alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 164 (Monday, August 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44959-44960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22432]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ER97-2126-000]


Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company; Notice of Filing

August 19, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 6, 1997, the Cleveland Electric 
Illuminating Company tendered for filing an amendment in the above-
referenced docket.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 285.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such 
motions or protests should be filed on or before August 29, 1997. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in

[[Page 44960]]

determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to 
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public 
inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-22432 Filed 8-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
From: "Palazzolo, Michael A." <Michael.Palazzolo@alcoa.com>

To: Roc helle Boyd/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: <psohi@aluminum.org>, "Charles D. Johnson" <cjohnson@aluminum.org>

Date: 12/08/2011 09:26 AM Subject: RE: Performance Testing

____________________________________ Rochelle,

Thank you for t he reminder.

Under the rule, any exceedance of a parametric limit, like chlorine flux injection rate is considered a deviation. If a facility needs to increase their flux injection limit, a performance test must be conducted with the new (higher) flux rate but when they conduct the test they are exceeding their current flux limit.

This issue could be resolved if there were an exemption from established parametric limits only when 1) the owner or operator is conducting a performance test to establis h a new or revised parametric limit and 2) the site

- specific test plan documents the intent to establish the new or revised parametric limit. (The exemption would only apply for the operating period or process cycles when emissions sampling is being perfo rmed.)

Please let me know if you have further questions.

Thanks,

Mike

Michael Palazzolo Alcoa, Inc.

201 Isabella Street Pittsburgh, PA 15212

- 5858

Ph: 412

- 553

- 4832

________________________ From: Boyd.Rochelle@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Boyd.Rochelle@epamail.epa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 2:30 PM To: Palazzolo, Michael A. Cc: psohi@aluminum.org; Charles D. Johnson Subject: Performance Testing

Hi, Mike, one thing that was not on my checklist was the issue that you were having when you go to set new parametric settings for new or altered waste streams. You mentioned that if you used 40 lbs of flux instead of 20 lbs in you OM&M plan you, you had to file that as a deviation. i am assuming that this is not a test for compliance but for the purpose of of setting new parameters. Can you please explain the type of waiver exemption you would like? Thanks

Rochelle Boyd, Environmental Engineer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Offi ce of Air Quality Planning and Standards Sector Policies and Programs Division 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, RTP, NC 27711 Mail Drop D243

- 02 Ph: (919) 541

- 1390 Fax: (919) 541

- 3207 Email: boyd.rochelle@epa.gov
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-70,204-03

EX PARTE JUAN MELECIO ESPARZA, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. F-2005-2101-C (WHC3) 

IN THE 211 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM DENTON COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of murder and

sentenced to seventy-five years’ imprisonment.

In his present application, Applicant raises four grounds challenging his conviction. This

application, however, presents a more serious question. Applicant alleges, among other things, that

he is actually innocent and that counsel was ineffective. In support of his allegations, Applicant

submitted a document purporting to be affidavit.
2

After a remand, the trial court has found that the purported affidavit submitted by Applicant

“is neither accurate nor correct, nor was it authored by the person listed in the document.” The court

also found that the Notary Public listed in the affidavit did not notarize the document. The court

concluded that Applicant submitted false evidence. 

The writ of habeas corpus is not to be lightly or easily abused. Sanders v. U.S., 373 U.S. 1

(1963); Ex parte Carr, 511 S.W.2d 523 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974). We find that Applicant has abused

The Great Writ by submitting false evidence. We deny relief on this application and cite him for

abuse of the writ. By that abuse, Applicant has waived and abandoned any contention that he might

have in regard to the instant conviction, at least insofar as existing claims that he could have or

should have brought in the application. Ex parte Jones, 97 S.W.3d 586 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003);

Middaugh v. State, 683 S.W.2d 713 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985); Ex parte Emmons, 660 S.W.2d 106

(Tex. Crim. App. 1983). Additionally, based on Applicant’s submission of false evidence, we find

that Applicant has filed a frivolous lawsuit.

