alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
June 9, 2021

AMENDMENT NO. 2

COMMODITY SPECIFICATION

DRIED FRUIT – January 2021

The purpose of this amendment is to revise and clarify the Individual Commodity Specification 

for Dried Apricot Pieces – 24/1 pound. 

• Further clarify color and defect requirements.

• Add allowance and tolerance for optional addition of sulfur treatment

Additions and clarifications are shown in blue; strikethroughs are deletions.

INDIVIDUAL COMMODITY SPECIFICATIONS

1. Grade: Made from apricots equivalent to U.S. Grade B or better, low-moisture apricots in 

accordance with the United States Standards for Grades of Dehydrated (Low Moisture) 

Apricots effective date June 30, 1974 with the following clarifications:

• Color: the over-all color may vary considerably ranging from slightly dull orange to 

dull amber.

• Absence of Defects: the low-moisture apricots are reasonably free from any defects 

that affect materially the appearance or eating quality of the low-moisture apricots; 

and that not more than a total of 10 percent, by weight, of the low-moisture apricots

may be damaged units; Provided, that not more than 4 percent, by weight, of the lowmoisture apricots may be seriously damaged units (units that are seriously darkened

very dark brown to black) or which in any other way seriously affect the appearance 

of the low-moisture apricots.

2. Apricots must not be subjected to sulfur treatment.

7. Color: Characteristic of unsulfured low-moisture apricots.

2. Style: Diced or pieces. 

3. Additives or optional ingredients:

• Sodium sulfite or sodium acid sulfite or other FDA approved sulfating agents – up to 

2000 parts per million (ppm) (Calculated as sulfur dioxide using the optimized 

Monier-Williams – AOAC Method 990.28). 

4. Labeling: A detectable level of a sulfiting agent equal to or above 10 ppm must be 

declared in the ingredient statement. 

5. Truckload size: 1,440 cases per truckload.

6. Material Code and UPC:

Specialty Specialty Crops 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.

Crops Inspection Room 1536-S, STOP 0240

Program Division Washington, DC 20250-0240
Dried Fruit WBSCM

Material Primary Container Secondary 

Container

Apricot Pieces - 24/1 pound 111431 7 15001 11431 0 7 15001 11431 7

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
AMS Unpasteurized Liquid Whole Eggs for Further Processing Contractor Indicator Organism Performance - Fiscal Year: 20201/,2/

Standard Plate Count3/ Total Coliforms4/ Generic E. coli5/

Contractor

# Lots Produced 

(% of Total)

# Exceeding 

Critical Limit

% Exceeding 

Critical Limit

# Exceeding 

Critical Limit

% Exceeding 

Critical Limit

# Exceeding 

Critical Limit

% Exceeding 

Critical Limit

C1 91 (21.5) 6 6.59 2 2.20 1 1.10

C4 233 (55.1) 6 2.58 3 1.29 0 0

C6* 99 (23.4) 2 2.02 2 2.02 1 1.01

Total 423 (100.0) 14 3.31 7 1.18 2 0.47

1/A full description of the unpasteurized liquid whole eggs for further processing purchase program specification is available at https://www.ams.usda.gov/selling-food/product-specs#Eggs. 2/Production Dates: October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020.

3/Standard Plate Count Critical Limit: 50,000 CFU/g.

4/Total Coliforms Critical Limit: 5,000 CFU/g.

5/Generic E. coli Critical Limit: 1,000 CFU/g.

*Data corrected from previous reports.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Georgia Trust Bancshares, Inc. (the Company), each certify that, to his knowledge on the date of this certification:



| | 1. | The quarterly report of the Company for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |                        
|----------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 14, 2006 |  | /s/ J. Michael Allen   
|                        |  | J. Michael Allen       
|                        |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                        | 
|Date: November 14, 2006 |  | /s/ J. Dave DeVenny    
|                        |  | J. Dave DeVenny        
|                        |  | Chief Financial Officer
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



         In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Roebling  Financial  Corp,
Inc.  (the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 (the
"Report")  as filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date
hereof, we, Frank J. Travea,  III,  President and Chief Executive  Officer,  and
Janice A. Summers,  Senior Vice  President,  Chief  Operating  Officer and Chief
Financial Officer,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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) 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.


