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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

# AGENCY:

Office of the Assistant Secretary—Water and Science, Department of the Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of intent to discontinue preparation of an Environmental Assessment for the conversion of a portion of Strawberry Valley Project (SVP) water from irrigation to other beneficial uses including municipal and industrial (M&I) use.

# SUMMARY:

                        Recent discussions among the Department, Strawberry Water Users Association, and the South Utah Valley Municipal Water Association have resulted in a decision to terminate work on contracts to convert Strawberry Valley Project water from agricultural to municipal and industrial use. The Department has discontinued preparation of an Environmental Assessment intended to allow the conversion of SVP water from agricultural to municipal and industrial use. The Environmental Assessment was being prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and in accordance with a                         **Federal Register**                         notice published February 7, 2000, (Page 5880, Volume 65, Number 25).                     

The SUVMWA have determined to use alternate sources for municipal and industrial water instead of SVP water. The SWUA have determined to discontinue negotiations with the Department relative to the conversion of SVP water. As a result SVP water will continue to be used only for agricultural purposes and will only be available during the irrigation season. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Additional information on matters related to this Federal Register notice can be obtained at the address and telephone number set forth below: Mr. Reed Murray, CUP Completion Act Office, Department of the Interior, 302 East 1860 South, Provo UT 84606-6154, (801) 379-1237, rmurray@uc.usbr.gov.

Dated: December 1, 2000.

Ronald Johnston, 

CUP Program Director, Department of the Interior. 

[FR Doc. 00-31461 Filed 12-8-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-RK-P
#### LESTER v. STATE.

No. 16536.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 2, 1934.

Gus Morris and Milton Greer Mell, both of Gilmer, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

LATTIMORE, Judge..

Conviction for polluting a water course and lake; punishment a fine of $250.

Article 698, P. C., under which this prosecution was had, penalizes him who shall pollute any water course, -body of water, etc., by depositing or discharging therein, “or in such proximity thereto as that it will probably reach and pollute the water” thereof, any crude petroleum,, oil, sewage, or polluting matter, etc. Other averments relative to other features of the offense are set out in the information, but are not quoted or discussed in view of our disposition of the case.

The information herein does not follow that part of the statute above quoted, but instead states as follows: “Cast crude petroleum, and oil in proximity to such water course, that such crude petroleum and oil reached such water course.” A motion to quash, based on the above averment, was overruled. In our opinion it should have been sustained. It seems plain that there might have arisen causes, circumstances, and conditions in any case, not reasonably to be foreseen when the oil in question was deposited or put in some tank or reservoir, by means and. because of which unexpected and .untoward happening such oil was thrown or discharged into some not too distant water course.. Would such .proof as here indicated meet the demand of the above statute? We think, not.

If an'.individual or corporation build adequate oil tanks on a hillside and fill them with oil, and a tornado sweep their contents *279into tlie stream at the foot of the hill, while of necessity this would have been a putting of the oil where it reached the water course, still no court would hold upon such showing that this law had been violated. There are -many other conceivable ways in which polluting substances might reach a water course or a lake from points of location or discharge, when the causes by means of which they reach the water were not such as could have been reasonably foreseen or prevented. ■ Illustrations ad libitum might be adduced.

This law demands, and we hold, that the complaint must aver the depositing, casting, or discharge of the alleged polluting substance either in such water course or body of water, or else in such proximity thereto as that such polluting substances would probably reach and pollute the water.

Believing, the trial court in error, and that the complaint is not sufficient, the judgment will be reversed and the prosecution or.dered dismissed.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### September 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 134349 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### MATTHEW VAN EMAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 134349 COA: 267473 Wayne CC: 04-407867-CP C.A.R.S. PROTECTION PLUS, INC., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the May 22, 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.

s0917 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.

September 24, 2007

Clerk
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 99(a)



                   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
                                 FRONTSTEP, INC.

         This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the annual report of Frontstep, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the year ended June 30, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"). The undersigned, in the
capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies that, to the best
of his knowledge:

         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 operation
            of the Company.


                                                     /s/ Stephen A. Sasser
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                         Stephen A. Sasser
                                                         Chief Executive Officer


         Date: December 5, 2002
<PAGE>

                   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF
                                 FRONTSTEP, INC.

