alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA
- 2011
- 0474 SNPRM **Directorate ID:** 

### 2010
-NM
- 213
- AD Originating Office Tracking No.: 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, list latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.
Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA
- IR
- M
- 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because

### Page 2 of 3

**For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.:

**ASE Date** 

**Branch Manager Date**
Exhibit 32.2
 WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (a)
    
    The Form 10-K of Colonial Realty Limited Partnership for the period ended December 31,
2008 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934; and(b)
    
    Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Colonial Realty Limited Partnership.
 Date: February 27, 2009
    By:

/s/
C. Reynolds Thompson, IIIC. Reynolds Thompson, IIIPresident and Chief Financial
Officer of Colonial Properties Trust, the general partner of Colonial Realty Limited Partnership 150
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.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# AGENCY:

Federal Election Commission.

# DATE & TIME:

 Thursday, February 12, 2015 At 10:00 a.m.

# PLACE:

 999 E Street NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor)

# STATUS:

 This Meeting Will Be Open To The Public.

# ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

Correction and Approval of Minutes for January 15, 2015

Draft Advisory Opinion 2014-20: Make Your Laws PAC, Inc.

Draft Advisory Opinion 2014-21: Cambia Health Solutions, Inc.

Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on the Republican Party of Orange County (Federal) (RPOC) (A11-23)

Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on the Democratic Party of Wisconsin (DPW) (A12-04)

Proposed Final Audit Report on the Joe Walsh for Congress Committee, Inc. (A13-01)

Management and Administrative Matters

                    Individuals who plan to attend and require special assistance, such as sign                           ( print page 6517)                        language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should contact Shawn Woodhead Werth, Secretary and Clerk, at (202)694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date.                

# PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:

 Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Shawn Woodhead Werth,

Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2015-02447 Filed 2-3-15; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 22-0207 HELEN WEEMS AND JANE DOE,

Plaintiffs and Appellees,
v. STATE OF MONTANA, by and through AUSTIN KNUDSEN, in his official capacity asAttorney General;and TRAVIS R. AHNER, in his official capacity as County Attorney for Flathead County,

Defendants and Appellants. 

### FILL.L) NOV 1 0 2022 Bowen GreerAcod < of FL rer Court S,ate o. rvInntarla ORDER

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules ofthis Court, this cause is classified for oral argument before the Court sitting en banc and is hereby set for argument on Wednesday, December 14, 2022, at 9:30 a.m. in the courtroom ofthe Montana Supreme Court,Joseph P. Mazurek Justice Building, Helena,Montana. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to M. R. App. P. 17(3), oral argurnent times in this cause number shall be forty (40) minutes for the Appellants and thirty (30) minutes for theAppellees. Counsel should be mindful ofthe provisions ofM. R.App. P. 17(6). The Court will not entertain any motions toreschedule. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereofto all counsel of record and to the Honorable Mike Menahan, District Judge. DATED this/V
..

‘ day ofNovember, 2022. Forthe Court,

ChiefJustice 11/10/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0207
# C_2004265EN.01000101.xml

| 28.10.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 265/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 265/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

27 October 2004

(2004/C 265/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2792 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 136,37 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4348 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,69455 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,0238 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5321 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 88,22 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,162 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9559 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5765 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 31,595 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 247,63 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6763 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4309 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3483 |
| ROL | Romanian leu | 40 914 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,81 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 39,965 |
| TRL | Turkish lira | 1 889 900 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,708 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5628 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,9487 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8312 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,126 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 442,94 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 7,8898 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2792

JPY

Japanese yen

136,37

DKK

Danish krone

7,4348

GBP

Pound sterling

0,69455

SEK

Swedish krona

9,0238

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5321

ISK

Iceland króna

88,22

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,162

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9559

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5765

CZK

Czech koruna

31,595

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

247,63

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6763

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4309

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3483

ROL

Romanian leu

40 914

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,81

SKK

Slovak koruna

39,965

TRL

Turkish lira

1 889 900

AUD

Australian dollar

1,708

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5628

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,9487

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8312

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,126

KRW

South Korean won

1 442,94

ZAR

South African rand

7,8898

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
EXHIBIT 23.1




February 24, 2012




El Capitan Precious Metals, Inc.


15225 N. 49th Street


Scottsdale, AZ 85254




Gentlemen:




The undersigned hereby consents to the reference to the undersigned in Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A of El Capitan Precious Metals, Inc. for the year ended September 30, 2011 (“Amendment No. 1”), including without limitation references in Item 2, to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.
 
 I also confirm that I have read each of the references to me in Amendment No. 1 and concur with such statements. In giving this consent, the undersigned does not admit that he is within the category of persons whose consent is required by Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission.


