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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7433

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

BOBBY RAY WHITE, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, 

District Judge. (5:98-cr-00158-BO-1)

Submitted: June 17, 2010 Decided: June 23, 2010

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bobby Ray White, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Anne Margaret Hayes, 

Rudolph A. Renfer, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, 

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Bobby Ray White, Jr., appeals the district court’s 

order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion for a 

sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. United States v. White, No. 

5:98-cr-00158-BO-1 (E.D.N.C. July 21, 2009). 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.

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 190 (Wednesday, October 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 51460]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-25980]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 092297A]


Endangered Species; Permits

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Receipt of an application for a scientific research permit 
(1076).

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the California Department of Fish 
and Game in Sacramento, CA (CDFG) has applied in due form for a permit 
that would authorize takes of a threatened species for scientific 
research.

DATES: Written comments or requests for a public hearing on the 
application must be received on or before October 31, 1997.

ADDRESSES: The application and related documents are available for 
review in the following offices, by appointment:
    Office of Protected Resources, F/PR3, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, 
Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 (301-713-1401); and
    Protected Species Division, NMFS, 777 Sonoma Avenue, Room 325, 
Santa Rosa, CA 95404-6528 (707 575-6066).
    Written comments or requests for a public hearing should be 
submitted to the Protected Species Division in Santa Rosa, CA.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CDFG requests a five-year permit under the 
authority of section 10 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (16 
U.S.C. 1531-1543) and the NMFS regulations governing ESA-listed fish 
and wildlife permits (50 CFR parts 217-227), for takes of juvenile, 
threatened, southern Oregon/northern California coast coho salmon 
(Oncorhynchus kisutch) associated with fishery studies in drainages 
throughout the Evolutionarily Significant Unit. Eight CDFG workplans 
are defined in this application for distribution and abundance surveys. 
ESA-listed juvenile fish are proposed to be captured by electrofishing, 
anesthetized, handled (weighed, measured, sampled for tissues and/or 
scales, and fin-clipped), allowed to recover from the anesthetic, and 
released. ESA-listed juvenile fish indirect mortalities associated with 
the research are also requested.
    Those individuals requesting a hearing on this request for a permit 
should set out the specific reasons why a hearing would be appropriate 
(see ADDRESSES). The holding of such a hearing is at the discretion of 
the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA. All statements and 
opinions contained in the above application summaries are those of the 
applicants and do not necessarily reflect the views of NMFS.

    Dated: September 24, 1997.
Nancy Chu,
Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources, 
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 97-25980 Filed 9-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
Conventional Paving: Vertical Edge 

Drop-off

In the 

conventional 

asphalt paving 

process, 

approximately 

80 percent of 

compaction is 

achieved by the 

screed, then a 

series of rollers 

is used to provide some additional compaction. 

However, at the edge of the pavement, the 

asphalt material is not well compacted and lays 

somewhat loosely at about a 45-degree angle. 

This loose material cools faster than the rest of 

the asphalt and typically breaks off.

Before the project is 

complete, the 

shoulder material is 

brought flush with 

the top of the 

pavement, so that 

drivers are not 

exposed to a dropoff initially.

After a few months, 

the shoulder begins 

to settle and the 

edge is exposed. 

Erosion also works on 

this material to wash 

it away. On narrow 

pavements, or in 

certain locations like 

curves or mailboxes, 

the unpaved shoulder 

may be worn down by tires as well. The loose 

asphalt at the edge is lost with the shoulder 

material and the hard pavement edge is nearly 

vertical, with a rounded top. This edge can 

cause tire-scrubbing in a roadway departure.

ADVANTAGES: We’ve always done it this 

way—no training needed.

DISADVANTAGES: Where edge is exposed, 

drivers may encounter tire-scrubbing and lose 

control, potentially resulting in a crash. The 

pavement edge is more likely to ravel and 

break off. 

How Does Safety Edge Compare to Conventional Paving?
Paving with the Safety Edge: 

Mountable Drop-off

There is one change with the Safety Edge—a 

shoe is attached to the paver to consolidate 

the edge material into a tight 30-degree shape 

as it comes off the screed. Compactive rolling 

of the rest of the pavement proceeds normally, 

as no additional compaction is necessary. 

As with conventional 

paving, the shoulder 

material is brought 

flush with the top of 

the pavement before 

the project is 

considered complete. 

Again, drivers are not 

initially exposed to a 

drop-off.

