alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

### Werner, Christopher

From: Werner, Christopher

Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2016 2:28 PM

To: 'Szabo, Aaron'; Lorang, Phil; Beaver, Melinda Subject: RE: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO12866 a nd 13563: EPA NPRM -- Protection of Visibility: Amendments to Requirement s for State Plans (RIN 2060-AS55)

Aaron, to confirm, YES, this red text will be added to the preamble as well as the rule text.

Chris Werner US EPA – Office of Air Quality Planning and Standar ds Air Quality Policy Division (919) 541-5133 werner.christopher@epa.gov

From: Werner, Christopher

Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2016 12:28 PM

To: 'Szabo, Aaron' <Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov>; Lorang , Phil <Lorang.Phil@epa.gov>; Beaver, Melinda <Beaver.Melinda@epa.gov> Subject: RE: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO12866 and 13563: EPA NPRM -- Protection of Visibility: Amendments to Requirements for State Plans (RIN 206 0-AS55)

Hi Aaron, thank you for the comments. Please advise whether the below would be acceptable in lieu of w hat has been proposed. Text added by reviewers is in italics and text added by EPA is in red italics:

The new §51.308(g)(6) is proposed to include a prov ision requiring a state whose long-term strategy in cludes a smoke management program for prescribed fires on wildland to include a summary of the most recent periodic a ssessment of the smoke management program including conclusions that were reached in the assessment as to whether the program is meeting its goals regarding improving ecosystem health and reducing the damaging effects of catastr ophic wildfires.

Chris Werner US EPA – Office of Air Quality Planning and Standar ds Air Quality Policy Division (919) 541-5133 werner.christopher@epa.gov

From: Szabo, Aaron [ mailto:Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov ]

Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2016 11:53 AM

To: Lorang, Phil < Lorang.Phil@epa.gov >; Werner, Christopher < Werner.Christopher@epa.gov >; Beaver, Melinda

< Beaver.Melinda@epa.gov > Subject: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO12866 and 13563: EPA NPRM -- Protection of Visibility: Amendments to Requirements for State Plans (RIN 206 0-AS55)

Attached please find the summary of interagency com ments under EO 12866 and 13563 for the draft propos ed rule entitled, Protection of Visibility: Amendments to Requirement s for State Plans (RIN 2060-AS55). The interagency comments are in response to the last RLSO version s ubmitted to OMB for review. I accepted all changes from that version and the interagency comments within this ve rsion are new.

Thank you and please let me know if you have any co mments or questions.2 Aaron L. Szabo Policy Analyst Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Office of Management and Budget

202-395-3621 Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov
February 14, 2005

25630

#### Chapman v. Schmidt

Vacated in part, Affirmed in part
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                 IONATRON, INC.
                               September 30, 2004


           CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Thomas C. Dearmin, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of Ionatron,
Inc. (the "Company"), does hereby certify with respect to the Company's
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004
(the "Report") that:

      (i)   the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (ii)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operation
            of the Company.

This certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by the
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Ionatron, Inc. with the
requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be
used for any other purposes. A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to Ionatron, Inc. and will be retained
by Ionatron, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

                                       /s/ Thomas C. Dearmin
                                       -------------------------------
                                           Thomas C. Dearmin
                                           Chief Executive Officer and
                                           Chief Financial Officer


Date: November 15, 2004
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusGrounds Features
Representative Don Fuqua Tree
        
                  The Basics
      
Materials
    Sweetbay Magnolia

Year
    2000

Location
      
Capitol Square, S.W.

U.S. Capitol Grounds

                  View on Map

Text on the Plaque

U.S. Capitol Grounds
Memorial Tree

*Magnolia virginiana*
(Sweetbay Magnolia)

Sponsored by
Rep. Herbert H. Bateman

To Honor Former Rep. Don Fuqua

September 21, 2000
          
    
      Image Gallery
    
    The Rep. Don Fuqua tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during summer.

The Rep. Don Fuqua tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during summer.
    The Rep. Don Fuqua tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during winter.

The Rep. Don Fuqua tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during winter.

      Previous Image
        Next Image

          The Rep. Don Fuqua tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during summer.
      The Rep. Don Fuqua tree on the U.S. Capitol Grounds during winter. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
EXHIBIT
      32.1




CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE


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 filing by Applied Energetics, Inc. (the “company”) of its
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008
      (the
“Report”) I, Dana A. Marshall, Chief Executive 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:




(i)
            the
                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
                and




(ii)
            the
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
                company.




This
      certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by the Chief
      Executive Officer of Applied Energetics, Inc. with the requirements of Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be used for any other
      purposes. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906
      has been provided to Applied Energetics, Inc. and will be retained by Applied
      Energetics, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
      its
      staff upon request.




/s/
                Dana A. MarshallDana
                A. MarshallChief
                Executive Officer





Date:
      August 11, 2008
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 138 (Tuesday, July 19, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 42471]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17978]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0116; Airspace Docket No. 11-ANE-1]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Brunswick, ME

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects the effective date of a final rule 
correction, that was published in the Federal Register on July 6, 2011. 
The effective date in that Final Rule; Correction. inadvertently listed 
the wrong effective date in the Correction to Final Rule section.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, July 28, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito; telephone (404) 305-
6364.

