alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AFS-14-366-E

July 29, 2014

 Exemption No. 10645A

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-1050

Mr. Brent Armenta

Director of Operations

Maverick Airstar, LLC

P.O. Box 3297

Grand Canyon, AZ 86023

Dear Mr. Armenta:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No.

10645. It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists the conditions and 

limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated June 30, 2014, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Maverick Airstar, LLC (Maverick) for an extension of Exemption No. 10645. That 

exemption from § 93.323 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows Maverick 

relief from the requirement to file a flight plan prior to conducting operations in the Grand 

Canyon National Park (GCNP) Special Flight Rules Area.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Maverick.
2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 10645

remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the 

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has 

delegated to me, Maverick Airstar, LLC is hereby granted an extension to their exemption 

from 14 CFR 93.323, which relieves Maverick from the requirement to file a flight plan prior 

to conducting operations in the GCNP Special Flight Rules Area.

The Effect of Our Decision

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2016, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/S/

John Barbagallo

Acting Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 101 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 101

    Expressing support for democratic elections in the Co-operative 
                          Republic of Guyana.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 8, 2020

   Mr. Bishop of Georgia (for himself, Mr. Payne, Mr. Hastings, Ms. 
   Jackson Lee, and Mr. Johnson of Georgia) submitted the following 
 concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
    Expressing support for democratic elections in the Co-operative 
                          Republic of Guyana.