         This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the annual report of Frontstep, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the year ended June 30, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"). The undersigned, in the
capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies that, to the best
of his knowledge:

         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 operation
            of the Company.


                                                     /s/ Daniel P. Buettin
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                         Daniel P. Buettin
                                                         Chief Financial Officer



         Date: December 5, 2002
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-40173

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARIO GERARDO FLORES-HERNANDEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:14-CR-229-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mario Gerardo 

Flores-Hernandez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in 

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States 

v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Flores-Hernandez has not filed a 

response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the 

record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 22, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-40173 Document: 00513243344 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/22/2015
No. 15-40173

2

presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s 

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 15-40173 Document: 00513243344 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/22/2015
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM AIRNET
SYSTEM INC.'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           3,064
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,753
<ALLOWANCES>                                       581
<INVENTORY>                                      9,543
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,806
<PP&E>                                         159,004
<DEPRECIATION>                                  75,798
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 125,850
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,223
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           128
<OTHER-SE>                                      76,677
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   125,850
<SALES>                                            468
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               102,274
<CGS>                                              827
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   79,543
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,104
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,779
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,848
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,536
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,312
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,312
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .48



</TABLE>
ACTIVECORE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
                      (FORMERLY IVP TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION)
            NOTES TO THE UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
                 FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2005 AND 2004

                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of ActiveCore Technologies, Inc.
formerly IVP Technology Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the
period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned herby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his capacity as an officer of the Company, 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 operation of the
Company.

Date:    August 12, 2005           By:    /s/ Peter J. Hamilton
                                         -------------------------------------
                                   Name:  Peter J. Hamilton
                                   Title: President and Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to ActiveCore Technologies,
Inc. formerly IVP Technology Corporation and will be retained by ActiveCore
Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.

                                       51
exv10w16






Exhibit 10.16




SECOND AMENDMENT TO

ALON USA OPERATING, INC.

INCENTIVE STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT




     This Amendment is entered into as of November 4, 2008, by and between Alon USA Operating,
Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”), and Jeff D. Morris (the “Participant”). Terms
not defined in this Amendment will have the meaning set forth in the Incentive Stock Option
Agreement described below.



     WHEREAS, the Corporation and the Participant entered into an Incentive Stock Option Agreement
dated as of July 31, 2000 (the “Agreement”), pursuant to which the Corporation granted to the
Participant an option intended to qualify as an incentive stock option within the meaning of
Section 422 of the Code to purchase 3,033.4 shares of Common Stock; and



     WHEREAS, the Corporation and the Participant wish to amend the Agreement to assure that the
Option does not constitute a deferral of compensation subject to Section 409A of the Code.



     NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:



     1. With respect to any portion of the Option that vests and becomes exercisable in a calendar
year after 2007, the Participant must exercise that portion of the Option (including any portion
that exceeds the $100,000 limit of Section 422(d) of the Code) by the earlier of the maximum
exercise period set forth in Section 2 or Section 5 of the Agreement, whichever applies, or March
15 of the calendar year immediately following the calendar year in which such portion of the Option
vested. To the extent not exercised within the time period set forth in the preceding sentence,
the portion of the Option that was exercisable will expire.



     2. Notwithstanding any provision of the Agreement to the contrary, in light of the uncertainty
with respect to the proper application of Section 409A, the Company reserves the right to make
amendments to the Agreement as the Company deems necessary or desirable solely to avoid the
imposition of taxes or penalties under Section 409A.



     3. The provisions of this Amendment supersede and replace in their entirety any conflicting
provision set forth in the Agreement, including Exhibit A to the Agreement.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first written
above.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	ALON USA OPERATING, INC.	 	PARTICIPANT
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ David Wiessman
	 	 	 	/s/ Jeff D. Morris
	 

	 	   Name: David Wiessman
	 	 	 	Jeff D. Morris
	 

	 	   Title: Executive Chairman
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 5 77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD CHICAGO, IL 60604-3590

Douglas Hmris, General Manager VeoliaES Technical Solutions, L.L.C. 7 Mobile Avenue Sauget, Illinois 62201 DearMr. Harris: 

## MAY 042015
REPLY TO THE ATTENTION OF:

Thankyou for meeting with us on Apri19, 2015 at our offices in Chicago, and for your April15, 2015 letter. I believe that the meeting was helpful and productive. We are currently reviewing the information you provided concerning EPA's pending Title V renewal operatingpermit for the VeoliaES Technical Solutions, L.L.C. facility in Sauget, Illinois. We will include your letter inthe docket for .this permitproceeding. Itis importantto meto make sure that EPAunderstands and addresses your concerns before proceeding further. As we discussed, EPA will be in touch with youbefore we take action on the permit. Again, thank you for your letter. Ifyouhave further questions, please contact me at (312) 886- 3000 or George Czemiak, at (312) 353-2212.