Shoulder material will settle, erode, or be worn 

down by tires, similar to conventional 

pavement. However, the edge holds its shape 

(if a proper shoe provided the intended 

compaction at laydown), so there is no lost 

material in the process. More importantly, the 

30-degree edge that is exposed does not 

induce tire scrubbing. Drivers who have 

dropped a tire over this edge are very likely to 

be able to return to their lane without losing 

control as they attempt to steer back onto the 

pavement. 

ADVANTAGES: Safer for drivers attempting to 

steer back onto pavement. Costs are low to 

none, depending on project parameters. The 

pavement may last longer.

DISADVANTAGES: Requires training and a 

small, relatively inexpensive piece of 

equipment.

Contact Information:

To learn more about EDC, visit: 

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/everydaycounts 

 

For training or more information on this Every 

Day Counts Initiative, please contact your local

FHWA Division Office.

Version 1: 10/1/2010
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 205 (Thursday, October 23, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 55263]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28073]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of Banks 
or Bank Holding Companies; Correction

    This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc. 97-27510) published on pages 
54113-54114 of the issue for Friday, October 17, 1997.
    Under the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco heading, the entry 
for Wendell A. Jacobson, Fountain Green, Utah, is revised to read as 
follows:
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Pat Marshall, Manager of 
Analytical Support, Consumer Regulation Group) 101 Market Street, San 
Francisco, California 94105-1579:
    1. Wendell A., and Melba B. Jacobson, Fountain Green, Utah; to 
acquire additional voting shares of Bank of Ephraim, Ephraim, Utah.
    Comments on this application must be received by October 30, 1997.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 17, 
1997.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-28073 Filed 10-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
# L_2005065EN.01000701.xml

| 11.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 65/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 65/7

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 400/2005

of 10 March 2005

on the issue of import licences for high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 936/97 of 27 May 1997 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas for high-quality fresh, chilled and frozen beef and for frozen buffalo meat (2),

Whereas:

| (1) | Regulation (EC) No 936/97 provides in Articles 4 and 5 the conditions for applications and for the issue of import licences for meat referred to in Article 2(f). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 936/97 provides in Articles 4 and 5 the conditions for applications and for the issue of import licences for meat referred to in Article 2(f).

| (2) | Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 fixes the amount of high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal meeting the definition laid down therein which may be imported on special terms for the period 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005 at 11 500 t. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 fixes the amount of high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal meeting the definition laid down therein which may be imported on special terms for the period 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005 at 11 500 t.

| (3) | It should be recalled that licences issued pursuant to this Regulation will, throughout the period of validity, be open for use only in so far as provisions on health protection in force permit, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

It should be recalled that licences issued pursuant to this Regulation will, throughout the period of validity, be open for use only in so far as provisions on health protection in force permit,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   All applications for import licences from 1 to 5 March 2005 for high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal as referred to in Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 shall be granted in full.

2.   Applications for licences may be submitted, in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 936/97, during the first five days of April 2005 for 8 553,508 t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 11 March 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 10 March 2005.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 21. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 1).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 137, 28.5.1997, p. 10. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1118/2004 (OJ L 217, 17.6.2004, p. 10).

2

---
# EUR-Lex - 32005M3837 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 32005M3837

**Commission Decision of 16/06/2005 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No IV/M.3837 - THIEL LOGISTIK / MONDI / PROXAR) according to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (Only the English text is authentic) **

*

*

| |Brussels, 16.06.2005

SG-Greffe(2005) D/202671/2

To the notifying parties

Dear Madam, dear Sir,

Subject : Case No. COMP/M.3837-Thiel Logistik / Mondi / Proxar Notification of 11.05.2005 pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 [1] Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No. C119, 20.05.2005, page 8.

1. On 11.05.2005, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 by which the undertakings Thiel Logistik AG (“Thiel Logistik”, Luxembourg), controlled by Mr Stefan Quandt, and Mondi Business Paper SCP a.s. (“Mondi”, Slowakia), controlled by Anglo American plc. (“Anglo American”, UK), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of the undertaking Proxar Slovakia Internationale Spedition a.s. (“Proxar”, Slovakia) by way of purchase of shares. Proxar is currently solely controlled by Mondi.

2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

- for Thiel Logistik: transport and logistic services;

- for Mondi: production of paper;

- for Anglo American: production or extraction of materials such as gold, diamonds, metals, coal, paper, minerals and wood;

- for Proxar: transport and logistic services.

3. After examination of the notification, the Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 and of paragraph 5, subparagraphs a and c of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004[2].

4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the common market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004.