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

<S>                                           <C>
/s/Frank J. Travea, III                          /s/Janice A. Summers
-------------------------------------            --------------------------------------------------
Frank J. Travea, III                             Janice A. Summers
President and Chief Executive Officer            Senior Vice President, Chief Operating Officer and
                                                 Chief Financial Officer
</TABLE>




May 11, 2005
AMS Boneless Beef Supplier Pathogen Performance - Fiscal Year: 20191/,2/

Supplier

S1

# Lots Produced 

(% of Total) 

1,116 (3.8) 

E. coli O157:H73/

# Positive % Positive

0

0

# Positive

37

Salmo

S2 407 (1.4) 

0

0 20 

S3 63 (0.2) 

0

0

0

S4 7,814 (26.6) 

5 0.06 146 

S5 --- --- --- --- 

S6 40 (0.1) 

0

0

0

S10 6,400 (21.8) 

0

0 68 

S11 --- --- --- --- 

S14 7,320 (24.9) 

0

0 68 

S21 1,512 (5.1) 

0

0 53 

S29 --- --- --- --- S43 4,667 (15.9) 1 0.02 51 S44 30 (0.1) 

0

0

0

Total 29,369 (100.0) 

6 0.02 443 

1/A full description of the boneless beef purchase program specification is available at https://www.ams.usda.gov/selling-food/product-specs#Beef.2/Production Dates: October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2019.3/E. coli O157:H7 Critical Limit: Positive (+) Result / 325g.4/Salmonella Critical Limit: Positive (+) Result / 325g.
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 73 (Monday, April 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 22569]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9014]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR12-20-000]


NorthWestern Corporation; Notice of Petition for Rate Approval

    Take notice that on April 2, 2012, NorthWestern Corporation 
(NorthWestern) filed a Rate Election pursuant to 284.123(b)(1) of the 
Commissions regulations and to revise its Statement of Operating 
Conditions. NorthWestern proposes to utilize rates that are the same as 
those contained in NorthWestern's transportation rate schedules for 
comparable intrastate service on file with the South Dakota Public 
Utilities Commission as more fully detailed in the petition.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate filing must file in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). 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. Any 
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or 
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests 
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing 
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the 
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the 
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or 
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d4929186979bbab8bdbab187a1a4a4bba6a094b2b1a6b7fab3bba2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e5a3a0b7a6aa8b898c8b80b69095958a9791a583809786cb828a93">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 16, 2012.

    Dated: April 4, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-9014 Filed 4-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 72 (Friday, April 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 22318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9025]


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

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

TIME AND DATE: 1 p.m., Tuesday, April 17, 2012.

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, 9th Floor, 601 New Jersey 
Avenue NW., Washington, DC

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Commission will consider and act upon the 
following in closed session: Long Branch Energy v. Secretary of Labor, 
Docket Nos. WEVA 2009-1492-R, et al. (Issues include whether the judge 
erred in granting motions to dismiss late-filed petitions for 
assessment of civil penalties.).
    Any person attending this meeting who requires special 
accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 
interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. 
Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO: Jean Ellen (202) 434-9950/(202) 708-9300 
for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

    Dated: April 9, 2012.
Emogene Johnson,
Administrative Assistant.
[FR Doc. 2012-9025 Filed 4-11-12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 72 (Friday, April 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 22360]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8899]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Advisory Committee for Geosciences; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:
    Name: Advisory Committee for Geosciences (1755).
    Dates: April 18-April 19, 2012; 8:30 a.m.-2 p.m.
    Place: Stafford I, Room 1235, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Blvd. Arlington, Virginia 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Person: Melissa Lane, National Science Foundation, Suite 
705, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Virginia 22230. Phone 703-292-8500.
    Minutes: May be obtained from the contact person listed above.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice, recommendations, and 
oversight concerning support for geosciences.
    Reason for Late Notice: Scheduling complications and last minute 
changes to the agenda.

