alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>

To: Nathan Topham/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 10/28/2011 05:01 PM

Subject: RE: E.O. 12866 NESHAP Primary Lead Processing Final AQ

- 43

- Response to

OMB's 10/28 Questions

Hi Nate,

Thanks for sending this information over.

The source category listing was for “Primary Lead Smelting,” not Primary Lead Processing. Smelting is a

heat based

process. Isn’t the new process that Doe Run is planning to install an aqueous based proces s? Have you

had

discussions about that point?

Regards,

Cortney

From: Topham.Nathan@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Topham.Nathan@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 4:36 PM

To: Higgins, Cortney

Cc: Talcott.Fred@epamail.epa.g ov; French.Chuck@epamail.epa.gov;

tierney.jan@epamail.epa.gov; Secrest.Cary@epamail.epa.gov;

Garlow.Charlie@epamail.epa.gov; Benner.Tim@epamail.epa.gov;

Stewart.Michael@epamail.epa.gov; vahanzel@rti.org; mnl@rti.org

Subject: E.O. 12866 NESHAP Primary Lea d Processing Final AQ

- 43

- Response to OMB's

10/28 Questions

Hi Cortney,

In response to some of your questions on our call today:

1. There were no comments (supportive or adverse) on the original NESHAP related to the source

category applicability definition. The comments are all included in the preamble.

2. I've attached the initial source category listing document and the background document. Where you'll

want to look is page A

- 8 for the description of primary lead. Please note the first sentence of the

paragraph is pretty clear in saying the category includes any facility processing lead ore to lead metal.

3. In response to your question about case

- by

- case MACT, as I understand it, the provision in 112(j) sets

up a pr ogram for states to develop permits where the EPA has failed to promulgate a standard on time.

I'm not an expert on the nuances but if you take a look at 112(j) it may provide some basic

understanding

of the provision.Do you think we need to set up a time to have a call on Monday?

Nathan Topham

Environmental Engineer

US EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MIG

Phone

- (919)541

- 0483
EXHIBIT 3.4 ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT OF
HOLDINGS, CHANGING ITS NAME TO GETTY REALTY CORP., FILED JANUARY 30, 1998.



| |                                                                                     | 
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
| | DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS 
 AND TAXATION 
 APPROVED FOR RECORD
 1.30.98 at 2.30p.m. | 

GETTY REALTY HOLDING CORP.

ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT

THIS
IS TO CERTIFY THAT:

FIRST:
The charter of Getty Realty Holding Corp., a Maryland corporation (the
Corporation), is hereby amended by deleting existing Article II in its
entirety and adding a new article to read as follows:

ARTICLE II

NAME

The name of the corporation (the
Corporation) is:

Getty Realty Corp.

SECOND:
The amendment to the charter of the Corporation as set forth above has been
duly advised by the Board of Directors and approved by the stockholders of the
Corporation as required by law.

THIRD:
The undersigned President acknowledges these Articles of Amendment to be the
corporate act of the Corporation and as to all matters or facts required to be
verified under oath, the undersigned President acknowledges that to the best of
his knowledge, information and belief, these matters and facts are true in all
material respects and that this statement is made under the penalties for perjury.

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused these Articles to be signed in its
name and on its behalf by its President and attested to by its Secretary on
this 29th day of January, 1998.

|                       |  |                             |                    |       
|---------------------- |  | --------------------------- | ------------------ | ------
|ATTEST:                |  | GETTY
 REALTY HOLDING CORP.
|/s/
 Randi Young Filip |  | By:                         | /s/
 Leo Liebowitz
|                       |  |                             |                    | (SEAL)
|Randi
 Young Filip     |  |                             | Leo
 Liebowitz    
|Secretary              |  |                             | President         

---
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
134770 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan FRED BURGESS, Plaintiff-Appellant, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 134770 COA: 268569 Otsego CC: 04-010786-CK DONALD BERN HARDT and MICHAEL BERNHARDT, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 12, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

s1119 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 29, 2007

Clerk
#### CHAMPION v. STATE.

No. 26775.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 20, 1954.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Presiding Judge.

