension of the services that the Majorca Group, Ltd. will perform:


 



		1.	Majorca Group to insert over 3000 linked sites for the leafstrain.com Website.






		2.	Majorca Group to continue ongoing consulting and to bring in other types of contracts and business that will enhance the value of Earth Science Tech, such as retail outlets, etc.










If accomplished, these additional services will be paid at a onetime flat rate of five million two hundred thousand (5,200,000) Preferred Class “A” stock, at the original price of the initial contract for the 25,000,000 common shares, which were issued at .50 per share.  The additional reason for this price is that there is no market at this time for EST shares and will be Restricted for one (1) year.







These shares will be issued only after realization of the LeafStrain.com website going live. Majorca will not be entitled to any other compensation of any type for a period of twelve (12) months.














Earth Science Tech, Inc.


2255 Glades Road   Suite# 324A


Boca Raton, FL 33431


 




There being no further business for the Board this meeting was adjourned.







	
Earth Science Tech, Inc.

	 
	 	 
	
/Harvey Katz

	 
	
HARVEY KATZ, Ph.D.

	 
	
CEO, Director
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 11-1946

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of South Dakota.

Eduardo Contreras-Flores, *

also known as Carlos Flores, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: October 5, 2011

Filed: October 19, 2011

___________

Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Eduardo Contreras-Flores pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation. 

See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). The district court sentenced him to 77 months in 1

prison and 2 years of supervised release. His counsel has moved to withdraw and

filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that the

sentence is unreasonable. Contreras-Flores has filed a supplemental brief challenging

his sentence and asserting that his trial counsel was ineffective.

The Honorable Karen E. Schreier, Chief Judge, United States District Court

1

for the District of South Dakota.
Contrary to counsel’s and Contreras-Flores’s arguments, we conclude that the

district court committed no procedural error in sentencing Contreras-Flores, and that

the court imposed a substantively reasonable sentence. See United States v.

Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc); United States v. Garcia, 512

F.3d 1004, 1006 (8th Cir. 2008). We decline to review Contreras-Flores’s

ineffective-assistance claims in this direct appeal. See United States v. Looking

Cloud, 419 F.3d 781, 788-89 (8th Cir. 2005).

Having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find

no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we

affirm.

______________________________

-2-
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8575 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8575

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to revise the definition 
   of institution for mental diseases under the Medicaid program to 
  exclude from such definition institutions having 36 beds or less if 
               such institutions meet certain standards.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 28, 2024

 Mr. Goldman of New York (for himself, Ms. Malliotakis, Mr. Cardenas, 
and Mr. Bilirakis) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                  the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to revise the definition 
   of institution for mental diseases under the Medicaid program to 
  exclude from such definition institutions having 36 beds or less if 
               such institutions meet certain standards.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Michelle Alyssa Go Act''.

SEC. 2. REVISING THE DEFINITION OF INSTITUTION FOR MENTAL DISEASES 
              UNDER THE MEDICAID PROGRAM TO EXCLUDE FROM SUCH 
              DEFINITION INSTITUTIONS HAVING 36 BEDS OR LESS IF SUCH 
              INSTITUTIONS MEET CERTAIN STANDARDS.