Agenda

April 18, 2012 8:30 am-5:30pm

<bullet> Update on Directorate Activities and Plans
<bullet> Updates on FY 2013 Budget Requests
<bullet> Meeting with the Director and Deputy Director
<bullet> Division Subcommittee Meetings

April 19, 2012 8:30 am-2:00pm

<bullet> Division Subcommittee Reports
<bullet> Updates on the U.S. Global Change Research Program, Education 
Program Planning, and International Activities
<bullet> Action Items/Planning for Fall Meeting

    Dated: April 10, 2012.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-8899 Filed 4-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
Jeremy Nichols <jnichols@wildearthguardi
ans.org>

11/23/2010 09:55 PM To LisaP Jackson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

cc Gina McCarthy/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Bruce Moore/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, CCG

- ONG@EPA, Ted Zukoski <tzukoski@earthjustice.org>, Michael Freeman

< mfreeman@earthjustice.org>, Mike Eisenfeld <meisenfeld@frontier.net> Subj
ect Oil and Gas Regulatory Review, Report on Methane Controls

Dear Administrator Jackson:

On behalf of WildEarth Guardians, San Juan Citizens Alliance, and Earthjustice , please find attached a report detailing strategies to achieve significant and cost

- effective methane reductions nationwide from the oil and gas sector. As detailed within, reductions in methane emissions from a variety of sources is more than achievable with available technologies and practices, and can help put the nation on track for a 90% or greater reduction sector

- wide.

We provide this report to help inform the EPA in its review of the New Source Performance
Standards and National Emission Standar ds for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the oil and gas

sector. A hard copy has also been sent via certified mail. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Jeremy Nichols

-- Jeremy Nichols Climate and Energy Program Director
WildEarth Guardians 1536 Wynkoop, Suite 301

- De nver, CO 80202
303

- 573

- 4898 x 1303 www.wildearthguardians.org

Read my blog on the Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeremy

- nichols/

J oin our e

- mail list today http://wg.convio.net/site/Survey?ACTION_REQUIRED=URI_ACTION_USER_REQUESTS& SURVEY_ID=1241WildEarth Guardians has earned a Four Star rating from Charity Navigator. View our profile

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=9974

Cover Letter and Final Report on Methane Controls for Oil and Gas.pdf
# Pollard-Kelley Auditing Services,
Inc......................................................................

#### Auditing Services
             4500 Rockside Road, Suite 450 Independence OH  44131
330-836-2558











### Report of Independent Certified
Public Accountants





Board of Directors

Falcon Target, Inc



We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets of Falcon Target, Inc.y as of March 31, 2007 and the
related consolidated statements of income, stockholders’
equity, and cash flows for the three-month and nine- month periods
then ended.  These interim financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company’s management.



We conducted our review in accordance with the
standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board.  A review
of interim financial statements consists principally of applying
analytical procedures and making inquiries of persons responsible for
financial and accounting matters.  It is substantially less in scope
than an audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board, the object of which is the expression of
an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole.
Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.



The accompanying financial statements have been
prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern.
As discussed in notes to the financial statements, the Company has
negative working capital, negative cash flows from operations and
recurring operating losses which raises substantial doubt about its
ability to continue as a going concern.  Management’s plans in
regard to these matters are also described in the notes to the
financial statements.  These financial statements do not include any
adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.



Based on our review, we are not
aware of any material modifications that should be made to the
accompanying financial statements in order for them to be in
conformity with generally accepted accounting principles accepted in
the United States of America.



Pollard-Kelley Auditing Services,
Inc.



/S/ Pollard-Kelley Auditing
Services, Inc.



May 15, 2007

Independence, Ohio

# Pollard-Kelley
Auditing Services, Inc......................................................................

#### Auditing Services
                 4500 Rockside Rd #450, Independence, OH 44131
330-836-2558







May 15, 2007







To the Board of Directors

Falcon Target, Inc.



We hereby consent to the
incorporation of our opinion dated May 15, 2007, in the 10Q of
Falcon Target, Inc. Corp for the three months  ended March 31, 2007.



Very truly yours,

Pollard-Kelley Auditing Services,
Inc.









