alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

OFFICE OF WATER MAR 15 1985 MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Variances in Water Quality Standards TO: Water Division Directors Numerous questions have been raised regarding the granting of variances to water quality standards. The Preamble to the water quality standards regulations discusses limiting the granting of a variance that"...based on a demonstration that meeting the standard would cause substantial and widespread economic and social impact, the same test as if the State were changing a use..." A interpretation by our Office of General Counsel, provides a better determination on what factors can be considered in allowing variances from water quality standards. The OGC interpretation is that any of the factors recognized in the regulation for justifying a stream use downgrade, not just the substantial and widespread economic and social impact test, may be used to support a variance. Our previous interpretation was somewhat illogical as it allowed more opportunity for a permanent change in standards then it did for a temporary, short-term change which could be granted by a variance. Under Section 510 of the Clean Water Act, States have the right to establish more stringent standards than suggested by EPA. Therefore, as long as any temporary water quality standards modification conforms to the requirements established in Section 131.10 (g) of the regulation for downgrading uses, such an approach is acceptable as it would lead to only a temporary change to a water quality standard rather than a downgrade, and thus would be more stringent than the Federal requirements. This interpretation dies not change the regulation which provides that States may have general policies affecting the application and implementation of standards. It does affect the discussion of variances contained in the Preamble to the regulation and the guidance included in the WQS Handbook, page 1-9. No other aspect of the variance policy and guidance is altered by this new interpretation. this memorandum should be kept as part of your permanent file for interpreting water quality standards.-2-

Overall, we expect the impact of this change to be minimal as the discussion of variances appears to far outweigh its actual affects on the program. Often the confusion surrounding variances obscures the fact that what is really being discussed are specialized permit conditions, scheduling adjustments, site-specific criteria, or actual downgrading actions.

Edwin L. Johnson, Director Office of Water Regulations and Standards (WH-551)

cc: Bill Whittington Peter Perez Cathy Winer Net Notzen
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 23, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

136099 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. RUSSELL PLASTE RING COMPANY, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff, Justices Counter-Defendant-Appellee,

v SC: 136099 COA: 274049 Oakland CC: 2004-059387-CK MICHIGAN CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, Counter-Plaintiff-Appellant, and

CHLYSTEK & WHITE SERVICES, INC. and TIMOTHY KUIPER, Defendants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e February 21, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0616 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 23, 2008

Clerk
**EXHIBIT 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-131366,333-42747, 333-75420, 333-75422, 333-39690, 333-42753, 333-00537, 033-60169, 033-69922 and033-33373 on Form S-8 of our report dated September 12, 2007, relating to the consolidatedfinancial statements and financial statement schedule of Datascope Corp. (which report expressed anunqualified opinion and included an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of Statement ofFinancial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 123(R), *Share-Based Payment,*SFAS No. 158, *Employers’Accounting for Defined Pension and Other Postretirement Plans,*and the provisions of UnitedStates Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108, *Considering theEffects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year FinancialStatements*), and of our report dated September 12, 2007, relating to management’s report onthe effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report onForm 10-K of Datascope Corp. for the year ended June 30, 2007./s/ Deloitte & Touche LLPParsippany, New Jersey
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1603 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 432
113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1603

To reaffirm that certain land has been taken into trust for the benefit 
 of the Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatami Indians, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2013

Ms. Stabenow (for herself and Mr. Levin) introduced the following bill; 
  which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs

                             June 12, 2014

               Reported by Mr. Tester, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To reaffirm that certain land has been taken into trust for the benefit 
 of the Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatami Indians, and for 
                            other purposes.

    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 ``Gun Lake Trust Land Reaffirmation 
Act''.

SEC. 2. REAFFIRMATION OF INDIAN TRUST LAND.

