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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of availability.

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with Section 3(b) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the USDA Forest Service, Washington Office, is transmitting the final boundary of the Allegheny National Wild and Scenic River to Congress.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Information may be obtained by contacting Operations Staff Officer Jim Seyler, Allegheny National Forest, 4 Farm Colony Drive, Warren, PA or phone (814) 728-6239.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Allegheny Wild and Scenic River boundary is available for review at the following offices: USDA Forest Service, Wilderness & Wild and Scenic Rivers, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20024; Allegheny National Forest, 4 Farm Colony Drive, Warren, PA 16365. A detailed legal description is available upon request.

The Allegheny Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (Pub. L. 102-271) of April 20, 1992, designated the Allegheny River, Pennsylvania, as a Wild and Scenic River, to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture. As specified by law, the boundary will not be effective until ninety days after Congress receives the transmittal.

Dated: April 3, 2012.

Erin Connelly,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 2012-8451 Filed 4-9-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 4, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20379-20380]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8020]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL00-95-000, et al.]


San Diego Gas & Electric Company v. Sellers of Energy and 
Ancillary Services Into Markets Operated by the California Independent 
System Operator Corporation and the California Power Exchange; Notice 
of Designation of Certain Commission Personnel as Non-Decisional

    Commission staff member Aaron Siskind, of the Office of Energy 
Market Regulation, previously was assigned to assist the Office of 
Administrative Litigation in settlement and litigation proceedings in 
the above-referenced dockets. In addition, Mr. Siskind

[[Page 20380]]

remains assigned to the designated matters to assist in litigation 
proceedings.
    As non-decisional staff, Mr. Siskind will not participate in an 
advisory capacity in the Commission's review of any future filings in 
the above-referenced dockets, including offers of settlement or 
settlement agreements.
    Mr. Siskind will not be assigned as advisory staff to review and 
process subsequent filings that are made in the above-referenced 
dockets, including any offer of settlement or settlement agreement. 
Non-decisional staff and advisory staff are prohibited from subsequent 
communications with one another concerning matters in the above-
referenced dockets.

    Dated: March 28, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-8020 Filed 4-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
P.O. Box 7249 • Boise, Idaho 83707 • (208) 332-8500 • www.agri.idaho.gov

BRAD LITTLE, GOVERNOR

CHANEL TEWALT, DIRECTOR

Idaho State Department of Agriculture

Bureau of Food Safety, Hemp, and Hops

P.O. Box 7249 • Boise, Idaho 83707 

P: 208.332.8500 • F: 208.334.2170

The Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA) Hop Sampling, Inspection, and 

Laboratory Analysis Fee Schedule

Effective Date:

Mar 23, 2024

General Fees:

Bale Sampling, Inspection, and Lab Analysis............................................. $1.50 a bale, $30 minimum per lot. **(Includes 4% 

Commodity Cooperative Service Agreement Fee.)

Lot Re-certification........................................................................................ $100.00 if additional sampling required.

Document Amendment................................................................................ $25.00

Rush Service Fee............................................................................................ $50.00

**Commodity Cooperative Service Agreement Fee

a. Commodity Cooperative Service Agreement Fees. In addition to all other applicable fees, commodity 

cooperative service agreement fees for commodity inspection services (pulses, hops, and miscellaneous 

processed commodities), excluding rice, will be assessed at the current percentage rate identified in FGIS 

Directive 9180.74 (Service Fees and Billing Codes, Attachment 4.) The assessed fees must exclude travel, mailing 

expenses, and state and local taxes. Invoices will identify assessed commodity cooperative service agreement 

fees as separate line items.

General Provisions:

• The ISDA will allow two lot re-certifications for each season; after that the $100 recertification fee will be 

charged when an additional site visit and sampling need to take place. If no site visit or sampling is required a 

$25.00 document amendment fee will be charged.

• Lot sampling will consist of one visit to each facility per day. Additional 

sampling requests after the initial sampling visit will incur a $50 rush service 

fee in additional to standard sampling costs.

Payment of Fees and Charges:

All fees and charges for service rendered are due within thirty (30) days of the 

statement date. Funds not received within the thirty (30) days of the statement date 

will incur a 1% interest charge for the total balance due.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 413 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con.Res.413
                                         Agreed to July 19, 2002        

                      One Hundred Seventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
          the twenty-third day of January, two thousand and two

                          Concurrent Resolution

Whereas on July 17, 1902, Dr. Willis H. Carrier submitted designs to a 
  printing plant in Brooklyn, New York, for equipment to control 
  temperature, humidity, ventilation, and air quality, marking the 
  birth of modern air conditioning;

Whereas air-conditioning has become an integral technology enabling the 
  advancement of society through improvements to the Nation's health 
  and well-being, manufacturing processes, building capacities, 
  research, medical capabilities, food preservation, art and historical 
  conservation, and general productivity and indoor comfort;

Whereas Dr. Carrier debuted air-conditioning technology for legislative 
  activity in the House of Representatives Chamber in 1928, and the 
  Senate Chamber in 1929;