Malcolm L Pollard

Vice-President
#### The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James D. WEBER, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 28230.

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.

Dec. 17, 1979.

*31Alexander M. Hunter, Dist. Atty., C. Phillip Miller, Chief Deputy Dist. Atty., Boulder, for plaintiff-appellant.

J. Gregory Walta, Colorado State Public Defender, Craig L. Truman, Chief Deputy State Public Defender, Richard D. Irwin, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, for defendant-appellee.

LEE, Justice.

The People appeal from a judgment of the district court imposing an indeterminate four-year sentence on appellee for second-degree burglary. Section 18-4-203, C.R.S. 1973 (1978 Repl. Vol. 8). We reverse the district court.

Weber pled guilty to a charge of second-degree burglary after he had been advised of his rights as provided by Crim.P. 11. At the probation hearing, the defense counsel admitted that Weber had been convicted of another felony within the previous five years. The prosecutor, noting the earlier conviction, argued that under section 16-ll-101(l)(d), C.R.S.1973 (1978 Repl. Vol. 8),1 Weber should be given a determinate sentence. That statute provides:

> “(d) A person who has been previously convicted of a felony in this state * * based upon an offense which occurred within five years prior to the date of the offense for which he is being sentenced, shall not be eligible for an indeterminate sentence * *

The district court concluded that the pri- or conviction first had to be filed and proven in the same manner as an habitual criminal count under section 16-3-102, C.R.S. 1973 (1978 Repl. Vol. 8). Since that had not been done, the court imposed an indeterminate sentence.

The People contend that the court erred in imposing an indeterminate sentence and that it is not necessary to comply with the habitual criminal act procedures2 when determinate sentencing is required by section 16-ll-101(l)(d). We agree.

This issue was decided by the court in *People v. Smith,*195 Colo. 404, 579 P.2d 1129 (1978), announced subsequent to the district court’s ruling in the instant case. In *People v. Smith, supra,*we held that section 16-11-101 “contains no directive requiring that procedures similar to those of the Habitual Criminal Act be followed.”

The requirements of section 16-11-101(l)(d) are mandatory. The statute prohibits an indeterminate sentence for a defendant with a prior felony conviction within the five-year period prior to the date of the offense for which he is being sentenced. Accordingly, the district court was without authority to impose an indeterminate sentence on appellee.

The judgment is reversed and the'cause is remanded to the district court with directions to vacate the indeterminate sentence and to resentence appellee to a determinate term.

1

. This section was amended by Colo.Sess.Laws 1977, ch. 216, 16 — 11—101(l)(d), at 862, effective July 1, 1978.

2

. Section 16-13-103, C.R.S.1973 (1978 Repl. Vol. 8).
# C_2004094EN.01005301.xml

| 17.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/53

---

Action brought on 9 February 2004 by Carlos Leite Mateus against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-51/04)

(2004/C 94/142)

Language of the case: French

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 9 February 2004 by Carlos Leite Mateus, residing in Zaventem (Belgium), represented by Sébastien Orlandi, Albert Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Etienne Marchal, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of 14 March 2003 drawing up the applicant's career development report for 2001-2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 14 March 2003 drawing up the applicant's career development report for 2001-2002;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant disputes his career development report for the period from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002.

In support of his claims he relies on pleas of:

| — | breach of the obligation to state grounds; |
| --- | --- |

—

breach of the obligation to state grounds;

| — | a manifest error of assessment; |
| --- | --- |

—

a manifest error of assessment;

| — | breach of the general provisions for implementing Article 43 of the Staff Regulations, in that, first, the decision of the appeal assessor to downgrade the assessment of the applicant's skills was erroneously based on tasks which were not his responsibility and were not required by his post, and, second, there were inconsistencies between the comments and the marks awarded. |
| --- | --- |

—

breach of the general provisions for implementing Article 43 of the Staff Regulations, in that, first, the decision of the appeal assessor to downgrade the assessment of the applicant's skills was erroneously based on tasks which were not his responsibility and were not required by his post, and, second, there were inconsistencies between the comments and the marks awarded.

---