Therefore, we instruct the Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals not to accept or file the

instant application for a writ of habeas corpus, or any future application pertaining to this conviction

unless Applicant is able to show in such an application that any claims presented have not been

raised previously and that they could not have been presented in a previous application for a writ of

habeas corpus. Ex parte Bilton, 602 S.W.2d 534 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980).

Copies of this order shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Filed: May 1, 2019

Do not publish
RECEIVED

JUL 12 2012

Office of Air, Waste &Toxics

STATE OF IDAHO

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

LAWRENCE G. WASDEN

July 11, 2012

Sent Via US Mail

Rick Albright, Director

Office of Air, Waste and Toxies

U.S. EPA Region 10

1200 Sixth Ave. - AWT - 128

Seattle, WA 98101

Re: Clarification ofAttorney General's statement

Dear Mr. Albright,

In response to questions your staff have raised please consider the following clarification of the

"Attorney General's Statement for Final Authorization of Change to the Federal RCRA Program

through July 1, 2010" dated October 14, 2011.

Concerning Page 2, Table reference 40 CFR Part 262; right hand column; item number 1:

Reference to "262.54" should read "262.53." This was a typographical error.

Concerning Page 2, Table reference 40 CFR Part 262; right hand column; item number 2: Delete

the first "The" as this was a typographical error.

Concerning Page 3, Table reference 40 CFR Part 268; right hand column; item number 2: The

state statutory provisions which define "Restricted Waste" to include by-product, source and

special nuclear materials regulated under the AEA are broader in scope because they regulate

materials specifically exempted from regulation by the Solid Waste Disposal Act. The state

regulatory provisions at IDAPA 58.01.10 which further regulate "radioactive materials not

regulated under the AEA" are likewise broader in scope because they regulate the radioactive

characteristic of the waste materials which, although meeting the definition of "solid waste" are

not differentially regulated by EPA under Subtitle C or D of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as

amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act for their radioactive characteristic.

Natural Resources Division, Environmental Quality Section,

1410 N. Hilton, 2nd Floor, Boise, Idaho 83706-1255

Telephone: (208) 373-0494, FAX: (208) 373-0481
Rick Albright, Director

July 11, 2012

Please contact me if you have any questions concerning this clarification.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          40,681
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,680,681
<PP&E>                                         161,567
<DEPRECIATION>                                  60,700
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,781,548
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          603,426
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,789
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,176,333
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,781,548
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,213,723
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,213,723)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (1,640,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,573,723)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,573,723)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.19)
        

</TABLE>
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN
NO. 03-0 8 -00 711 -CR

Br ando n Cu r r y , A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 403RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1- DC-06 -20 5022 , HO NORAB LE B RENDA KENNEDY , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N
The district cour

t revoke d Br andon Curry ’s term of c ommunity supervision and assessed a four- y ear prison term as punishment. Curry and his trial counsel—as we ll as the attorney fo r t he State and

the tr ia l ju dg e —s ig ne d D e fe nd ant’ s Ple a of Tr ue , V olu nta ry State me nts , Wa ive rs , Stipul ations & J udicial Confession to Plea dings Seeking Revocation or Adjudication in which Curry
e xpre ssl y wa ive d h is ri g ht to a

pp e a l. Th e tr ia l c ourt

signe d a c e rt if ic a tio n th a t th is i s a

ple a ba rg a in
case and Curry

has no rig ht of appea l. Be cause the rec ord does not c ontain a cer tification that Curry has the rig ht to appeal, we are require d to dismi ss this appeal. SeeTex. R. App. P . 25.2(d).