Whereas the people of Guyana voted on March 2, 2020, in general and regional 
        elections;
Whereas the Guyanese people showed their strong belief in the democratic process 
        by approximately a 75 percent voter turnout; and
Whereas although international observers such as the Organization of American 
        States (OAS), the Commonwealth, the Carter Center, and the Ambassadors 
        of the United States, Great Britain, Canada, and the European Union 
        issued preliminary statements, based on their observation on Election 
        Day, suggesting that the voting itself was free and fair, it has been 
        alleged that irregularities occurred in the vote tabulation process, 
        leading to a decision made by the Guyana Elections Commission on March 
        15, 2020, to conduct a recount of the ballots cast under the supervision 
        of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM): Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress--
            (1) commends the people of Guyana for holding peaceful 
        multiparty general and regional elections;
            (2) supports the current recount by the Guyana Elections 
        Commission of all ballots cast, under the scrutiny of CARICOM, 
        an organization deemed acceptable to all parties, the 
        International Observer teams such as the Carter Center, and the 
        duly appointed representatives of the contesting Political 
        Parties;
            (3) calls on all parties to respect the Declaration of 
        Results consistent with the laws of Guyana as the final 
        decision and make a vow for peace and stability in Guyana; and
            (4) calls on the citizens of Guyana to remain calm and to 
        respect the rule of law and human rights as the recount 
        proceeds under the framework of respected democratic norms.
                                 <all>
```
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

WENDAL MAURICE BAKER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-2340

[October 10, 2019]

Appeal from order denying rule 3.800(a) motion from the Circuit Court 

for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Gary L. Sweet, 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 562010CF834A.

Wendal Maurice Baker, Blountstown, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

WARNER, GROSS and GERBER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF EARNINGS OF BENTHOS, INC. AND
SUBSIDIARY CONTAINED ELSEWHERE AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           2,930
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,432
<ALLOWANCES>                                       220
<INVENTORY>                                      4,794
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,189
<PP&E>                                           6,641
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,862
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,787
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,780
<BONDS>                                          4,649
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           110
<OTHER-SE>                                       9,248
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    18,787
<SALES>                                         17,248
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,248
<CGS>                                            9,801
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,385
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,113
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     8
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  49
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,076
<INCOME-TAX>                                       248
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                828
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       828
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .61<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .60<F1>
<FN>
<F1>THE EARNINGS PER SHARE INFORMATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SFAS
NO. 128 AND BASIC AND DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE HAVE BEEN ENTERED IN PLACE OF
PRIMARY AND FULLY DILUTED, RESPECTIVELY.
</FN>


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

SHAHEED COLEMAN,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 828 MAL 2014

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 9th day of April, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 4.1    
  



	No.	 	INCORPORATED UNDER THE DELAWARE GENERAL CORPORATION LAW	 	Shares




Verint Systems Inc.  



	This is to Certify that is the registered holder of	 	shares of common stock




Verint Systems Inc.  


The
class or series of shares represented by this Certificate has rights, privileges, restrictions or conditions attached thereto and the Corporation will furnish to the holder, on demand and without
charge, a full copy of the text of, 


	(i)
	the
rights, privileges, restrictions and conditions attached to the said shares and to each class authorized to be issued and to each series insofar as
the same have been fixed by the directors, and



	(ii)
	the
authority of the directors to fix the rights, privileges, restrictions and conditions of subsequent series, if applicable. 



IN
WITNESS WHEREOF the Corporation has caused this Certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers this            day
of                        ,            . 


PAR VALUE $.001 PER SHARE  





 
CERTIFICATE

FOR 


shares
of common stock

VERINT SYSTEMS INC. 


ISSUED
TO 


Date 


FOR
VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby assigns and transfers unto 





shares
represented by the within Certificate. 



	 
	 	 
	 	 

	
 	
 	

 	
 	

 





	 
	 
	 	 

	DATED	
	 	 
	    	 	 	 
	    	 	 	 
	 	 	 	

	    	 	 	 
	In the presence of	 	 
	    	 	 	 
	    	 	 	 
	
	 	 





NOTICE:
the signature of this assignment must correspond with the name as written upon the face of the certificate, in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatever. 


2









QuickLinks


Exhibit 4.1
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of CB Richard Ellis Realty Trust (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Laurie E. Romanak, 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 result of operations of the Company.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ LAURIE E. ROMANAK  