Correction to Final Rule; Correction

    In final rule FR Doc 2011-16783, on page 39259 in the Federal 
Register of July 6, 2011 (76 FR 39259), make the following correction:
    On page 39259, in the second column, in the Correction to Final 
Rule section, in the second paragraph, remove the dates August 28, 
2011, and July 25, 2011, and replace them with the dates August 25, 
2011, and July 28, 2011.

    Issued in Washington, DC on July 8, 2011.
Rebecca B. MacPherson,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2011-17978 Filed 7-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
NORMANY.MINETASANJOSE1__\:fjAIRPORTSILICONVALLEY'SAIRPORTApplicationofHainanAirlinesCo.,LTD.AmendedForeignAirCarrierPermitandExemptionAuthorityBeijing,China-SanJose,CAScheduledServiceDocketNo.OST-2007-0066January22,2015PaulGretchDirectorOfficeofInternationalAviationDepartmentofTransportation120INewJerseyAvenue,SEWashington,DC20590AndRobertFinamoreDivisionChief,ForeignAirCarrierLicensingOfficeoflnternationalAviationDepartmentofTransportation120INewJerseyAvenue,SEWashington,DC20590DearDirectorGretchandDivisionChiefFinamore,MinetaSanJoseInternationalAirport(SJC)justconfirmedthatHainanAirlinesfileditsformalrequestforaForeignAirCarrierPermitandassociatedexemptionauthoritywiththeUnitedStatesDepartmentofTransportationtooperatenonstopBeijing-SanJosepassengerservice.AsDirectorfortheSanJoseInternationalAirport,weareverysupportiveofthissubmittalandurgetheDepartmenttoapproveHainan'sapplication.ThegreaterSanJose/SiliconValleyregion,comprisingatotalpopulationofapproximatelythreemillionresidents,isoneofthenation'shighestprofileandmostethnically-diversemetropolitanareawithpersonalandeconomictiesacrosstheglobe.ThelocalChinesepopulationofmorethan220,000isoneoftheverylargestintheUnitedStates,reflectingthesubstantialandexpandingculturalrelationshipbetweenthesetwodynamicregions.SanJoseInternationalwillbeanaturalgatewayfornonstopflightsbetweenBeijing,ChinaandtheSiliconValley,providingcriticalaccessandgreatlyenhancedtraveloptions.Ourregionasa\vholehassignificantbusinessandpersonallinkstoChinaandthatnation'scontinuedeconomicgrowthwillfurtherstrengthenthosetiesintheyearsahead.1701AirportBoulevard,SuiteB-1130•SanJose,CA95110-1206•Tel408.392.3b00•Fax408.441.4591•\WII'J.flysanjose.comSANjOSEt'AITl:\1(lf-\:\ll.LYDirectorGretchandDivisionChiefFinamoreRE:ApplicationofHainanAirlinesCo.,LTD.January22,2015Page2Hometo18Fortune500companiesincludingAdobe,Apple,Cisco,eBay,Google,andIntel,theSiliconValleyregionisakeyeconomicdriveroftheentireBayAreamarketandincludesthehighestaveragehouseholdincomeinthenation.ConsistentlyatornearthetopofthenationalrankingsintermsofhightechGDP,income,jobgrowth,andoveralleconomy,ourprogressiveregioncontinuestoexpandonavvorldwidebasisandreliesonhighqualitycommercialairservice.ResearchhasshownthatSiliconValleycompanieshaveover500locationsthroughoutChina,and(ourorganization)iscertainlyamongthosewithagrowingfocusondevelopingbusinessacrossAsia.TheChinamarketinparticularisanimportantandgrowingelementofourinternationalbusiness,andHainan'sproposednonstopflightstoBeijing·withconnectionstootherChinesecities'Nillprovidegreateropportunitiesfortravelbybusinesses,students,families,andindividuals.HainanAirlinesanditsproposedBoeing787DreamlinerserviceisanidealfitfortheverydynamicSiliconValleymarketandwillnodoubtbehighlysuccessfulinthisventure.SanJoseInternationalisverysupportiveofHainan'sproposedBeijing-SanJoseserviceandwefullyrecommendU.S.Depat1mentofTransportationapprovaloftheirrouteapplication.Respectfullysubmitted,KimBeckerAguirreDirectorofAviationSANjOSEs1L1co11vALLEv•sA1RPoRr1701AirportSuae!!·1130•SanJose,CA95110·1206•Tel408.392.3600•Fax408.441.4591•w:::1.flysanjose.com"=
#### George A. PIKE, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee.

No. 3062.

Supreme Court of Alaska.

Nov. 10, 1977.

Frank S. Koziol Jr., Sue Ellen Tatter, Barbara J. Miracle, Asst. Public Defenders and Brian Shortell, Public Defender, Anchorage, for appellant.

Ivan Lawner, Monica Jenicek, Asst. Dist. Attys., and Joseph D. Balfe, Dist. Atty., Anchorage, Avrum M. Gross, Atty. Gen., Juneau, for appellee.