    (a) In General.--The land taken into trust by the United States for 
the benefit of the Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians 
and described in the final Notice of Determination of the Department of 
the Interior (70 Fed. Reg. 25596 (May 13, 2005)) is reaffirmed as trust 
land, and the actions of the Secretary of the Interior in taking that 
land into trust are ratified and confirmed.
    (b) No Claims.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an 
action (including an action pending in a Federal court as of the date 
of enactment of this Act) relating to the land described in subsection 
(a) shall not be filed or maintained in a Federal court and shall be 
promptly dismissed.
    (c) Retention of Future Rights.--Nothing in this Act alters or 
diminishes the right of the Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of 
Pottawatomi Indians from seeking to have any additional land taken into 
trust by the United States for the benefit of the Band.
                                                       Calendar No. 432

113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 1603

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

To reaffirm that certain land has been taken into trust for the benefit 
 of the Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatami Indians, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             June 12, 2014

                       Reported without amendment
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           3,263
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   61,382
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,130
<INVENTORY>                                     44,122
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               148,163
<PP&E>                                          34,927
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,900
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 468,679
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           64,450
<BONDS>                                        323,545
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      77,853
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   468,679
<SALES>                                        270,074
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                          200,177
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (833)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,829
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (40,977)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (8,481)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (24,081)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (32,496)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
An official website of the United States government                

----

end of header

Census.govNewsroom

# Newsroom Archive

Skip left menu navigation                          - About the Newsroom
                          - Facts for Features
                          - **News Releases**
                          - Press Kits
                          - Tip Sheets

## Kevin Gover

### Director, National Museum of the American Indian

Kevin Gover is an author, educator, policy specialist, and an administrator in the public, private, and academic realms. Since 2007, Gover has served as director of the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of the American Indian. He has also been Professor of Law at Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law at Arizona State University, Tempe. Kevin Glover is a member of the Pawnee Tribe of Oklahoma.

Gover received his J.D. degree (cum laude) from the University of New Mexico School of Law in 1981, and his A.B. in Public and International Affairs from Princeton University in 1978.

After graduation, he clerked for United States District Judge Juan Burciaga. Gover then entered private practice and then started work with a large firm in Washington, DC. In 1986, Kevin Gover formed a firm in New Mexico with two other highly regarded tribal attorneys. The firm grew into one of the largest Indian-owned law firms in the country. In 1997, Kevin Gover was selected by President Clinton to serve as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs under Interior Secretary and former Arizona Governor, Bruce Babbitt. He served as Assistant Secretary until January 2001. His service was notable for his work on upgrading Indian law enforcement, rebuilding decrepit Indian schools, reforming trust services and overhauling the Bureau of Indian Affairs' management systems. Assistant Secretary Gover won wide praise for these reform efforts, but also for the apology he crafted on behalf of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to the nation's Indian communities for the history of wrongs done to them. (Those remarks can be read in our online Library.)

Since 2007, Professor Gover has served as director of the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of the American Indian. He also serves as a Judge for the Tonto Apache Tribal Court of Appeals, and the San Carlos Apache Tribal Court of Appeals, as well as on the governing boards of several non-profit educational institutions.

CONNECT WITH US**********

                            - Information Quality
                            - Data Linkage Infrastructure
                            - Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                            - Accessibility
                            - FOIA
                            - Inspector General
                            - No FEAR Act
                            - U.S. Department of Commerce
                            - USA.gov

----

Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy

Is this page helpful?
YesNo

NO THANKS

255 characters maximum255 characters maximum reached

Thank you for your feedback.Comments or suggestions? 

PIO@census.gov
# C_2011264EN.01002001.xml

| 8.9.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/20

---

Special Report No 6/2011 ‘Were ERDF co-financed tourism projects effective?’

2011/C 264/10

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 6/2011 ‘Were ERDF co-financed tourism projects effective?’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website: http://www.eca.europa.eu

A hard copy version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court of Auditors:

| European Court of Auditors |
| --- |
| Unit ‘Audit: Production of Reports’ |
| 12, rue Alcide de Gasperi |
| 1615 Luxembourg |
| LUXEMBOURG |
| Tel. +352 4398-1 |
| E-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu |

European Court of Auditors

Unit ‘Audit: Production of Reports’

12, rue Alcide de Gasperi

1615 Luxembourg

LUXEMBOURG

Tel. +352 4398-1

E-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu

or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.

---
#### James H. PRICE, Individually and as Last Director and Trustee of James H. Price & Co., Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation, Appellant, v. AIRLIFT INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Florida corporation et al., Appellees.

No. 67-584.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

July 20, 1967.

Horton *&*Schwartz, Miami, for appellant.

Sibley, Giblin, Levenson & Ward, Miami Beach, and Dixon, Dejarnette, Bradford, Williams, McKay & Kimbrell, Miami, for Airlift International.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Milton J. Wallace, Asst. Atty. Gen., for Florida Securities Comm.

Hansford D. Tyler, Jr. and David D. Phillips, Miami, for Voyle C. Johnson.