G. Alan Waldrop, Just ice Be fore J ustices Patterson, Waldrop and H enson Dismissed Filed: F ebrua

ry 6, 2009 Do No t Pu

bli sh
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 20 (Thursday, January 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 4525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2272]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. TM97-2-76-000]


Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd; Modification of Pending 
Technical Conference

January 24, 1997.
    The Secretary to the Commission previously issued a notice that the 
Staff would hold an technical conference in these proceedings at 10:00 
a.m., January 28, 1997, at 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C., in 
a room to be designated at that time. The purpose of the conference was 
to discuss Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd Company's proposed increase 
of the Fuel Gas and Unaccounted-for Gas percentage component of its 
transportation rates. On January 21, 1997, Public Service Company of 
Colorado and Cheyenne Light, Fuel, and Power Company (PSCo) filed a 
notice of withdrawal of protest with the Commission.
    PSCo was the only active party and no longer desires to hold a 
technical conference. However, the proposed technical conference was 
also to address certain matters of concern to the Commission staff. 
These are expected to require only a small amount of time. Therefore, 
in the interest of administrative efficiency, the technical conference 
will be conducted by telephone on the date and time scheduled. 
Questions should be directed to John M. Robinson, (202) 208-0808, or 
Leon Smith, (202) 208-0505.
Lois D. Cashell,
    Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-2272 Filed 1-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
### CHAPTER 33-15-15 PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION OFAIR QUALITY

Section 33-15-15-01 33-15-15-01.1 33-15-15-01.2 33-15-15-02 General Provisions [Repealed] Purpose Scope Reclassification

33-15-15-01. General provisions. Repealed effective February 1, 2005.

33-15-15-01.1. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to adopt by reference federal provisionsforthe prevention ofsignificantdeterioration program in North Dakota. The department will continue to implement the prevention of significant deterioration program as part ofthe state implementation plan.
History: Effective February 1, 2005. General Authority: NDCC 23-25-03, 23-25-04.1 Law Implemented: NDCC 23-25-03, 23-25-04.1

33-15-15-01.2. Scope. The provisions of40 Code of Federal Regulations part 52, section 21, paragraphs (a)(2) through (e), (h) through (r), (v), (w), (aa), and (bb) as they existon January 1, 2012, are incorporated by reference into this chapter. This includes revisions to the rules thatwere published as afinal rule in the Federal Registerbythisdatebuthad notbeen published intheCode ofFederal Regulations yet. Any changes or additions to the provisions are listed below the affected paragraph. ·,**~-** .40 CFR 52.21(d) The paragraph is deleted and replaced with the following:

40 CFR 52.21(k)(1) No concentration ofa contaminant shall exceed: (1) The concentration permitted under the national primary and secol')dary ambient air quality standards. (2) The concentration permitted by the ambient air quality standards in chapter 33-15-02.

This subparagraph is deleted and replaced with the following:



### 4. i

\ 40 CFR 

### 52.21(1)(1) (1) Any national ambient air quality standard or any standard in chapter 

### 33-15-02.
This subparagraph is deleted and replaced with the following:
All estimates ofambient concentrations required under this chapter shall be based on applicable air quality models, technical data bases (including quality assured air quality monitoring results), and other requirements specified in appendix w of40 CFR 

### 51 ("guideline on air quality models" as it exists on January 

### 1, 2012) as supplemented by department guidance. Technical inputs for these models shall be**~ased** upon credible technical data approved in advance by the department. In making

· such determinations, the department shall review such

technical data to determine whether it is representative of actual source, meteorolog'ical, topographical, or local air quality circumstances

.40 CFR 52.21(v)(2)(iv)(a) This subitem is deleted and replaced with the following: (a) Cause orcontributeto aviolation ofan applicable national ambient air quality standard or any ambient airquality standard in chapter33-15-02;

or

History: Effective February 1, 2005; amended effectiveApril 1, 2009;April 1, 2011; January 1, 2013. General Authority: NDCC 23-25-03, 23-25-04.1 Law Implemented: NDCC 23-25-03, 23-25-04.1
#### Yolanda DIAZ, Appellant, v. Pedro HERNANDEZ and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Appellees.

No. 77-1168.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 27, 1978.