For the Commission

signed Neelie KROES Member of the Commission

[1] OJ L 24, 29.1.2004 p. 1

[2] OJ C 56, 05.3.2005 p.32

MERGER PROCEDURE

ARTICLE 6(1)(b) DECISION

SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE

PUBLIC VERSION
EXHIBIT 10.29




 




CERTIFICATION OF




CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL

OFFICER




DUPONT PHOTOMASKS, INC.




 




 




I, Peter S. Kirlin, Chief

Executive Officer of DuPont Photomasks, Inc. (the “Company”), 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

accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) for the fiscal

quarter ended December 31, 2002 and filed with the United States Securities and

Exchange Commission, do hereby certify that to my knowledge:




 




1.     The Report fully complies with the

requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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 in respect of those items required to be described

or presented in such Report under Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934.




 




 




	

    /s/ PETER S. KIRLIN


  	

   


  
	

  Peter S.

  Kirlin


  
	

  Chief Executive

  Officer


  
	

   


  
	

  February

  13, 2003


  





 




 




I, Satish Rishi, Chief

Financial Officer of DuPont Photomasks, Inc. (the “Company”), 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 accompanying

Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) for the fiscal quarter ended

December 31, 2002, 2002 and filed with the United States Securities and

Exchange Commission, do hereby certify that to my knowledge:




 




1.     The Report fully complies with the

requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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 in respect of those items required to be described

or presented in such Report under Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934.




 




 




	

    /s/ SATISH RISHI


  	

   


  
	

  Satish Rishi


  
	

  Chief

  Financial Officer


  
	

   


  
	

  February

  13, 2003
EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM

Application 

No. Project/Facility Name Project Type Federal Land Accessed Applicant County

Fiscal 

Year*

TN 53 Great Smoky Mountain 

Boundary Greenway Bicycle/Pedestrian Facility

National Park ServiceGreat Smoky Mountains 

National Park

Blount Co. Blount PE 2023 

CN 2024

TN 55 Barnett Bridge Rehabilitation Bridge Rehabilitation National Park ServiceObed Wild & Scenic River Morgan Co. Morgan

PE 2023 

CN 2024

TN 58

Observation Knob Park & 

Campground

Miscellaneous 

Improvements: Roadway 

Resurfacing, ADA ramps, 

Boat ramp

Tennessee Valley 

Authority- Observation 

Knob Park

Sullivan Co. Sullivan PE 2023 

CN 2025

TN 61 Wyatt Hollow Road Bridges

Roadway 

Resurfacing/Bridge 

Replacement

US Forest ServiceCherokee National Forest Sullivan Co. Sullivan PE 2023 

CN 2025

TN 70 Directional Signs Wayfinding Signage

National Park Service- Big 

South Fork National River 

& Recreation Area

Fentress Co. Fentress 2023

The Programming Decisions Committee (PDC) responsible for the Tennessee Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) has selected its multiyear Program 

of Projects. The projects identified for programming for the Tennessee FLAP are listed below by application number and include:

Tennessee Program of Projects for Federal Fiscal Years 2023-2026
EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM

Application 

No. Project/Facility Name Project Type Federal Land Accessed Applicant County

Fiscal 

Year*

TN 75 Shotoff Cliff Road Roadway Reconstruction

National Park Service- Big 

South Fork National River 

& Recreation Area

Scott Co. Scott

PE 2023 

CN 2024

TN 82 Gibbs Ferry Park

Miscellaneous 

Improvements: Trailhead, 

Kayak Launch, Parking Lot

Tennessee Valley 

Authority- Clinch RiverMelton Lake CorridorAnderson Co. Anderson PE 2024 

CN 2026

TN 83

Fort Donelson Northbound 

Access Improvements Roadway Resurfacing

National Park Service- Fort 

Donelson National 

Battlefield

Town of Dover Stewart

PE 2023 

CN 2024

Tennessee Program of Projects for Federal Fiscal Years 2023-2026

The PDC does not have a firm date for the next Call for Projects under the Access Program. Please bookmark our webpage to watch for future Calls for Projects in 

your state. https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-access

If you have any questions regarding the Call for Projects, please contact Mr. Lewis Grimm, Planning Team Leader, at 703-404-6289 or Lewis.Grimm@dot.gov. For 

questions regarding project agreements and funding, please contact Ms. Jacinda Russell, Access Program Manager, at 571-434-1543 or Jacinda.Russell@dot.gov.
Energy East Exhibit 10-16 (2002 10-K)



Exhibit 10-16


AMENDMENT NO. 1

to

RESTRICTED STOCK PLAN

of

ENERGY EAST CORPORATION



 

     The Restricted Stock Plan (the "Plan") of Energy East Corporation is hereby amended as follows, effective as of February 13, 2003: 


	Article XII (C) of the Plan is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:




     In the event that a Participant elects ("Section 83(b) Election"), pursuant to Section 83(b) of the Code, to include in gross income for Federal income tax purposes an amount equal to the fair market value of the Restricted Stock at the time of the issuance of the Award, the Participant shall notify the Company of said election at the time the Section 83(b) Election is made.