# ~~~)~£- Robert Kaplan Deputy Regional Administrator

Recycled/Recyclable a Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (50% Postconsumer)
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 
  (1)
    
    The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Small Business Issuer
as of, and for, the periods presented in such report.
  Dated: April 17, 2007
    By:
    /s/ ROBERT SNUKALROBERT SNUKALCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERBy:
    /s/ LEONARDO BEREZOVSKYLEONARDO BEREZOVSKYCHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
exv10w28






Exhibit 10.28




Non-Employee Director Compensation




     Cash compensation for non-employee directors is as follows:



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	Committee
	 	 	Annual	 	Board Meeting Attended	 	Meeting
	Position	 	Retainer*	 	In Person	 	By Telephone	 	Attended
	Board Chairman
	 	$	30,000	 	 	$	2,000	 	 	$	500	 	 	$	500	 
	Audit Committee Chairman
	 	$	30,000	 	 	$	2,000	 	 	$	500	 	 	$	500	 
	Compensation Committee Chairman
	 	$	27,500	 	 	$	2,000	 	 	$	500	 	 	$	500	 
	Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Chairman
	 	$	25,000	 	 	$	2,000	 	 	$	500	 	 	$	500	 
	Board Member (other than Board or Committee Chairs)
	 	$	20,000	 	 	$	2,000	 	 	$	500	 	 	$	500	 








 




			
	*	 	Each non-employee director is entitled to only one annual retainer fee.





     Equity compensation for non-employee directors is as follows:



     Annual Grants. Each year, immediately following Cardica, Inc.’s Annual Meeting of
Stockholders, each non-employee director will be granted an option to purchase 5,000 shares of the
Company’s common stock. Each such option will vest monthly over the ensuing year.



     Initial Grants. Automatically upon becoming a director, any new non-employee director
shall be granted an option to purchase 15,000 shares of Cardica, Inc.’s common stock, vesting
monthly over three years.



     The foregoing compensation for non-employee directors was approved by Cardica, Inc.’s board of
directors on August 13, 2008, effective immediately.
#### WHATLEY v. STATE.

No. 19938.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 16, 1938.

Artio. Stephen and Emmet Thornton, "both of Sulphur Springs, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is theft by bailee; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

Omitting the formal parts, the indictment reads as follows: “Piercie Whatley did, having possession of ninety dollars in money, of the value of ninety dollars, the same being the corporeal personal property of D. D. Brogdon, by virtue of his contract of hiring with said D. D. Brogdon, did then and there' unlawfully and without the consent of the said D. D. Brogdon, the owner thereof, unlawfully convert said ninety dollars in money, of the value of ninety dollars,- to his, the said Piercie Whatley’s own use and with the intent to deprive the said D. D. Brogdon, the owner thereof, of the value of the same.”

It is observed that the word “fraudulently” is omitted from the indictment. The use of such word is indispensable in charging theft by bailee under Art. 1429, P.C. Rhodes v. State, 122 Tex.Cr.R. 156, 54 S.W.2d 119; Patterson v. State, 122 Tex.Cr.R. 502, 56 S.W.2d 458. We quote said article as follows: “Any person having possession of personal property of another by virtue of a contract of hiring or borrowing, or other bailment, who shall without the consent of the owner, *fraudulently*convert such property to his own use with intent to deprive the owner of the value of the same, shall be guilty of theft, and shall be punished as for theft of like property.” (Italics ours.)

The judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
S. 2040 

One Hundred Fifteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 621 Kansas 

Avenue in Atchison, Kansas, as the ‘‘Amelia Earhart Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. AMELIA EARHART POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 621 Kansas Avenue in Atchison, Kansas, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Amelia Earhart Post Office 

Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Amelia Earhart Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.