A. Koss and Gary D. Malfeld, Coral Gables, for appellant.

Talburt, Kubicki & Bradley and Betsy E. Hartley, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The only substantial question presented on this appeal is whether the trial court properly applied the test set forth in *Marshall v. Papineau,*132 So.2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961); and *Reeder v. Edward M. Chadbourne, Inc.,*338 So.2d 271 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), in excluding the testimony of an expert witness. Our review of the record shows no error.

Affirmed.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

S. EDWARD NEISTER, 

Appellant

v.

EDEN PARK ILLUMINATION, INC., LARSON 

ELECTRONICS LLC, FAR UV TECHNOLOGIES, 

INC., 

Appellees

______________________

2024-1317

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2022-

00682.

______________________

O R D E R

The appellant having failed to file the brief required by 

Federal Circuit Rule 31(a) within the time permitted by the 

rules, it is 

Case: 24-1317 Document: 18 Page: 1 Filed: 05/07/2024
2 NEISTER V. EDEN PARK ILLUMINATION, INC.

ORDERED that the notice of appeal be, and the same 

hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in 

accordance with the rules. 

FOR THE COURT

May 7, 2024

Date

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: May 7, 2024

Case: 24-1317 Document: 18 Page: 2 Filed: 05/07/2024
II 

Calendar No. 398 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1829 

[Report No. 109–236] 

To repeal certain sections of the Act of May 26, 1936, pertaining to the 

Virgin Islands. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 6, 2005 

Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. BINGAMAN) (by request) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

APRIL 20, 2006 

Reported under authority of the order of the Senate of April 7, 2006, by Mr. 

DOMENICI, without amendment 

A BILL 

To repeal certain sections of the Act of May 26, 1936, 

pertaining to the Virgin Islands. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•S 1829 RS

1 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF CERTAIN LAWS PERTAINING TO 

2 THE VIRGIN ISLANDS. 

3 (a) REPEAL.—Sections 1 through 6 of the Act of May 

4 26, 1936 (48 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), are repealed. 

5 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

6 this section takes effect on July 22, 1954. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
Calendar No. 398 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1829 

[Report No. 109

–236] 

A BILL 

To repeal certain sections of the Act of May 26, 

1936, pertaining to the Virgin Islands. 

APRIL 20, 2006 

Reported without amendment 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
109TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1752

AN ACT

To amend the United States Grain Standards Act to

reauthorize that Act.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
 †

2

S 1752 ES

1 SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF ACT.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Sections 7(j)(4), 7A(l)(3), 7D, 19,

3 and 21(e) of the United States Grains Standards Act (7

4 U.S.C. 79(j)(4), 79a(l)(3), 79d, 87h, 87j(e)) are amended

5 by striking ‘‘2005’’ each place it appears and inserting

6 ‘‘2015’’.

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

8 subsection (a) take effect on September 30, 2005.

Passed the Senate September 22, 2005.

Attest:

Secretary.
109TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1752

AN ACT

To amend the United States Grain Standards Act

to reauthorize that Act.
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 American Physicians Service Group, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacity 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 the best of 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.



/s/ Kenneth S. Shifrin
-------------------------
Kenneth S. Shifrin                                   Date:  March 29, 2005
Chairman of the Board and
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 Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1752 

To amend the United States Grain Standards Act to reauthorize that Act. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 

Mr. CHAMBLISS (for himself and Mr. HARKIN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed 

A BILL 

To amend the United States Grain Standards Act to 

reauthorize that Act. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF ACT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Sections 7(j)(4), 7A(l)(3), 7D, 19, 

5 and 21(e) of the United States Grains Standards Act (7 

6 U.S.C. 79(j)(4), 79a(l)(3), 79d, 87h, 87j(e)) are amended 

7 by striking ‘‘2005’’ each place it appears and inserting 

8 ‘‘2015’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

10 subsection (a) take effect on September 30, 2005. 

Æ