    Section 1905(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(i)) is 
amended to read as follows:
    ``(i) Institution for Mental Diseases.--The term `institution for 
mental diseases' means a hospital, nursing facility, or other 
institution that is primarily engaged in providing diagnosis, 
treatment, or care of persons with mental diseases, including medical 
attention, nursing care, and related services, unless such hospital, 
facility, or other institution--
            ``(1) has 36 beds or less; and
            ``(2) meets nationally recognized, evidence-based standards 
        for mental health programs (and, in the case of an institution 
        for mental diseases that provides treatment for substance use 
        disorders, meets nationally recognized, evidence-based 
        standards for substance use disorder programs, such as the 
        latest standards set forth by the American Society of Addiction 
        Medicine) approved by the Secretary, including standards that 
        establish the types of services offered, hours of clinical 
        care, and staffing credentials for such an institution, and any 
        other standards as the Secretary may require.''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 180 days after 
the date of enactment of this Act and shall apply to State plans 
beginning on such date.
                                 <all>
```
U. S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

12/08/2015 

Re: Amendment to Exemption 11240 issued pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Reform 

Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations in Regulatory Docket No. FAA2014-0894 

Dear Sir or Madam; 

Aerius Flight LLC was issued Exemption 11240 (hereinafter the Exemption) for the 

purpose of commercial aerial survey and photography operations. Aerius Flight LLC 

herby requests an amendment to the Exemption to allow the following additional type of 

small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) that fully complies with the conditions of the 

Exemption. 

Aerius Flight LLC seeks to add”

1. AgEagle RAPID

2. Precision Hawk Lancaster

3. UASUSA Tempest

4. Event 38 E386 & E382

5. AeroMao Aeromapper Talon UAV

As this is an amendment to an existing exemption, Aerius Flight LLC respectfully 

submits that good cause exists so that notice does not need to be published in the Federal 

Register for the requested amendment. Please contact the me should you have any 

question concerning this request for an amendment to the Exemption. 

Regards,

Kenneth Beason, CEO

Aerius Flight LLC 

kbeason@aeriusflight.com

(248) 667-8577
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 Annual Report of Manhattan Scientifics, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K / A for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Chris Theoharis, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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.





Date: March 25, 2011





/s/ Chris TheoharisChris TheoharisChief Financial Officer (Principal Financial 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 Manhattan Scientifics, Inc. and will be retained by Manhattan Scientifics, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Appliances & Commercial Equipment Standards: Residential Furnaces and Boilers Final Rule

U.& DepafteW of Ere

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Page 1 of 2

1EFr rl ^^

€'nM am Arn;is

Search Help is More Search Options

EEr~ E Infcerrnation Center

Appii•3nxes Home

About Standards

Laws 6, Regulations

EPACT 2005 Test

Procedures

Peer Review

Information Resources

Notices L- Rules

Schedule Setting

Public workshops &

Hearings

Stake Petitions

Useful Links

Commercial Equipment

Residential Products

Battery Chargers .&

External Pu4teer Supplies

Ceiling Fans &. Ceiling

Fan Light Kits

Central Air Conditioners

& Heat Pump"

Clothes Dryers

Clothes 'c al 31-ieri

Cooking Products

I) ehum dil Nr :

Dish-A'asFier5

Furnaces E. Boilers

Fluorescent Lamp

rda11asts

Fluorescent &

Inrarr,1e cent Limps.

PI:ijmainri Products

PooI I-leai:e'rc

( efrigdrat rs Li; Free2ers

P;oorn Air !=onditirlr ers

Residential Furnaces and Boilers

Final Rule

The Department has published its new energy efficiency standards

for residential furnaces and boilers and it is available on this site as

published in the Federal Register.

Some of the following documents are available as Adobe Acrobat

PDFs . Download Adobe Reader.

• Final Rule Technical SLi pnI l Document

• Final Rule Analyticaf Tools

• Finding of No Significant Impact: Energy Conservation

Program for Consumer Products , November 8, 2007 (.P F_49

K-13)

• Final Rule : Energy Conservation Program for Consumer

Products: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential

Furnaces and Boilers (PDF _1 08 M B

httD://www.eere.enerL-v.2ov/buildiniis/annliance standards/residential/furnace boiler fr.html 2/1/2008

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 164
Appliances & Commercial Equipment Standards: Residential Furnaces and Boilers Final Rule Page 2 of 2

:_nr.j [ L EJc:. i ighr ti..I:,

Air Cul-,JiLiCIrers

[•'rini ab le Version

Webmaste[ I Security & Privacy I Bkll.1 ling c noI_]^iie f?rogrem Horne I EERE Fiui'

U.S. Department of Energy

Content Last Updated : 11/19/2007

httr^ •//cvcvcv aara anarnv trnvMni1,1incre /ar^r^lionna elan`lorrle /racirlanti ,1 Ifnrnar a hnilar -Fr html ')/l /')nnQ

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 164
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v CALVIN CONWAY GETER, Airman, U. S. Navy, Appellant

15 USCMA 209, 35 CMR 181

No. 18,182

January 6, 1965

*Lieutenant K. L. Abernathy,*USN, was on the brief for Appellant, Accused.

*Commander M. S. Ochstein,*USNR, was on the brief for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

Tried by special court-martial, accused stands convicted of absence without leave for less than one day, wrongful possession of a false leave authorization, and breach of restriction, violative of Articles *86*and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §§ 886 and 934. After receiving evidence of two prior convictions by summary court-martial, the court sentenced accused to bad-conduct discharge, confinement at hard labor for two months, and reduction in grade. Such sentence having been approved at intermediate levels of review, accused petitioned this Court under the provisions of Article 67(b)(3), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 867.

*210
      *209Accused’s unauthorized absence and *210his breach of restriction were properly-treated by the court-martial president as multiplicious for sentence purposes. Thus, the maximum penalty permitted for those offenses under the Table of Maximum Punishments extends only to confinement and partial forfeitures for one month. As the specification involving the false leave authorization does not allege that accused’s possession of the instrument was accompanied by an intent to deceive, that offense is punishable, as a disorder, by confinement and forfeiture of two-thirds pay for four months. United States v Karl, 3 USCMA 427, 12 CMR 183; United States v Blue, 3 USCMA 550, 13 CMR 106. Thus, it is apparent that a punitive discharge was authorized as part of accused’s sentence only due to the evidence of two prior convictions. Table of Maximum Punishments, Section B, paragraph 127, Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1951.

At no time did the president advise the court-martial, in his instructions on sentence, that the bad-conduct discharge was imposable only because of the previous convictions. Indeed, his only reference to the impact of the prior convictions was that they affected the applicable period of forfeitures. In view of those circumstances, and in light of trial counsel’s argument on sentence — the thrust of which was that accused’s pattern of conduct made his retention in the Navy detrimental to the service — it is apparent that the instant case falls within the purview of our opinion in United States v Hutton, 14 USCMA 366, 34 CMR 146. Chief Judge Quinn dissented in that case, but agrees that decision is controlling here.

Accordingly, accused’s petition for review is granted. The decision of the board of review as to sentence is reversed and the record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Navy for further action. The board of review may affirm a sentence which does not include a bad-conduct discharge, or a rehearing may be ordered on the penalty.
Before the Third Division,

September 25, 1944

No. 49727.

#### Petition 6154-R of A. W. Fenton Co. (Cleveland).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

At the second hearing a report made by a customs agent, read into the record without objection, stated that the merchandise was invoiced at 10 cents per pound and that these shipments were all made subsequent to advance in price of this commodity on February 15, 1937, from 10 to *10)i*cents per pound, and that the importer was advised of this advance on February 13, 1937. The court was therefore unable to find that the importer was without intention to defraud the revenue or to conceal or misrepresent the facts. The petition was therefore denied.
No. 54759.

#### Independent Fur Brokers, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 71130-K (New York).

*295Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the issue herein is the same in all material respects as that presented in *Mamary Bros., Inc.*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 135, C. D. 1142). In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoice should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on the entry involved.
(Reap. Dec. 8466)

#### Atalanta Trading Corp. *v.*United States

Entry No. 854546-1/8.

(Decided July 14, 1955)

*Martin A. Fromer*for the plaintiff.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Johnson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, by and between the attorneys for the respective parties hereto, that the price of the imported merchandise hereinabove named at which such or similar imported merchandise was freely offered for sale, packed, ready for delivery, in the principal market of the United States, to all purchasers at the time of exportation .of the imported merchandise hereinafter described, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, with allowance made for duty, cost of transportation and insurance, and other necessary expenses from the place of shipment to the place of delivery, a commission not exceeding 6%, if any has been paid or contracted to be paid on goods secured otherwise than by purchase, or profits not to exceed 8%, and a reasonable allowance for general expenses not to exceed 8% on the purchase of goods, is as follows:

> $0.5081 per 8 oz. box

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no foreign or export value for the merchandise hereinabove set forth.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the case be submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the United States value, as that value is defined in section 402 (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by section 8 of the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value was $0.5081 per 8-ounce box.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
#### JOSEPH PETERS, PLAINTIFF-PETITIONER, v. STEPHEN H. MAGNUS, *ET AL.,*DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

*Mr. George J. Kaplan*for the petitioner.

*Mr. Sydney I. Turtz*for the respondents.

May 29, 1967.

Denied.
J