     The Company shall have the right to require the Participant to remit promptly to the Company, upon demand, amounts sufficient to satisfy any applicable Federal, state and local taxes that are required to be withheld with respect to the following events with respect to the Restricted Stock: (i) the lapsing or other satisfaction of forfeiture restrictions on the Restricted Stock, or, if earlier, the making of a Section 83(b) Election with respect to the Restricted Stock, and (ii) the payment of dividends with respect to  Restricted Stock as to which a Section 83(b) Election has not been made and as to which the forfeiture restrictions have not lapsed or been otherwise satisfied.  If a Participant fails to remit the full amounts required hereunder, the Company shall, to the extent permitted by law, have the right to deduct from any payment of any kind otherwise due to the Participant the amount by which any applicable Federal, state and local taxes that are required to be withheld exceeds the amount remitted by the Participant to the Company.
Re g ul atory Eva l uat i on
D

oc ket No
. FAA- D i r e cto rate Identifier: -AD ( /y ou m a ke c h a n ge s to th e va lu e s in th e tahle h e/e m. yo u must e n s ur e th e t o wl s up da te a cc o rdin t• !/

)'. ( / th e y d o n o t. cl i c k (o r Tab ) int o a n d th e n o ut (?/ th e c h a ng ed ce ll. Es tim ate d Cos t s: Ac tion Co s t s pe r Pro duct ( e .g . , a i r c r

aft , engine , (e.g
. , Inspect ion , prop e ll er, a pplianc e) W

o rk

- hour s Labor P m1 s Co s t Tota l Costs Numb er o f Total Co s t repl acement) ( includ e co s t ( l abo r + 

## u. s . for U.S
. Fl ee t D o n o t include o nco ndition c os t s her e acc ess , tes ti n g , ( @ $85 / h parts) Reg is tered and c lose -up) our) Pro du cts 

### Upgrade of one 4. 0 $0 

### 107 

## SE C U U p g ra e o f t w o 6 .0 

## s o 1 07 

## S

E

CU

T h e kn ow n n um be r of p ro du c t s in c o m p li a n ce: T o ta l Cos t s of co mpl ia n ce f o r U.S
. fl ee t : $90 , 950 Cos t s cov e red und e r wa rra nt y (if kn o wn ) $ O n- C o n ditio n Cos t s: Action W o rk

- h o ur s La bor co s t P a rt s Co s t Cos t p er Pr odu c t (e
. g ., In s p ection , ( in c lu d e access, ( @ $ 8 5 / h o ur ) te s tin g, an d c l o se - rep lace m e nt) u p)

S p ecia l c on s id e r at ion s fo r Eco n om i c A n alys is (Use thi s fie ld t o e xpla in t tn y thin g in th e Es t im a t e d Cos t s table that wa s a s sum ed o r mi g h t n o t be ob vio us . This .fi e ld can a l so he us e d t o e xplain wa rr a n t y cos t s) :

### Executive Order 12866: 

### Could the AD be considered a " significant regulatory actio n ' ' ? 

# G YES*0

**NO~** 

### *Expla nat i o n : DOT R eg ulatot -y Policies and Procedure s : 

### I s the A D s i g nifi can t ? 

# G YES* 

# D

**NO~** 

### *Exp l a n atio n : Regulatot·y Flexibility Act: 

### Will t he AD ha ve a sign ificant eco no mic impa c t on a subs tantial n umber of small entit ies? Exp l a in for e i

ther a Yes or No answe r . 

## @ YESD

**NO~** 

### Explanat i o n : Intr astate Av i ation in Ala s k a : 

### This AD co ul d affec t int rastate av i at i o n in A l aska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements fo r a ircraft operated in Alaska w h e r

e aviat i o n mi ght be t h e only mode of tran s portation? 

# G YES*0

**NO~** 

### *E xplana tion :
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA- 2009-0686

Directorate Identifier: 2009NM044AD

MD11-28-126 --- 3/3/09

MD11-28-126, R1 --- 6/18/09

MD11-28-126IN 02 ---7/1/09

MD11-28-126IN 03 ---7/15/09

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03105/2008