Roger H. Edwards, South Miami, for Harold Swartz.

Marchant & Perkins, Miami, for Robert M. Hewitt.

Shutts & Bowen, Miami, for Hargis and McKeller.

Boris Spaseff, Miami, for Leo Gutstein.

Moore & Moore, Miami, for William R. Price.

Robert L. Achor, Miami, receiver.

Before PEARSON, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This interlocutory appeal is brought by one of several defendants to review an in-junctive order and an order appointing a receiver for that defendant. The receiver was appointed pursuant to the motion of the intervening Florida Securities Commission acting under authority of Sections 517.19(6) and 517.19(7), Fla.Stat., F.S.A.

Appellant contends that the statute does not authorize the injunctive order and the appointment of the receiver, and that if authorized the trial judge has abused the discretion vested in him by the statute. We hold that the record fully sustains the action of the chancellor, and that the statute clearly intended the action taken when necessary or advisable for the purpose of protecting the public.

Affirmed.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2959

To repeal the increase in tax on social security benefits.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 6, 1993

Mr. KYL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Ways and Means

A BILL

To repeal the increase in tax on social security benefits.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF TAX INCREASE ON SOCIAL SECU4 RITY BENEFITS.

5 Section 13215 of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of

6 1993 is hereby repealed, and the Internal Revenue Code

7 of 1986 shall be applied and administered as if such sec8 tion (and the amendments made thereby) had not been

9 enacted.

Æ
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.1


CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Experts" in the
Registration Statement (Form S-3) and related prospectus of CV Therapeutics,
Inc. for the registration of an aggregate amount of $9,000,000 of its common
stock and to the incorporation by reference therein of our report dated
March 2, 2000 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of CV
Therapeutics, Inc. included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 1999, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

                                                   /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
                                                   --------------------------

Palo Alto, California
September 22, 2000
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          14,392
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,659
<PP&E>                                         110,934
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,700
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 171,271
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           56,216
<BONDS>                                         54,767
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       145,512
<OTHER-SE>                                    (89,139)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   171,271
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                34,385
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   34,824
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,544)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,668
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,137)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        17
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,154)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 15,546
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,392
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .77
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .77


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 294 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 294

  To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to add Morro Bay, 
   California, to the priority list of the national estuary program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 1993

 Mr. Panetta introduced the following bill; which was referred jointly 
to the Committees on Merchant Maine and Fisheries and Public Works and 
                             Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to add Morro Bay, 
   California, to the priority list of the national estuary program.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 
320(a)(2)(B) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 
1330(a)(2)(B)) is amended by inserting ``Morro Bay, California;'' after 
``Sarasota Bay, Florida;''.

                                 <all>
```
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases 2010 Census
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB10-CR.144 **Contact:**  Public Information Office
(301) 763-3691
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  FRIDAY, APRIL 16, 2010 2010 Census: New York Approaches Its 2000 Mail Participation As of Friday, April 16, New York is just two percentage points away from matching the mail participation rate it achieved in the 2000 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau announced today.  New rates released today show that 64 percent of New Yorkers have mailed back their forms so far, compared with 66 percent in 2000. The nation as a whole — at 69 percent — is still three percentage points away from matching the mail response rate achieved in 2000 (72 percent). A number of counties and cities across the country have already matched or exceeded their Census 2000 rates (see: http://2010.census.gov/news/xls/match_surpassed_4-16.xls [Excel] for the full list). “If you mail back your 2010 Census today you can ensure that your household is counted,” U.S. Census Bureau Director Robert Groves said. Households that normally pick up their mail from a post office box are already slated for in-person follow-up from census workers. The rates for all states, counties, places, towns and townships are updated each afternoon through April 23 at 4:00 p.m. on the Take 10 Challenge Map (http://2010.census.gov/2010census/take10map/). A final rate will be announced May 3. ABOUT THE 2010 CENSUS The 2010 Census is a count of everyone living in the United States and is mandated by the U.S. Constitution. Census data are used to apportion congressional seats to states, to distribute more than $400 billion in federal funds to tribal, state and local governments each year and to make decisions about what community services to provide. The 2010 Census form is one of the shortest in U.S. history, consisting of 10 questions, taking about 10 minutes to complete. Strict confidentiality laws protect the respondents and the information they provide.
 https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/office/troubleshoot/excel/get-latest-excel-viewer
 CONNECT WITH US

Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
                   Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy