alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SERVED: JUNE 11, 2015 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF FISHER SCIENTIFIC COMPANY, LLC DOCKET NO. FAA-2015-1321 (Civil Penalty Action)
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING ;, ,,

· .•. 'i;

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2011S0700457) has been assigned to Administrative LawJudge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served onthe Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other persons onthe attached Service List.

Attachment

- Service ListSERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2Wl0001

President Fisher Scientific Company, L.L.C. 6722 Bickmore Avenue Chino, CA 91708 Jerry W. Cox, Respondent's Counsel Potomac Strategy Associates 2729 Gallows Rd., Suite 401 Vienna, VA 22180 TEL: 703-757-5866 ONE COPY

Email: 

### jcox@potomacstrategyassociates.com William Vines, Complainant's Counsel Office ofthe Regional Counsel, ASO-7 Southern Region 1701 Columbia Avenue College Park, GA 30337 TEL: 404-305-5200 FAJ(: 404-305-5223 I The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin,Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAJ(: 202-366-7536 PocketNo. FAA-2015-1321 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was byU.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGG--430. 

### -2-
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements (Form S-
8 Nos. 2-33676, 2-56821, 2-77219, 2-77575, 2-83637, 2-97935, 33-17831, 33-23601,
33-23603, 33-30927, 33-54496, 333-07733, and 333-91367) pertaining to employee
benefit plans, of Brown & Sharpe Manufacturing Company of our report dated
February 15, 2001, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of
Brown & Sharpe Manufacturing Company included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K)
for the year ended December 31, 2000.


                                         /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Providence, Rhode Island
March 27, 2001
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Steven Haskins, Appellant.

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Danaher, J.), rendered September 30, 1985, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, grand larceny in the third degree, petit larceny, criminal use of a firearm in the first degree, and criminal use of a firearm in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted for his participation in the armed robbery of a taxi-cab driver. His codefendant’s conviction was affirmed by this court in *People v Williams*(142 AD2d 310). The underlying facts of this case are set forth in that decision.

The defendant argues that the trial court committed reversible error by permitting the People and the codefendant to cross-examine him as to the underlying facts of a previous attempted robbery conviction, notwithstanding that the court in its *Sandoval*ruling directed that the defendant could be cross-examined only as to the *fact*of that conviction. We disagree.

The defendant failed to register specific objections to the cross-examination, and has thereby failed to preserve his argument for appellate review *(see, People v Fleming,*70 NY2d 947; *People v Irby,*112 AD2d 447). In any event, the record reveals that the court generally kept the cross-examination within the bounds of its *Sandoval*ruling, and, at most, allowed a limited amount of further cross-examination only after the defendant himself went beyond the fact of conviction by attempting to downplay the circumstances of the prior crime. Under the circumstances, and considering the overwhelming proof of defendant’s guilt, any arguable error in this regard was harmless *(see, People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.
Formal Recommendation by the 

National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) 

to the National Organic Program (NOP)

Date: May 22, 2012

Subject: GMO Letter to the Secretary

Chair: Barry Flamm

 

 

The NOSB hereby recommends to the NOP the following: 

Rulemaking Action __________

Guidance Statement __________

Other ___X______

Statement of the Recommendation (Including Recount of Vote): 

Send a letter to Secretary Vilsack about GMOs and Organics

Rationale Supporting Recommendation (including consistency with 

OFPA and NOP): 

Advice to the Secretary as per our NOSB mandate to keep excluded methods out 

of organic

Committee Vote:

Moved: Colehour Bondera Second: Mac Stone

Yes: 15 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recusal: 0
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00802-CV

In the Interest of V.G., Y.G., R.G., M.G., R.G., A.G., and A.G., Children

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-PA-02840

Honorable Richard Garcia, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI, JUSTICE CHAPA, AND JUSTICE PULLIAM

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, the trial court’s 

termination order is AFFIRMED.

SIGNED April 8, 2015.

