alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 229 (Friday, November 28, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 63320]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31255]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Fossil Energy; National Coal Council Renewal

    Pursuant to Section 14(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463) and in accordance with title 41 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations, section 101-6.1007, and following consultation 
with the Committee Management Secretariat of the General Services 
Administration, notice is hereby given that the National Coal Council 
has been renewed for a two-year period ending November 22, 1999. The 
Council will continue to provide advice, information, and 
recommendations to the Secretary of Energy, on a continuing basis, 
regarding general policy matters relating to coal issues.
    Council members are chosen to assure a well balanced representation 
from all sections of the country, all segments of the coal industry, 
including large and small companies, and commercial and residential 
consumers. The Council also has members who represent interests outside 
the coal industry, including environmental interests, labor, research, 
academia, and minorities. Membership and representation of all 
interests will continue to be determined in accordance with the 
requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and implementing 
regulations.
    The renewal of the Council has been determined essential to the 
conduct of the Department's business and in the public interest in 
connection with the performance of duties imposed upon in the 
Department of Energy by law. The Council will continue to operate in 
accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 
and implementing regulations.
    Further information regarding this advisory committee may be 
obtained from Rachel M. Samuel at (202) 586-3279.

    Issued at Washington D.C. on: November 21, 1997.
James N. Solit,
Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-31255 Filed 11-26-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-M
SERVED: FEBRUARY 25, 2015 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

JAMES JUAQUIN JORDAN 

DOCKET NO. FAA-2015-0205 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2014SW700104) has been assigned 

to Administrative Law Judge J.E. Sullivan. All future pleadings and other communications 

regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other 

persons on the attached Service List. 

Attachment - Service List 
SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

James Juaquin Jordan, Respondent 

11980 Carriage Park Lane 

Johns Creek, GA 30097 

ONE COPY 

Rebecca Holmes, Complainant's Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel (ASW -7) 

2601 Meacham Blvd. 

Fort Worth, TX 76137 

TEL: 817-222-5064 

FAX: 817-222-5945/5092 

Hon. J.E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-31 0) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-6941 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Docket No. FAA-2015-0205 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC--430. 

-2-
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 224 (Thursday, November 20, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 62033]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30450]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-152-005]


Michigan Gas Storage Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

November 14, 1997.
    Take notice that on November 12, 1997, Michigan Gas Storage Company 
(MGSCO) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First 
Revised Volume No. 1, three tariff sheets (Sheet Nos. 1, 41A, and 54A) 
with effective dates of June 1, 1997 and another revised tariff sheet 
(No. 54A) with an effective date of November 1, 1997.
    MGSCO states that this filing is made in compliance with the letter 
order issued on October 27, 1997, in Docket Nos. RP97-152-003 and -004. 
MGSCO states that these tariff sheets reflect the correct pagination as 
required by the Commission, and the incorporation of GISB standards 1, 
2, 3 and 5, Version 1.1 and GISB standard 4, Version 1.0.
    MGSCO also notes that although these tariff sheets are being filed 
with effective dates of June 1, 1997 and November 1, 1997, the 
Commission has granted MGSCO an extension of time for implementation of 
certain of the GISB standards incorporated within these tariff sheets, 
to and including February 1, 1998.
    MGSCO states that copies of this filing are being served on all 
customers and applicable state regulatory agencies and on all those on 
the official service list in Docket No. RP97-152-000. Any person 
desiring to protest this filing should file a protest with the Federal 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Section 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and 
Regulations. All such protests must be filed in accordance with Section 
154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by 
the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but 
will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Copies of 
this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-30450 Filed 11-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Geraldine L. ACRE, Appellant, v. Kenneth E. ACRE, Sr., Appellee.

No. 73-198.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 13, 1973.

Calvin J. Faucett, Winter Park, for appellant.

Thomas R. Mooney, of Meyers, Mooney & Adler, P. A., Orlando, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Upon careful consideration of the arguments of counsel and a review of the record in this cause we are of the opinion that the order of the lower court denying alimony pending appeal was an abuse of discretion. See Sharpe v. Sharpe, Fla.App. 1972, 267 So.2d 665. Accordingly, that portion of the order denying alimony pending appeal is quashed and the cause remanded to the trial court for the purpose of determining alimony pending appeal. Cf. Rule 3.8(b), F.A.R., 32 F.S.A.