|Laurie E. Romanak      
|Chief Financial Officer

August 14, 2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          12,510
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   53,646
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        828
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,609
<PP&E>                                         565,145
<DEPRECIATION>                                 133,342
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 536,299
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           49,252
<BONDS>                                         81,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        100
<COMMON>                                         3,531
<OTHER-SE>                                     398,466
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   536,299
<SALES>                                        104,431
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               214,850
<CGS>                                          125,672
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  203,800
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,503
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,560
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,050
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (4,293)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,007
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,007
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23

- 0 514 IN THE MATTER OF: A.Z.G., A Youth.

**ORDER SUPPLEMENTING THE RECORD** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the motion to supplement the record is granted. The January 19 , 202 2 Disposition Transcript that has been prepared and filed with this Court shall be made part of the record herein. The Clerk shall serve a copy of this Order upon the court reporter.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 3 2024

10/03/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0514
AMS Animal Handling and Welfare Performance – Fiscal Year: 20221/,2/,3

Species / Total # Animals Observed Missed Stuns4/,5/ Sensible Animals on Rail

Supplier (% of Grand Total) # % # %

Beef Total 3,993 (43.3) 1 0.03 0 0

S1 100 (1.1) 0 0 0 0

S2 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S4 370 (4.0) 1 0.27 0 0

S5 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S6 100 (1.1) 0 0 0 0

S10 300 (3.2) 0 0 0 0

S11 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S12 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S14 300 (3.2) 0 0 0 0

S21 100 (1.1) 0 0 0 0

S25 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S28 100 (1.1) 0 0 0 0

S29/6 35 (0.4) 0 0 0 0

S31 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S32 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S41 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S42 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S43 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S44 39 (0.5) 0 0 0 0

S45 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

V50 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S47/6 35 (0.4) 0 0 0 0

S48/6 110 (1.1) 0 0 0 0

S49/6 4 (0.0) 0 0 0 0

Pork Total 4,800 (52.0) 0 0 0 0

S1 100 (1.1) --- --- 0 0

S2 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S3 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S4 300 (3.2) --- --- 0 0

S5 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S6 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S7 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S8 100 (1.1) --- --- 0 0

S10 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S11 400 (4.3) --- --- 0 0

S13 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

S14 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S15 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S16 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S17 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S18 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S19 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S20 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S21 300 (3.2) --- --- 0 0

S22 200 (2.2) --- --- 0 0

S23 600 (6.5) --- --- 0 0

Bison Total 138 (1.5) 1 0.91 0 0

S16/ 34 (0.4) 0 0 0 0

S36/ 23 (0.2) 0 0 0 0

S46/ 8 (0.1) 0 0 0 0

S56/ 15 (0.2) 1 6.67 0 0

S66/ 58 (0.6) 0 0 0 0

Lamb Total 300 (3.2) 0 0 0 0

S2 100 (1.1) 0 0 0 0

S3 200 (2.2) 0 0 0 0

Grand Total 9,231 (100.0) 2 0.02 0 0 1/A full description of AMS animal handling and welfare purchase program requirements is available here. 2/Production Dates: October 1, 2021 to September 30, 2022. 3/Data summarized from findings obtained from AMS/Livestock and Poultry Program/Quality Assessment Division audits.

4/Religious harvest (Kosher and Halal) is exempt from effective stunning calculations and is denoted with “■”. 5/Suppliers utilizing CO2 stunning (e.g. gondolas) are not evaluated for missed stuns and are denoted with “---”. 6/Low capacity establishment.
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 23 - 0564

_________________ ANTHONY CORDERO, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY and WADED CRUZADO,

Defendants and Appellees. O R D E R

_________________ Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for submission on briefs to a five - justice panel of this Court. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the Honorable Michael F. McMahon , District Judge . For the Court,

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 5 2024

06/05/2024
Case Number: DA 23-0564
NO. 07-07 -011 7-CV IN THE CO URT OF APPEA LS FO R THE S EVEN TH D ISTRI CT O F TEXAS

AT AM AR ILLO PAN EL A MA Y8, 2007

_________

_________

_________

___ LEE Y . C OC KR ELL, GU AR DI AN OF THE PER SON AN D ESTATE OF ALICE B. INGRUM GRAY, AN INC APA CITAT ED PERSON, AP PEL LANT V. GEN E O. “ BU DD Y ” CO CK RE LL, A PPELLE E

_________

_________

_________

______ FRO M T HE 31 ST DIS T RI CT COU RT OF G RAY COUN T Y; NO . 33, 395-A; H ON ORABLE STEVEN R . EM ME RT, JU DG E

_________

_________

_________

____ Before CAMPBE LL a nd HANCOCK an d PIRT LE, JJ. ME MO RA ND UM OPI NI ON Pen ding before this C ourt is App ellant ’ s Mot ion to Dism iss

in w hich, L ee Y. Cockrell, Guardia n of the Person and Es tate of Ali ce B. I ng ru m Gray , an Inc apaci tated Person, represe nts th at pu rsuan t to a set tlem enta gr e e m e n t , h e no longer w ishes to pursue this2