Whereas the air-conditioning industry now totals $36 billion on a 
  global basis and employs more than 700,000 people in the United 
  States; and

Whereas the year 2002 marks the 100th anniversary of modern air-
  conditioning: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress honors the invention of modern air-conditioning by 
Dr. Willis H. Carrier on the occasion of its 100th anniversary.
  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```
Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            
            
            U.S. Air Force
                    U.S. Air Force
        Search
                    Search AF.mil:
                        Search
                Search AF.mil:
                    Search
    News
    
        Commentaries

    Features

    Photos

    Art

    Air Force TV

    Radio

    Week in Photos

    Coronavirus Disease 2019

    Air Force Art Collection





    About Us
    
        Air Force Senior Leaders    
        SECAF

    CSAF

    CMSAF

    Biographies

    Adjunct Professors

    Fact Sheets

    Commander's Call Topics    
        CCT Archive

    50 Years of the CMSAF

    The Book

    Speeches Archive    
        Former AF Top 3 Viewpoints and Speeches

    Air Force Warrior Games 2019

    Air Force Strategic Documents

    DoD Warrior Games

    Portraits in Courage    
        Portraits In Courage Vol. I

    Portraits In Courage Vol. II

    Portraits In Courage Vol. III

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IV

    Portraits In Courage Vol. V

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VI

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VIII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IX

    Portraits In Courage Vol. X

    Chapman MoH

    The Air Force We Need

    Events 2021

    Focus on Priorities

    Empowered Airmen

    State Licensure Portability

    CSAF Leadership Library    
        CSAF Leadership Library Bookshelf

    2018 CSAF Reading List

    2017 CSAF Reading List

    2016 CSAF Reading List





    AF Sites
    
        Social Media Sites

    Site Registration





    AF Content Management





    Careers





    Contact Us  
 Home
  News
  Photos
 Air Force Photos Search
 Search
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Full Size (0.18 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 Quick Links
                            Join the Air ForceSite MapQuestionsContact UsRSSFOIAIGAF SitesAccessibilityEEOLink DisclaimerStrategic APRSuicide PreventionSAPRUSA.govNo FEAR ActOSI Tip Line
                    Connect
                    Official United States Air Force Website
                        Subscribe to USAF News and Information
          Submit
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-14-00910-CR

Jacob ADAME,

Appellant

v.

The /s

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR1528A

Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Delivered and Filed: March 4, 2015

DISMISSED

On January 7, 2015, this court issued an order stating this appeal would be dismissed 

pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification that shows appellant has the 

right of appeal was made part of the appellate record within thirty days. See TEX. R. APP. P.

25.2(d), 37.1; see also Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 175-76 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, 

order). Appellant did not file an amended certification. The clerk’s record does not contain a 

certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal; to the contrary, the trial court 

certification in the record states “this criminal case is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has 
04-14-00910-CR

NO right of appeal.” The clerk’s record contains a written plea bargain, and the punishment 

assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the 

defendant; therefore, the clerk’s record supports the trial court’s certification that defendant has no 

right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 25.2(d).

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

- 2 -
DAIRY MARKET NEWS, NOVEMBER 17 -21, 2014 -10- VOLUME 81, REPORT 47 

2015 OFFICIAL MONTHLY AVERAGE RELEASE TIMES 

MONTH - 2015 RELEASE DAY* 

JANUARY MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2 

FEBRUARY MONDAY, MARCH 2 

MARCH FRIDAY, APRIL 3 

APRIL FRIDAY, MAY 1 

MAY MONDAY, JUNE 1 

JUNE MONDAY, JULY 6 

JULY MONDAY AUGUST 3 

AUGUST FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 4 

SEPTEMBER FRIDAY, OCTOBER 2 

OCTOBER MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2 

NOVEMBER FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4 

DECEMBER MONDAY, JANUARY 4, 2016 

*Release time: 9:00 am Central time
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA

No. 16

- 0537 Filed December 21, 2016

BRADLY SHAY CRADY , Applicant

- Appellant,

vs.
STATE OF IOWA, Respondent

- Appellee.

________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for P oweshiek County, Annette J.

Scie szi nski , Judge.

Bradley Crady appeals from the denial of postconviction relief.

AFFIRMED.

Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Nan Jennisch
, Assistant
Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Louis S. Sloven , Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee State.

Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Doyle and McDonald , JJ.2

DANILSON, Chief Judge.
As a result of his 2012 guilty plea to third

- degree sexual abuse, Bradley
Crady is subject to a lifetime special sentence under Iowa Code section 903 B .1
(2011).
In September 2015, Crady sought postconviction relie f (PCR), requesting
his special sentence be reduced to ten years. The district court dismissed the

PCR action for failure to state a cause of action

. O n appeal
, Crady argues PCR

counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the lifetime special sentence as
grossly disproportionate to Crady ’ s crime

. In order to prove his claim that PCR counsel w as ineffective , Crady must

show PCR counsel breac hed an essential duty and prejudice resulted. See

Rhoades v. State , 848 N.W.2d 22, 28

- 29 (Iowa 2014). We review ineffectiveness

claims de novo. Id. at 26.
Crady acknowledges he is still serving his prison sentence for the
underlying offense . He also acknowledges that under State v. Tripp , 776 N.W.2d
855, 859 (Iowa 2010), the question o f whether a special sentence may amount to
cruel and unusual punishment is not ripe for review “until the length of [the

offender ’ s] parole and the extent of his supervision are determined.” 1 Because
Crady was not on parole, PCR counsel breached no duty i n failing to rais e an

1 Crady asks that Tripp be overruled. W e leave the task of overruling precedent to our supreme court. See State v. Miller
, 841 N.W.2d 583, 584 n.1 (Iowa 2014) (acknowledging that both the district court and the court of appeals had “properly relied
on .