Reversed and remanded.

CROSS and MAGER, JJ., and MORROW, RUSSELL O., Associate Judge, concur.
The State of 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 18, 2014

No. 04-14-00517-CR

Trisha Marie ANTHONY,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2010CR8748W

Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellant’s attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 368 U.S. 738 

(1967); however, the brief is not accompanied by: (1) a separate motion to withdraw; and (2) an 

exhibit showing that counsel has notified appellant that, should appellant wish to exercise the 

right to review the appellate record in preparing a response to the Anders brief, appellant should 

immediately file a motion for pro se access to the appellate record with this court within ten days 

and has provided appellant with a form motion for this purpose containing the mailing address 

for this court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); Nichols v. 

State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet).

It is therefore ORDERED that appellant’s attorney file the requisite motion to withdraw 

and Kelly exhibit containing a form motion for pro se access to the record in this court no later 

than 10 days from the date of this order. Counsel shall also provide proof that a copy of the 

motion to withdraw and Kelly exhibit containing a form motion for pro se access to the record

have been provided to appellant.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 18th day of November, 2014.
___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****NIAID year in review**
 
SuDoc Number:HE 20.3251/2:

Item Number:0505-A-34 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000871979
 
2010| 2011
 
March 6, 2020
# ORIGINAL
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 23-0138
IN RE THEMARRIAGE OF 

### MAR 

## 13 2024 JACQUILINE STEINMANN,

Petitioner/Appellee, Bowen Greenwoou Clerk of Supreme Court iiitate of Montana ORDER v. BRETT STEINMANN,

Respondent/Appellant.

Brett Steinmann (Brett) has filed a petition for a rehearing ofour January 30, 2024, decision affirming the District Court's order dividing the marital estate. Jackie opposes the petition for rehearing. This Court will only consider a petition for rehearing if one of the following circumstances are present: "[t]hat it overlooked some fact material to the decision; [][t]hat it overlooked some question presented by counsel that would have proven decisive to the case; or [] [t]hat its decision conflicts with a statute or controlling decision not addressed by the supreme court." M. R. App. P. 20(1)(a)(i)-(iii). Brett argues our decision overlooked his testimony that heput $200,000 ofhis own assets towards the Shadow Circle hoithe before he and Jackie moved in and that there was a double counting of some of Brett's business assets in the overall distribution. Brett argues these facts were arbitrarily overlooked by the District Court and that they would have had an impact on this Court's decision. Jackie responds these arguments were new arguments made in the reply brief and even considering them on the merits, the District Court was within its discretion to determine the amount ofpre-marital credit Brett should be awarded in the properties and 03/13/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0138

### itscredit determinationofhisassets. Jackiemaintainsthecourt's decisionwas not arbitrary

and was based on the record. We did address the facts Brett raised concerning his contributions and determined they would have no impact on our decision since the District Court is not obligated under § 40-4-202(1), MCA, to award any credit to a premarital interest and the District Court's credit determination-was reasonable and based on the record. Further, the alleged double countingofBrett'sbusinessassetswasraisedonlyinhisreplybrief,contradictstheDistrict Court's final determination ofBrett's value ofhis business, and could not have affected the distribution ofthe propertiesthat were the only disputed issue on appeal. Brett has not met his burden under M. R. App. P. 20(1)(a) of showing a rehearing should be granted. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for rehearing is DENIED. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and to Brett Steinmann personally. DATED this )

—

day ofMarch, 2024.