appeal . Coc krell al so re present s t hat a ll disput es between t he par ti es hav e been settl ed and req uest s d is mis sal w it h preju dic e. W it hout pass ing on t he mer it s o f the cas e, purs uant to Rul e 42.1(a )( 1) of the Tex as Rul es of Appel lat e Procedu re , we g ra nt t he moti on and dis mis s t he appe al w it h preju dic e. Hav ing d ism is sed the a ppeal at Coc krell ’s req uest , no moti on for re hear ing w il l be enter tai ned and our

mandate w il l is sue forthw it h. Pat rick A. Pirtle Justice
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    Exhibit 23.1



                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of our report dated December 3, 1998, included in this Form 10-K, into
the Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. previously filed Form S-8 Registration
Statement File Nos. 33-38117, 33-41281, 33-53393 and 33-56583, Form S-3
Registration Statement File Nos. 33-58298 and 33-65055 and Form S-4 Registration
Statement File No. 33-58889.






ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Houston, Texas
December 3, 1998
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. R IC ARDO SANDOVAL JIM ENEZ, a .k.a . Soste nse Hue rta , a .k.a . Agustin Lione l, a .k.a . R o se ndo Pine da , a .k.a . Jim e n e z R oge ndo, a .k.a . R ic ardo Sandova l, a .k.a . R ic ha rdo Sandova l , De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 13-10109

D.C . No. 3:12-c r-00468-EM C M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia Edwa rd M . C he n, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d De c e m

be r 17, 2013 ** B e fore : GOODW IN, WALLAC E, a nd GR AB ER , C irc uit Judge s. R ic ardo Sandova l Jim e ne z a ppe a l s from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt a nd c ha lle nge s the 60-m onth se nte n c e and thre e -y e ar supe rvise d re le a se te rm im pose d 

# FIL ED JAN 03 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).following his guilty -ple a c onvic tion for re e ntry

of a re m ove d

a lie n , in viola

tion of 8 U.S.C . § 1326. W e hav e jurisdic t ion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291, a nd we a ffirm . Sandova l Jim e ne z c onte nds tha t the distric t c ourt proc e d

ura lly e rre d by fa iling to c onside r a ll of the18 U.S.C . § 3553(a) se nte nc ing fa c tors, to c onside r and re spond to his m

i tiga ting a rgum e nts, a

nd to e xpla in the se nte nc e im pose d. W e re vie w for pla in e rror, se e Unite d State s v . Vale nc ia-Barragan , 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th C ir. 2010), a

nd find none . The re c ord re fle c ts tha t the distric t c ourt a de quate ly

c onside re d

the se c tion 3553(a

) se nte nc ing fa c tors, a de q uate ly c onside re d a

nd re sponde d to Sa

ndova l Jim e n e z ’ s m i tiga

t ing a rgum e nts, a

nd suffic i e ntly

e xpla ine d the se nte n c e and why a supe rvise d re le a se te rm wa s warran te d. Se eUnite d State s v . C arty , 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th C ir. 2008) (e n ba nc ). Sandova l Jim e ne z ne xt c onte nds tha t the thre e -y e ar te rm

of supe rvise d re le a se is substa

nt ive ly unre a sona

ble in light of U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1(c ) (2011). The distric t c o urt did not a

buse its disc re tion. Se e Unite d State s v . Valdav inos-Torre

s , 704 F.3d 679, 692 (9th C ir. 2012). Thethre e -y e ar te rm of supe rvise d

re l e a se is substa ntive ly re a sona

ble in light of the

tota lity of the c irc um sta

nc e s, inc luding Sandova l Jim e ne z ’ s e xte nsive c rim ina l history an d thre e prior de porta

tions. Se e id . at 692-93; s e e also U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1 c m t. n.5. AFFIRM E D. 1 3 - 1 0 1 0 9 2
DANIEL SMITH, ESQ. 18 State Street P.O. Box 801 

Montpelier, VT 05601 

(802) 229-6661 phone dsmith@dairycompact.org email

Dana H. Coale, Deputy Administrator March 4, 2011 

Dairy Programs, USDA, AMS

1400 Independence Avenue SW

Washington, DC 20250 

Dear Ms Coale:

The Maine Dairy Industry Association (MDIA) continues its interest in developing a 

basic formula price based on competitive prices paid for Grade A milk. 

Your office generously provided data for the Federal Order system that illustrated the 

most competitive counties across the whole system. That information was original and 

very helpful. 

A new issue has arisen as the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) has expressed 

an interest in capturing competitive pay prices on a regional basis. We would like to 

explore this idea. 

Therefore, we hereby request that you use the same data as was used earlier to measure 

competition for the whole system, by county, to measure competition for each of the 

eight NMPF-identified regions, again by county. Those regions are outlined on the 

attached map.

For this new analysis, we request that the information identify only the most competitive 

counties for each region that, when combined, include 25 percent of the milk for each 

region. The regional, county-based analyses would again rely on the HerfindahlHirschman Index, and start with the lowest indexed or most competitive county. Also, 

we would like to have identified the highest Herfindahl-Hhirschman Index that applies to 

any county included in each of these regional groupings of counties. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely,

/s/ Daniel Smith /s/ Paul Christ

Daniel Smith Paul Christ 

on behalf of MDIA
2
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 76 (Thursday, April 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 23475]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9370]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER12-91-000, ER12-91-002, ER12-92-002]


PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., Duke Energy Ohio, Inc., Duke Energy 
Kentucky, Inc; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on April 5, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. and Duke 
Energy Kentucky, Inc., tendered for filing a Settlement Agreement on 
behalf of themselves and the Indiana Municipal Power Agency, pursuant 
to 18 CFR 385.602, in the above-docketed proceeding. Pursuant to 18 CFR 
385.602(f)(2) initial comments on the settlement agreement should be 
filed on or before April 18, 2012. Reply comments are due on or before 
April 20, 2012.

    Dated: April 12, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-9370 Filed 4-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P