Sincerely,/s/ Clyde L. SmithClyde L. Smith, Ph.D.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, February 06, 2020.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, February 06, 2020

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A20D0278. THOMAS WHEELER v. MAYOR PHIL BEST, CITY OF DUBLIN.

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

19CG0846
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18. U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The
undersigned executive officers of the Registrant hereby certify that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



By:

/s/ Michael J. DeeName:

Michael J. DeeTitle:

President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ William C. Wiedel, Jr.Name:

William C. Wiedel, Jr.Title:

Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


May 13, 2009
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC StaffStatus of the Decommissioning Program (NUREG-1814)

# Status of the Decommissioning Program: 2004 Annual Report (NUREG-1814, Initial Report)

On this page:
        - Publication Information 
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-1814, Initial Report (PDF – 661 KB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**January 2005**Date Published:**January 2005

**Prepared by:**J. Buckley

Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report provides a comprehensive overview of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) decommissioning program. Its purpose is to provide a stand-alone reference document which describes the decommissioning process and summarizes the current status of all decommissioning activities including the decommissioning of complex decommissioning sites, commercial reactors, research and test reactors, uranium mill tailings facilities, and fuel cycle facilities. In addition, this report discusses accomplishments in the decommissioning program since publication of the 2003 annual report (SECY-03-0161), and it identifies the key decommissioning program issues which the staff will address in fiscal year (FY) 2005.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
*January 16, 1940.*

#### Funk, Respondent, vs. S. S. Kresge Company, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Port & Dierker*of Watertown.

For the respondent: *George A. Hartman*of Juneau.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.

A motion for a rehearing was denied, with $25 costs, on January 16, 1940.
June 1 2 , 2014



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals
ADEDJI ALALINCOLN AD EKEYE , Appellant NO. 14

- 12

- 01097

- CR V. NO. 14

- 12

- 01098

- CR THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

________________________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

. We furt her order this decision certified below for observance.
# C_2004251EN.01002601.xml

| 9.10.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 251/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 251/26

---

Action brought on 15 July 2004 by Kris Van Neyghem against the Committee of the Regions

(Case T-288/04)

(2004/C 251/47)

Language of the case: Dutch

An action against the Committee of the Regions was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 15 July 2004 by Kris Van Neyghem, residing in Tienen (Belgium), represented by Dirk Janssens.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Decision 87/03; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Decision 87/03;

| — | annul any decision connected with or resulting from Decision 87/03; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul any decision connected with or resulting from Decision 87/03;

| — | classify the applicant in Grade B 1, or at least no lower than Grade B 4, Step 4; |
| --- | --- |

—

classify the applicant in Grade B 1, or at least no lower than Grade B 4, Step 4;

| — | order the Committee of the Regions to pay all costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Committee of the Regions to pay all costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The applicant has been working as an official of the Committee of the Regions since 1 December 2002. He is challenging the decision of 26 March 2003 whereby he was definitively classified in Grade B 5, Step 4.

In support of his application, the applicant argues that the contested decision is inadequately reasoned and that there has been a breach of Articles 5(3), 31 and 32 of the Staff Regulations, in conjunction with an infringement of the principle of equal treatment.

---
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsRulemaking DocumentsPetition  for Rulemaking Dockets

# Petition for Rulemaking Dockets for 2015

subscribe to page updates
*This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.*

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, July 28, 2022

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Open Petition for Rulemaking Dockets
          - 2024
          - 2023
          - 2022
          - 2021
          - 2020
          - 2019
          - 2018
          - 2017
          - 2016
          - 2015
          - 2014
          - 2013
          - 2012
          - 2011
          - 2010
          - 2009
          - 2008
          - 2007
          - 2006
          - 2005
          - 2004
          - 2003
          - 2002
          - 2001
          - 2000
          - 1999

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, July 28, 2022
**Conservation Practice Effects**

**Commonly Associated Practices:**Access Control , , Brush Management, Firebreak, Forage and Biomass Planting, Forest Stand Improvement, Forest Trails and Landings, Herbaceous Weed Control, Integrated Pest Management, Nutrient Management, Tree/Shrub Establishment, Tree/Shrub Pruning, Tree/Shrub Site Preparation, Woody Residue Treatment.