2 ChiefJustice

Justices
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1567 

To allow certain qualified law enforcement officers and retired law enforcement officers to carry a concealed firearm to protect children in a 

school zone. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 3, 2021 

Mrs. HARTZLER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To allow certain qualified law enforcement officers and retired law enforcement officers to carry a concealed firearm to protect children in a school zone. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Police Officers Pro5 tecting Children Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1567 IH

1 SEC. 2. CERTAIN QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFI2 CERS AND RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OF3 FICERS ALLOWED TO CARRY A CONCEALED 

4 FIREARM, AND DISCHARGE A FIREARM, IN A 

5 SCHOOL ZONE. 

6 Section 922(q) of title 18, United States Code, is 

7 amended— 

8 (1) in paragraph (2)(B)— 

9 (A) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of clause 

10 (vi); and 

11 (B) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause 

12 (ix) and inserting after clause (vi) the following: 

13 ‘‘(vii) by a qualified law enforcement offi14 cer (as defined in section 926B) who is author15 ized under such section to carry a concealed 

16 firearm, if the firearm is concealed; 

17 ‘‘(viii) by a qualified retired law enforce18 ment officer (as defined in section 926C) who 

19 is authorized under such section to carry a con20 cealed firearm, if the firearm is concealed; or’’; 

21 and 

22 (2) in paragraph (3)(B)— 

23 (A) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of clause 

24 (iii); 

25 (B) by striking the period at the end of 

26 clause (iv) and inserting a semicolon; and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1567 IH

1 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

2 ‘‘(v) by a qualified law enforcement officer 

3 (as defined in section 926B) who is authorized 

4 under such section to carry a concealed firearm; 

5 or 

6 ‘‘(vi) by a qualified retired law enforcement 

7 officer (as defined in section 926C) who is au8 thorized under such section to carry a concealed 

9 firearm.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000022198
<NAME> COLUMBUS SOUTHERN POWER COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    1,901,648
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     41,265
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         286,930
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        53,090
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                 354,490
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,637,423
<COMMON>                                        41,026
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      572,207
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            142,623
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 755,856
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           25,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           939,659
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              26,000
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                  34,050
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   24,750
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     33,823
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                 6,126
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 792,159
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                2,637,423
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      375,481
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            14,680
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     315,572
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     330,252
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         45,229
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 (28)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  45,201
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        19,556
<NET-INCOME>                                    25,645
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        533
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   25,112
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        20,661
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       12,763
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          49,974
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1> All common stock owned by parent company; no EPS required.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.2





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 Quarterly Report of TNP Enterprises, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Theodore A. Babcock, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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







/s/  Theodore A. Babcock





Theodore A. Babcock
Chief Financial Officer
August 6, 2002
EXHIBIT 34.1











ATTESTATION REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH




SERVICING CRITERIA FOR ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES
















REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





To the Board of Directors and Shareholder


Entergy Texas, Inc.


Beaumont, Texas





We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Servicing Criteria For Asset-Backed Securities, that Entergy Texas, Inc. (the "Company") complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB applicable for Entergy Texas Restoration Funding, LLC’s Senior Secured Transition Bonds (the “Securities”) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2012, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(ii), (1)(iii), (1)(iv), (2)(iii), (2)(vi), (4)(iii), (4)(v), (4)(ix), (4)(x), (4)(xi), (4)(xii), (4)(xiii), and (4)(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by the Company with respect to the Securities.  Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination.





Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria, including tests on a sample basis of the servicing activities related to the Securities, determining whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria during the specified period, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  Further, an examination is not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to the period specified above that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report.  We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.





In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2012 for Entergy Texas Restoration Funding, LLC’s Senior Secured Transition Bonds is fairly stated, in all material respects.





/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP





New Orleans, Louisiana


March 28, 2013
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

The undersigned, David K.
Spohr, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of KMP Futures Fund I LLC for the period January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Registrant.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |                                                                                                                                                                                 
|------------------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ David K. Spohr
|Name:              |  | David K. Spohr                                                                                                                                                                  
|Title:             |  | Senior Vice President and Director of Fund Administration (Principal Financial/Accounting Officer) Kenmar Preferred Investments Corp., Managing Member
of KMP Futures Fund I LLC
|                   | 
|Date:              |  | March 25, 2010
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 63197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31049]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-33,782]


General Motors Corporation, Delphi Chassis (Livonia Plant), 
Livonia, Michigan; Notice of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation 
was initiated on September 2, 1997 in response to a worker petition 
which was filed on behalf of workers at General Motors Corporation, 
Delphi Chassis, Livonia Plant, Livonia, Michigan.
    The petitioners have requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no 
purpose; and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 10th day of November 1997.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-31049 Filed 11-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M