_____________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice
<PAGE>   1


                          Hyperion Software Corporation

<TABLE>

   Exhibit (11) - Statement Re: Computation of Earnings Per Share (Unaudited)
                    (in thousands, except per share amounts)

<CAPTION>

                                                                THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                   SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                                1996          1995
                                                                ------------------

<S>                                                            <C>           <C>   
  PRIMARY
    Weighted average number of common shares
      outstanding                                               17,060        16,226
    Weighted average number of common
      equivalent shares outstanding                                753         1,664
                                                               -------       -------
                                                                17,813        17,890
                                                               =======       =======

    Net income                                                 $ 2,041       $ 2,216
                                                               =======       =======

    Per share amount                                           $   .11       $   .12
                                                               =======       =======

  FULLY DILUTED
    Weighted average number of common shares
      outstanding                                               17,060        16,226
    Weighted average number of common
      equivalent shares outstanding                                953         1,730
                                                               -------       -------
                                                                18,013        17,956
                                                               =======       =======

    Net income                                                 $ 2,041       $ 2,216
                                                               =======       =======

    Per share amount                                           $   .11       $   .12
                                                               =======       =======

</TABLE>
## Estimating Pesticide

Handler Exposure HSRB Meeting – Potomac Yard,Arlington VA U.S. EPA, Office of Pesticide Programs

William Jordan January 17, 2013

1

# Statutory Framework  

## EPA regulates pesticides under FIFRA  

## FIFRA requires registration of all pesticides sold in the US  

## Each product has a defined composition, labeling, and packaging

2

## Pesticide Product–Registration Terms  Composition – defined by a Confidential Statement of Formula (percentage of active and inert ingredients; type of formulation, e.g., liquid, granules, wetable powder, etc.)  Labeling – use directions (site, target pests, method of mixing, loading, application; application rate, timing, and frequency; personal protective equipment; warnings; limitations (e.g., REI, PHI, plant back), etc.  Packaging – container size, composition, other characteristics 3

# Statutory Standard  

### EPA may register a pesticide if it will not cause “unreasonable adverse effects on the environment”  

### This standard is defined in a way that directs EPA to balance the risks of using a pesticide against its benefits  

### Risk is a function of toxicity and exposure

4

# Types of Risks Considered  

## EPA considers a wide range of potential risks – human health and environmental  

## For human health, EPA considers occupational, dietary, bystander, residential risks  

## Occupational risks includes handlers and workers 5

# Handler Exposure Handler exposure depends on three factors:  How the particular pesticide is mixed, loaded, and applied – unit exposure for a handling scenario (mg active ingredient/ amount of active ingredient handled (AaiH)  How much of the pesticide is handled – AaiH  The impact of using personal protective equipment (PPE)

6

# Data sources for estimating occupational exposure  

### Unit exposure – studies with surrogate chemicals measuring inhalation & dermal exposure of handlers’ body parts, when performing scenario tasks (mg active ingredient/AaiH)  

### AaiH – data on pesticide product composition, product application rate, and high end quantities handled during a work period  

### Impact of PPE – studies of protection 78



## Historical Background

“In estimating exposure for a pesticide application from a surrogate study, it has been our experience that the proper (and logical) conversion factors are amounts of pesticide applied for applicators and the quantity of chemical handled by mixer/loaders.” (Reinart, J.C. and D.J. Severn, 1985; pg 361)

Reinart, J.C. and D.J. Severn, 1985; pg 3609 

## Proportionality Analysis Discussion  

### Practicality of estimating handler exposure using unit exposure values together with data on AaiH  

### Potential Error from assuming proportionality 

##  May underestimate @ lower AaiH 

##  May overestimate exposure @ higher AaiH  

### From a policy perspective, this type of error is acceptable
CHAPTER 7-12-03 

RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR 

AGRICULTURAL ANHYDROUS AMMONIA FACILITIES 

A new chapter to North Dakota Administrative Code Article 7-12 is created relating to a 

risk management program for agricultural anhydrous ammonia facilities. 

CHAPTER 7-12-03 

RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR AGRICULTURAL ANYDROUS AMMONIA 

FACILITIES 

Section 

7-12-03-01 

7-12-03-02 

7-12-03-03 

Scope 

Incorporation by Reference 

Definitions 

RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR 

AGRICULTURAL ANYDROUS AMMONIA FACILITIES 

7-12-03-01. SCOPE. The requirements of this chapter apply only to agricultural 

anhydrous ammonia facilities. 

History: Effective -

General Authority: N.D. C. C. § 28-32-02 

Law Implemented: N.D.C.C. ch. 19-20.3 

7-12-03-02. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. The provisions of 40 Code of 

Federal Regulations part 68 as they existed on June 30. 2011. are incorporated by 

reference into this chapter. with the following exceptions: 

.1. Where the term "stationarv source" appears in 40 Code of Federal Regulations 

part 68. substitute "agricultural anhydrous ammonia facilitv." 