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the unlawful possession of wine for the purpose of sale in a dry area, and his punishment was assessed at a fine of $100.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exceptions. All matters of procedure appear regular.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
**Exhibit 31.2**

**Certification**

I, Andrew S. Prince, certify that:

 

- I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Precision AerospaceComponents, Inc. (the “Company”);

 

- Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

- Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

- As the Company’s sole certifying officer, I am responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe Company and have:

 

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Company, includingits consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;
Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or causedsuch internal control over financial reporting to be designed under my supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding thereliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;
 and
Disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the Company’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Company’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theCompany’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

- As the Company’s sole certifying officer, I have disclosed, basedon my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and the audit committeeof the Company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Company’s abilityto record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

/s/ Andrew S. Prince

 

Andrew S. Prince

President and Chief Executive Officer

Date: August 14, 2013
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350



Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, we, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of C2, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, based on
our knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                   
|-------------------
|/s/ William Donavan
|William T. Donovan 
|March 9, 2004      
|                   
|/s/ John Buono     
|John Buono         
|March 9, 2004
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3340 

To require use of amounts repaid to the Secretary of the Treasury by 

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to reduce the national debt. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 24, 2013 

Mr. KINGSTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To require use of amounts repaid to the Secretary of the 

Treasury by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to reduce 

the national debt. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fannie-Freddie Debt 

5 Elimination Act of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. USE OF FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC REPAY7 MENTS TO REDUCE NATIONAL DEBT. 

8 (a) REDUCTION OF NATIONAL DEBT.—Any amounts 

9 paid or repaid to the Secretary of the Treasury by the 

10 Federal National Mortgage Association or the Federal 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3340 IH

1 Home Loan Mortgage Corporation in any form, including 

2 any dividends paid pursuant to the Amended and Restated 

3 Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements, dated Sep4 tember 26, 2008, amended May 6, 2009, further amended 

5 December 24, 2009, and further amended August 17, 

6 2012, between the United States Department of the 

7 Treasury and the Federal National Mortgage Association, 

8 and between such Department and the Federal Home 

9 Loan Mortgage Corporation shall be transferred by the 

10 Secretary to the special account established by subsection 

11 (d) of section 3113 of title 31, United States Code, and 

12 shall be used only as provided in such subsection. 

13 (b) PROHIBITION.—The Secretary of the Treasury 

14 may not enter into any agreement to further alter, amend, 

15 or change any provision of the Amended and Restated 

16 Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements referred to 

17 in subsection (a) (as amended through August 17, 2012) 

18 that relates to dividend payment dates, dividend periods, 

19 dividend rates, or dividend amounts. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### KIRVIN et al. v. KAUFMAN COUNTY LEVEE IMPROVEMENT DIST. NO. 13.

No. 13043.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Dallas.

June 13, 1941.

Rehearing Denied July 11, 1941.

Ross Huffmaster, of Kaufman, for plaintiffs in error.

J. P. Moseley, of Ennis, for defendant in error.

BOND, Chief Justice.

This is an attempted appeal by writ of error on a judgment entered in the District Court of Kaufman County, in favor of defendant in error, Kaufman County Levee Improvement District No. 13. The petition for the writ and the bond were filed in the court below on November 7, 1939, and citation in error was issued and served on defendant in error on February 21, 1940.

In May, 1939, the Legislature enacted a statute, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St. Art. 2249a, taking away the right of appeal by writ of error of participants in the actual trial of a cause in the court below. The act became a law immediately upon its passage, effective from and after January 1, 1940. The attempted appeal in this case did not confer jurisdiction on this court, because of lack of service of the citation before the effective date of the statute taking away the right of appeal by writ of error. United Employers Casualty Co. v. Skinner, Tex.Civ.App. 141 S.W.2d 955, writ refused; Copus, et al. v. Chorn, et al., Tex.Sup., 150 S.W.2d 70; Traders & General Ins. Co. v. Reid, Tex.Civ.App., 150 S.W.2d 74; Southwestern Life Ins. Co. v. Kaufman County Levee Improvement District, 152 S.W.2d 443, decided by this Court on May 9, 1941.

The appeal is dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 210 (Monday, October 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64703-64704]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27746]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Report No. 2448]


Petitions for Reconsideration and Clarification of Action in 
Rulemaking Proceedings

October 23, 2000.
    Petitions for Reconsideration and Clarification have been filed in 
the Commission's rulemaking proceedings listed in this Public Notice 
and published pursuant to 47 CFR Section 1.429(e). The full text of 
this document is available for viewing and copying Room CY-A257, 445 
12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. or may be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, ITS, Inc. (202) 857-3800. Oppositions to 
these petitions must be filed by November 14, 2000. See Sec. 1.4(b)(1) 
of the Commission's rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)). Replies to an opposition 
must be filed within 10 days after the time for oppositions have 
expired.
    Subject: Implementation of 911 Act; Use of N11 Codes and Other 
Abbreviated Dialing Arrangements (CC

[[Page 64704]]

Docket No. 92-105, WT Docket No. 00-110).
    Number of Petitions Filed: 1.
    Subject: Amendment of the Commission's Rules Regarding Installment 
Payment Financing for Personal Communications Services (PCS) Licensees 
(WT Docket No. 97-82).
    Number of Petitions Filed: 5.

Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-27746 Filed 10-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
file:///J|/SNURS/SNUR%20Batch%20FY10-3/reports%20for%20sanitization/CBI%20engineering%20reports/p100014.eng.txt[4/23/2010 12:29:10 PM] INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: PMN: 10-0014 Focus Ready Draft 11/9/2009 ENGINEER: Arnold \ CLM PV (kg/yr):
SUBMITTER: USE:
OTHER USES: MSDS: Yes Label: No Gen Eqpt: Ensure adequate ventilation to minimize exposures. Provide appropriate exhaust ventilation at machinery and at places where dust, aerosol, or mist can be generated. // Wear protective gloves to prevent soiling of hands. Wear eye/face protection. Safety glasses with side-shields. Goggles. Wear suitable protective clothing including long sleeves and long pants. Respirator: Approved respirator may be necessary if local exhaust ventilation is not adequate. Health Effects: EYE CONTACT: May cause mechanical irritation. Irritating, but will not permanently injure eye tissue. SKIN CONTACT: No adverse effects expected. INHALATION: Dust may be irritating to respiratory tract. INGESTION: Low hazard for usual industrial or commercial handling. Health injuries not known or expected under normal use. TLV/PEL: none established

CRSS : Chemical Name: S-H20: Dispersible g/L @ VP: 1.0E-6 torr @ MW: 667.00 %<500 %<1000 Physical State and Misc CRSS Info:file:///J|/SNURS/SNUR%20Batch%20FY10-3/reports%20for%20sanitization/CBI%20engineering%20reports/p100014.eng.txt[4/23/2010 12:29:10 PM] Consumer Use: SAT (concerns) (11/03/2009): Related Cases and Related Cases and Misc SAT Info: Ecotox Related Cases: // Human Health Related Cases: Migration to groundwater: Slow to moderate PBT rating: P2B1T1 - Health: 1-2 Inhalation Eco: 2 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 71 ppb) OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 1-2A NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER.

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS: None.
EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW: No INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI:file:///J|/SNURS/SNUR%20Batch%20FY10-3/reports%20for%20sanitization/CBI%20engineering%20reports/p100014.eng.txt[4/23/2010 12:29:10 PM] PMN: 10-0014file:///J|/SNURS/SNUR%20Batch%20FY10-3/reports%20for%20sanitization/CBI%20engineering%20reports/p100014.eng.txt[4/23/2010 12:29:10 PM] INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: PMN: 10-0014file:///J|/SNURS/SNUR%20Batch%20FY10-3/reports%20for%20sanitization/CBI%20engineering%20reports/p100014.eng.txt[4/23/2010 12:29:10 PM]
#### HULAN v. STATE.

No. 25464.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 14, 1951.

No attorney on appeal, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

Upon an indictment charging assault with intent to murder, appellant was convicted of aggravated assault and punishment assessed at confinement in jail for six months and a fine of $500.

Neither a statement of facts nor bills of exception accompany the record. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 20 - 0198

_________________ IN THE MATTER OF: M.D.U-N., A Youth in Need of Care. O R D E R

_________________ Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is class ified 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 Mary Jane Knisely , District Judge . For the Court,

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

December 2 2020

12/02/2020
Case Number: DA 20-0198
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          98,067
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   82,718
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,300
<INVENTORY>                                     66,363
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               275,371
<PP&E>                                          20,496
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,946
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 306,953
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           85,239
<BONDS>                                          2,493
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            34
<OTHER-SE>                                     218,574
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   306,953
<SALES>                                        112,402
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               112,402
<CGS>                                           92,817
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   92,817
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,008
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   429
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (543)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,446)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,495)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,951)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,951)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.17)
        

</TABLE>
#### BELAND v. STATE.

No. 23757.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 11, 1947.

No appearance for appellant.

Alfred M. Clyde, Crim. Dist. Atty., Ar-dell M. Young, Asst. Crim. Dist. Atty., and W. E. Myres, Asst. Crim. Dist. Atty., all of Fort Worth, and Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

*937BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal is from a conviction for the offense of theft of property of the value of $50 or over, with a penalty assessed of three years in the penitentiary.

The record as brought forward contains neither bills of exception nor a statement of facts. There are no exceptions to the charge of the court. No question of procedure is raised by the appeal and nothing is presented for our consideration.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNAUDITED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND UNAUDITED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 36 WEEKS ENDED OCTOBER 12, 1997
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-01-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-03-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-12-1997
<CASH>                                          63,524
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   45,708
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,630)
<INVENTORY>                                    492,894
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               626,261
<PP&E>                                       1,447,859
<DEPRECIATION>                               (367,171)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,076,768
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          776,329
<BONDS>                                      2,448,088
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    192,831
<COMMON>                                           172
<OTHER-SE>                                   (614,014)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,076,768
<SALES>                                      3,778,470
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,778,470
<CGS>                                        3,000,531
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,000,531
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               640,329
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             191,528
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (53,918)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (53,918)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 47,983
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (101,901)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.78)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>