. . applicable precedent” and noting that “ it is the role of the supreme court to decid e if case precedent should no longer be followed”); State v. Eichler
, 83 N.W.2d 576, 578 (Iowa 1957) (“If our previous holdings are to be overruled, we should ordinarily prefer to do it ourselves.”); State v. Hastings
, 466 N.W.2d 697, 700 (Iowa Ct. App. 19 90) (“We are not at liberty to overturn Iowa Supreme Court precedent.”).3

issue that is not ripe for review. The district court did not err in dismissing the

action. We affirm.

AFFIRMED.
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2012-1037 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2012-NM-008-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

 Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            
            
            U.S. Air Force
                    U.S. Air Force
        Search
                    Search AF.mil:
                        Search
                Search AF.mil:
                    Search
    News
    
        Commentaries

    Features

    Photos

    Art

    Air Force TV

    Radio

    Week in Photos

    Coronavirus Disease 2019

    Air Force Art Collection





    About Us
    
        Air Force Senior Leaders    
        SECAF

    CSAF

    CMSAF

    Biographies

    Adjunct Professors

    Fact Sheets

    Commander's Call Topics    
        CCT Archive

    50 Years of the CMSAF

    The Book

    Speeches Archive    
        Former AF Top 3 Viewpoints and Speeches

    Air Force Warrior Games 2019

    Air Force Strategic Documents

    DoD Warrior Games

    Portraits in Courage    
        Portraits In Courage Vol. I

    Portraits In Courage Vol. II

    Portraits In Courage Vol. III

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IV

    Portraits In Courage Vol. V

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VI

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VIII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IX

    Portraits In Courage Vol. X

    Chapman MoH

    The Air Force We Need

    Events 2021

    Focus on Priorities

    Empowered Airmen

    State Licensure Portability

    CSAF Leadership Library    
        CSAF Leadership Library Bookshelf

    2018 CSAF Reading List

    2017 CSAF Reading List

    2016 CSAF Reading List





    AF Sites
    
        Social Media Sites

    Site Registration





    AF Content Management





    Careers





    Contact Us  
 Home
  News
  Photos
 Air Force Photos Search
 Search
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Full Size (0.67 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 Quick Links
                            Join the Air ForceSite MapQuestionsContact UsRSSFOIAIGAF SitesAccessibilityEEOLink DisclaimerStrategic APRSuicide PreventionSAPRUSA.govNo FEAR ActOSI Tip Line
                    Connect
                    Official United States Air Force Website
                        Subscribe to USAF News and Information
          Submit
May 28, 2015



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

CHARLIE JONES , Appellant

NO. 14

- 15

- 00102

- CV V.

SOUTH WEST PAINT & B ODY SHOP LP, B & B M AIN ST AUTO STORAGE,

CITY OF BELLAIRE , Appellee s

________________________________ Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment signed by the court below on February 2, 2015. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, w e order the appeal DISMISSED

. We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellant, Charlie Jones.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Exhibit
32.1




TOT
Energy, Inc.


12100 NE
16 Ave; Suite 210


North
Miami, FL 33161




June
29, 2010




Securities
and Exchange Commission


100 F
Street, NE


Washington,
DC 20549




Re:
Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350




Dear
Ladies and Gentlemen:




In
connection with the accompanying Amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TOT
Energy, Inc., for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, each of the undersigned
hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
Code), to the undersigned’s knowledge that:




1.
            such Quarterly Report on Form
      10-Q of TOT Energy, Inc., for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, 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 such
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TOT Energy, Inc., for the quarter ended
      September 30, 2009, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of TOT Energy,
      Inc.




BY: /S/ Mike ZoiMike
      ZoiChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)BY: /S/ Jonathan NewJonathan
      NewChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting 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 TOT Energy, Inc. and will be
retained by TOT Energy, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.




In
accordance with Item 601 of Regulation S-K, this certification is being
“furnished” as Exhibit 32.2 to TOT Energy, Inc.’s quarterly report and shall not
be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that
section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under
the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except as expressly set forth by
specific reference in such a filing.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent 

 v. 

YASHEAM WASHINGTON, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 188 MM 2014 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 6th day of January, 2015, the Petition for Leave to File Petition 

for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. Although counsel was negligent, Petitioner is 

entitled to a counsel-filed Petition for Allowance of Appeal. See Pa.R.Crim.P. 122. 

Counsel is DIRECTED to file the already-prepared Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

within five days.