2. Not adopted by reference is 40 Code of Federal Regulations § 68.120. Petition 

Process. 

3. Not adopted bv reference are 40 Code of Federal Regulations § 68.210. 

Availabilitv of Information to the Public. and 40 Code of Federal Regulations § 

68.215. Permit Content and Air permitting Authoritv or Designated Agency 

Requirements. 

History: Effective -

General Authority: N.D.C.C. § 28-32-02 

Law Implemented: N.D.C.C. ch. 19-20.3 
-

7-12-03-03. DEFINITIONS. The definitions in 40 Code of Federal Regulations 

part 68 apply to this chapter. The following additional definitions also apply: 

1., "Agricultural anhydrous ammonia facility" means any facility that has at least 

10.000 pounds of storage capacity and stores anhydrous ammonia intended to 

be used as a fertilizer or in the manufacturing of a fertilizer. 

2. "Fertilizer" means any substance regulated as a fertilizer under North Dakota 

Century Code chapter 19-20.1. 

History: Effective -

General Authoritv: N.D. C. C.§ 28-32-02 

Law Implemented: N.D.C.C. ch. 19-20.3
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 14-1423

UNITED STATES and COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ex rel. JULIO

ESCOBAR and CARMEN CORREA, Administratrix of the Estate of

Yarushka Rivera,

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v.

UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC.,

Defendant, Appellee.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on March 17, 2015 is amended

as follows:

The sentence beginning on page 19, line 12 is modified to

read:

The express and absolute language of the regulation in

question, in conjunction with the repeated references to

supervision throughout the regulatory scheme,

"'constitute dispositive evidence of materiality.'" 

Hutcheson, 647 F.3d at 394 (quoting SAIC, 626 F.3d at

1269); see 130 Mass. Code Regs. § 429.439 ("Services

provided by a satellite program are reimbursable only if

the program meets the standards described below.").
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JULY 14, 2015

NO. 03-14-00494-CR

Isaac Benavidez, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 21ST DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND BOURLAND

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ briefs, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial 

court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of conviction. Because 

appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JULY 14, 2015

NO. 03-14-00495-CR

Isaac Benavidez, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 21ST DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND BOURLAND

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ briefs, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial 

court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of conviction. Because 

appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
Official Listing of Approved

USDA Quality System Assessment (QSA) Programs

Page 1 of 2

Last Revised February 13, 2024

Company Claims Verified Program Scope Verification Information

Agri Beef Company 

Corporate Live Cattle Program

1555 Shoreline Drive

Boise, ID 83702

Phone: (208) 338-2629

Contact: Jordan Sparrowk

Email: Jordan.Sparrowk@agribeef.com

Age Verified

Source Verified

Livestock: Cattle (Beef & Dairy)

Location(s):

Producers, Feedyards, Dairy Calf 

Ranch & Grow Yards

Service(s):

Program Compliant Tags

Effective Date: March 5, 2007

Lindsay Ranch

73375 Lindsay Feedlot Lane

Lexington, OR 97839

Phone: (541) 989-8478

Contact: Corinne Lindsay; Leanne

Lindsay

Email: lindsayranch@machmedia.net;

leanne.lindsay@icloud.com

Age Verified

Source Verified

Livestock: Cattle (Beef)

Location(s):

Producers & Feedlots

Service(s):

Effective Date: September 22, 2008

M&R Cattle Company

Route 1, Box 25

Burwell, NE 68823

Phone: (308) 346-4394

Contact: Dan Morgan

Email: info@morganranchinc.com

Breed Verified – Meets 

genotype requirements of 

AWA Specification (Wagyu 

Influence)

Livestock: Cattle (Beef)

Location(s):

Producers & Feedlots

Service(s):

Effective Date: May 21, 2013

Morgan-Davis International

Iron Horse Ranch Location

31365 Rattlesnake Hill Road

Macomb, OK 74852

Phone: (405) 598-2380

Contact: Ted Davis, Jr.