Before BOOCHEVER, Chief Justice, and RABINO WITZ, CONNOR, BURKE and MATTHEWS, Justices.

MATTHEWS, Justice.

Appeal is taken *from*a 15 year concurrent sentence for four counts of armed robbery, assault with a dangerous weapon, a felon in possession of a weapon, and probation violation. The crimes were committed while appellant was on probation for assault with a dangerous weapon and passing a forged check. Appellant also has a prior conviction for robbery.

It is contended that (1) the trial judge needed a psychiatric report in order to be fully informed prior to passing sentence and (2) the possibility of rehabilitating defendant through a shorter sentence was not given proper weight.

We find no error. The sentencing judge ordered a psychiatric evaluation and report and had it before him at the hearing on defendant’s motion to reduce sentence. It contains no material information which was not before the court at the time the initial sentence was passed. *Adams v. State,*521 P.2d 516, 519 (Alaska 1974). The judge considered rehabilitation of the defendant along with the other objectives of sentencing set forth in *State v. Chaney,*477 P.2d 441, 443 (Alaska 1970). In view of defendant’s prior record and rehabilitation failures, and in view of the dangerous nature of defendant’s acts, we are unable to say that improper weight was given to the goal of rehabilitation.

AFFIRMED.
927 P.2d 447

INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I

#### State v. Mata

17781

10/02/96

Vacated, Reversed and Remanded
23699

#### State v. Johnson

Affirmed
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED August 20, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-21163 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FRANCISCO DE LA CERDA-GUERRERO, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-02-CR-255-1

-------------------- Before JONES, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Francisco De La Cerda-Guerrero appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. De La Cerda-Guerrero contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional. He argues that the prior conviction that resulted in his increased sentence is an element of a separate offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) that should have been alleged in his indictment. De La Cerda-Guerrero maintainsNo.02-21163 -2- that he pleaded guilty to an indictment which charged only simple reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He argues that his sentence exceeds the maximum term of imprisonment and supervised release which may be imposed for that offense.
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. De La Cerda-Guerrero acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
#### Herman Muller et al., Copartners Doing Business as Milligan, Muller & Company, Appellants, *v.*Henry Holtzer et al., Doing Business as John E. Cahill & Company, et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

April 30, 1959.

*Chamberlin, Kafer, Wilds $ Jube (John M. Johnston*and *Macdonald Flinn*of counsel), for appellants.

*Irwin Isaacs*for respondents.

*Per Curiam.*

Testimony of hardship that might be suffered by the tenants-respondents was clearly inadmissible and prejudicial to the landlords-appellants. The landlords comply with *863the statute’s demands if they bring the eviction proceeding with the honest intention and desire to obtain possession of the business space for their own immediate and personal use *(Matter of Rosenbluth*v. *Finkelstein,*300 N. Y. 402; *Kauffman & Sons Saddlery Co.*v. *Miller,*298 N. Y. 38; *N. R. M. Garage Corp.*v. *Feig Garage Corp.,*10 Misc 2d 216, affd. 279 App. Div. 126, affd. 303 N. Y. 922).

The final order should be reversed and new trial ordered, with $30 costs to appellants to abide the event.

Concur — Hofstajdter, J. P., Steuer and Tilzer, JJ.

Final order reversed, etc.
**AD Economic Evaluation**

Docket No . FAA - 2016 - 2843 Directorate ID : 2015 - SW - 003 - AD Helicopter Model: Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH Model MBB - BK 117 C - 2 and MBB BK 117 D - 2 helicopters Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operat ors): 137 Helicopters in the US Registry . Reason : The actions of this AD are intended to prevent the hoist damper unit detaching from the cable resulting in loss of an external load or person from the helicopter hoist and injury to persons being lifted by the hoist. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $8,715 for the replacement $171 for the modification Labor per Helicopter ( 1 work - hour X $85 for the replacement) (0.5 work - hour X $85 for the deactivation) (2 work - hours X $85 for the modification) $ 85 $43 $170 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $8,800 for the replacement $43 for the deactivation $341 for the modification Total U . S . Fleet Cost Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory

Flexibility

Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : David N. Hatfield
Exhibit 21 List of Subsidiary Corporations of Transit Group, Inc.

                                            Jurisdiction of       % of Voting
     Name                                   Incorporation     Securities Owned

     Transit Group, Inc.                    Florida                   100

     Subsidiaries:

         GPS Acquisition Company            North Carolina            100
         Carolina Pacific Distributors,Inc. North Carolina            100
         Service Express, Inc.              Alabama                   100
         Capitol Warehouse, Inc.            Kentucky                  100
         Carroll Fulmer, Inc.               Florida                   100
         Carroll Fulmer & Co., Inc.         Florida                   100
         Carroll Fulmer Payroll, Inc.       Florida                   100
         Rainbow Trucking Services, Inc.    Kentucky                  100
         Hawk's Enterprises, Inc.           Kentucky                  100
         T.W. Transport, Inc.               Kentucky                  100
         Transportation Resources           Indiana                   100
           Management, Inc.



                                       33