**Note:**This worksheet contains general talking points for the conservation planner to discuss with the land user.  It is the first step towards an economic or financial analysis.  The second step would include identifying a specific site for analysis at the farm or field level, editing the template for local conditions, adding units and quantities of farm inputs and outputs.  The third step in the economic analysis is to place a dollar value on as many variables as possible, put all units in the same time frame, using amortization ($/Acres/Year) or net present value ($/Acre), so benefits and costs can be compared.  The fourth and final step would be to combine several conservation practices into a conservation system, which is how most conservation practices are applied at the field level. Data for the worksheet comes from the land user, conservation planner, technical specialist and local agricultural supply vendors and contractors.  See Economics Technical Note: TN 200-ECN-1, Basic Economic Analysis Using T-Charts (August 2013) for more information.
lnventoryExpertServic$~{}~·· A division of the American Chemical Society Phone: 80D-631-1884, 614-447·387(), 

Fax: 614-447-3747 

E-mail: answers@cas.org 

Web: www.cas.org/productslother-cas-productstcllent-servicesl 

[ 

INVENTORY EXPERT SERVICE REPORT 

IES Order Number: 339443 

Registry Number: Not Registered 

CA Index Name: 

CAS 

l rtf 

Please print the above CA Index Name on the appropriate page of your PMN. 

If this box is checked, CAS has made correction(s) marked in red to your IES order. 

Please make the same corrections to your PMN before submitting it to the EPA. 

2540 Olentangy River Road P.O. Box 3343 Columbus, OH 43210-0334 USA
MEMORANDUM

Date: September 14, 2011

Subject: Summary of Stakeholder Contact Prior to MOVES Grace Period Extension 

Rulemaking

From: Meg Patulski, State Measures and Conformity Group, OTAQ

To: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0393

Starting in September 2010, EPA was contacted by several state and local transportation 

and air agencies that were concerned that there was insufficient transition time before 

MOVES2010a would be required in regional conformity analyses. At the time, the conformity 

grace period for MOVES2010a would expire on March 2, 2012. EPA Regional Offices 

confirmed the status of the transition in their nonattainment and maintenance areas. These 

general communications occurred until March of 2011 and informed EPA’s decision to proceed 

with its rulemaking.
# L_2015198EN.01003101.xml

| 28.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 198/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 198/31

---

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EU) 2015/960 of 19 June 2015 amending Regulation (EU) 2015/104 as regards certain fishing opportunities

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 157 of 23 June 2015
  )

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 157 of 23 June 2015

On page 12, Annex II, point 5, table, heading, second column:

for:

| ‘Zone | : | Norwegian waters of I and II
  (RED/1/2AB.)’, |
| --- | --- | --- |

‘Zone

:

Norwegian waters of I and II

(RED/1/2AB.)’,

read:

| ‘Zone | : | Norwegian waters of I and II
  (RED/1N2AB.)’. |
| --- | --- | --- |

‘Zone

:

Norwegian waters of I and II

(RED/1N2AB.)’.

---
#### THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE TOWN OF ASHEVILLE *vs.*JAMES B. MEANS.

The commissioners of,an incorporated town have no right to impose any taxes, but such as are expressly authorized by the Act of incorporation.

A power to enact bye-laws, &c. for the good government of the town, of itself, confers no right to levy taxes.

Appeal from tbe Superior Court of Law of Buncombe County, at the Special Term in. June 1846, his Honor Judge Battle presiding.

This was an action, commenced by a warrant before a single magistrate, to recover the sum of twenty-five dollars, which the Board of Commissioners for the town of Asheville had imposed, as a tax upon the defendant as a retailer of ardent spirits. It was admitted, that the defendant resided and did business, as a retailer, within the limits of the town ; and the plaintiffs contended that they were authorized to impose and collect the tax sued for, by virtue of the Act of 1840, ch. 58, entitled “ An Act to incorporate the town of Asheville in the County of Buncombe and to appoint Commissioners thereof.” The defendant insisted, that the Act referred to did not confer the power upon the plaintiffs to impose the tax sued for, and of this opinion was the Court. Upon the intimation of this opinion, the plaintiffs submitted to a judgment of non-suit and appealed.

*N. W. Woodfin*and *Edney,*for the plaintiffs.

*Gaither,*for the defendant.

Daniel, J.

The Judge was of opinion, that the Act of Assembly mentioned in the case, did not confer the power on the commissioners, to lay the tax on the defendant, for the non-payment of which he was sued. The third section of the Act empowers the commissioners of Asheville *409to lay a tax, annually, on the property and *inhabitants*of the said town, not exceeding ten cents on each hundred dollars valuation of real estate in the said town,'and ten cents on every taxable poll, as they shall deem necessary for the repair of the streets and for the good of the said corporation. It seems that the Legislature has expressly conferred on the commissioners the power of taxing but two objects, to-wit: the real estate, and polls within the limits of the town. The Legislature, designating two objects of taxation, intended, as it seems to us, to exclude from the taxing power of the commissioners every thing else. It would have been very imprudent legislation, to have permitted the commissioners to tax any-and every thing in the town they might think fit, and that, without limit in the amount of the tax. 'The powers conferred on them, to pass bye-laws for the good government of the town, does not authorize them to make Lye-laws to lay taxes on any other things than those expressly named by the Legislature. We think that the-judgment must be affirmed.

PER CüRIAM. Judgment affirmed,