Email: 

ted@morgandavisinternational.com

Age Verified

Source Verified

Breed Verified – Meets 

genotype requirements of 

AWA Specification (Wagyu 

Influence)

Livestock: Cattle (Beef)

Location(s):

Producers

Service(s):

Program Compliant Tags

Effective Date: May 15, 2007

Suspended effective January 20, 2022
Official Listing of Approved

USDA Quality System Assessment (QSA) Programs

Page 2 of 2

Last Revised February 13, 2024

Company Claims Verified Program Scope Verification Information

Morgan Ranch Beef

83583 Gracie Creek Avenue

Burwell, NE 68823

Phone: (308) 346-4394

Contact: Dan Morgan 

Email: info@morganranchinc.com

Breed Verified – Meets 

genotype requirements of 

AWA Specification (Wagyu 

Influence)

Livestock: Cattle (Beef)

Location(s):

Producers & Feedlots

Service(s):

Effective Date: May 21, 2013

Texas Cattle Feeders Association

5501 I-40 West

Amarillo, TX 79106

Phone: (806) 358-3681

Contact: Brady Miller

Email: brady@tcfa.org

Age Verified

Source Verified

Beef Export Verification (EV) 

Program for Saudi Arabia

Livestock: Cattle (Beef)

Location(s):

Producers & Feedyards

Service(s):

Effective Date: December 10, 2005
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 on Form 10-Q of Wise Metals Group LLC (the Company) for the quarter ending
September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kenneth Stastny, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1. The Report fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. The information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:
November 16, 2009



By:

/s/ Kenneth StastnyKenneth StastnyChief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement, or other document authenticating, acknowledging,
or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement, 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> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
DECEMBER 31, 1999 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                      85,064,053
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       2,361,784
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                556,191,355
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      25,201,876
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        25,351,000
<LOANS>                                  1,195,986,791
<ALLOWANCE>                               (14,413,104)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,985,454,701
<DEPOSITS>                               1,530,083,303
<SHORT-TERM>                               277,230,026
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         18,503,921
<LONG-TERM>                                 27,704,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    50,886,135
<OTHER-SE>                                  81,047,316
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>           1,985,454,701
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             94,493,565
<INTEREST-INVEST>                           33,963,262
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               522,216
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                           128,979,043
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          51,330,450
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          66,379,906
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       62,599,137
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                4,250,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             215,640
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             66,017,871
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             22,124,922
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                  22,124,922
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                16,560,117
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .80
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.50
<LOANS-NON>                                  7,259,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                 1,794,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               399,000
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                950,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                            14,172,264
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                6,404,068
<RECOVERIES>                                 2,394,908
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                           14,413,104
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                        14,413,104
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
Formal Recommendation 

From: National Organic Standards Board (NOSB)

To: the National Organic Program (NOP)

Date: October 29, 2015

Subject: Petition to add sulfuric acid to §205.601

NOSB Chair: Jean Richardson

The NOSB hereby recommends to the NOP the following: 

Rulemaking Action: None. Motion failed

Statement of the Recommendation: 

Sulfuric acid was petitioned for use as a solubilizing agent to make micronutrients more 

available for plant uptake. The sulfuric acid would solubilize mineral oxides of micronutrients, 

which would then be chelated with amino acid complexes, making them more plant-available.

The Crops Subcommittee did not think it was necessary to add sulfuric acid, a very corrosive 

strong acid, to §205.601 to make micronutrients more plant-available. Synthetic micronutrients 

are already allowed under §205.601. In organic production systems, micronutrient availability is 

part of a biological process. On a vote of 5 to 0, the Crops Subcommittee voted to not list 

sulfuric acid, as petitioned at §205.601. 

Rationale Supporting Recommendation (including consistency with OFPA and Organic 

Regulations): 

The Crops Subcommittee had concerns that the process of treating micronutrients with sulfuric 

acid, as petitioned, would produce forms of micronutrients that are highly refined and designed 

to spoon-feed plants in ways that circumvent the natural soil biological processes central to 

organic farming. The Subcommittee thought that was not consistent with the principles of 

organic farming.

NOSB Vote: 

Motion to classify sulfuric acid as petitioned as synthetic 

Motion by: Francis Thicke 

Seconded by: Harold Austin

Yes: 14 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0

Outcome: Classification motion passed
Motion to list sulfuric acid, as petitioned, at §205.601.

Motion by: Francis Thicke 

Seconded by: Harold Austin

Yes: 0 No: 14 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recuse: 0 

Outcome: Listing motion failed