~~~ EO sr qT ~

s UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

~ )If/ o

~~ ylq G 

# PROT SG

~ 

# _ SEP 16 2010

OFFICE OF Donald C Gadbury AIR AND RADIATION Director, National TRU Program Carlsbad Field Office Department of Energy P.O. Box 3090 Carlsbad, NM 88221 Dear Mr. Gadbury: We received your letter dated September 16, 2010, requesting the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) concun:ence on the draft expansion memo CBFO plans to issue to add six remote-handled (RH) waste streams generated by the Battelle Columbus Laboratory (BCL) characterized by the Central Characterization Project (CCP) at the Savannah River Site (SRS). This request is in accordance with the CBFO procedures that are intended to ensure that the U. S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) site certifications correlate appropriately with EPA approvals for waste characterization activities at DOE transuranic (TRU) waste generator sites. On September 9, 2010, EPA approved the SRS-CCP implemented RH waste characterization process for the six BCL generated waste streams (See EPA Air pocket No A-98-49, II-A4-129). EPA has also received and reviewed quarterly tiering reports covering the waste characterization program implemented by CCP at SRS and have found all changes made to be acceptable. EPA concurs that the waste characterization equipment, procedures and waste streams encompassed in DOE's draft expansion memo comport with all of EPA's existing approvals for RH waste at SRS-CCP. Thank you for providing us with an opportunity to review the draft expansion memo for SRS CCP. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Ed Feltcorn (202-343-9422) or Rajani Joglekar (202-343-9462).

Sincerely,

Edward Feltcorn Center for Waste Management and Regulations

Intemet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov Recycled/Recyclable o Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Papercc: Bill Mackie, CBFO

Ava Holland, CBFO QA Norma Castaneda, CBFO Court Fesmire, CBFO J. R. Stroble, CBFO Martin Navarrete, CBFO Dennis Miehls, CBFO Allison Pangle, CTAC Porf Martinez, CTAC